| Subscribe via RSS

…The U.S. Will Not Force Musharraf’s Hand

November 8th, 2007 | No Comments | Posted in Politics

Musharraf1. Despite a history of corrupt government and leadership that has been dominated by military dictators, Pakistan remains one of Washington’s principal political and military assets in South Asia. Historically, the country was seen as an essential obstacle to Soviet expansion. More recently, as it sits in the middle of Afghanistan, China and India, the geographical importance for U.S. foreign policy and regional stability cannot be underestimated. A minor tilt in the balance of power can quickly create uncertainty in a region over which the U.S. has tenuous influence.

2. Pakistan is a nuclear time-bomb. Ironically enough, it developed nuclear capabilities with the support of the U.S. Treasury. The U.S. has provided billions of dollars in economic and military aid since the mid-1950s, helping create one of the world’s largest armies. In exchange, the country’s governments have consistently supported U.S. foreign policy positions.

3. While Pakistan appears to be losing the battle in quelling Taliban interests within the country, and despite a dubious and unsuccessful “crackdown” on Islamist extremists, the country remains a key strategic outpost for the U.S.’s war on terror.   

4. Oil and natural gas. Pakistan has an abundance of both. With natural resource prices surging and the expansion of both Chinese and Russian influence of global oil stocks, the U.S. is loathe to alienate a significant producer of essential resources. While environmentalism is the buzz word of the day, and Bush has expressed a desire to move off of foreign oil supplies, U.S. consumers are still gluttons for oil.

5. Relations between India and Pakistan are somewhat held together by U.S. interests in the region. While some commentators suggest that U.S. support of Pakistan’s ruling party has driven a wedge between India and Pakistan, any change in policy from the White House (or Pentagon) could provide either side with the gumption to extend its reach into Kashmir.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google]

Related Posts

  • ….We’re in a Food Crisis
  • …You Should Travel Alone To Somewhere Foreign
  • …Tech and Human Rights in China: Ha!
  • …Nuclear Power is Making a Comeback

    October 25th, 2007 | No Comments | Posted in Business, Environment, Politics

    mr burns1. We are greedy, greedy energy users. Unless consumption patterns change dramatically, energy production and use will contribute to global warming through large-scale greenhouse gas emissions. According to an MIT study, rebuilding nuclear power plants could be one of the principle means of reducing carbon emissions. Unfortunately, alternative energy, while promising, is too early in its development for broad commercialization.

    2. September saw the first application for a new nuclear power plant in the United States. Filed by New Jersey-based utility NRG, the company is aspiring to build a plant in Texas. This comes nearly 50 years after the Shippingport Atomic Power Station in Pennsylvana became the first commercial power plant to go online and the first application since 1979 - the year of the Three Mile Island partial meltdown.

    3. Politicians are climbing on board. Former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman, a self-declared environmentalist during the first Bush term, states that “the Bureau of Labor Statistics will tell you that the nuclear industry is the safest place to work - safer than real estate and Wall Street.” Nice.

    4. Environmentalists are climbing on board. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace and now co-chair of the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition, used to see nuclear energy as “synonymous with nuclear holocaust.” He is now singing a different tune, declaring “nuclear is the cleanest, safest and has the smallest footprint” of any major means of energy production. And he’s not the only one.

    5. Demographics. As of 2006, approximately 41% of the U.S. population was under the age of 30. With every passing year, fewer and fewer people remember the accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Given that more people spend time cruising Facebook than history books, this should come as no surprise.

    For more about the financial requirements surrounding nuclear power, click here. And for a perspective on the other side of the coin, click here.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google]

    Related Posts

  • …The Debate Around Global Warming Is Irrelevant
  • ….We’re Less Green Than We Think
  • ….We Shouldn’t Exchange Xmas Gifts
  • ….Al Gore Should Run for President

    October 22nd, 2007 | No Comments | Posted in Politics

    Al Gore
    1. He was just a few chads away - and some mysteriously uncounted votes in Dade Country - from winning it in 2000 - and this time he won’t have to run against George Bush again.

    2. He recently won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize (actually, he shared it with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) for his work on climate change. How many other presidential contenders have that kind of accolade on their resume?

    3. He invented the Internet. How can you not vote for someone who created the most amazing communications system since Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone? For those who don’t believe Gore invented the Internet, here’s his quote during a 1999 interview with Wolf Blitzer: “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

    4. He spent eight, long years as Bill Clinton’s second-in-command. Can you imagine having to spend that much time watching Clinton charm, bumble and stumble his way for that long. Just for that, Gore deserves a shot at being numero uno.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google]

    Related Posts

  • ….You Have to Vote
  • ….Things Aren’t What They Seem
  • ….You Shouldn’t Use Google Chrome
  • ….You Have to Vote

    October 10th, 2007 | 1 Comment | Posted in Politics

    Voting
    1. It’s your democratic duty. By not voting, you might as well be endorsing anarchy or a dictatorship. Okay, that’s an extreme position but willingly take a pass on casting your ballet is truly lame.

    2. If you don’t vote, you forfeit your right to complain about the government of the day. Everyone likes to criticize the government; it’s one of those things that unites people (along with talking about the weather). But if you don’t vote, you automatically forfeit your right to complain. Don’t even think about squawking about a new tax or reduced services because you had your chance to make your voice heard but you passed.

    3. Voting keeps you connected with your community. At a time when people don’t even though their neighbours, voting is an exercise that brings people together, regardless of age, income, ethnicity or income.

    4. Voting feels good! There’s nothing like marking your ballot and then putting it in the ballot box. After voting this morning, I felt empowered. And you don’t get to vote very often so it’s a novelty.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google]

    Related Posts

  • ….You Need to Get on Facebook
  • ….Year-End Lists are Boring
  • ….Morning Exercise is Good for You
  • ….It’s Good to Be Canadian

    September 25th, 2007 | No Comments | Posted in Politics

    Loonie-1
    1. It only took 31 years but the Canadian dollar is finally close to being par again with the greenback. Hello, cross-border shopping! Hello, exchange rates that aren’t embarrassing anymore!

    2. Canada has an abundance of wood and oil - two commodities in strong demand, particularly fast-growing countries such as India and China. All we have to focus on now is keeping everyone away from our water, especially those drought-stricken Americans.

    3. The NHL’s 2006/07 season is just a few weeks away. It’s the sign that summer is over, and that we can now retreat to our home entertainment centres to watch hours of sports.

    4. We may have the annoying Avril Lavigne but she’s an angel compared with Britney, Lindsay, Hilary, etc.

    More: It’s weird when you take pride in a beer commercial but Molson’s “I Am Canadian” ad continues to prompt people to break into “Oh Canada”. And if Canadians ever need a pick-me-up, Paul Henderson’s game-winning/series-winning goal during the 1972 Summit Series always does the trick.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google]

    Related Posts

  • ….Britney Spears is Done Like Dinner
  • ….Radio is So Uninspiring
  • ….Canada Leads the World in Donut Consumption

    • Enter your email address:

      Delivered by FeedBurner