I think its important for folks to understand that the reason that Iran has what you kindly describe as "democratic deficiencies" is due to actions of the United States, in 1953. the CIA M16 assisted in the overthrow of the Iran's dem,ocratically elected prime minister (he nationalized their oil company) . He was replaced by the Shaw of Iran who was seen by most Iranians as repressive, corrupt and beholden to the US. Thus in 1979 the Islamic Revolution occurred - leading to the current (at least as of yesterday) repressive and theocratic government. What's important to understand, therefore, is that it is the actions of the United States that brought this awful situation to the Iranians.
There’s almost nothing you just wrote that is true. The Prime Minister was not elected, he was appointed by the Shah, and the United States played a marginal role at best in his dismissal.
Your assessment is so condescending to the Iranian people as if they had no agency whatsoever but were totally manipulated for decades by the United States.
Using X as a source is not a proof. There are many sources which shows Nancy has the correct information. You have sourced and interpretation if history put up by people who aren't historians, but more than weekend hacks.
Mossadegh was an elected member of the Majlis and again elected Prime Minister by the Majlis in 1951. The Shah's only role here was to confirm him. If anything, Mossadegh was his rival.
The United States was whistled-in by the UK after Mossadegh expropriated the Iranian assets of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (an ancestor of today's BP).
That the US had Iranian collaborators on the ground there changes nothing about the basic offence, which is that it provided external material support to depose the democratically-elected leader of a sovereign country.
Mr. Bosch is supported by Wikipedia, Herb. It may not always be right, but it's the default global argument-settling authority. Sorry, time for you to slink away.
Of course the Iranians had agency. Some of them used it to assist the coup. The rest were up against the power of carbon capital, backed up by the UK and US governments. We know how it has gone for them since then, and Trump's war of choice is just the latest installment.
Funny that you don’t say a word about the fact that he dissolved parliament. and the referendum to justify that was recognized as a phony referendum as it required voters to enter separate booths depending upon whether they were voting yes or no so it wasn’t a secret election at all.
By summer 1953, Mossadegh's coalition had fractured, and he faced a "deadlocked" Parliament. To break the stalemate, he encouraged his supporters in the Majlis to resign (denying a quorum) and then called for a national referendum to formally dissolve the body.
• Under the 1906 Constitution, only the Shah had the formal right to dissolve Parliament. Mossadegh justified bypassing this by invoking "the will of the people."
The referendum held in August 1953 (just days before the coup) was not a secret ballot. Reports from the time, including those by the Associated Press and other international observers, describe a system where:
• Separate Booths: There were distinct, physically separate tents or ballot boxes for "Yes" and "No" votes.
• Intimidation: Voters had to display their identity cards, and "No" booths were often surrounded by pro-government mobs or situated in locations that made voting against the dissolution dangerous or socially impossible.
• The Result: Mossadegh claimed a 99.9% victory (roughly 2 million "Yes" votes to 1,200 "No" votes).
You and others deny the agency of the Iranians. Blaming what is happening today on a highly contested event that occurred over 70 years ago
Why am I not surprised that empire simps immediately play the ad hominem victim card when called out for their sycophancy?
Your facts are cherry-picked, nimrod. In the grand scheme of U.S. meddling in Iranian affairs, they are mouse crap as opposed our imperialist elephant dung. Your contextual historical awareness is wanting.
