I’ve held off as long as I can with commenting on the presedential election, as it tends to suck all the oxygen right out of the room, but this issue needs to be aired. There’s more to Obama’s energy plan than bankrupting coal power plants. He also intends to make energy prices “skyrocket”:
This doesn’t sound sustainable to me. Hat tip to Jon Jewitt.
UPDATE: here is video from the San Francisco Chronicle of the actual interview:
Hat tip to Fred for this one.
kim (10:12:22) :
“Saddam had the will and was getting the means to WMD, just as do the Persians”
Big difference between Iraq and Iran (besides the different Islamic ideaologies):
Iraq never had, or was ever likely to get WMD. They showed their lack of military prowess and backbone in Kuwait, any prospect of formidable defence technology was severely depleted by effective sanctions. The US and allies could expect a comfortable and rapid victory with little prospect of retaliation against their, or allies populations.
Iran either already has, or will very soon have a functionable and deliverable nuclear device. They have a well equipped and formidable army. There is no prospect of a quick decisive victory. The US and allies will not attempt to invade Iran and will be reticent about a pre-emptive strike on nuclear facilities, it is too late for that now.
This is where Bush’s foreign policy went completely pear shaped. By concentrating all his efforts on Irag instead of being proactive on Iran he lost his options. The Iranians know they have the US over (if you excuse the pun) a barrel. Bush/McCaines only option now is to do nothing, just bleat about sanctions whilst neighbouring countries ignore the pleas. Israel would probably have to do the dirty business with all the fallout (pun not intended) thiswill involve.
Because of Bush’s inaction over Iran there is only one way to resolve the issue without the prospect of a wide-ranging war, and that is to talk to them. Obama said he will talk to them, McCain calls this dangerous. Who is right, you decide.
You said immediately, now you are watering that down when you realise alternatives would have to be put in place.
I’m still looking forward to your comments on democratically elected Hamas and the democracy loving US’s reaction to that, plus a list of other middle eastern states that have gone over to democracy with US help since Iraq was invaded.
Regards
Andy
kids kids kids…. Don’t freak out, OK? One guy can not make this happen. Perhaps its a dream of his…his passion is mis-spoken. You’re focusing on one clip of video posted by one guy…then the “sky is going to fall” starts…
Barack Obama knows good and well, he’ll never make that fly…but if you’re able to separate your hatred from common sense for a moment, and listen, you will see that he is simply exaggerating to make a point. We NEED to start looking at and investing in alternative energy…
He even talks about the entreprenuerial spirit into investing in this area, which frankly I believe will be the next “hi-tec” industry globally. And the US needs to be leading that charge as it will be the global demand of the next century to come.
So don’t go losing all your marbles kids… Step back and look at the big picture. He knows he can’t make that happen, and anyone with any idea of how things work in Washington, knows it too.
peace.
Iraq never had, or was ever likely to get WMD.
They definitely had oldstyle. Not only were they used against the Kurds, but we’ve uncovered around 500 already. They had at least 500 tons of yellowcake; if Israel hadn’t been on the ball in ’81, who knows? And they had lab setups for bio (presumably to be put to use once the sanctions had been busted). But that is not important. What’s important is that Iraq was a charnel house.
There was never any chance at all we would have invaded Iran. No holocaust ongoing. At most we’d have done a modicum of hot pursuit or done a deep strike on their nuke facilities.
But I don’t think invasion of Iran was ever justified. Furthermore, their bomb (which is inevitable) is not for use against Israel, but for power politics (Pakistan and India-style prestige) and deterrence to invasion (they could deter troop concentrations near or inside their borders). Besides, 80% of Iranians are pro-west in general, and pro-US, in particular. I’d hate to see that change. And 80% of Iranians feel they have the right to the bomb. We will woo them over time. Not their current government, but their people.
AndyW,
Sure, the Palestinians elected Hamas [who promptly murdered the opposition], the Germans elected Hitler, the Iranians elected Ahmedinijad, and the catholic Cardinals elect the Pope.
So you’re a papist supporter, eh?
[That’s a joke, son.]
The Soviets had elections, too. Didn’t make them a genuine democracy. They had a constitution, too. But it didn’t make them a genuine republic.
They had “rights”, too. Food, Work, Shelter, “Peace”–whatever the heck that means–Education (and ReEducation, as applicable), etc. But so what? Those are the rights of slaves.
I congratulate already the AGW-duped leftists, socialists etc. on Obama’s almost certain victory.
