Speaking of Dean, there is an interesting article on his foreign policy views right now at washingtonpost.com.
I'm still a bit mixed on this stuff. On the one hand, I'm in favor of invading Iraq if its done right. On the other, I'd just as soon we not if its not. So him not doing it just about equals Rumsfeld not doing it right for me.
Which leaves North Korea. No need to repeat my "withdraw the army and tell them they are burnt nuclear toast if they touch anyone in any significant way", right? Dean says he'd offer them a package in exchange for them certifiably going non-nuclear. Ya know, if he'd add my "withdraw the army and tell them they are burnt nuclear toast if they touch anyone in any significant way" to his policy, I'd probably forgive him for the appeasement aspects of his package. But you can't threaten to nuke someone who you are trying to get to give up nukes, right? Could someone check with his people and have them PM me here so I can be sure he'd not a Chamberlain?
He also said he'd have elections almost instantly in Iraq. All I'm saying is, fuck, that is exactly what I wanted to hear on that topic.
Haven't really considered the Israeli-Pali implications of his views yet, except that I do appreciate his appreciation of Bush's don't-deal-with-Arafat policy, which he impliedly would continue.
All in all, sounds like someone is telling him what the Hellos of the world want to hear. Have him PM me. I promise it'll be just between me and him.
Hello
