Words about “An Excruciating Truth”

I’m going to do my best – it’s going to sound like a fisking, because I might not be talented enough to make it into a coherent essay…

http://geekwitha45.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.html#3067857684043450484

Did you read it?  All right…

So, here’s the Excruciating Truth: Whether America remains free and prosperous will be determined by whoever controls The Lightning; which is some critical portion of war suitable energy resources.And it damned well better be us.At first blush, this sounds awfully like the charges of “Blood for Oil” were true.  Is he not arguing that we need to do anything in order to keep the flow of oil going? And to use his Go analogy: with the state of things now, is it not now possible to trade for the “lightning” we need?

And further, when he discusses the propping up of regimes, why then, did we remove Saddam?  Did he stop suddenly being  a “credible existing power”? And if so, why – since the US supported him in the Iran-Iraq war?

 

Not that I jump to defend Saddam.  His removal was an absolute good, if half what was said about his regime was true. But, with the absence of WMDs (for good or ill, they were never found – not that I believe that they were never there) we must pull out.  Our economy can’t take the strain quoted here…

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071024/pl_nm/iraq_usa_funding_dc 

 

we need our brave men & women of the National Guard to return to do their jobs here.

 

At what point does “a moral, principled man” say enough? At what point wiil he say “I’ve done my part”? Is the answer to that question “never”?

 

Are we to beileve that there is no point far enough down the line to say we are done with this particular job? No price too steep to pay?

 

I agree with L. Neil Smith and Aaron Zelman when they wrote, “‘The perfect is the enemy of the good’, you say? I say that if nobody ever insisted on the perfect, there’d never be any good.” And that’s why I’m supporting Paul. It’s been the same ol-same ol for too long, and the “moral, principled” argument has, in my opinion, landed all of us in this mess to start with. And as to Paul’s un-electablilty – someone in Texas has elected him to 10 terms in Congress.

 

I hope I have made some sort of coherent point in this (especially since the version I worked on all morning has disappeared with the push of a wrong button in WordPress). Now off to read some LOLcats.