Display:
I hope you are right, with regards to Cheney's influence.  A Democrat big win in 2008, which seems likely at this point, will also of course help.

I'd say Pakistan is the bigger danger when it comes to unstable realms and nukes, seeing as Pakistan definately has nuclear missiles already.

However, Pakistan is a US ally in the so-called "War on Terror" (or whatever they are caling it today) and it is off the media radar in respect to its nuclear arsenal falling into even more extreme hands than it already is.  If I had to pick the most likley spot for a nulcear war, Pakistan Vs. India would be it.

Small varmints, if you will.

by Eric K on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 08:00:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am certain about Cheney as well as the influence of Bush Sr. Politics in DC should never be painted with a broad brush, it is usually sublties that make a difference. It is never stagnant, and it is best to reflect on what is taking place now in comparison to what took place six months ago or a year ago.

I always believed from that the neocons brought Bush Jr. to power but made sure Cheney was there to run things. Bush Sr. was never one of those neocons and was kept on the outside until the '06 election disaster. Bush Sr. and his allies like Jim Baker forced their way in and have pushed Cheney aside for all intents and purposes.

Regarding nuclear weapons, I don't see any difference between Pakistan and Iran. They are both highly volatile states with significant internal dissent which is a bad formula for for nuclear weapons.

by BJ Lange (langebj@gmail.com) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2007 at 09:19:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series