Maybe it's not quite on topic, but this deserves noting. I hope that right after Speckhard said "The Iraqi government needs to build up its capability to do its own capital budget investment," someone punched him in the nuts, hard.
Clearly the right thing to have happened. I doubt it did, though.
Of course, it has never been about democracy, now or ever. If democracy was this our leaders' ultimate goal, they'd have no problem with Chavez and Hamas. All our government has ever been interested in are governments friendly to US corporate interests, regardless of what constitutional form those regimes have taken.
Central and South America have, oh, a nearly infinite number of excellent examples.
Speaking of comments that should have brought out Mark Hammill from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, does anyone have a link to the press conference where GWB started an answer with something like "Let me see if I can answer that politely"? I think it was after the Bush-Blair meeting reported in the recent memo (and of course, GWB proceeded to lie his face off).
The NYT article that Gary linked to describes the Finance Minister, the guy (Abel something) whom the US is said to prefer, as a former Maoist turned Islamist and free-marketeer. Sounds like a steady sort, and I'm sure we can trust him.
That would be Adel Abdul Mahdi, whom the NYT article kept referring to as "Mr. Mahdi" (that can't be right, can it?).
We've been attacking Jafaari's party? I can't keep up.
Juan Cole thinks that raid might have hit the wrong target. But at this point? Who knows.
Do we have to have the "stable, quasi-liberal institutions precede democracy" discussion? It's awful late.
9: I was figuring it was accidental, but still.
10: I think we might be having the "where's the omelette?" discussion instead.
If the only the Bush administration had advertised the war as a means to install "stable, quasi-liberal institutions". As it is, we promised Iraq democracy (however incoherent that might be as a plan) in exchange for their thousands of dead. On this point it doesn't matter whether what 10 says about SQLIs is true.
10. That depends on whether you think that stable quasi-liberal institutions should/do precede democracy; I would agree with you if you thought that.
I assume we've been tinkering with the politics all along, in major and minor ways, both before and after the "transfer of sovreignty." What's problematic here is not just that the US seems to be trying to game the system after the given, fragile institution chose Jaaferi but also that the Iraqi politicians Khalilizad met with saw fit to publicize and denounce it.
All our government has ever been interested in are governments friendly to US corporate interests, regardless of what constitutional form those regimes have taken.
Okay, corporate interests is bad.
But part of me is getting extremely cynical. Why the heck should we go in and invade and muck up everything if it's pretty likely that whoever ends up in there isn't going to like us? Self-interest seems to be pretty rational here; it's not like the military cost is free.
Shorter me: I'm cranky, tired, and probably not making a lot of sense but the administration line is always 'democracy good' and I'm thinking it's possible to elect a fair government that doesn't like us much.
Unfogged: now contracted to broadcast content on a one-year delay from Crooked Timber.
Ha! The beard and sunglasses give you away.
Quite 'round these parts tonight.
[fire crackles; coyote howls]
Yep...
Ah, shit. Why didn't I preview?
Quite s/b Quiet
Though, depending on the parts to which you were referring, the fomer construction might be just as valid.
Had it been "Quite round these parts," then I would have been referring to my "round parts," a stirring comment to be sure. But with that goddamn apostrophe (fucking apostrophes), it's clear that I meant not round but rather a-round...
Yeah, I started to qualify it, but seemed best left unsaid.
Oh.
Um.
Yeah, I thought...so...too...
It's been quiet a lot lately. It's almost as if people have more productive things to do with their nights.
I was going to do my taxes finally, but instead I watched some Discovery Channel thing about the perils of Alaskan crab fishing.
There, that should be enough for some raunchy humor and/or insightful commentary.
I did my taxes the other day. I'll probably mail them off tomorrow.
(This comment has been neither raunchy nor insightful. Sorry.)
I got crabs the other day.*
These cannot be simply "mailed off," alas.
*untrue
I'm not tempted to write a song about George W.Bush. I couldn't figure out what sort of song I would write. That's the problem: I don't want to satirise George Bush and his puppeteers, I want to vaporise them.
Tom Lehrer, 2003.
"I'm thinking it's possible to elect a fair government that doesn't like us much."
Possible? Try "damn near inevitable".
Cheech and Chong had a "Buster the Body Crab" skit. It's Canadian humor and as I remember, the crab is Quebecois.
#14:
When I saw the quotes/reactions to this while scrolling up I didn't realise it meant "possible for other people to elect a fair government that doesn't like us much."
But it made me wonder if it's possible for us to elect a fair government that doesn't like us much? That is, that confronted our collective wishes, for cheap oil, for low taxes, for cheap pieties, and said no?
