Letters to the Editor
-
@pantanal
The jerk has to find someway to soothe his scary inner feelings and even then he was probably taught masturbating is wrong and immoral.
-
And this is what will ultimately happen
One of the things that I kept on saying in letters to my congressmen back in 2002/2003 in an effort to persuade them not to fling us headlong into war was, "The United States is the most powerful nation in the world, but it is not more powerful than the rest of the world". The world today reminds me of medieval Italy when that country was a crazy quilt of city states. One city state would do something to piss off its neighbors and they would all gang up on the offending city and kick its ass. One of the city states would become ascendant in the process and then, in a fit of hubris, would themselves do something stupid. A new coalition would form and they would then kick the second city's ass. And then, ... this is an infinite loop.
Complete is the first cycle. A bunch of nations got together and kicked the evil empire's ass. One country became ascendant in the process, the US, and, feeling our oats, we've been going around slamming little countries who don't have a chance in hell of fighting back against the wall. Sooner or later we're going to slam the wrong country against the wall. It won't be the wrong country because we couldn't defeat them. It will be the wrong country because they will have powerful friends who can join together to bring us down.
And in this day and age, that take down doesn't even have to be military. China warns that it may start demanding payment in euros if the dollar remains in free fall. That, especially if done in concert with a refusal to buy American debt, would wreak havoc on the US economy. The second shoe would be if the world's oil bourses were to start pricing oil in euros in lieu of dollars. The world could destroy the American economy without firing a single shot or making a single counterfeit $20 . And, since we've been being mean, nasty, and ugly toward the very countries upon whom we depend, it would come as no surprise to me.
While I'm at it, next time you're talking to your beltway buddies : ), you might want to point out to them that all the saber rattling about surgical strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and stealing Pakistan's bombs all depend very heavily on one thing - success. A failure would mean dead and/or captured American troops as demonstrable proof of our unprovoked act of war. Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Panama, and Grenada, these countries have the ability to bite back at the US. Should they choose to do so, the dynamic would change dramatically. Legally speaking, they'd have every right.
-
I would have e-mailed Mo about this, but she no longer has a link on the Times site.
So I shall have to make do with snail-mail, and in the meantime share the letter with a few of my friends on Newsvine:
http://wood-s.newsvine.com/_news/2007/11/18/1105904-and-the-pullet-surprise-goes-to-mowdy-doody
-
You sure this wasn't on some crazy conservative blog?
If the mainstream media is going to try and convince us that it is the standard bearer of quality journalism and the internet is a place filled with crazies, then they'll have to do a lot better than Thomas Friedman. The guy has been saying the same vague, ill thought out nonsense for years. Give us some sharp well reasoned analysis, not the same junk you've been typing for the last five years. "The World is Flat" -- yeah that was an amazing revelation about twenty years ago.
I actually think the problem is that these people haven't evolved since the 1980's. Instead of truly tackling post-9/11 issues with new tools they trudge out the same old playbook from the cold war. Let's attack foreign states by proxy so that we may somehow get to the terrorists, because all Muslims are essentially the same, after all. It's as if they believe the world hasn't changed since the 1800s. Because empirical rule turned out so well for the British Empire.
-
He don' wanna be like, WIMP
So he go WINEP, 'stead.
Y'see
-
@has_te
No see. No understand.
-
Thank goodness...
..that the Neocons weren't driving US policy towards the Soviet Union. If so, we'd all be dead now.
I wish Friedman, et al, would consider that the Iranians are engaging in perfectly rational behavior by pursuing nuclear weapons -- considering America's bellicose rhetoric and the fact that we have invaded and occupied countries on their eastern and western borders. In their position, we'd do the same.
The Neocons may get some type of twisted satisfaction (and political mileage) from their macho sabre rattling, but it's been counter-productive to US security interests.
-
@Susan Wood
Excellent, regarding Dowd.
-
3 Points
@ pantanal and whatshisname:
What does being pudgy and Jewish have to do with the price of eggs? And what, I ask you, is a "Judedeofascist"? I'm afraid I can't hear what either of you are saying due to the overwhelming anti-Semitic static.
@ Micki
You are brilliant. I didn't get it in Friedman's column, but you've managed to bring it out: the 22nd amendment says absolutely NOTHING about the Vice-President!!! (One could argue, I suppose, that Cheney has de fact served as President for more than two years of each of Bush's four-year terms, but we'll leave that to constitutional lawyers.) What we really need to be asking in the Democratic debates is whether CHENEY would rule out serving as Hillary's VP. :-) or should I say :-( ?
And lastly, does anyone (aside from Glenn) actually READ Friedman and Dowd anymore? Sometimes I read the titles of their columns, but only as a soporific. Indeed, Glenn's blog today inspired me to write the following to Pinch and his president:
Gentlemen,
Can you find no better columnists for the Times Op-Ed page than Thomas Friedman and Maureen Dowd with their tired cliches?
Personally, I have ceased to read their columns except when Glenn Greenwald points out their latest outrages. Friedman, with his imaginary grasp on "what Americans want", hasn't the courage to ascribe his own reactionary opinions to himself; Dowd I find simply incoherent.
No doubt you have a much better understanding of what your readers want than I, since I am but one reader. But Friedman and Dowd are, to my mind, wasted space. I would suggest you look at Glenn Greenwald, or someone similar from the blogosphere, to draw not only readers but to bring renewed respectability to your Op-Ed page.
Sincerely,
[my name]
Times reader
Perhaps there's a way to start calling them on publishing such fluff!