Neither nancy nor Herb have adequately documented their claims (sorry Herb, your citation to X isn't probative), but nancy is closer to what Wikipedia says:
Mossadegh "served as the prime minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953, elected by the 16th Majlis.[5][6] He was elected to the Iranian parliament in 1923 and served through a contentious 1952 election into the 17th Iranian Majlis,[7] until his government was overthrown in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état aided by the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom (MI6) and the United States (CIA), led by Kermit Roosevelt Jr.[8][9] Mossadegh's National Front was accordingly suppressed in the undemocratically manipulated 1954 general election.[10][11][12][13]"
Nancy, your antipathy toward the US is retroactive, as we weren't so much a world power yet in 1953 (the year I was born). Britain was still the dominant power in Iran in 1953, and it looks like MI6 was at least as culpable as the CIA:
"His time as prime minister was marked by the clash with the British government, known as the Abadan Crisis, following the nationalisation of the Iranian oil industry, which had been built by the British on Persian lands since 1913 through the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC/AIOC), later known as British Petroleum (BP).[14]"
Well, what do you know: *Big Oil* was a politically repressive global power, long before we all learned about global warming!
In such a soul-sucking war-mongering day, it gave me some comic (cosmic) relief to read about the hypocrisy of Republican leaders secretly installing solar panels.
Thanks for all your shareable news about our planetary trajectory. I'm grateful for my solar panels, ev, and Climate First Bank account.
That is funny! Republicans secretly putting in solar panels. Sound like a secret you made up in your imagination because you have nothing else to argue with. Trust me, I know hundreds of Republicans and none of them have solar panels. We know how to use a calculator.
Trust you? A behavioral finance guru who subscribes to a hack like Bari Weiss and uses declarative Pinker capitalism and poverty fallacy as voice of authority?
Indeed, I was thinking the same thing, 👉yet another endless war, all the more reason to end the reign of the oil🛢️ cartel, whose CEO's benefit financially off all these wars, weapons of death, equals higher gas prices and more profits and Trump, he too, is in bed with them and other gross polluters bidding, for I have not forgotten, when Trump invited the fossil fuel CEO's to Mar Lago and saying to them,, you give me a billion dollars(bribe) and I will undo all of Bidens green energy deals
It may be common knowledge that when a national government is in trouble, the easiest thing for them to do is to start a war--as a distraction from serious domestic problems. I don't have to cite the president's many domestic problems, just Epstein.
An excellent essay on an absolutely dismal day. The US has been screwing around with Iran since 1953. And most Americans don't understand the history and as a consequence understand that their 'exceptionalism' brought Iran to this exact spot.
These war crimes will serve their purpose, however. Nobody is writing about Epstein and Trump's demonstrated affection for young children, and certainly only a few people are actually thinking about creating a world in which we are committed to reducing emissions and halting the currently inevitable slide towards massive food insecurity and eventual societal disintegration.
So this essay is wonderful. Thank you from Toronto, Canada.
Reducing emissions is not synonymous with eliminating transportation. But there will be massive food insecurity if we NOT reduce emissions as a priority right now. It is not an option.
Food insecurity? Are you not aware of how food is grown and delivered to where you obtain it? Rescuing emissions will make it less and less available and much more expensive.
Oh, Ken! "Rescuing emissions"? You're still not reading your comments before posting them! You can edit yourself in place, you know: click the three dots ('...') on the upper right of your comment. But maybe it's time to stop making yourself a figure of fun on the Internet altogether? Please, Dr. Towe, you're squandering a respectable scientific reputation by yelling at clouds!
After all this time, you still haven't made your case that *reducing* emissions will make food "less and less available and much more expensive." Do you have complete causal knowledge of the universe, like Laplace's demon? Like him, you're overlooking the stochasticity built into the cosmos! Nor do you account for teleonomic and stochastic human agency.
As always, you don't provide any time frame for any imaginary horrors ensuing from global decarbonization. What do you see in your clairvoyant visions? On what date will all fossil fuel burning be abruptly banned by the Green King of the World? Failing that, when will collectively accelerated, market-driven, incremental electrification with wind and solar plus storage result in the first missed meal? Do you expect any decarbonization-related food insecurity to be permanent?
