That’s the BDS in action, VotC. Classic symptoms.

Oh. My. Goodness. ‘dog I greatly enjoy our sparing and witty repartee but you must stick to facts. If your girl Maddie was successful, that is one heck of a low standard.

Or is this one of those cases where they didn’t develop a bomb until they were provoked into it by a speech from the “world’s biggest moron”?

I am saying we should do real diplomacy. That means using what we have as leverage. Our leverage is with the Unocol and Mobil contracts, and our close alliance with India.

Instead of doing this, Jules wants to plead with the Chinese. And Bush wants to keep up the junta’s invite to his ranch next summer. Oh, and he’ll have his spokesperson put out “strongly-worded” statements such as:

“we understand that some of the monasteries have been sealed. Now, obviously, this has, again, a chilling effect on protestors, but we would ask that everyone show restraint and allow those who want to express themselves to be able to do so in Burma.”

VC,

The difference between Maddie’s diplomacy and Bush’s, is that Maddie, using whatever means at her disposal (ok, let’s not go there), was…. successful.

How is that different than Maddie Albright, heels, pearls and all dancing with ‘lil Kim and letting him have a little feel (eiuww, sorry, hope you’ve eaten) and having him promise her he’ll never, commies honor, never make a nuclear bomb?

Simple as I am, I believe I’ve got it. Its about Bush isn’t it? If he does something, anything, he’s an out of control cowboy. If he does nothing or if he advocates the continued flow of the world’s oil so that people have heat and transportation, he’s obviously got a sinister agenda.

I got news for you ‘dog. No matter whether oil is Unocal or Exxon Mobil or Total Fina Elf, or a completely nationalized entity: some rich guy somewhere will still be making a lot of money off of it. You have to let go of that at some point.

No doubt they’ll say they’re sorry for killing all those monks, and they’ll promise, scouts honor, never to hurt Unocol or Mobil.

Why can’t we be like Sweden and New Zealand and just tut tut about it and get on with our comfortable subsidized lives while the wogs off each other?

Burma is a regional problem, let the “region” or the UN take care of it. No sense going all cowboy imperialist over a few murdered religious extremists, and if we can do a little business on the side, well heck, that’s just gravy. Right? I mean the Clintons did business with the PRC and the Norks while they were doing dastardly things to dissenters and minorities and nobody who’s opinion mattered gave a crap. And since you know doubt dislike religious extremists here, why do you care about them 8000 miles away? And the perps are socialists so the Left should be fawning over them anyhow.

And your prescription is we shouldn’t have them over for BBQ???

I guess that’ll show ‘em. Man I am confused.

My point is that Bush’s “sanctions” from last week were obviously impotent. And there is no “endless diplomacy” because Bush has yet to do squat (see quotes I pasted above).

Meanwhile the leverage we actually have – through Unocol and Mobil, as well as our great relations with India – is ignored. Instead, Jules wants us to go crawling to the Chinese to please! please! do something!

Bush doesn’t have to bomb Rangoon. But he also doesn’t need to invite the junta over to his ranch for dinner (see quotes above).

This nuance stuff is so confusing to a simple sort like me.