You’ll get to see first hand real dissent over the next couple of years when the masses see their standards of living deteriotrate rapidly under Obama’s kooky policies. I can hear the echos of Ronald Reagan already in 2012: “Are you better off than 4 years ago?”
I see a repeat of 1994 in just 2 short years from now.
Who’s in favour of higher taxes on business and bankrupting 50% of our energy supply in the middle of a recession?
Please make yourself known.
Concerning Greece, even Bill Clinton was forced to detour around Athens because he was so unwelcome there too. So let anna v dwell alone peacefully in her feelings. It’s a shame, really.
I must say I’m quite surprised, as I have Greek friends here in Germany, and they are just the nicest fun-loving people. First time I encounter one that is so teed off.
Take a couple of shots of Ouzo, anna v.
inappropriateone
By whatever measure I am not a kid. Maybe engineers should not take what people say at face value. But when 50% of our nations electrical energy comes from coal fired plants and a presidential candidate says that he will bankrupt that source of energy I must take him at his word. If a super majority is attained in this election maybe our government can do for energy what it has achieved in banking. Maybe I can get a NIJA loan on a windmill paid for by taxpayers. Not sure how to hook it to the grid not to worry. Not sure what to do when there is no wind, not worry. Maybe I can get the proposed security force to install it for me.
MarkW, US support of two none democracies in the Iran v Iraq war with neither likely to become a democracy shows the USA was supporting one side because of power balance and not because of putting a new political system in place in one or more.
————-
The world is more complicated than a simple democracy, non-democracy split.
Between the two, Iran was much worse. Iraq was not expansionist. Iran was.
When the US intervened, Iran was winning. The US’s goal was to maintain the status quo.
Maybe I can get the proposed security force to install it for me.
That, more than anything else, scares the hell out of me…
Since humans emit CO2 ,Obama’s plan is to starve the poor with ethanol and freeze the rest of us with coal being replaced with unreliable wind power. Of course he will exempt environmentalists, hollywood elites , billionaires, and political elites .
Bobpr
Sorry, those conflicting behaviour patterns show that democracy was just a byproduct of the war in Iraq, not the reason, so claiming it was a great result is non sensical.
—————-
Since nobody in the US ever said that democracy was the only reason for going into Iraq, your point is without merit.
On what basis would the US invade Kuwait to impose a democracy? Iraq had invaded it’s neighbor, and was continuing to violate the terms of the cease fire that it had signed.
Iraq was continuing to try and destabilize it’s neighbors.
Iraq was continuing to fund terrorists throughout the region.
Iraq was refusing to come clean on it’s WMD programs.
Trying to pretend that the only thing that matters is whether a country is a democracy or not, may sound good in the halls of academia. But it doesn’t cut it in the real world where there are often dozens of different factors at play in every situation.
And to think, liberals like to accuse conservatives of over simplifying things.
—————
As for Georgia, there has hardly been any global mass support of Georgian initial military intervention in South Ossetia apart from the USA where the Bush simplification of “good guys” and “bad guys” tends to get in the way of facts.
—————
I see you prefer to live in a world of fantasy.
The initial attack came from South Ossetia. That is an established fact.
The fact that Europe prefers to cozy up to the Soviets and their supplies of natural gas is hardly surprising, but not indicative of anything beyond the weak livered nature of most Europeans.
How much more money would we have if we could power our nation with solar and wind, and export that coal to china? just sayin’
————-
1) China has all the coal they need for the foreseeable future.
2) Since neither wind nor solar will ever be able to provide more than a tiny percentage of the electric grid, the question is moot.
“This is where Bush’s foreign policy went completely pear shaped. By concentrating all his efforts on Irag instead of being proactive on Iran he lost his options.”
What would being proactive on Iran have looked like?
Francois O (08:39:19) :
Anthony,
Where you err, in my opinion, is not so much in discussing politics, but in relying on some hysterical discussion on Fox news about some obscure taken-out-of-context quote by one particular candidate,
————–
Francios,
Where you err is in your assumption that the article is hysterical, that is obscure, and that it was taken out of context.
Other than getting every single fact wrong, the rest of your post wasn’t too bad.
So how are you doing, which states have gone over to democracy in the Middle East since you have been promoting it?
—————–
There’s Iraq for one.
——————
Lets take one arabic region that did go over to democratic rule in the last few years, Gaza/WestBank. They voted for Hamas, so how did the USA respond to this new found democratic government voted in by majority?
————
So you have no problem with a country having an openly terroristic organization for a government. Apparently you have no problem with a country openly dedicating itself to the destruction of a neighbor and the murder of it’s people?
