• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

I’m starting to think Jesus may have made a mistake saving people with no questions asked.

People really shouldn’t expect the government to help after they watched the GOP drown it in a bathtub.

Weird. Rome has an American Pope and America has a Russian President.

America is going up in flames. The NYTimes fawns over MAGA celebrities. No longer a real newspaper.

Many life forms that would benefit from greater intelligence, sadly, do not have it.

I’m more christian than these people and i’m an atheist.

Jack Smith: “Why did you start campaigning in the middle of my investigation?!”

Books are my comfort food!

When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty. ~Thomas Jefferson

There are some who say that there are too many strawmen arguments on this blog.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

I might just take the rest of the day off and do even more nothing than usual.

When someone says they “love freedom”, rest assured they don’t mean yours.

When they say they are pro-life, they do not mean yours.

Stamping your little feets and demanding that they see how important you are? Not working anymore.

They punch you in the face and then start crying because their fist hurts.

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

In after Baud. Damn.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

Tick tock motherfuckers!

I desperately hope that, yet again, i am wrong.

Someone should tell Republicans that violence is the last refuge of the incompetent, or possibly the first.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / Asking For Trouble

Asking For Trouble

by Tim F|  January 29, 20075:51 pm| 90 Comments

This post is in: Foreign Affairs, Blogospheric Navel-Gazing

FacebookTweetEmail

The Economist blog makes an observation:

So now that is out of the way. What is undeniable is that, as if they thought as one, (though I’ll say it again: I do not believe in conspiracies), various Jewish-American groups who have my Economist e-mail have together taken a very strong interest in Iran lately.

Funny, I’m on a couple of Jewish mailing lists myself and things have mostly been quiet with respect to Iran. Are there that many Jewish groups out there?* At any rate it isn’t surprising to see co-interested groups acting together. Evangelicals do it, the right wing noise machine does it with a vengeance. For any grassroots/astroturf group coordinated action is a basic prerequisite for getting noticed. Sure I think that people who attack Iran right now are nuttier than a fruitcake, but at least they are messaging smart.

Why Jewish groups? Well, absent a massive missile upgrade Iran doesn’t threaten the U.S. like it does Israel. Even without attacking her outright a nuclear Iran will force Israel to be much more circumspect about Iran and Iran’s interests. Neighboring countries will give Iran far more leeway, and in general the mideast power center will tilt noticeably towards Persia. The thought of a Sunni-Shia nuclear arms race ought to keep anybody up at night. Nobody particularly wants to see this come to pass, but it seems safe to say that Jewish groups will feel it with particular urgency**.

Of course attacking Iran is a counterproductive move that is unlikely to work. As clear as that seems to me I doubt that Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz are the only Jewish hawks who see things differently than I do. As they say, ask two of us and get three opinions.

Anyhow, we all know the drill. Even though the Economist‘s observation is ordinary to the point of banal, cue antisemitism charges in 5, 4, 3, 2…

(*) Quick answer: yes.
(**) What about those evangelical pro-Israel millenarians? I can’t think of anyhting that would please them more than an unstable mideast bristling with nukes. Revelations,here we come.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Open Thread
Next Post: Cynicism Works »

Reader Interactions

90Comments

  1. 1.

    Zifnab

    January 29, 2007 at 6:02 pm

    Even without attacking her outright a nuclear Iran will force Israel to be much more circumspect about Iran and Iran’s interests. Neighboring countries will give Iran far more leeway, and in general the mideast power center will tilt noticeably towards Persia.

    Wake me in five to ten years. Seriously, the “Oh shit! They’ve got teh noooks!” card got played three years ago. You can only sail that ship once. To paraphrase Secretary Rice, America won’t be moved until “the smoking gun is a mushroom cloud.” That’s what you get for crying wolf.

  2. 2.

    Gatchaman

    January 29, 2007 at 6:20 pm

    We will be greated with flowers and candy sooner or later — we just need to keep invading more countries. The law of averages says its bound to happen sooner or later.

    I look forward to more Freedom Fries and other great moments of Republican Leadership in our future!

    And if the shite hits the fan, lets just blame those damn Jews!

  3. 3.

    chopper

    January 29, 2007 at 6:22 pm

    We will be greated with flowers and candy sooner or later—we just need to keep invading more countries. The law of averages says its bound to happen sooner or later.

    we just need to look for countries whose largest exports are flowers and candy. maybe Hallmarkistan.

  4. 4.

    Jonathan

    January 29, 2007 at 6:28 pm

    The thought of a Sunni-Shia nuclear arms race ought to keep anybody up at night. Nobody particularly wants to see this come to pass, but it seems safe to say that Jewish groups will feel it with particular urgency**.

    Hmm.. A pretty good case can be made that the nuclear arms race between the Soviets and the Americans kept the Cold War from ever getting hot.

    I don’t think that the leaders in the Middle East are any crazier than our own leaders. George Bush seems to think that God is telling him to attack various Middle Eastern countries.

    God told me to invade Iraq, Bush tells Palestinian ministers

    As far as the populations go, our own population has 25% of us who believe Jesus is coming back in 2007, 40% who think the world is 6000 years old and fully 60% who do not accept evolution.

    Not to mention about 30% who think Bush is smart.

  5. 5.

    BARRASSO

    January 29, 2007 at 6:29 pm

    We should totally attack Iran, shrubby could be the first preznitend to lose 3 wars. A NEW RECORD!! HUUREYAAAYYY!!

  6. 6.

    Bubblegum Tate

    January 29, 2007 at 6:38 pm

    I just can’t shake the thought that on his very last day in office, Bush is just going to say, “Fuck it–we’re invading Portugal. Why? Because it’s my last chance to invade a country, that’s why. And I don’t trust Portugal. Right there next to Spain, but they don’t speak Spanish.”

