Monday, September 16, 2002

Your Handy-Dandy Comparative Guide



Believed to be developing WMD: North Korea, Iraq

Squashes internal dissent: North Korea, Iraq

Has weapons that can reach significant US allies: North Korea (Japan, South Korea), Iraq (Israel)

US has fought previous conflict without causing regime change: North Korea, Iraq

Part of the "Axis of Evil": North Korea, Iraq

US Foreign Policy regarding North Korea: Sit back and condemn, while not doing anything to support or obstruct South Korean and Japanese attempts to improve ties.

US Foreign Policy regarding Iraq: Well, I think you know.

So, if it isn't oil that's causing it to be Iraq and not North Korea, just what is it?

Fiscanancial Insanity



Live at the WTC has reported on President Bush's request to the Senate for "fiscal sanity", including actually passing some appropriation bills so that he can sign them. A noble action, after all no-one likes trying to spend government money that hasn't been authorised.

However, wouldn't this have been a whole lot less of an issue without the tax cuts he phased in last year? Don't blame the Senate for not agreeing a budget under these conditions, Mr. President. Have a look at the overall picture for a change.

Extremely Curious George



No, not the president of the United States. This twit, who seems to have been going on about Saddam as a bulwark of anti-Imperialism. Last time I checked, the Gulf War (soon, presumably, to be renamed the First Gulf War) was a response to Saddam's imperial decision that he needed Kuwait as an additional province.

George claims to have been amongst the first to point out Saddam's human-rights violations back in the 1970s. As Saddam turned from American client to thorn in America's side George's opinions have apparently gone the other way. Not that he seems to actually be in favour of Saddam remaining in power, though, according to the interview.

So, if you want to see Saddam's "regime replaced by a democratically elected government", George, why on Earth are you going over there and acting all buddy-buddy?

Sunday, September 15, 2002

Skeptical


Get this book. Now.

Be careful with the message though. Bjorn is very careful to point out that the fact that by most indicators we're getting better doesn't mean we can rest on our laurels. After all, resting on our laurels is not what got us there in the first place. But, as he has said, there is no "gun against our heads", so we should reflect, and make rational decisions to determine the best and most efficient way to improve our environment.