OTOH: GMST is already 1.3 degrees higher than 100 years ago, and rising at greater than 0.2°C/decade (https://berkeleyearth.org/global-temperature-report-for-2025/). Do you foresee more or fewer people dying in heat waves, flash floods, tropical cyclones, and so forth? Do you think capping the trend of GMST at 2, 3, or more degrees of warming will not cap the rising global cost of the warming in money and grief? Are we doomed to a maximally tragic ending to the drama of the climate commons? Is that what your palantir descries?
I don't have a crystal ball myself, but I'm less worried about food security, than of being burned out of my historically wildfire-safe home. Fire season comes earlier every year: less rain falls as snow at high elevations; soil moisture dries up sooner in spring, as evapotranspiration increases with average growing-season temperature; and all categories of wildfire fuel dry out sooner and catch fire more easily. The flames are burning closer year by year. You're not helping, Dr. Towe!
Oh yes.. thanks for your help. I forgot to add that across the world food is grown and delivered by vehicles that run on gasolines and renewable biofuels. Eight billion people rely on that. The same is true for continuing the transition to renewables and EVs. And also for global travel. I'm sure even you know what that means for that "dangerous:" CO2 in the atmosphere. Better stop Mal Adapting and start serious real adapting because mitigations won't work without adding even more CO2. Remember Mr. Mal.. rapid reductions in CO2 emissions will take none of the CO2 already added out of the atmosphere to lower global temperatures.
Burned? Most wildfires are caused by humans anyhow. Some intentionality (arson) others by accident and many by poor forest management.
Bill, I think you know that the politics of ESG are complicated, especially now with the current administration. Just as the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) provided funding for backlogged federal land maintenance projects, the source of that funding came from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is funded by 50% of federal energy development revenue. Talk about a sausage factory!
Now this story about mineral development from Alaska. Pebble Mine may become another Project Chariot.
The answer to all the crazy shit is to just stop buying cheap plastic crap from Amazon, or just stop buying so much crap. We are all culpable and until we put the brakes on our stupid Techno-capitalist addiction, this isn’t headed in a direction anyone - red, blue, purple - really wants to go. Let’s learn from the Cubans and Ukrainians!
"The answer to all the crazy shit is to just stop buying cheap plastic crap from Amazon, or just stop buying so much crap. "
I'm afraid that's not the answer on a global scale. Direct carbon pricing, i.e. collectively internalizing some of the social cost of carbon in the market price, would not only accelerate emissions reductions, but would make plastic more expensive. That would have some public benefit, but would also encourage the use of other resources to make cheap crap.
Because as long as crap is cheap, we'll buy it! That's the tragedy of the commons. Voluntary private renunciation is up against the free-rider problem. Only collective (i.e. government) intervention in the otherwise-"free" market can mitigate most of the common-pool resource market failures ongoing since agriculture arose.
The same great analysis also applies to Iran, Bill. I'd love to see your book translated into Farsi, for Iranians, with the final chapter adjusted for Zoroastrian and Koranic references to the power of the Sun. If they could realize the hige solar potential they have, they could drop their nuclear power obsession! Keep up the great work
I recommend reading (or rereading) Pope Francis' 'Encyclical on Climate Change & Inequality'. I'm finally reading his 2015 'call to action'. Hard to beleive, just like Bill, how he was ignored, for the most part, when warning about the destruction of our planet being done by us.
The number of Americans with some concern about climate change has just topped 50%! Now, if in the next 10 years (up to 2036) perhaps we will move to 50% who are alarmed ! Then, after we loose a few million people in the country to natural disasters, and half the population of the western states have moved to places that have water, we could get to enough of a majority to win an election, if we still have those, and we might be ready to change.
Brian.. how many people will we lose if they cannot be fed because of the lack of oil needed for transportation. There are no EVs providing the transportation of groceries.
I am too old for this, I am sickened by the ignorance of our population who keeps buying the lies and propaganda that the republicans always bring to the table, and keep electing these one-track bastards. It’s wackamole every time, you kill, and another one rises up. America and Americans will now become a target for every crockpot out there.