  7. 7.

    Unfiltered G

    January 29, 2007 at 6:45 pm

    Countries with nukes get to keep control of their natural resources. Iran has learned that lesson.

  8. 8.

    Jonathan

    January 29, 2007 at 6:47 pm

    Right there next to Spain, but they don’t speak Spanish.”

    You are giving Bush far too much credit. I’d be surprised if he knew anything about the language difference between Spain and Portugal.

  9. 9.

    TenguPhule

    January 29, 2007 at 6:53 pm

    I don’t think that the leaders in the Middle East are any crazier than our own leaders. George Bush seems to think that God is telling him to attack various Middle Eastern countries.

    You invalidated your argument in the second sentence.

  10. 10.

    TenguPhule

    January 29, 2007 at 6:54 pm

    Countries with nukes get to keep control of their natural resources. Iran has learned that lesson.

    Please stop feeding the Darrell meme.

    No proof of nukes or nuclear weapon development. So let’s stop trying to scare them into going for it, please.

  11. 11.

    dreggas

    January 29, 2007 at 7:01 pm

    You know, while Iran having nukes is definitely not in anyone’s interest they’d be complete and total fucktards (not to mention batshit crazy) if they got them and then did use them against Israel.

    Even a low yield weapon has the potential to destroy most of Israel INCLUDING the palestinian territories of the west bank and gaza not to mention the humanitarian crisis that would follow and wind up hurting the palestinians even more. Add to that the irradiation of the greater ME and you can bet there’d be some pretty pissed off Arabs.

    Ahmadinejad might be just a little bit crazy (ok a lot) but he doesn’t strike me as stupid enough to A) get a nuke and B) use it on Israel thus destroying Israel all the while claiming to be doing so to fight the “zionist enemy” for their “palestinian brothers” and destroying the Palestinians too.

    Not only would it lead to retaliation from the rest of the ME but it would ruin the rallying cry of everyone in the region about helping the palestinians in the occupied territories (which would now be fallout zones) since there’d be either none left or they’d be dropping like flies for years to come due to radiation and cancer.

    Don’t get me wrong I do not believe Iran should be allowed to acquire the bomb but to use the whole “they’ll nuke israel when they get it” card is a bit much. Unless their leaders are as batshit crazy as the current Admin here but as has been the case they probably are just projecting.

  12. 12.

    Jonathan

    January 29, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    You invalidated your argument in the second sentence.

    Not really, the Middle Eastern leaders are still no crazier than Bush and probably a good bit less so.

    It wouldn’t surprise me much to see Bush order nuke attacks on Iran. Whether or not those orders will be carried out is an interesting question.

  13. 13.

    Tsulagi

    January 29, 2007 at 7:08 pm

    Well, if the Israelis fail to herd our lobotomized decider into shock and awe in Iran then instead use the long-range F-16s and bunker busters they bought from us to go after Iran’s nuclear facilities, maybe they’ll at least have a little humor about it. Call it Operation Rapture or something. A gift to our 28%ers.

  14. 14.

    Pooh

    January 29, 2007 at 7:10 pm

    Paging Wes Clark.

  15. 15.

    Zifnab

    January 29, 2007 at 7:22 pm

    You know, while Iran having nukes is definitely not in anyone’s interest they’d be complete and total fucktards (not to mention batshit crazy) if they got them and then did use them against Israel.

    You don’t bring a nuke to a knife fight.

    If Hiroshima, Chernobyl, Three-Mile Island, and the rest have taught us anything, it’s that nukes mean no one wins. Dropping nukes in your own backyard is perhaps even dumber than hurling nukes across oceans via ICBM. And I’m betting that much like how Republicans “hate” abortion, Islamic dictatorships “hate” Isreal – which is to say they love to hate what gets them so many votes, but they’d never want to actually press the button, because then they wouldn’t have their blood shirts to wave anymore. Hamas won leadership in Palestine by making lots of noise about the Jews, then proceeded to pick a fight with Fatwah as quick as you please. Iran rattles sabers at Isreal all the time, but focuses its actual political and military pressure on its borders.

    After the disaster of three consecutive Arab Wars, Middle Eastern leaders have learned its alot easier to “hate” Isreal than to do anything about it.

  16. 16.

    tBone

    January 29, 2007 at 7:30 pm

    Right there next to Spain, but they don’t speak Spanish.”

    You are giving Bush far too much credit. I’d be surprised if he knew anything about the language difference between Spain and Portugal.

    I’d be surprised if he knew Portugal was in the same hemisphere as Spain.

  17. 17.

    Jonathan

    January 29, 2007 at 7:40 pm

    tBone:

    Donald Rumsfeld is giving the president his daily briefing. He concludes by saying: “Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed.”

    “OH NO!” the President exclaims. “That’s terrible!”

    His staff sits stunned at this display of emotion, nervously watching as the President sits, head in hands.

    Finally, the President looks up and asks, “How many is a brazillion?”

  18. 18.

    jake

    January 29, 2007 at 8:18 pm

    We will be gre[e]ted with flowers and candy sooner or later—we just need to keep invading more countries.

    Next stops on the Mission Accomplished Express Tour: The Netherlands (for flowers), Switzerland (for candy)! Then on to Wales (for ponies)! Come on, success is just around the coroner.

  19. 19.

    Rome Again

    January 29, 2007 at 8:25 pm

    We will be greated with flowers and candy sooner or later—we just need to keep invading more countries. The law of averages says its bound to happen sooner or later.

    Yeah, that’s a good reason to kill hundreds of thousands of people.

