
Shorter Robert Kagan:
Forget for a moment that that last “regime change” thingy I suggested ended up costing over $700 billion and resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people, this time it will totally work. I promise. Let’s roll! And by “let’s” I mean “you guys”.



27 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About TBogg
RSS/XML Feed
And may you all have the courage of my convictions.
Is this another example of the “left-leaning” Post editorial page Kurtz was telling me about?
Wait a minute. I thought Yemen was supposed to be next. I’m so confused. I don’t know who’s the greatest threat since Hitler is supposed to be today…well, except for our own President: the secret Islamo-terrorist, commie-fascist, non-citizen and pretty darned brown person.
And on an irony side note:
Loved reading the the biggest shareholder of News Corp after the Murdock family was a Saudi Prince…a very, very rich one who gets to help Rupert select his successor. He has approved of Rupert’s son. Who’s going to
tell the Fox zombies?
I can never remember, is he the brother with two chins or the one with three?
Which he developed while working Special Ops in Iraq.
You just have to follow the bouncing logic:
The only possible way to convince the Yemenis that America is serious about stopping disaffected Nigerian youths who sympathize with the Afghani Taliban and Pakistani al Qaeda is by invading Iran.
$700 billion? Shit, we cold have bought another TARP for that!!!
Wasteful scoundrels.
Aren’t the Foxies in love with Obama, now that he’s done the stupid “freeze” thing-y?
Imagine an
IraqPalestineCubaIran whose educated, inventive and highly cultured people were allowed to flourish, fully enmeshed in the global economy and society… And a pony, Bob, imagine a pony.Also. “Even if the next Iranian government refused to give up the weapons program, its need for Western economic assistance and its desire for reintegration into the global economy and international order would at least cause it to slow today’s mad rush to completion and be much more open to diplomatic discussion.” — So the Kagan doctrine is basically: spend billions bombing them back to the stone age so they’ll come grovelling for our aid money to rebuild what we destroyed. Nice. But, Bob, do you still think the “educated, inventive and highly cultured people” of Iran will love you as much when you’ve destroyed their homes and killed their children? And what if they end up taking Chinese or Russian or Saudi money to rebuild what we destroyed?
Thinking things thru and learning from past mistakes: for losers and hippies. Real men just write for the WaPo.
Kagan is just trying to show that he’s stupid enough to be Sarah Palin’s foreign policy adviser.
Just notice how brave, serious men like Kagan never just come out and say “we should bomb and invade this country” because that would be self-evidently wrong. Instead they make vague references to “regime change” while heaping disdain on non-violent forms of foreign engagement.
It’s obvious enough what these people want, they just don’t have the balls to say it outright because they know it’s evil.
They never give up, they never quit, and they never face reality.
Ummm, that would be $1 trillion and over a million deaths,* but, otherwise……..
*The Lancet; 2006, 2008
Forget it. Iran is so 2009.
Even if you don’t quite buy the Lancet figures, it is reasonable to conclude that there have been hundreds of thousands of deaths attributable to the US war in Iraq.
The Lancet articles were submitted by the epidemiology department of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. I realize right wingers hate anything to do with science and fact, but you cannot find two more respected institutions in the medical world than Johns Hopkins and The Lancet.
Fixed.
thingwarbler wins the internets for today.
I am familiar with the Lancet studies and with some of the (manufactured) controversy about them. I didn’t say that I don’t buy the Lancet figures, but there are lots of people who don’t, some for at least half decent reasons, and others for purely political reasons. In any event, it is virtually unquestionable that hundreds of thousands of excess deaths have occurred.
Not to mention more American deaths than in the WTC attacks.
Sometimes the “stupid” is so thick it just isn’t funny anymore….
anonymap, I didn’t mean to suggest that you were among the fact-averse ilk. I wanted to emphasize the point that The Lancet study was the only assessment of Iraqi war-related deaths that was based on accepted investigative epidemiological principles rather than having some political motivation one way or another. Due to the way this war was prosecuted, with the deliberate pre-mediated plan to keep the American people from ever finding out the extent of the devastation that was wreaked upon the people of Iraq, and with the collusion of the new Iraqi power center, we’ll probably never get any better data.
“Respected” is just another one of those liberal elitist code words. You know like “empirical evidence” and “peer reviewed journals.”
Along with “accurate,” “factual,” “truthful” and “reliable.” Yep.
No. Now they want budget cuts. The department of education, for starters.
These frickin’ idiots never seem to stop and think that if the situation were reversed, and somebody bombed and attacked the U.S., that no matter how unpopular the US govt might have been before the attack, the people of the US would come together and support that unpopular regime 150%.
That’s the theory, anyway. Oh, wait…..
Percentages work different for republicans. 150% means like, negative 10%. Or less.
Perhaps Kagan might be interested in traveling to Iran with a chocolate cake and a bible to talk with “pro-Western moderate Iraaaanians”. Deja-vu all over again.
Imagine a world in which Megan McArdle could buy orange salt from the Sea of Iran, or whatever they call it, right there in Tehran without having to wear some headscarf-thingy! Tell me why, oh why, oh why can’t my dream come true?