Even Trump’s CIA has concluded that any successor government will more likely be even more repressive - Republican Guards- rather than a reform administration. So be careful what you wish for.
The world could well collapse in economic chaos in the coming days and weeks leading to more right wing repression everywhere as well.
Life isn’t always as simple as you suggest.
And besides do we really want some deranged madman of a president to be unilaterally making these decisions without involvement of the American people or our allies?
Well we all know what you are rooting for. Look at your answer. It is like "yeah, we killed most of the leaders and bad guys" but what if..... You are a leftist. Your opinions don't count.
I recommend reading (or rereading) Pope Francis' 'Encyclical on Climate Change & Inequality'. I'm finally reading his 2015 'call to action'. Hard to beleive, just like Bill, how he was ignored, for the most part, when warning about the destruction of our planet being done by us.
Us humans have created a dependency on oil. To remove this problem we would have to give up all the following. plastics, gasoline, fuel for all airborne, farming equipment, all clothing, shoes not made from natural materials, foam cushions, all electronics. Just to name a few. This is the driving force for greed , wars, unbearable suffering.
I think its important for folks to understand that the reason that Iran has what you kindly describe as "democratic deficiencies" is due to actions of the United States, in 1953. the CIA M16 assisted in the overthrow of the Iran's dem,ocratically elected prime minister (he nationalized their oil company) . He was replaced by the Shaw of Iran who was seen by most Iranians as repressive, corrupt and beholden to the US. Thus in 1979 the Islamic Revolution occurred - leading to the current (at least as of yesterday) repressive and theocratic government. What's important to understand, therefore, is that it is the actions of the United States that brought this awful situation to the Iranians.
There’s almost nothing you just wrote that is true. The Prime Minister was not elected, he was appointed by the Shah, and the United States played a marginal role at best in his dismissal.
Your assessment is so condescending to the Iranian people as if they had no agency whatsoever but were totally manipulated for decades by the United States.
See this detailed history of those times:
https://x.com/tabletmag/status/2027862330638290992?s=46
Using X as a source is not a proof. There are many sources which shows Nancy has the correct information. You have sourced and interpretation if history put up by people who aren't historians, but more than weekend hacks.
Nonsense.
Mossadegh was an elected member of the Majlis and again elected Prime Minister by the Majlis in 1951. The Shah's only role here was to confirm him. If anything, Mossadegh was his rival.
The United States was whistled-in by the UK after Mossadegh expropriated the Iranian assets of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (an ancestor of today's BP).
That the US had Iranian collaborators on the ground there changes nothing about the basic offence, which is that it provided external material support to depose the democratically-elected leader of a sovereign country.
Mr. Bosch is supported by Wikipedia, Herb. It may not always be right, but it's the default global argument-settling authority. Sorry, time for you to slink away.
Of course the Iranians had agency. Some of them used it to assist the coup. The rest were up against the power of carbon capital, backed up by the UK and US governments. We know how it has gone for them since then, and Trump's war of choice is just the latest installment.
Funny that you don’t say a word about the fact that he dissolved parliament. and the referendum to justify that was recognized as a phony referendum as it required voters to enter separate booths depending upon whether they were voting yes or no so it wasn’t a secret election at all.
By summer 1953, Mossadegh's coalition had fractured, and he faced a "deadlocked" Parliament. To break the stalemate, he encouraged his supporters in the Majlis to resign (denying a quorum) and then called for a national referendum to formally dissolve the body.
• Under the 1906 Constitution, only the Shah had the formal right to dissolve Parliament. Mossadegh justified bypassing this by invoking "the will of the people."
The referendum held in August 1953 (just days before the coup) was not a secret ballot. Reports from the time, including those by the Associated Press and other international observers, describe a system where:
• Separate Booths: There were distinct, physically separate tents or ballot boxes for "Yes" and "No" votes.
• Intimidation: Voters had to display their identity cards, and "No" booths were often surrounded by pro-government mobs or situated in locations that made voting against the dissolution dangerous or socially impossible.