  20. 20.

    Dug Jay

    January 29, 2007 at 8:26 pm

    Well, at least this discussion is about as informed and helpful as that of former general and acknowledged anti-Semite, Wesley Clark.

  21. 21.

    Rome Again

    January 29, 2007 at 8:31 pm

    I just can’t shake the thought that on his very last day in office, Bush is just going to say, “Fuck it—we’re invading Portugal. Why? Because it’s my last chance to invade a country, that’s why. And I don’t trust Portugal. Right there next to Spain, but they don’t speak Spanish.”

    Interesting, I’m expecting him to withhold elections, dissolve congress, throw out SCOTUS, initiate martial law, and decide he’s POTUSFL (President of the United States For Life).

  22. 22.

    tBone

    January 29, 2007 at 8:32 pm

    We will be greated with flowers and candy sooner or later—we just need to keep invading more countries. The law of averages says its bound to happen sooner or later.

    Yeah, that’s a good reason to kill hundreds of thousands of people.

    You can’t make a delicious freedom omelet without cracking a few eggs, moonbat.

  23. 23.

    Rome Again

    January 29, 2007 at 8:38 pm

    Freedom omelets aren’t all they’re cracked up to be.

  24. 24.

    Gatchaman

    January 29, 2007 at 8:44 pm

    I think Rome Again is incapable of detecting sarcasm.

  25. 25.

    Jimmy Mack

    January 29, 2007 at 8:46 pm

    Yup, that’s it — an Israeli conspiracy to get the US to bomb Iran. When we bomb Iran, it won’t have anything to do with our own security or that of the region. It will be all about the Joos.

  26. 26.

    SPIIDERWEB™

    January 29, 2007 at 8:46 pm

    1. Why does anyone deny conspiracy theories? People conspire all the time. Maybe this one is false, but they do exist.

    2. Why does anyone think Israel would not attack Iran. They have almost admitted they will?

    3. Why isn’t Bush attacking Canada? Too easy?

  27. 27.

    tBone

    January 29, 2007 at 8:51 pm

    Freedom omelets aren’t all they’re cracked up to be.

    Just wait, I’m sure the freedom-hating Democrat Congress will add illegal immigration burritos and Islamofascist couscous to the menu soon enough.

    3. Why isn’t Bush attacking Canada? Too easy?

    The Canuckistani menace was halted by the combined efforts of Zombie Santa and the Easter Bunny in the final, decisive battle of the War on Christmas. The moose-lovers are no longer a concern.

  28. 28.

    TenguPhule

    January 29, 2007 at 8:57 pm

    Why does anyone think Israel would not attack Iran. They have almost admitted they will?

    Because an Israeli strike wouldn’t solve anything and only create new problems for Israel. And if you think Israel is crazy enough to try and get into a land war with Iran, I have bridges to nowhere to sell you.

  29. 29.

    Jonathan

    January 29, 2007 at 8:58 pm

    Jimmy Mack:

    What do you think of the quote below?

    Does it make you at all uncomfortable that the leader of your nation, a man who controls literally thousands of nuclear warheads, thinks he is on a mission from God?

    Link in my post earlier in the thread.

    Nabil Shaath says: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, “George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.” And I did, and then God would tell me, “George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …” And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, “Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.” And by God I’m gonna do it.'”

    Do you wonder what God is going to tell George Walker Bush next?

    I do.

  30. 30.

    Rome Again

    January 29, 2007 at 9:33 pm

    I think Rome Again is incapable of detecting sarcasm.

    I think Rome Again is not.

    Where did what I say indicate I was not detecting sarcasm? Just because I added my own little twist doesn’t mean I didn’t get it.

  31. 31.

    Rudi

    January 29, 2007 at 9:33 pm

    Even a low yield weapon has the potential to destroy most of Israel INCLUDING the palestinian territories of the west bank and gaza not to mention the humanitarian crisis that would follow and wind up hurting the palestinians even more. Add to that the irradiation of the greater ME and you can bet there’d be some pretty pissed off Arabs.

    This is pure BS. Japan had two low yield bombs dropped on them, I don’t recall hearing of the demise of Japan. If Iran drops anything on TelAviv, 68 million Iranians would die before Israel is wiped off the map. I believe that Israel has thermonuclear bombs (H bombs). A couple of low yield fission bombs aren’t a threat to Israel’s arsenal. Please go to a technical site to explain the actual yield of Irans possible weapons. WHEN(no nukes now) they develope a bomb it may fizzle like the NORK dud.

  32. 32.

    Pb

    January 29, 2007 at 9:38 pm

    What about those evangelical pro-Israel millenarians?

    It’s called the 2008 Presidential primary season – obviously McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and Edwards are trying to lock up all the Israeli delegatesevangelical pro-Israel millenarian votes early on.

  33. 33.

    jake

    January 29, 2007 at 9:38 pm

    Japan had two low yield bombs dropped on them, I don’t recall hearing of the demise of Japan.

    [Checks map. Compares Japan to Israel. Declines to comment.]

  34. 34.

    Pooh

    January 29, 2007 at 10:28 pm

    I think Rome Again is incapable of detecting sarcasm.

    I think Rome Again is not.

    Where did what I say indicate I was not detecting sarcasm? Just because I added my own little twist doesn’t mean I didn’t get it.

    Well played. The double reverse sarcasm is at least intermediate level. To be l337, you really need to routinely add the 3rd level and a twist of irony.

  35. 35.

    Tim F.

    January 29, 2007 at 11:01 pm

    Jimmy, conversing with you is like kicking Teddy Ruxpin. Words come out but I don’t think you really understand what they mean.

  36. 36.

