Reader comment on: Stockman on Neoconservative Imperialism
Submitted by Allen Tobias (United States), Aug 14, 2012 21:30
It seems to me that Stockman has, since his "exposure" in the Reagan administration when his own position was exposed ... he held contrary opinions on the same important governing issues, was himself unable to hold firm on policy and lost the confidence of his superiors, turned from a kind of bright bad boy of his party into the kind of critic with a personal ax to grind against conventional Republicanism and its view of the status quo.
That being said, I think you take him far too seriously.
Stockman does err bu most tellingly and importantly in your fourth place:
Yes "Mr. Stockman confidently deems Iran to be 'irrelevant' ... until it sets off an atom bomb in a Western city or shuts down the Persian Gulf oil supply ... " but I think that we must face the fact that an Iranian atomic attack will fall not in the West but if it comes, which I doubt, it will more likely aim to strike at Israel. What is now truly more relevant is this: that any belicose act on either side may trigger the shut down of a most vital oil supply. The West, for one, will not tolerate it. Nor, in fact, will China. But China may be forced may then feel itself forced into a position of limited military support of Iran.
Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.
Other reader comments on this item
|⇒ Stockman again [226 words]||Allen Tobias||Aug 14, 2012 21:30|
|GREAT post [88 words]||George Garrison||Aug 14, 2012 18:41|
Comment on this item