Robert Mugabe is an Evil, Evil Man

Although their are a lot of narcissistic, corrupt leaders of nations in the world Robert Mugabe is far and away the worst of this despicable lot (Ahmadinejad, Burma General Than Shwe, Sudan President Omar al-Bashir, Hugo Chavez...). It really is amazing how the leadership of Africa refuses to intervene (calling out Thabo Mbeki in particular here) even though it is clear Mugabe will do anything to remain in power until his death.

Seriously, how can the political leadership of Africa watch Mugabe arrest his competitor in the runoff battle soon after he reenters the country, let his supporters beat up U.S and British diplomats in the country and have his goons threathen to burn U.S. and British diplomats alive (I do not think it was an idle threat).

Mugabe has already completely destroyed his country -- it is going to take a generation of Zimbabwians to repair the damage this maniac has already done -- what else does he have to do before Mbeki steps in? I realize he was the idol for the African liberation movement, yet does this entitle him to commit every possible crime against humanity?

Mbeki is already a complete lame duck. It is inexcusable why he can't show some leadership and do the right thing.

The Iranian Nuclear Threat

Although I have been an extreme skeptic of charges that Bush and/or Israel would attack Iranian nuclear facilities since rumors started flying in 2001, I am beginning to think this actually may happen.

In addition to the serious consequences such an action would have on the global economy and state of security (nicely laid out by Nouriel Roubini recently), I remember watching a panel discussion on PBS in 2002 or so where Lawrence Eagleburger (of all people) stated that if the Bush administration used military force against Iran he would be the first person to speak out against the POTUS. Furthermore, I always believed that the bellicose rhetoric from W was a diplomatic ploy to force greater concessions from the Iranian leadership (he really could not be crazy enough to add even more gasoline on the Middle East inferno... right?).

Roubini quotes Joschka Fischer, foreign foreign minister of Germany, who believes that Israel will attack Iran before the end of the Bush administration. Fischer is definitely a credible source (the Green Party in Germany should not be confused with their disorganized U.S. counterpart).

Furthermore, the Asia Times had a recent article stating a similar opinion. Now I have no idea if they used the same sources, yet apparently this possibility is moving into the realm of feasibility. If Fischer and the Asia Times are correct...

Clearly we need to do everything possible to stop Iran from having The Bomb. Considering how close Pakistan and India have been to blowing each other up... just imagine what the hell could happen if Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Egypt also have The Bomb... outright frightening, I know, I know.

Furthermore, I do not envy the incredibly difficult position Israel lies in. In addition to a domestic political nightmare right now, you have a freakshow lunatic in Ahmadinejad threatening to blow Israel off the map. It is imperative for America to support the only real voice of democracy in the Middle East and ensure Israel continues to thrive for generations to come.
------
What is really missing from this debate is a conversation on what actually is happening in Iran right now. I listened to a fantastic podcast from Stratfor (do yourself a favor... subscribe to their podcast -- seriously!) this morning. Basically, there is an intense political fight currently between different factions of the conservative political hierarchy. Although I strongly disagree with almost everything the Iranian conservative movement stands for, I do believe figures like Akbar Rafsanjani and others will be reasonable on the nuclear issue if they win out in the current political struggle.

I have heard rumors in the past few years that Khamenei is nearing the end of his life, which makes the implications of the current conservative political battle even more important. However, it makes negotiations on the nuclear issue even more difficult if there is an apparent void of leadership at the top.

Bottom line is we should be waiting to see who the new Ayatollah is after the death of Khamenei before "cowboying up" and bombing Iran. If Iran gets The Bomb before then... well that is really unfortunate... yet I am not convinced we can even eradicate the Iranian intentions militarily anyways. Now, if an Ahmadinejad ally should take over as Ayatollah that is a different ballgame. Quite frankly Ahmadinejad's talk of the "hidden iman" scares the hell of me and reminds me of one General Ripper.

Google and the iphone

I am a huge fan of the iPhone. Although I have heard legitimate criticism it is prone to breakdown, I have only had one minor software problem that was fixed by my local Apple store at The Grove here in L.A.

Google reader is a fantastic tool to keep up-to-date with the blogs I enjoy following (currently at 180 and counting). The most recent update for this iPhone feature is fantastic -- I highly, highly suggest anybody who has an iPhone to add this feature to your home page: www.google.com/reader/i.

I'll have some thoughts on Iran, communication between generations and how McCain has lost control of his brand in the next few days.

Inflation in Zimbabwe

If you ever wanted a sign that Robert Mugabe is truly an evil human being and is completely destroying the former bread-basket of Africa here you go:

"During the meal, one of my mates was drinking beer — 750ml bottles of Castle Lager (fondly called bombers). He ordered a fifth one, was advised that the price, which when he ordered his first, second, third and fourth ones was 160 million per bottle, had gone up to 340 million per bottle."

