Connect the dots
There are three concurrent bits of news that no one is connecting yet, but I believe they are all part of a unified whole.
- The first is the sudden revelation by Bob Novak that Condoleeza Rice supports a withdrawal of troops from Iraq. To say this is unexpected is a bit of an understatement. Why would the administration pick now to declare victory and leave? (Pay no attention to the permanent bases there, however. If they become US military enclaves surrounded by hostile territory - like Guantanamo, it doesn't really matter.)
- Bush's popularity is dropping like a stone. He's down to 45% at last count.
- Scott Ritter now reiterates his claim that the Pentagon was told to be prepared to launch an attack against Iran by June. Isn't it funny that this is not reported in the US corporate media?
The best question would be what will happen to precipitate action on this timetable?
Q: "where do you get the troops to attack Iran".
A: "by taking the Sir Robin approach and bravely fleeing Iraq"
Gimme a 'P'!
Gimme an 'O'!
Gimme an 'L'!
Gimme another 'L'!
Gimme an 'S'!
What does it spell?!
War!
(apologies to Country Joe and the Fish)
Me? In May, I'm buying shares in ProFunds UltraBear investors.
posted by Lumberjack @ 9:01 PM
2 Comments:
In the upcoming struggle over oil (actually already commenced), apparently we have decided that going after Iran's (still functioning) oilfields is better than trying to restart Iraq's oil production. We also get the added bonus of cutting China out of the action. It actually fits in pretty well with what the advocates of the Peak Oil theory have been saying for a while - as soon as worldwide oil production peaks (which may have already happenned), there will be a desperate scramble by nations to secure enough oil for their perceived needs. And that scramble may migrate out of the markets and into the battlefields.
Ain't Peak Oil great?
I have a slightly different take on peak oil. Would we be better off if we were enabled to continue burning the stuff indefinitely? Given the pessimistic projections of the result of uncontrolled global greenhouse gas emissions, the human race is probably better off falling back to a more agrarian existence. It's in my nature to be a contrarian.
Post a Comment
<< Home