    Richard 23

    January 29, 2007 at 11:08 pm

    I don’t think that the leaders in the Middle East are any crazier than our own leaders.

    Welcome to the hive mind of the ‘reality-based’ community.

    acknowledged anti-Semite, Wesley Clark.

    I can’t wait for the cite. I believe it.

    It will be all about the Joos.

    Jimmy Mack is an obvious anti-Semite. Why don’t you move to Iran, you Islamofascist?

  37. 37.

    Andrew

    January 29, 2007 at 11:37 pm

    Jimmy, conversing with you is like kicking Teddy Ruxpin.

    He was programmed by a non-English speaking Asian electronics engineer?

  38. 38.

    srv

    January 29, 2007 at 11:48 pm

    Because an Israeli strike wouldn’t solve anything and only create new problems for Israel. And if you think Israel is crazy enough to try and get into a land war with Iran, I have bridges to nowhere to sell you.

    Well, the neocons know better, and that’s why we have the good old USofA. Right in the middle. It used to be a figurative statement. Now it’s literal.

  39. 39.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 12:15 am

    Richard23:

    Welcome to the hive mind of the ‘reality-based’ community.

    I’m asking you the same question I asked Jimmy Mack.

    What do you think of the quote below?

    Does it make you at all uncomfortable that the leader of your nation, a man who controls literally thousands of nuclear warheads, thinks he is on a mission from God?

    Link in my post earlier in the thread.

    Nabil Shaath says: “President Bush said to all of us: ‘I’m driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, “George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.” And I did, and then God would tell me, “George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …” And I did. And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, “Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.” And by God I’m gonna do it.’”

    Do you wonder what God is going to tell George Walker Bush next?

    I do.

  40. 40.

    Pb

    January 30, 2007 at 12:22 am

    Does it make you at all uncomfortable that the leader of your nation, a man who controls literally thousands of nuclear warheads, thinks he is on a mission from God?

    Out of context, no. In context, yes. See, if the leader of my nation was, say, Elwood Blues, then that’d be kind of cool.

  41. 41.

    Rome Again

    January 30, 2007 at 12:46 am

    Well played. The double reverse sarcasm is at least intermediate level. To be l337, you really need to routinely add the 3rd level and a twist of irony.

    I’m taking that class next semester Pooh, TZ is going to teach it to me.

  42. 42.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 1:01 am

    Pb:

    “America, land of the Chrysler 440 cubic inch engine!”

    From the Blues Bros “Made In America” vinyl album on my shelf.

    My oldest granddaughter pointed at my turntable a few months ago and asked me “what’s that grandpa?”. It took a few minutes to explain about records and turntables.

  43. 43.

    Jimmy Mack

    January 30, 2007 at 1:08 am

    What do you think of the quote below?

    I don’t think it’s true. I could find all kinds of quotes about Clinton, some I believe and some I don’t, that you wouldn’t think were true. What does that prove?

  44. 44.

    Jimmy Mack

    January 30, 2007 at 1:08 am

    What do you think of the quote below?

    I don’t think it’s true. I could find all kinds of quotes about Clinton, some I believe and some I don’t, that you wouldn’t think were true. What does that prove?

  45. 45.

    Richard 23

    January 30, 2007 at 1:31 am

    Does it make you at all uncomfortable that the leader of your nation, a man who controls literally thousands of nuclear warheads, thinks he is on a mission from God?

    Not really. But you’d probably be more comfortable if he thought he was on a mission from Stalin or Satan. Typical moonbat.

    Do you wonder what God is going to tell George Walker Bush next?

    Not really. Maybe pinch off Jonathan’s head and pitch it into the pits of hell so the demons can use it as a soccer ball?

    I do.

    I now pronounce “you” “man and wife.”

    Hey, did you ever notice that Evian spelled backwards is “naive?”

  46. 46.

    Richard 23

    January 30, 2007 at 1:36 am

    Why not move to Iran, Jimmy Mack, you pinko Islamofascist anti-Semite?

  47. 47.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 7:57 am

    Not really. But you’d probably be more comfortable if he thought he was on a mission from Stalin or Satan. Typical moonbat.

    Wait until it’s Hillary that’s president. I don’t even like Hillary, I think she’s a two faced, triangulating rhymes with witch. But I kind of hope she becomes president just to watch conservative’s heads explode.

    She’ll be a “war president” too, with all those cool “unitary executive” powers that the Decider and uncle Dick have worked so hard for.

    Eight more years, eight more years.

    I don’t believe in Satan and I think Stalin was a psychotic mass murderer.

  48. 48.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 8:10 am

    I don’t think it’s true. I could find all kinds of quotes about Clinton, some I believe and some I don’t, that you wouldn’t think were true. What does that prove?

    Well, Bush has certainly been keeping some good company, Pastor Ted “meth and man sex” Haggard.

    Pastor Ted, who talks to President George W. Bush or his advisers every Monday, is a handsome forty-eight-year-old Indianan, most comfortable in denim. He likes to say that his only disagreement with the President is automotive; Bush drives a Ford pickup, whereas Pastor Ted loves his Chevy. In addition to New Life, Pastor Ted presides over the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), whose 45,000 churches and 30 million believers make up the nation’s most powerful religious lobbying group, and also over a smaller network of his own creation, the Association of Life-Giving Churches, 300 or so congregations modeled on New Life’s “free market” approach to the divine.

    I wonder what Pastor Ted has been whispering in the Decider’s ear, eh? Do you think they disagree over meth and man sex?

  49. 49.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 8:55 am

    Chuckle.. More powers for president Hillary.

    President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much greater control over the rules and policy statements that the government develops to protect public health, safety, the environment, civil rights and privacy.

