<$BlogRSDURL$>

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Blogarama - The Blog Directory

Thursday, September 21 

We're never gonna win the world.

But you know, we'll get closer to the truth as long as, sigh, Mr. Anderson "I'll get to the bottom of everything" Cooper is there.

Oh Anderson. Have you ever watched his show Anderson Cooper 360? Seriously, the best 2 hours you will ever spend. Ok so for those of you who have no idea what I am talking about - I'll lay it out for you.

Ok so he kinda emerged during the whole Hurricane Katrina thing. He was on the front lines, being blown over by the wind and he rescued dogs and comforted people after the bitch left New Orleans. He landed on my radar not just because of his dashing good looks (something about TV reporters...) but his candid personality and incredible ability of getting to the bottom of anything and everything.

So last night while munching on a Skinny Cow fudge bar, Anderson graced the TV screen with his 20 minute interview with Iranian President Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (say that 8 times fast). The President had some really interesting points actually and it pains me to say that. One excerpt:

COOPER: The report that I read in August said Iran has not address the long outstanding verification issues or provided the necessary transparency to remove uncertainties associate with some of its activities. Mohamed ElBaradei was quoted as saying that he can't give you a clean bill of health yet.

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Perhaps the report that you had and saw is incomplete. The IAEA has indicated that it has found no evidence that would show that Iran is developing a nuclear energy for other purposes that are other than peaceful.

So I like to ask -- I want to take the opportunity -- are you positive that the United States of America, in fact, has not diverted from its own nuclear programs to develop perhaps nuclear devices that are not for peaceful purposes? The United States, are you telling me, is not building a nuclear bomb? Are you not concerned about that?

Ok so the more I thought about it - he has a point. The States sure does have nuclear bombs. Why is Iran not allowed to develop them? What singles out Iran?

Whatever, I'm sure ya'll have answers and reasons for the question but watching him last night fascinated me. Not just because of who he was and that he was talking to Anderson, but because he spoke so much more coherently than Bush. He followed through with the questions which were asked of him. He didn't smirk when he was talking about "freedom and peace" like Bush does.

By no means am I saying that this whack job is better than Bush, but, he raised some interesting points last night.

Anyways, yes. Anderson Cooper. You all must think I'm nuts. He's just so dramatic and in your face and full of "what-if's". You should watch him. Like seriously.

4 Comments:

you are a fool. when the leader of our country starts telling the world he is going to "wipe israel off the map", then we wont deserve them either.

Tis true. He's still a crazy bastard but really - is Bush any saner?

Bush has checks & balances to keep him from ordering a nuclear strike. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, his cabinet, and frankly a room full of armed men and women who have lots to lose. Ahmadinejad theoretically has people holding him at bay in his own country, but if history's an indicator, middle eastern presidents tend to have more freedom to launch wars with impunity. In the past century alone Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt have all launched invasions or initiated aggression against their neighbors under sub-optimal and/or illegal circumstances. Often at great cost to their own people.

Short version: Even if, and it's a big if, Bush is "crazy" like everyone likes to cast him, the system he operates under has far more emergency overrides in place than do the governments in the Islamic world. That's not polite to say, but it's true.

Raise your hand if you honestly think the US is ever, ever, ever going to detonate a nuclear warhead on the battlefield? I didn't think so. Now raise your hand if you think Iran could have a nuke for more than 12 months without threatening to fire it at Israel or "lend it" to their puppet, Hizb'allah. Exactly.

Yes, Anerica bombed Hiroshima and Nakasaki, but that was the culmination of almost four years of all-out conventional warfare. That's a world of differencefrom a nuke going off in Tel Aviv just because Iran has a burr up it's butt over having jews in the neighborhood.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of unstable regimes such as Palestine, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, India or Pakistan make the world an unsafe place. The only reason the US and Russia were able to co-exist was mutually assured destruction.

Yes, I feel much safer with the US having nuclear weapons than Iran. It won't be long before a suitcase nuke is detonated by an Islamic extremist.

Post a Comment