Oh I forgot, there just Jews, they don’t deserve to live.
Iraq never had, or was ever likely to get WMD.
————-
Iraq not only had WMDs, he used them.
That he had ongoing WMD programs has been well documented.
Obama said he will talk to them, McCain calls this dangerous. Who is right, you decide.
————-
What is it about liberals that they feel the need to lie about things that can so easily be checked.
Obama said that he would meet with the president of Iran, with no preconditions. This is what McCain said would be dangerous.
Nobody said we wouldn’t talk to them. The US has been talking to them since the start of this crisis.
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”
– Winston Churchill
“So how are you doing, which states have gone over to democracy in the Middle East since you have been promoting it?”
Iraq has become a democracy. The Saudis are going to allow at least a portion of their leaders to be elected. But how is that relevant to anything? Are you saying that if we fail then it’s not worth trying, or are you saying that because we have failed so far that we will always fail.
“Lets take one arabic region that did go over to democratic rule in the last few years, Gaza/WestBank. They voted for Hamas, so how did the USA respond to this new found democratic government voted in by majority?”
Pretty much the same as most of the rest of the world. So what is your point now? Are you now saying that we shouldn’t promote democracy because people will sometimes choose terrorist organizations. Are you saying that we are wrong to think that people want the right to choose their own government? Are you going to offer that worn out claim that you cannot impose democracy – like we did in Germany and Japan. The thing about Democracy is that people will sometimes make the wrong choice. But as long as it’s not a one vote one time issue, then they will usually correct their mistake. So other than the crying and the habitual America bashing, do you actually have a point?
“Or is it only democracies that are pro USA that are ok?”
Same old lines. The election of Hamas by the Palestinians is perfectly okay. But the fact that a government is democratically elected does not mean that it’s okay for that government to attack it’s neighbors or support terrorism. It’s rather stupid to think that supporting democracy means that you have to accept bad behaviour on the part of a democratically elected government. Experience has shown that democratic governments will be beneficial for both the countries that have them and for the rest of the world the majority of the time. The fact that you are trying to make hay out of an exception is simply political partisanism.
>>””inappropriateone (12:07:14) :
…… you will see that he is simply exaggerating to make a point. We NEED to start looking at and investing in alternative energy…
….
He even talks about the entreprenuerial spirit into investing in this area, which frankly I believe will be the next “hi-tec” industry globally. And the US needs to be leading that charge as it will be the global demand of the next century to come.
peace.
“<<<
Well don’t count on it. When Ronald Reagan ran for Governor of California, he told the people eaxctly what he planned to do in the State, particularly wtih regard to State Education. Everybody, including the CTA said; “nah; he’ll never do anything like that.”
Fortunately, Californians elected him, and he immediately implemented exactly what he said he would do, and they believed he would never do.
Obama will do likwise. If you haven’t read Saul Alinski’s book “Rules for Radicals”, you have no idea who this guy is; a plain Marxist; Communist if you will, and he does plan to do exactly what he says he will. He’s another Jim Jones, and millions will follow him to their own ruin. And don’t look to the Congress for control; they have been waiting to have a debate proof Congress for so long and now they can taste it. You go vote your conscience; but don’t come complaining to me, when you get exactly what you voted for.
Islam prohibits no amount of subterfuge, lying, cheating or stealing, to advance the cause of allah; even deliberately calling your self Christian is ok if it advances the cause of a culture that tolerates zero non-compliance.
After today, the science problems of climate will be small potatoes for the world to worry about.
Mary Hinge. Wrong yet again, I’m afraid. Iraq did once have WMD. What do you think they used on the Kurds, and on Iranian troops? Note to Mary: Must do more research.
Wait just one month. If no one does anything about Iran – Israel will.
How ironic. On the progressive blogs, which I frequent, because I consider myself to be a progressive, Obama’s critics claim he is a corporatist and in the pocket of big oil and gas and especially in the pocket of the coal industry. On the right, they claim he is a socialist and out to destroy big oil and gas and the coal industry.
Either side seem to be able to find words and deeds that support their opinion.
They have a saying in law that when a judge makes a ruling neither side likes, the decision is usually is a reasonable resolution of the problem.
Obama’s managed to make both sides unhappy with his energy policy so his policy will probably be straight down the middle.
Will 4th November 2008 be remembered as
the most obvious example in human history so far of,
turkeys voting for Christmas.
Hey, talking of the lame stream media, if O wins,
will his birth certificates “problems” be aired or quashed…
Any bets on a void election being declared..
It maybe be politics, and this is first a science blog,
but what funds science more often than not..