Wednesday, November 26, 2008

If He Keeps This Up...

I'm going to have to start paying him.

So here we are again - my Euro/Arab friend (who I will refer to as "Mo") says that:

"as for Russia and Iran, it’s time America stopped walking around with it’s chest sticking out, bulling everyone.
Let others shoulder some of the leadership. I think you will be surprised how much Iran is interested in stability , as well as Russia."

In the words of MuscleDaddy-the-Elder: "Ok - Let's Review"...

Hmmm - yeah... let Russia shoulder some 'Leadership'...

Do you know anyone in Georgia?
I know people in Georgia ...

- if you'd like, I could let you ask them how Russia's "Leadership" and "desire for stability" has been working out so far...

And that "Show of Power" - sending a missle cruiser to Venezuela?

- No, I'm sure you're right...
Clearly only demonstating Russia's desire for stability with THAT move.

And ... Iran?

If Iran "wants stability" - why ignore sanctions (which makes it harder to feed their people) and continue enriching uranium?

- and don't bother saying 'for nuclear power' - they have more oil than they could even use (that 'oil giant' thing)

- and don't bother saying 'to go nuke to protect the environment' - if that were a real concern, they'd stop selling oil to every country with the intent to burn it.

- and don't bother saying 'to defend themselves' - No one is threatening Iran with nukes - Hell, no one would be interested in attacking Iran at all if they'd back off of developing nuclear weapons, threatening other countries (even if they're dirty Jooooos) and funding terrorists all over the world.
(go ahead - try and tell me they're not)

- and you might as well forget the "Don't want to be told what to do" meme - that is not the attitude of a "stability-craving" government.

They have as much money as they could ever need - all anyone's ever said is:
"Quit trying to build nukes, quit sponsoring terrorists and quit threatening other countries with total annihilation, and you can do what ever you want - free trade - open international relations - whatever"...

- doesn't seem unreasonable,
but they just can't seem to go with that for the sake of "stability"

And btw, what sort of "Leadership" has Iran evinced a desire to "shoulder"?
I mean, aside from an open & blatant desire to take over a weakened Iraq (and her oil fields) ?

...Oh, and to one of the old arguments on the Iran/Nuke topic:

"The US has nukes - why shouldn't Iran?"

Just to make sure that one's covered -

The US has hundreds-or-even-thousands of nukes and has for decades - and has, since 1945, demonstrated time and time again the overwhelming desire to never use them.

Iran seems to only want one -- and we don't have to guess why they want one, because they have said, in no uncertain terms, time-and-again what they would intend to do with it.

Mo, you have always thought that the world should show greater respect to Muslim/Arab countries -

What greater respect can be granted than taking someone at his word?

Yeah - absolutely....

This is who should be entrusted with the safety of the free world. /sarc-off

[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full article.]


  1. The 'zette has a limited budget for stringers like Mo, even though he's pure comedy gold. I could probably come up with 300 Chuck E. Cheese tickets and a coupon for a free Chick-fil-a.

    On a serious note: When's the last time you saw 100,000 Americans burning flags and chanting "Death to Iran"?

  2. He's not wrong. China, Russia, and Iran are all interest in stability. On THEIR terms. Think how much more stable the Middle East would be if Israel suddenly disappeared. Or central Asia if those former SSRs would just fall back in line. Or if Taiwan would just stop insisting so selfishly on freedom.

    Why is it that liberals all think that just underneath every blustering, murderous dictator is a fellow lover of human rights and democracy just waiting for the American "bullying" to stop so they can come out and join civilizations?


We reserve the right to delete comments, but the failure to delete any particular comment should not be interpreted as an endorsement thereof.

In general, we expect comments to be relevant to the story, or to a prior comment that is relevant; and we expect some minimal level of civility. Defining that line is inherently subjective, so try to stay clear of insulting remarks. If you respond to a comment that is later deleted, we may take your response with it. Deleting your comment isn't a personal knock on you, so don't take it as such.

We allow a variety of ways for commenters to identify themselves; those who choose not to do so should take extra care. Absent any prior context in which they may be understood, ironic comments may be misinterpreted. Once you've earned a reputation for contributing to a conversation, we are likely to be more tolerant in those gray areas, as we'll understand where you're coming from.