From the El Paso Times…..

Mexico is one of two countries that “bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse,” according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.

The command’s “Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)” report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico. “In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico.

In many ways, Mexico has it worse than Pakistan. Lots of low level types die every day in Pakistan. But most of the elites are never touched because they play a double game. When Pakistan is forced to admit that someone of high level is working with the “bad guys” they put them under house arrest and let them do what they please. In return, the militants rarely kill anyone important in Pakistan.

In contrast, a lot of high level people in Mexico have either been killed (because they did not work with the bad guys) or had to face real jail time (because the government found out that they were working for the bad guys). Both of these things are largely unheard of in Pakistan. This is largely because Mexico is trying to destroy the destabilizing elements with in the country where as Pakistan is trying to get along with its destabilizing elements.

The disgusting thing is that the US is giving far more money to Pakistan (who is not really trying) then it is to Mexico (who are making an honest effort). At least there is a chance that Mexico can be saved. No such chance exists for Pakistan.

And least you think that we can deal with any collapse of Mexico by the simple expedient of sealing our border, remember this: A lot of our oil comes from Mexico, and it will not easily be replaced.

From the Chicago Sun Times…..

The press corps, most of us, don’t even bother raising our hands any more to ask questions because Obama always has before him a list of correspondents who’ve been advised they will be called upon that day.

I can still remember when Bush was taking flack for trying to control the media, but Obama can get away with this with nary a peep.

But that is hardly news to anyone who has been paying attention.

Broken Heart, New Alfa Romeo, Funded by Belgian Taxpayers From Reason Magazine.

After Action Report—General Barry R McCaffrey USA

Tanker-Grabbing Pirates Drown, with Bounty from Danger Room.

From The Telegraph…..

“In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favour,” Mr Olmert said

“I said ‘get me President Bush on the phone’. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn’t care. ‘I need to talk to him now’. He got off the podium and spoke to me.

“I told him the United States could not vote in favour. It cannot vote in favour of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of state and told her not to vote in favour.”

That is Olmert talking tough to impress an Israeli audience. He even saw fit to mentioned how Condoleezza Rice was humiliated in the same article. I suppose that reveals him to be a true gentleman of the finest qualities.

It may have gone down well in Israel, but I can’t think that it made him very many friends in America. I can’t think of how he could have possibly done more to make it seem like the US was Israel’s lap dog.

This week’s rant of the week is “The World’s Pornographic Interest in Jewish Moral Failure” by Jeffrey Goldberg.

From The New York Times….

President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran’s suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials.

I don’t understand why this article got printed. It is a known fact that the New York Times will print anything and everything without regard to national security. But the article reads like a bunch of Bush supporters were trying to do some legacy enhancement. In the process I think they damaged America’s national interests.

Particularly harmful was the article’s assertion that Israel has decided that it can not effectively attack Iran without US help. I have long suspected that was the case. But leaking an official assessment to that effect (or pretending you are) does not help the cause of halting Iran’s march towards nuclear weapons.

It would have been better had there been strategic ambiguity in regards to Israel’s ability. After all, even though everybody and their brother might suspect that Israel could not do much on their own, nobody can be quite sure given Israel’s past history. And that was useful pressure all the way around.

I suppose the article could be full of disinformation. In which case it is all well and good. But hard experience has taught me never to expect government officials to leak things for the right reasons.