Display:
I really don't think a military bombardment is plausible: this just another round of sabre rattling, I suspect.

Financial War

on the other hand, most certainly is plausible, and I'm surprised its taken them this long.

"Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Tue Mar 25th, 2008 at 02:21:50 PM EST
I hope you are right.

Wait this is important. Someone is wrong on the Internet.
by generic on Tue Mar 25th, 2008 at 11:11:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Sen Cato's "Carthago delenda est" was even less than sabre rattling, but when the Romans got the chance, Carthage was annihilated blandly.

Very likely, neocon pants are shivering, but they can (and probably wish to) talk themselves into utter craziness. If the markets and economy collapse, they have one way out of shame...

by das monde on Wed Mar 26th, 2008 at 12:01:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Quite true, and your point is the only plausible scenario for the Bush administration. Still, with the consequences relatively serious for the world, the key indicator to watch should be the economy-

A total meltdown, or an undeniable indication of a coming one, and the balloon goes up.

Are we pretty close to that point now?

In answer to the question posed--it seems to me that nuke use will be a diplomatic catastrophe for the US (perhaps  fairly near the Nocon's apocalyptic desire) and the death of Atlanticism, since it is hard to imagine any EC nation supporting such an act. Not so much for mopral; reasons, though I not so cynical as to discount that, but because it's totally idiotic.

I say again, the Empire can (and will) villainize anyone,with their tame media, when they need a scapegoat. Like Now.

 As an essential policy component, one must be sure to NOT be that villain. Let the Chinese eat that one, they are saying, I think. That seems pretty much obvious to me, and I'd bet that such considerations are discussed in the seats of policy Europewide. A European Marshall plan? TALK of such a thing? Would be a good vaccination for the disease of villany that the US will surely sow.

Nonetheless, I still don't see it, unless the Bush admin has just chosen to go it naked-- without even a real fig leaf. The abruptly released NIE just blew away all the old foliage.
Note that they will classify the next one, and not even provide a "sanitized" public version.  

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Thu Mar 27th, 2008 at 05:50:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The other issue is getting people to do their bidding on this one? Above board miltary orders are one thing  - though you might see a certain level of officers resigning commissions in the face of insanity - but any black ops could be difficult to arrange. I'm not sure that it would be good for your career to be involved in the last gasps of a lame duck, especially if the next president isn't McCain. Stuck with that disaster they might go looking for scapegoats.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Mar 27th, 2008 at 06:07:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is anyone keeping track of the string of military resignations during Bush' term. Is there a higher rate than "background"?

It'd be nice if the battle were only against the right wingers, not half of the left on top of that — François in Paris
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 27th, 2008 at 06:10:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There was an article in the salon I think a couple of weeks ago about resignations at captain level making it difficult to recruit the next generation of senior officers, but I haven't seen figures at a higher level. Those figures have to be public though.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Mar 27th, 2008 at 10:47:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
geezer in Paris:
In answer to the question posed--it seems to me that nuke use will be a diplomatic catastrophe for the US (perhaps  fairly near the Nocon's apocalyptic desire) and the death of Atlanticism, since it is hard to imagine any EC nation supporting such an act. Not so much for mopral; reasons, though I not so cynical as to discount that, but because it's totally idiotic.
You're such an optimist.

It'd be nice if the battle were only against the right wingers, not half of the left on top of that — François in Paris
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 27th, 2008 at 06:12:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm very skeptical too. A military war against Iran would be stupendously stupid for the US as a whole but...

But my inner Diogenes keeps reminding me that there is no such thing as "we".

As it seems that the Potemkin economy cannot be sustained until the election no matter how much liquidity the Fed pumps in, the recession will be in full swing by November and the Republicans are going be wiped out. It's going to be a wholesale massacre on the scale of 1932.

That is, unless something very spectacular falls the Republican way. And a shooting war a little bit before the elections is the only thing I can think of. The old patriotic con would work, again. Especially with a pro-war vet tough-guy candidate like McCain.

So, I'm a bit jittery. I can't convince myself that they are that depraved but with those gentlemen, there is no such thing as "too cynical".

by Francois in Paris on Wed Mar 26th, 2008 at 01:55:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's my main fear at this stage: a last double-or-nothing play.

On the other hand, their timing would need to be perfect, because a military campaign that set off an immediate disaster for US forces in Iraq would lose them everything. How sure are they that they won't lose a carrier or a lot of troops in Iraq?

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Mar 26th, 2008 at 05:22:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Not to mention that if they run it too close to election time they risk voters interpreting it as a cheap ploy to help their candidate.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Mar 26th, 2008 at 05:23:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
heh, the one thing you know is that it wouldn't be is cheap, on any level.

/snarkaroo

~"When an inner situation is not made conscious, it appears outside as fate." Karl Jung~

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Wed Mar 26th, 2008 at 04:45:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes- that's exactly the way it would be perceived, ---and accurately, of course. Hunger has an uncanny ability to focus the mind.
I return to one of my favorite analogies- the "we"  (and there IS a we) can be likened to a jewel in which each facet is a window through which the heart of man can be glimpsed-- but they are all different hearts.

Obama has recently made us look into a window that has not been much viewed of late- one in which empathy- the ability to take the other- to walk that mile in those other shoes- is central, and reveals truths that should have been apparent all along, - the nasty consequences of policies based on a cynical, zero-sum view are suddenly obvious,--again.

Should any European government support nuclear first-use in Iran, or even tolerate it, it would likely fall, I think. And Europe is sufficiently decoupled to survive the US meltdown intact, I think, thanks to the EU.

That said,---  any theater piece trumped up by the Bushwits of a lesser dramatic nature just might be inadequate to the task of diverting the American people from an empty bank account- or a failed bank.

 

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Thu Mar 27th, 2008 at 06:10:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

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