February 20, 2008


Glenn Reynolds is taking a short vacation, so Megan McArdle, Ann Althouse, and I will be filling in for him at Instapundit until Monday.

At the end of each day, I'll cross-post my InstaMJT links here.

Posted by Michael J. Totten at February 20, 2008 9:52 AM
psst...grammar alert on Insty...you may want to change the I to me as the receiver of the car keys. Happy driving.
Posted by: allan evans at February 20, 2008 11:19 am
Allan beat me to it. I hate to see my favorite site spoiled with egregious grammer. It's really jarring.
Posted by: David Docetad at February 20, 2008 11:21 am
Yikes, thanks.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at February 20, 2008 12:31 pm
Michael, you hear anything about this?
I think this is related to Muqtada
Posted by: JohnnyDepp at February 20, 2008 12:55 pm
The source said; there are suspicions of American - Israeli and possibly British intelligences behind this assassination attempt.
i.e., they don't know who did it.
Irradiated materials and exotic toxics (thallium, polonium, dioxin) are a KGB thing. I'd suspect ex-mukhbarat types looking for payback for what al-Sadr's militia has done to many many sunnis.
Posted by: rosignol at February 20, 2008 1:55 pm
Kudos MJT. Mr. Reynold's is a class act and it is great to see your involvement with him.
Posted by: rsnyder at February 20, 2008 4:23 pm
Off topic but related, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Ahmedinijad get whacked. I think the liklihood of this happening may be higher than a strike on the nuclear facilities, and it could be more cost-effective. He's definitely forfeited his status as statesman, and is nothing more than a loudmouthed terrorist.
I read a blurb in Haaretz that he's visiting Baghdad, and the Iraqi government will be protecting him. Sounds like an opportunity!
Posted by: MarkC at February 21, 2008 8:29 am
Off topic but related, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Ahmedinijad get whacked.
I would.
The US's goals in Iran are to get them to stop enriching uranium, and in the long term, encourage the government to become something less obnoxious, either via peaceful reform or revolution.
Whacking Ahmadinejad does not bring the US closer to either goal. His death would not stop the nuclear program, and his abysmal understanding of economics is doing more to increase discontent among Iranians than the US could ever do on it's own.
If Ahmadinejad gets whacked, it'll be someone other than us behind it- we want him alive.
Posted by: rosignol at February 21, 2008 10:44 am
I thought for a minute that your writing style had made a radical departure owing to having maybe to address a different audience. But then I noticed the comment about "Cover Guy" was Megan McArdle. So, never mind.
Posted by: Pat Patterson at February 21, 2008 9:04 pm
Obviously, the idea of whacking the Iranian president is a long shot, but so is your argument that Ahmedinijad is somehow hastening the demise of the regime, and therefore "we want him alive." This seems to show a rather short-sighted view of things. The Middle East is full of dictatorships with discontented citizens. True, Ahmedinijad is the only president - the dictator of Iran is Khameni, but one can assume that Ahmedinijad has his eyes on that prize, and if he gets it, then he will be well beyond the reach of Iran's joke democracy. And armed uprising is just waiting for Godot.
I have no idea how things would play out internally if Ahmedinijad got whacked, maybe it would make things worse. Even so, given the history of modern dictatorships, and the kinds of things Ahmedinijad is threatening, I think your point is a little too glib.
Posted by: MarkC at February 21, 2008 11:33 pm
Post a comment

Winner, The 2008 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Winner, The 2007 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Read my blog on Kindle

Sponsored Links

Buy a used boat

Shanghai Hotels

Yachts for sale

Recommended Reading