Can We Stop Trying To Prounounce His Name?
In the category of "Hmmm, very interesting."
No cause for celebration, unfortunately. Stupid enemies are much better than smart ones. Ahmadinejad was in that first category. Khamenei has a bit more going on upstairs than his short-bus flunky does.
But setting that aside, it's still kind of fun when bad things happen to assholes, isn't it?
As Captain Ed observes:
The Islamic Republic daily, close to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has said Mr Ahmadinejad's behaviour is dangerous for Iran.
The publication is seen as a newspaper with impeccable Islamic credentials.
The attack would be difficult to imagine without at least tacit support from Ayatollah Khamenei.
. . .
It called on Iran's judiciary to perform its duty and punish people who make baseless allegations and cause public anxiety. (My bold.)
The newspaper's demand for judicial action could not have come without Khameini's approval, at least tacitly. The nuclear program cannot be the reason for this issue, but Ahmadinejad's clumsy diplomacy might. The increased sanctions, fueled in part by Ahmadinejad's careless rhetoric about America and Israel, have bit deeply into the economy. Popular discontent has increased sharply, to the point where some might actually welcome an American decapitation attempt.If this is just a warning shot it was close enough that Ahmadinejad must have felt the breeze off this bullet.
No cause for celebration, unfortunately. Stupid enemies are much better than smart ones. Ahmadinejad was in that first category. Khamenei has a bit more going on upstairs than his short-bus flunky does.
But setting that aside, it's still kind of fun when bad things happen to assholes, isn't it?
This entry was posted by Michael Reynolds, on
Thursday, November 22, 2007.
You can leave your response.
2:23 PM
I don't understand the preference for stupid enemies over smart ones. A smart Islamic theocract will make a lot of people's lives unpleasant in the short run, but when Iranians finally get sick of such people, there will be no permenant harm done to civilization. A stupid Islamic theocrat is the sort of person likely to start a nuclear war, which, even if it happened on a small enough scale so as to not make Earth immediately uninhabitable, would destabilize Western civilization as we know it.
3:21 PM
Chris:
Two examples come to mind: Hitler and Zarqawi.
Hitler, by personally taking charge of his war and undercutting his excellent generals made the allied victory possible.
Zarqawi, by failing to give Al Qaeda in Iraq any strategy beyond a sort of nihilistic, kill-em-all-and-see-what-happens idea, has destroyed Sunni support for his group.
On the flip side, in the smart opponent category we have Stalin, the North Vietnamese and, so far, the Iranians.
I see your point, but I think I'd still rather play chess against a weak opponent.
10:48 AM
Non sequitur, but I think "My bold" makes a good boast to counter the apologetic "My bad." You could just say that after firing off any particularly provocative salvo, as an anti-apology.
Sequitur: You're both right. Stupid enemies are more likely to start a nuclear war, but perhaps stupid enough to fuck up before they can manage it. Smart enemies are much deadlier, because they'll aspire less but accomplish more. Ahmadinejad may dream about apocalypse, but Osama has already realized a tidy little nightmare, and has refrained from anticlimactic follow-ups.