    In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president’s priorities.

    This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.

  50. 50.

    chopper

    January 30, 2007 at 9:35 am

    Ahmadinejad might be just a little bit crazy (ok a lot) but he doesn’t strike me as stupid enough to A) get a nuke and B) use it on Israel thus destroying Israel all the while claiming to be doing so to fight the “zionist enemy” for their “palestinian brothers” and destroying the Palestinians too.

    ahmedinijad doesn’t control the military, so he wouldn’t control any hypothetical nuclear devices.

  51. 51.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 9:56 am

    Jimmy, conversing with you is like kicking Teddy Ruxpin. Words come out but I don’t think you really understand what they mean.

    Tim, you keep your god damn dirty mits off Tedddy Ruxpin! Bastard!

  52. 52.

    Jimmy Mack

    January 30, 2007 at 10:13 am

    Wait until it’s Hillary that’s president. I don’t even like Hillary, I think she’s a two faced, triangulating rhymes with witch. But I kind of hope she becomes president

    No way, she’s way too polarizing. Won’t happen. Edwards has a chance, no one else in that field does.

  53. 53.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 10:23 am

    No way, she’s way too polarizing. Won’t happen. Edwards has a chance, no one else in that field does.

    Yeah, that’s kinda the thing, though. She’s not polarizing. That’s the whole “triangulating” part. Also, the whole “two-faced” part. She gets to play everyone’s ideal candidate while not really standing for anything. Kinda the John McCain of the Democratic Party.

    Personally, my money is on Obama but my vote is with Edwards. I think Edwards has a solid history and a good vision. He’s got experience in the Senate and he’s got experience running in a Presidential race. He’s definitely “electable” (whatever the hell that means). I honestly think he’d be the best man for the job.

  54. 54.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 10:44 am

    No way, she’s way too polarizing.

    Ever heard of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)?

    The Decider is awfully polarizing too and yet he “won” two elections.

    KRYA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: The biggest protest in 32 years marked President Bush’s inauguration and thousands of protesters joined anti-Bush rallies in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and several other cities around the country.

    The bigger protest 32 years ago was for Nixon’s second inauguration. You might recall what happened to him.

    There are more female voters than male and there are a lot of females who will vote for Hillary just because she’s a woman.

  55. 55.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 10:45 am

    If you think the Chinese are just going to sit on their thumbs while one of their largest oil trading partners, which borders another of their largest oil trading partners and a good chunk of the global oil market’s reserves, develops nuclear weapons and upsets the entire balance of power in the Middle East, than you are out of your mind. It would send the global oil market into conniptions, which is something the Chinese simply cannot afford anymore. They are as invested in a nuclear free Mideast as America, except their money goes a lot further with those whackos than greenbacks do these days.

    Iran can’t win this game. Period. Not even their allies and tranding partners want them to win. If Israel blows the fuck out of Iran’s reactors, the whole world will pretend to be shocked and offended, and then go out and buy a celebratory bagel and thank their lucky stars those crazy Jews still have the biggest pair in the region.

  56. 56.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 10:51 am

    Also, who shat Hillary and Pastor Ted and Bush Derangement Syndrom all over a perfectly nice foreign policy discussion? If we can’t manage to go fifty posts on the subject a crazy, crazy country developing nuclear arms, without devolving into a bunch of irrelevant partisan bullshit on BOTH sides of the spectrum, you may as well just give China and the EU the Daddy Pants now and get your Roman slide into debauched irrelevance over with sooner rather than later. I know this whole Nixonian-Macbethian devolution of the federal government has all your knives out for some domestic bitchslapping, but there ARE foreign policy concerns that have nothing to do with any of the 2008 presidential candidates, shocking as that might sound.

  57. 57.

    Andrew

    January 30, 2007 at 11:01 am

    there ARE foreign policy concerns that have nothing to do with any of the 2008 presidential candidates, shocking as that might sound

    No there are not. Noob.

  58. 58.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 11:01 am

    Hey poppinfresh, I don’t like your tone of voice. Go sit in an oven.

  59. 59.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 11:15 am

    Sir, I’ve been on the Internet long enough to remember the godawful day Usenet was opened up to AOL users and a total flood of gibbering morons washed over the whole place, and in that time I’ve been insulted and impuned in forms of language that require a welding mask to read. If you’re going to try to insult me, you’re going to need to use marital aid props and farm animals, and even then I’ll probably just smile and nod.

    But seriously, back to Iran. Let’s discuss what WOULD happen if Israel bombed their research facilities, because I think that’s one of the more likely scenarios at this point. My personal bet is on China putting a lean on Iran and quashing the deal, but I have a vested personal interest in that one because I wrote a theoretical paper about that and I love to be right; that said, the evil Zionist hordes having quite enough of their Persian neighbors and pulling an Iraq Nuclear Program: The Sequel strikes me as pretty plausible.

    John Edwards is not involved. John Edwards has less to do with Iranian nuclear diplomacy than Gumby.

  60. 60.

    Bubblegum Tate

    January 30, 2007 at 11:17 am

    3. Why isn’t Bush attacking Canada? Too easy?

    Pretty much. Canada is going to gay marry itself into oblivion. All we’d have to do is send in our special forces (the Elite Wedding Planners), and the rest would take care of itself.

  61. 61.

    Jonathan

    January 30, 2007 at 11:24 am

    If you think the Chinese are just going to sit on their thumbs while one of their largest oil trading partners, which borders another of their largest oil trading partners and a good chunk of the global oil market’s reserves, develops nuclear weapons and upsets the entire balance of power in the Middle East, than you are out of your mind.