• The Result: Mossadegh claimed a 99.9% victory (roughly 2 million "Yes" votes to 1,200 "No" votes).
You and others deny the agency of the Iranians. Blaming what is happening today on a highly contested event that occurred over 70 years ago
Funny that you are a bootlicking empire simp.
You deny the agency of American Empire, and it is embarrassing that you display propagandized narrative deflection in a public forum. Do better.
Why am I not surprised that your only response is to personally attack me in lieu of providing even one fact that would counter my previous comments.
You do have a way with words however I will give you that. I’ve never been called a boot licking Empire simp. I may attach that to my business cards.
Why am I not surprised that empire simps immediately play the ad hominem victim card when called out for their sycophancy?
Your facts are cherry-picked, nimrod. In the grand scheme of U.S. meddling in Iranian affairs, they are mouse crap as opposed our imperialist elephant dung. Your contextual historical awareness is wanting.
If one goes through history.. especially the last 100 years (but probably way back)
most of the problems in the world, are things we 'tried to fix'
OUR immigration problem.. all because of what we have done - - AS POLICY - - in central America
Neither nancy nor Herb have adequately documented their claims (sorry Herb, your citation to X isn't probative), but nancy is closer to what Wikipedia says:
Mossadegh "served as the prime minister of Iran from 1951 to 1953, elected by the 16th Majlis.[5][6] He was elected to the Iranian parliament in 1923 and served through a contentious 1952 election into the 17th Iranian Majlis,[7] until his government was overthrown in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état aided by the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom (MI6) and the United States (CIA), led by Kermit Roosevelt Jr.[8][9] Mossadegh's National Front was accordingly suppressed in the undemocratically manipulated 1954 general election.[10][11][12][13]"
Nancy, your antipathy toward the US is retroactive, as we weren't so much a world power yet in 1953 (the year I was born). Britain was still the dominant power in Iran in 1953, and it looks like MI6 was at least as culpable as the CIA:
"His time as prime minister was marked by the clash with the British government, known as the Abadan Crisis, following the nationalisation of the Iranian oil industry, which had been built by the British on Persian lands since 1913 through the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC/AIOC), later known as British Petroleum (BP).[14]"
Well, what do you know: *Big Oil* was a politically repressive global power, long before we all learned about global warming!
In such a soul-sucking war-mongering day, it gave me some comic (cosmic) relief to read about the hypocrisy of Republican leaders secretly installing solar panels.
Thanks for all your shareable news about our planetary trajectory. I'm grateful for my solar panels, ev, and Climate First Bank account.
That is funny! Republicans secretly putting in solar panels. Sound like a secret you made up in your imagination because you have nothing else to argue with. Trust me, I know hundreds of Republicans and none of them have solar panels. We know how to use a calculator.
Trust you? A behavioral finance guru who subscribes to a hack like Bari Weiss and uses declarative Pinker capitalism and poverty fallacy as voice of authority?
Not a chance.
Indeed, I was thinking the same thing, 👉yet another endless war, all the more reason to end the reign of the oil🛢️ cartel, whose CEO's benefit financially off all these wars, weapons of death, equals higher gas prices and more profits and Trump, he too, is in bed with them and other gross polluters bidding, for I have not forgotten, when Trump invited the fossil fuel CEO's to Mar Lago and saying to them,, you give me a billion dollars(bribe) and I will undo all of Bidens green energy deals
It may be common knowledge that when a national government is in trouble, the easiest thing for them to do is to start a war--as a distraction from serious domestic problems. I don't have to cite the president's many domestic problems, just Epstein.
An excellent essay on an absolutely dismal day. The US has been screwing around with Iran since 1953. And most Americans don't understand the history and as a consequence understand that their 'exceptionalism' brought Iran to this exact spot.
