You wrote [yesterday]: "What do you want Qaeda to do in Iraq, Mr Allbritton? Fall back without a whimper?"
Awed, no doubt, by the purity of our spirits.
When are people going to figure out that Gandhi succeeded because he opposed the British?
The Glittering Eye
If Gandhi hadn't existed, the British would have invented him. I won't carry that remark further. Pundita is in a terrible mood, so I don't want to regret everything I say this week. Not to cry on your shoulder but --
I just woke up and I'm having to type with CNBC blaring in the background. This in in hopes the Fed will suddenly wake up to the fact that they can't focus too much on technicals during a wartime situation.
And Ahmadinejad is having a great week on the international front -- first with Maliki, then with Karzai, then his little speech to the SCO.
Meanwhile, US policy on Iran is veering toward incoherence. There are so many layers to the US war effort, and State won't let the Pentagon take control of policy, and vice versa. Bush is just standing there with folded arms repeating his mantra, "What do I hire you people for?" The upshot is a crazy quilt of policy initiatives, from which Maddy is making mounds of hay.
But I get your point. In this context, however, the big difference between Gandhi and al Qaeda is that Gandhi wasn't a dope dealer. I will explain that remark as soon as I consume a quart of coffee.