    What are the Chinese going to do about it? They need the oil so they can’t very well stop doing business with Iran. They also have no means of projecting military power to the Middle East.

    If Israel strikes Iran that is going to upset the balance of power in the Middle East and disrupt the oil supply.

    Given that Israel got their arses kicked in Lebanon just recently and are currently reviewing their military forces I doubt they will strike Iran any time soon.

    Foreign policy is in large measure determined by domestic politics, to ignore domestic politics when discussing foreign policy is like ignoring intercourse when discussing where children come from.

  62. 62.

    demimondian

    January 30, 2007 at 11:25 am

    Yo, poppet-flesh! There are some of us here who remember the first post to alt.flame. You’re a N00b. :)

    Other than that, though, I agree with you. China, in particular, is nervous about the increasing dominance of Iran near the Strait of Hormuz. The PRC is desperately scared of a war in the Persian Gulf, as the United States has access to Venezuelan oil and the Japanese could go nuclear-only if they had to do so. The Russian have plenty of their own oil. Europe isn’t a big fan of the possibility of widespread chaos in the Arabian peninsula or the Persian Gulf — but China is shaking in its Mao slippers at the thought of the straight being closed.

  63. 63.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 11:30 am

    What can China do? You mean aside from cutting down on weapon transfers, withdrawing their Security Council protection, supporting economic sanctions unrelated to the oil trade, and a host of other things? They can do a LOT, if they want, as was shown in how fast they turned around on Sudan. China has a lot more power in their relationship than Iran does; Iran isn’t China’s only source of oil, and it’s certainly not their largest, but China is definitely Iran’s number one friend right now, and needs Chinese money badly. If China put the right kind of pressure on Iran in conjunction with EU and Arab League support, it would go a long way to cutting the legs out from under the clerical regime.

  64. 64.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 11:30 am

    You’re forgetting the China-trump. Hundreds of billions in US Foreign Debt. If China wants to pull the hair trigger on the US economy, we won’t be able to pay for a soldier’s toilet paper, much less the armor and weapons necessary to pick a fight with Iran. A massive depression in the western hemisphere would bring our troops home if nothing else did. Then China just sends in the diplomats, and before you know it Iran’s got the bomb, China’s got oil for life, and everyone on the Eastern Hemisphere who isn’t white is feeling pretty smug about themselves.

  65. 65.

    Punchy

    January 30, 2007 at 11:32 am

    I wrote a theoretical paper about that

    You had to research and write a paper on this to think this up? I said this 10 months ago. The Izzies bomb the Rugs first, then demand The Uncle step in and sodomize anything that moves (they liked our past body of work).

    Meanwhile, China starts a program to blast the moon out of the sky, claiming its fullness is causing far too many werewolf-related deaths.

  66. 66.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 11:34 am

    Oh, and as for domestic politics influencing foreign policy: of course it does. But the 2008 elections are a loooong way off, and anything any of the candidates says right now vis a vis their foreign policy positions should be taken with a grain of salt (if you could find the grain under the mounds of bullshit). Remember, Bush was against nation building, Clinton was anti-China, etc. etc. Candidates will say and do anything over the next two years to win the election, and with Iraq fouling the air none of it is very serious. I’ll listen to Congressional voices who are NOT running for president, and maybe the lame-ass administration we have now (if only because, while retarded, they still wield some measure of power), but Hillary and Rudy and Edwards and McCain et. al. are possibly as irrelevant as it gets at the moment.

  67. 67.

    Andrew

    January 30, 2007 at 11:40 am

    I don’t think that china is any more scared of Iranian oil problems than we are. It’s not like we own exclusive access to Venezuelan oil. Any event that causes oil to go to $100+ a barrel will mean that shipping costs are negligible and the convenience issue of using regional oil suppliers becomes far less important.

    In fact, we’re in a far worse position than the chinese. They’ve got the cash in hand to buy oil at almost any price. If they start calling in our t-bills to do so, watch out.

    One of the most interesting proposals, albeit insane and warmongering, that I’ve heard recently is that we should take out Iran’s refining capacity, not their nuclear program. It would cripple their economy, which depends on heavily subsidized refined fuels, which would put a huge damper on their nuclear program and terrorism funding. Further, it would not necessarily cause oil prices to sky rocket because Iranian crude would necessarily continue to flow to preserve what little funding they have. (The key difference here is production versus refining.) Iranian refineries are easy to target, easy to destroy, easy to reach, and not hidden in civilian areas; exactly the opposite of their nuclear program.

  68. 68.

    Andrew

    January 30, 2007 at 11:41 am

    I wrote a theoretical paper about that

    Theoretical papers are much easier to write than actual papers.

  69. 69.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 11:43 am

    Zifnab Says:

    You’re forgetting the China-trump. Hundreds of billions in US Foreign Debt. If China wants to pull the hair trigger on the US economy, we won’t be able to pay for a soldier’s toilet paper, much less the armor and weapons necessary to pick a fight with Iran. A massive depression in the western hemisphere would bring our troops home if nothing else did. Then China just sends in the diplomats, and before you know it Iran’s got the bomb, China’s got oil for life, and everyone on the Eastern Hemisphere who isn’t white is feeling pretty smug about themselves.

    Whaaaa? Have you been reading Tom Clancy or something?

    Where do I begin? Ok, for starters, oil is a globalized commodity, and as such instability ANYWHERE fucks people EVERYWHERE. The kind of massive turmoil you’re talking about would result in $200 dollar a barrel gas, and with it the total collapse of the Chinese domestic energy market. That market, you’ll note, being the nice candy the PRC is feeding their burgeoning middle class to support them in return for a lack of civil liberties. They like the trade, those middle class Chinese, but only if there’s DVDs and air con in it for them. Take that away, and they’ll make Tiananmen look like a Boy Scout Jamboree.

