From The Economist, which correctly points out that high oil prices can have an upside --
"Right now motorists have no substitute for oil. But it is no coincidence that car companies are suddenly accelerating their plans to sell electric hybrids that are far cheaper to run than petrol or diesel cars at these prices. The first two oil shocks banished oil from power generation. How fitting if the third finished the job and began to free transport from oil's century-long monopoly."
Showing posts with label Economist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economist. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
Speaking to the enemy, or sleazy political gamesmanship
The Economist, on whether Sen. Obama intends to 'appease' the Iranians:
"In January 1991 in Geneva, for example, America's secretary of state talked face-to-face to Tariq Aziz, a nasty piece of work who was Saddam Hussein's foreign minister and is currently on trial for murder. But nobody has ever been silly enough to accuse James Baker or the president who sent him (one George H. W. Bush) of appeasement. And that is because instead of letting Iraq keep Kuwait, which it had just invaded and annexed, Mr Baker told Mr Aziz that America would throw Iraq out by force if it did not leave. Hardly appeasement."
Later, in the same piece:
"Strange, then, that the very Mr Bush who admonished the appeasers from Israel's parliament has allowed Americans to negotiate with the North for years. If these talks ever make Kim Jong-Il give up his nukes, nobody in his right mind will hold Mr Bush's decision to talk against him. And if it's fine to speak to North Korea, why rule out talking, as Mr Obama says he would, to Iran?"
The cynic in me keeps screaming that cheap political points scored at the expense of skittish American voters may be somehow involved. I can't quite put my finger on how...
"In January 1991 in Geneva, for example, America's secretary of state talked face-to-face to Tariq Aziz, a nasty piece of work who was Saddam Hussein's foreign minister and is currently on trial for murder. But nobody has ever been silly enough to accuse James Baker or the president who sent him (one George H. W. Bush) of appeasement. And that is because instead of letting Iraq keep Kuwait, which it had just invaded and annexed, Mr Baker told Mr Aziz that America would throw Iraq out by force if it did not leave. Hardly appeasement."
Later, in the same piece:
"Strange, then, that the very Mr Bush who admonished the appeasers from Israel's parliament has allowed Americans to negotiate with the North for years. If these talks ever make Kim Jong-Il give up his nukes, nobody in his right mind will hold Mr Bush's decision to talk against him. And if it's fine to speak to North Korea, why rule out talking, as Mr Obama says he would, to Iran?"
The cynic in me keeps screaming that cheap political points scored at the expense of skittish American voters may be somehow involved. I can't quite put my finger on how...
Labels:
Bush,
Economist,
Horse Manure,
Obama
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)