US Declined To Back Bombing Iran

So, as I expected, Israel wanted to bomb Iran before the end of the Bush administration. President Bush declined support due to possible backlash in Iraq. Instead, he assured them that the CIA was undermining Iran's nuclear program.

This is classic US policy in the Middle East. Aside from being an easy way to shift blame away from their failures, why did the phrase "Death to America" originate in Iran? Because of the American government's support of CIA action in Iran, suppressing dissent. Intervention in other countries, more often than not, results in unintended consequences. It should be done only when there is absolutely no other choice. It remains to be seen what consequences will result from the intervention in Iraq.

If military intervention is going to be taken, it would seem that a good reason for it would be that a country with the slogan "Death to America" is going to produce a nuclear weapon. It will be interesting to see how Mr. Obama handles the situation, and perhaps even more interesting to see how his handling is perceived.

Craziness

Two random news stories caught my eye today.

First, virtually all of the flu in the US is immune to Tamiflu, the drug most commonly used to treat it. Obviously, this is not good. More interestingly, this did not occur due to overuse of the drug(for once) but just a random mutation of the virus. I'll resist the urge to get out my preventive medicine soapbox on this.

Second, Alaska is having a winter so cold it blows my mind. It's staying at -60 for weeks at a time, so cold that engines won't run. You know it's bad when Alaskans are complaining about the snow. My first thought was, of course, so much for global warming. My second thought was, how do you deal with that kind of crazy cold? I'm not particularly cold-sensitive, I'll wear shorts and a hoodie on 0 degree windchill days if I'm just driving somewhere. But its my understanding that at -40, if a part of your body is uncovered, you lose it. -60 is hard to fathom.

Dem Unity Straining?

Controversy over the Obama CIA appointment before he has even been inaugurated is the latest sign of Democratic unrest. Fault lines in the part have been showing ever since the DNC's strategy of using DINO candidates in 2006. The infighting between the Obama and Clinton campaigns didn't help a bit. In the debate on the bailout, party lines were muddled. Now, with Mr. Obama moving increasingly towards the center, he may be forced to contend with a situation that also faced another young, idealistic Democratic Senator turned President, that of dealing with a fractured party in addition to an official opposition. Mr. Obama's play to the center may reduce direct friction between the factions, but will also win him few allies. One interesting thing to watch will be the response of the Republican party if the Democratic Divide does emerge. They would be wise to stay out of direct conflict and instead build the image of their party which has been so damaged of late. Their choice may shape the Republican party for some time to come.

Innovation Over Handouts?!

Once again, an Asian car company has come up with an innovation to drive sales. Hyundai has a new promotion where, if you lose your job, you can return the car. This is aimed at people who still have a job, yet are too anxious to buy a car due to the economic downturn. It is still too early to tell if this will be a successful strategy, however, it highlights something severely lacking in today's economy. Everyone has been focused on getting government handouts and "managing expectations". However, two sure keys to success in the free market are quality and innovation. Hyundai has these down. They have chosen to at least try to determine their own destiny, rather than depend on charity. Regardless of success, kudos to them for trying to make something happen, rather than sitting around and whining.

Components Of Stimulus Emerging

Some of the components being discussed for the upcoming stimulus package are interesting. Most intriguing of all is that Mr. Obama apparently wants to pass his plan with over 80 votes in the Senate. How? Something for everyone. Big tax cuts and up to 600,000 new government jobs. This seems to be a continuation of the theme of his Presidency so far: Unity at any cost. The Republicans are being bought off at great expense, and the Democrats are getting only a fraction of what they want.

This is a strange reversal of the campaign, where the right(and myself) warned that we didn't know anything about Mr. Obama, and that he might be a closet socialist. Well, we were right and wrong. Nobody did know what Mr. Obama would do, but apparently he was a closet moderate republican! Even more bizarrely, much of what he looks likely to propose is right out of the things he criticized about the McCain campaign.

Though it is still extremely early, it looks as though the Obama presidency may be the exact opposite of what was expected: ambivalence.

Rush Job On Stimulus?

While at this point no one except anarcho-capitalists(not that there's anything wrong with that) opposes some form of stimulus package, the trickier question will be what's in it. However, carrying over from the Bush administration, we may not know until after it's passed. It now looks likely to race through the House before going into the pork-stuffing plant of the Senate, where the Democrats will need to buy some votes.

Most of the measures being discussed are not that objectionable so long as they are temporary. The follow up question will be what will be done to ensure long term growth? The two policies are very, very different, and the proposals seen so far by the Obama campaign are not the most encouraging. Raising taxes and imposing red tape is hardly the way to ensure a thriving economy.

Until this country renounces it's policy of bubbles, it will have one crisis after another, as that is what it is set up to do. There are worse things than continual rises and falls in the market. However, when every fall is an excuse to spend money we don't have, the rising will eventually slow or stop.

War In Gaza

The reason why I have not yet written about the Israeli offensive into Gaza, besides the fact that it's the holidays and I've been spending time with loved ones, is because, unusually for me, I don't have a clear cut answer. However, since the story is growing rather than going away, with the latest twist being that Israel's nuclear plant may be a target, I thought I would offer my two cents.

Let me start by saying I generally side with the Israelis. They have acted with much greater restraint than I would have in their situation. However, they hurt their cause so much with their poor PR. This may be helped with the new IDF youtube channel. It certainly is a unique perspective. However, it will not address the basic issue that Israel will always struggle as long as it tries to be both victim and victor. If you're going to attack, completely destroy your enemy. Mercy merely provides them the continued existence to regroup. If you need to deport everyone in Gaza to the West Bank in order to be safe, do it. Half measures only make you appear to be the bad guy while not solving the issue.

The Palestinians squander so much of the slanted press coverage they get. They have understandable grievances. If they made clear, reasonable demands and used civil disobedience only, they would have prevailed long ago. Instead, they resort the terror, which de-legitimizes them.

The worst part of watching this mess is knowing it will likely not be solved in our lifetimes. We are doomed to watch the same battles over and over with only the details changing. I sincerely hope that I am wrong in assuming this.