    As for withdrawing their credit support for the U.S. government: have you ever taken a basic econ course? China is as heavily invested in the modern Anglo-American global capitalist system as anyone, period. If the U.S. economy collapsed, the Chinese economy would collapse along with it. Where the fuck do you think all those pots and pans and DVD players and vaccums go, Mars?

    China and the U.S. are allies, for the simple reason that they both need cheap oil and do ungodly amounts of business. There are a ton of factors that could upset that balance (domestic nationalism as a post-Maoist national ideology, and other things you probably know nothing about), but none of them start with ‘I’ and end with ‘Ran’.

    If you want to be constructing large-scale fantasies about energy armageddeon, I’d be worrying more about Russia choking Europe’s energy independance to death like a cheap Sevastopol hooker- it’s both more realistic, and probably easier to follow.

  70. 70.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 11:52 am

    Andrew Says:

    Further, it would not necessarily cause oil prices to sky rocket because Iranian crude would necessarily continue to flow to preserve what little funding they have.

    This would be an excellent plan, if only refining capacity weren’t the single largest factor in determining energy prices, and the biggest bottleneck in the production chain. There’s a reason China is building billions of dollars in refining capacity, and it’s not because they’re bored and, like, really into petrochemical synthetics, man. Your plan would scare the world oil market into total histrionics, period. Since I’m currently living in a country with one of the world’s largest foreign currency reserves and a large supply of fresh fruit, I probably wouldn’t mind the resultant collapse of the world economy, but as someone currently residing in America you may wish to reconsider this plan.

  71. 71.

    Punchy

    January 30, 2007 at 11:54 am

    Further, it would not necessarily cause oil prices to sky rocket because Iranian crude would necessarily continue to flow to preserve what little funding they have.

    Uh…I’m guessing they wouldn’t be selling any of it to us anymore, which would indeed cause a massive spike in the price, being that we bogart a huge percentage of world’s supply of Texas tea…

  72. 72.

    The Other Steve

    January 30, 2007 at 11:58 am

    Before you go off criticizing the neoclowns desire to invade Iran. You really should offer your own plan to invade Iran.

    Otherwise you aren’t credible.

  73. 73.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 11:58 am

    Ok, for the last time, we don’t buy oil from a COUNTRY, we buy it from a MARKET. Just because it comes from a specific country and people try to sign exclusive access arrangements and screw over each other all the time, doesn’t mean it isn’t subject to globalized market forces. If you screw with oil anywhere, it gets expensive everywhere, for everyone, period.

  74. 74.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 11:59 am

    One of the problems with the Chinese economy is that they’re not consuming their own products. They build millions of high-end TVs and plastic dolls and other consumer goods, but they don’t actually consume them, just ship’m off to the US. But the Chinese population is huge and there’s no shortage of demand for the coolest techno-gadget. Once China gets its economy rolling, they won’t need to export everything en mass to the states. They can start consuming their own output. And as India and the Middle East develop their own economies, China can find new markets for its excess output.

    This won’t happen tomorrow, but it will happen – it’s been happening – for the past twenty years.

    And China already has nuclear technology. We’ve already seen proof in N. Korea that countries with nukes get the feather touch from US Diplomats. If China were to arm Iran – they won’t even have to sell the nukes, just install a military base or two Cuban-missle-crisis style – Iran suddenly looks like a much less appealing military target. China doesn’t have the US hang-up over diplomacy. They’ll wheel and deal with Amnmenijididadidy to secure their oil futures while we saber-rattle and gain nothing.

    The Chinese are in a great spot right now, if only because the US has become so openly hostile to some of the biggest oil-producing nations in the world. No one wants to be our friend, and China is the new rich kid on the block.

  75. 75.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 12:00 pm

    The Other Steve Says:

    Before you go off criticizing the neoclowns desire to invade Iran. You really should offer your own plan to invade Iran.

    Otherwise you aren’t credible.

    Bears, man.

    Jewish bears.

  76. 76.

    Andrew

    January 30, 2007 at 12:01 pm

    Refining capacity is hardly the single largest factor in determining energy prices. Refining capacity is a primary determinant of local fuel prices. Iran has very limited refining capacity and actually has very high fuel costs (subsidized down for consumers, ironically, by crude oil income).

    Eliminating Iran’s refining capacity, in a simple economic model that ignores the other, obvious issues, should make crude CHEAPER because Iranian fuel consumption and thus oil consumption would drop significantly while crude output is not effected.

    Of course, the minor flaw in this plan is that Iran woul probably strike oil production sites in the gulf, and try to shutdown shipping. Hence the ‘insane’ qualifier.

    In other news, cat weight lifting.

  77. 77.

    Pb

    January 30, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    You know who holds more US debt than China–almost twice as much? Japan. Also, the UK should get an honorable mention for picking up the slack.

  78. 78.

    Jake

    January 30, 2007 at 12:04 pm

    I think she’s a two faced, triangulating rhymes with witch.

    H. Clinton is a pentagon?

  79. 79.

    chopper

    January 30, 2007 at 12:10 pm

    all this talk about fungibility is making me hungry.

  80. 80.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 12:12 pm

    Pentagon does not rhyme with witch.

  81. 81.

    The Other Steve

    January 30, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    You know who holds more US debt than China—almost twice as much? Japan. Also, the UK should get an honorable mention for picking up the slack.

    What’s your plan for invading Japan then!?

    Good grief, we were afraid to do it in WWII, why do you think it’s going to be successful now?

  82. 82.