These war crimes will serve their purpose, however. Nobody is writing about Epstein and Trump's demonstrated affection for young children, and certainly only a few people are actually thinking about creating a world in which we are committed to reducing emissions and halting the currently inevitable slide towards massive food insecurity and eventual societal disintegration.
So this essay is wonderful. Thank you from Toronto, Canada.
Reducing emissions is not synonymous with eliminating transportation. But there will be massive food insecurity if we NOT reduce emissions as a priority right now. It is not an option.
Food insecurity? Are you not aware of how food is grown and delivered to where you obtain it? Rescuing emissions will make it less and less available and much more expensive.
Oh, Ken! "Rescuing emissions"? You're still not reading your comments before posting them! You can edit yourself in place, you know: click the three dots ('...') on the upper right of your comment. But maybe it's time to stop making yourself a figure of fun on the Internet altogether? Please, Dr. Towe, you're squandering a respectable scientific reputation by yelling at clouds!
After all this time, you still haven't made your case that *reducing* emissions will make food "less and less available and much more expensive." Do you have complete causal knowledge of the universe, like Laplace's demon? Like him, you're overlooking the stochasticity built into the cosmos! Nor do you account for teleonomic and stochastic human agency.
As always, you don't provide any time frame for any imaginary horrors ensuing from global decarbonization. What do you see in your clairvoyant visions? On what date will all fossil fuel burning be abruptly banned by the Green King of the World? Failing that, when will collectively accelerated, market-driven, incremental electrification with wind and solar plus storage result in the first missed meal? Do you expect any decarbonization-related food insecurity to be permanent?
OTOH: GMST is already 1.3 degrees higher than 100 years ago, and rising at greater than 0.2°C/decade (https://berkeleyearth.org/global-temperature-report-for-2025/). Do you foresee more or fewer people dying in heat waves, flash floods, tropical cyclones, and so forth? Do you think capping the trend of GMST at 2, 3, or more degrees of warming will not cap the rising global cost of the warming in money and grief? Are we doomed to a maximally tragic ending to the drama of the climate commons? Is that what your palantir descries?
I don't have a crystal ball myself, but I'm less worried about food security, than of being burned out of my historically wildfire-safe home. Fire season comes earlier every year: less rain falls as snow at high elevations; soil moisture dries up sooner in spring, as evapotranspiration increases with average growing-season temperature; and all categories of wildfire fuel dry out sooner and catch fire more easily. The flames are burning closer year by year. You're not helping, Dr. Towe!
Oh yes.. thanks for your help. I forgot to add that across the world food is grown and delivered by vehicles that run on gasolines and renewable biofuels. Eight billion people rely on that. The same is true for continuing the transition to renewables and EVs. And also for global travel. I'm sure even you know what that means for that "dangerous:" CO2 in the atmosphere. Better stop Mal Adapting and start serious real adapting because mitigations won't work without adding even more CO2. Remember Mr. Mal.. rapid reductions in CO2 emissions will take none of the CO2 already added out of the atmosphere to lower global temperatures.
Burned? Most wildfires are caused by humans anyhow. Some intentionality (arson) others by accident and many by poor forest management.
This is a great read on a day of distressing reads.
Bill, I think you know that the politics of ESG are complicated, especially now with the current administration. Just as the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) provided funding for backlogged federal land maintenance projects, the source of that funding came from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is funded by 50% of federal energy development revenue. Talk about a sausage factory!
Now this story about mineral development from Alaska. Pebble Mine may become another Project Chariot.
https://www.northernjournal.com/trump-is-all-in-on-mining-in-alaska-with-one-glaring-caveat-pebble/?ref=northern-journal-newsletter
What I detect is a tendency to defer to the kids on environmental issues. It was Ivanka and Jared pushing for GAOA and DTJ pushing to kibosh Pebble.
