Quote:
Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Mar 29 2005, 05:07 PM
Brutal writing and complete piece of crap. I was shaking my head through most of the article as the author uses the mistakes of the past to excuse or justify the probable mistakes of the future. The dufus admits that the World Bank is bad and has been run by immoral creeps in the past, but condones putting a complete and total looney in the position because its the way things have been done. Good thinking! Oh, and then there's the good old American mentality of "if it ain't working, don't fix it, just throw it away". Even better thinking!
Seriously, putting Wolfowitz into the position of leading the World Bank must have neo-cons everywhere walking around with a hard-on. Its not surprising in any way based on the PNAC manifesto. Their goal has been world domination through the use of military and economic power. They've flexed their muscle by kicking the shinguard out of a helpless Iraq (nee installing democracy in the region) and are now eye-balling other targets, which has the peasant nervous, so no one is going to test the American military (although now would be a great time IMO). Mission accomplished on the military goal. Next step? Economic. What better way to get countries by the economic balls than through the World Bank? And who better to see in the big chair for the PNAC than the shinguardhead who co-authored their Mein Kampf? Its a fit made in hell. Can't wait!
BTW... I laughed out loud when the guy tried to paint "liberals" as being the creators of "big government", and then had the balls to heap praise onto someone from the Bush administration. Bush, the puppet of the neo-con agenda, has done more to expand government and control during his time in office than any president in recent memory. The irony made me laugh heartily!
|
You cant be serious? Do you really think the author likes Wolfowitz and condones his nomination? He compares him to Trotsky for heavens sake.
“This is why Wolfowitz, a warmonger and disciple of Soviet terror master Leon Trotsky, is a perfect choice to serve as World Bank commissar.”
What the author is saying is this: Wolfowitz is bad, and hopefully liberals will realize what damage WB has done in the past and what damage is it doing right now, regardless who is its boss. Because the problem with the WB is not who heads it, but the fact it exists – actions and policies of the WB create poverty, wars, fund dictators, realocate resources etc.
In other words, Wolfowitz will show World Bank`s true colors.