    The Other Steve

    January 30, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    Pentagon does not rhyme with witch.

    yeah, but Pentagonich does.

  83. 83.

    poppinfresh

    January 30, 2007 at 12:19 pm

    Iran’s refined-product exports certainly don’t match it’s crude exports: the crude to refined ratio is something like four or five to one, last time I checked the OPEC figures. That doesn’t take into account the perception factor, though- when I said refining capacity is the single biggest factor, I should have said tangible factor, because fear trumps all when it comes to oil. The idea of refining capacity being blown up, combined with the instability caused by this proposed military adventure, potential insurgent attacks by Iranian allies around the world, and the general skittishness of oil traders, would be enough to push the whole damned thing over the egde, whether or not Iran only exports 400k barrels a day of refined oil.

  84. 84.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 12:23 pm

    What’s your plan for invading Japan then!?

    I’m thinking Clinton had the right idea. Who’d we invade under him? Serbia? Kosavo? See, that was easy. And it made our military feel like it had a big penis. No trillions of dollars spent. No thousands of lives lost. Every (non-Republican whiner) walked away more or less happy. Why couldn’t we have invaded, like, Serbia or something? Serbia would have been much easier.

    And Reagen invaded Grenada. That was a smart move. I mean, it’s Grenada. What are they going to do?

    None of this “axis of evil” nonesense. We need to focus on the “axis of tiny vacationing countries”. Conquer them. We’ll be much better for it in the long run.

  85. 85.

    Zifnab

    January 30, 2007 at 12:24 pm

    Syria or something. I mean Syria.

  86. 86.

    The Other Steve

    January 30, 2007 at 12:38 pm

    And Reagen invaded Grenada. That was a smart move. I mean, it’s Grenada. What are they going to do?

    Yes, Grenada was one of my proudest moments.

    I remember sitting in the Oval Office with Reagan on the day of the invasion. And when word came in from our forces that the nation had been liberated, I turned to Ron and said “You know, you will always be remembered as the great man who liberated Grenada, and allowed thousands of Americans to get a two-bit medical degree along with a suntan.”

    Yes, I agree. You konw the island of Fiji has been having some strife lately. If we invaded them, not only would we have prime vacation land, we’d also have a source of bottled water.

    Then maybe we can let Ford convert over to their engine technology that runs on bottled water.

  87. 87.

    Tsulagi

    January 30, 2007 at 12:51 pm

    You know who holds more US debt than China—almost twice as much? Japan.

    Umm, probably not. Don’t know how much Japan holds, but according to this congressional report, in addition to Treasury notes, China is also heavily invested in U.S. mortgage backed securities. Smart guys. Last August the estimate was China held $700b in U.S. debt.

    They’ve helped keep our interest and mortgage rates artificially low. China hearts US. They wouldn’t think to use the purchase of Bush debt to influence our decisions. Nope. Or tell us to fuck off as they did to Bush when he asked them to stop manipulating their currency value which hurts U.S. exporters.

  88. 88.

    Pb

    January 30, 2007 at 2:21 pm

    Tsulagi,

    Check out my link, above–“MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES”, i.e., the share of the national debt held by foreigners according to Treasury. The extra two items in the graph on page 14 of your link are definitely interesting, if technically outside the scope of our national debt. However, I’d wager that the total picture would look different if we included mortgage-backed securities and other holdings for every other country as well, although judging from your link the Japanese may be more risk-averse, or at the least more heavily invested in treasury securities.

  89. 89.

    Bob In Pacifica

    January 30, 2007 at 8:57 pm

    In the late 80s, early nineties the ADL was running a spying operation on hundreds of organizations in the San Francisco Bay Area. Some were KKK-type groups, but it covered the spectrum. Anti-apartheid groups. Labor unions, student groups like Filipino student organizations. Public television stations. Politicians (Pelosi and Boxer for two).

    The main man running the spy ring was an undercover SFPD cop who would routinely do TDY for the CIA. He had photos in his police locker of blind-folded men tied to chairs (ho ho!) when he disappeared (he split to the Philippines to avoid the court investigating). Another guy, who been an informant for the FBI, apparently did lots of dumpster-diving to get data for them. He single-handedly was responsible for the surge in paper shredders in offices all across the Bay Area.

    The SF office of the ACLU said that the spying operation run by the ADL had been an outgrowth of an illegal joint agency spying operation that began in S.F. before the 1984 Democratic Convention.

    Essentially, it was a privatized government spying operation. This was back when the government actually gave a toss about being caught violating civil rights. What did the ADL get out of this deal?

    The blame.

    What did the ADL do? They called everyone they spied on anti-Semitic. Talk about defamation.

  90. 90.

    Pb

    January 31, 2007 at 1:55 am

    Bob In Pacifica,

    Fascinating stuff. It didn’t take too much searching to find this link about a related lawsuit, but for all the times I’ve seen someone from the ADL pop up on TV, I’ve never heard anyone mention it.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Image by HinTN (5/22/25)

Recent Comments

  • Fair Economist on Thursday Evening Open Thread (May 22, 2025 @ 10:50pm)
  • mrmoshpotato on Thursday Evening Open Thread (May 22, 2025 @ 10:46pm)
  • Mr. Bemused Senior on Thursday Evening Open Thread (May 22, 2025 @ 10:36pm)
  • randy khan on Thursday Evening Open Thread (May 22, 2025 @ 10:36pm)
  • BellyCat on The PA Supreme Court Retention Election Matters! (May 22, 2025 @ 10:22pm)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Meetups

Upcoming Ohio Meetup May 17
5/11 Post about the May 17 Ohio Meetup

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Hands Off! – Denver, San Diego & Austin

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!