In the meantime, Biden-approved oil exploration on the North Slope is taking place next door, literally, to Nuiqsut.
https://www.northernjournal.com/willow-oil-field-caribou-protections-nuiqsut-blm/
The answer to all the crazy shit is to just stop buying cheap plastic crap from Amazon, or just stop buying so much crap. We are all culpable and until we put the brakes on our stupid Techno-capitalist addiction, this isn’t headed in a direction anyone - red, blue, purple - really wants to go. Let’s learn from the Cubans and Ukrainians!
"The answer to all the crazy shit is to just stop buying cheap plastic crap from Amazon, or just stop buying so much crap. "
I'm afraid that's not the answer on a global scale. Direct carbon pricing, i.e. collectively internalizing some of the social cost of carbon in the market price, would not only accelerate emissions reductions, but would make plastic more expensive. That would have some public benefit, but would also encourage the use of other resources to make cheap crap.
Because as long as crap is cheap, we'll buy it! That's the tragedy of the commons. Voluntary private renunciation is up against the free-rider problem. Only collective (i.e. government) intervention in the otherwise-"free" market can mitigate most of the common-pool resource market failures ongoing since agriculture arose.
The same great analysis also applies to Iran, Bill. I'd love to see your book translated into Farsi, for Iranians, with the final chapter adjusted for Zoroastrian and Koranic references to the power of the Sun. If they could realize the hige solar potential they have, they could drop their nuclear power obsession! Keep up the great work
I recommend reading (or rereading) Pope Francis' 'Encyclical on Climate Change & Inequality'. I'm finally reading his 2015 'call to action'. Hard to beleive, just like Bill, how he was ignored, for the most part, when warning about the destruction of our planet being done by us.
The number of Americans with some concern about climate change has just topped 50%! Now, if in the next 10 years (up to 2036) perhaps we will move to 50% who are alarmed ! Then, after we loose a few million people in the country to natural disasters, and half the population of the western states have moved to places that have water, we could get to enough of a majority to win an election, if we still have those, and we might be ready to change.
Brian.. how many people will we lose if they cannot be fed because of the lack of oil needed for transportation. There are no EVs providing the transportation of groceries.
Time to grow local, eat local, support local. There was a time when this was the norm.
Ok.. but that was when the population wasn't eight billion and world-wide travel didn't use fossil fuels to feed people across the world.
I am too old for this, I am sickened by the ignorance of our population who keeps buying the lies and propaganda that the republicans always bring to the table, and keep electing these one-track bastards. It’s wackamole every time, you kill, and another one rises up. America and Americans will now become a target for every crockpot out there.
And "decorum" is what is broken by Trump. The spirit of Constitutional law and international comradery. And the Israeli bully leads him into Iran.
Dumbest article. So you think the world is not better off when the ayotollas are dead. Wow.
Even Trump’s CIA has concluded that any successor government will more likely be even more repressive - Republican Guards- rather than a reform administration. So be careful what you wish for.
The world could well collapse in economic chaos in the coming days and weeks leading to more right wing repression everywhere as well.
Life isn’t always as simple as you suggest.
And besides do we really want some deranged madman of a president to be unilaterally making these decisions without involvement of the American people or our allies?
boy I hope @Russell Parish can grasp this, but the lack of facts from her makes me think it can’t
ha ha
Well we all know what you are rooting for. Look at your answer. It is like "yeah, we killed most of the leaders and bad guys" but what if..... You are a leftist. Your opinions don't count.
I recommend reading (or rereading) Pope Francis' 'Encyclical on Climate Change & Inequality'. I'm finally reading his 2015 'call to action'. Hard to beleive, just like Bill, how he was ignored, for the most part, when warning about the destruction of our planet being done by us.
I share your dream, Bill.
Us humans have created a dependency on oil. To remove this problem we would have to give up all the following. plastics, gasoline, fuel for all airborne, farming equipment, all clothing, shoes not made from natural materials, foam cushions, all electronics. Just to name a few. This is the driving force for greed , wars, unbearable suffering.