This is completely ridiculous. It is almost unfathomable South African President Thabo Mbeki continues to support Mugabe. What a travesty.

Update: Mugabe just introduced a Z$500,000,000 bill.

Highway Toll Lanes for L.A.

Good op-ed in the Los Angeles times yesterday on the trial plan approved by the Metro board here in L.A. to convert carpool lanes into toll lanes. I totally support this plan.

We currently finance transportation infrastructure primarily through gasoline taxes, as cars become more fuel efficient we will be losing needed revenue for infrastructure development. So we need to raise more revenue for transportation infrastructure. I am completely against increasing the sales tax to finance transportation infrastructure (there will probably be a 1/2 cent sales tax increase proposal on the November County of L.A. ballot -- VOTE NO!). Not only are sales taxes incredibly regressive, we should be getting money for transportation projects from the users themselves.

Some of the arguments against highway toll lanes and my response:

1. Freeways should be free.

• Freeways are not free, we pay for the lack of infrastructure with the opportunity cost of our time as we sit in traffic.
  

2. The lanes will be only for the rich, "Lexus Lanes"

• This one is real bizarre. The people who will be most inclined to use the toll lanes are one's who value their time the most. Think about a plumber. Paying say $20 (at most) to save up to an hour of their day in traffic they could probably fit two more service calls into their daily routine. A service call is at least $100 each.
• So the plumber makes $180 more each day. That is $900 a week in additional revenue that is possible with these toll lanes. That is real money to the plumber.
  

This proposal is a true win-win. We gain the revenue needed to develop a better transportation infrastructure and we allow entrepreneurs to improve our economy.

Mohamad Mahathir Has a Blog

Wow, this is awesome. The former prime minister of Malaysia now has a blog. For those of you who don't know, this guy was (and continues to be) one of the more colorful former leaders of the world. Some of his outlandish and utterly ridiculous statements have been:

• “Currency trading is unnecessary, unproductive and totally immoral. It should be stopped.”
• “As if these are the good old days when people can shoot Aborigines without caring for human rights.”
• "The Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.”
• "The Muslims have never ill-treated the Jews."

Mahathir claims he has friends that are Jewish... in the same manner as a cracker from Alabama in the 19th century would say he had black or gay friends.

His blog may be real interesting, once you hit post it is captured in a RSS feed -- even if you delete it right away. This could get real interesting. Citizens of a country deserve the public officials they elect.

On the Unipolar Moment...

I just listened to a fantastic podcast reading of a Richard Haass article in the May/June issue of Foreign Affairs entitled "The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S. Dominance."

Highlights, or rather comments/observations I particularly found of interest:

• Realist theory would predict an era of unipolarity would be followed by a multi-polar world. Haass makes a persuasive case we are headed towards an era of nonpolarity, or "a world dominated not by one or two or even several states but rather by dozens of actors possessing and exercising various kinds of power."
• Potential competing global powers are too entrenched in the movement of technology, energy, goods, etc. to consider removing themselves from this structure -- their own political stability depends on access to this system.
• Nonpolarity will increase the potential military/terrorist threats to the U.S. A global system with multiple powers (state and nonstate) is more difficult to defend against than a single enemy (Cold War).
• Nonpolarity makes diplomacy significantly harder. Getting a broad base of stakeholders to agree on anything will be increasingly difficult.
  

Haass is totally on point to state free trade of goods and investment amongst countries must be expanded. My final thoughts:

• The fact that we are leaving a unipolar world to an era where the U.S. has less power to shape the world in the image we see fit only gives greater impetimus on the importance of increasing the free trade of goods and investment.
• As much as some regimes, such as China, are not exempliary actors for the world or their own people, it is essential that we enhance global free trade of goods and investment to ensure the current system continues to be stable. I would hate to find out what would happen if Communist Party of China (CPC) where to disintegrate, much less the governments of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and others.
  
• I agree with Haass that our military budget probably should be increased, yet I would go further than Haass on the military expansion concept. The wars of the future are going to be different than the wars of the past. Iraq and Afghanistan clearly have shown that. Honestly -- and granted I have no military experience or expertise -- we should explore radically increasing the number of marines and eliminating the army completely. Are we really going to ever fight a broad based land war again? Probably not. Instead of the army we need to develop a core of nationbuilders (funny how Bush was disgusted with the thought of nationbuilding as a candidate in 2000 and it has since defined his Presidency). Details and role of engagement would have to be hamered out, yet the concept should be explored.
  

Like... You Know?

I was having dinner with my father about a month ago and I kept catching myself using the phrase "you know." I immediately commented that this was really a horrible expression. What a ridiculous way to ask for acceptance or comment from the intended audience. This got me thinking... how prevalent is this phrased used by the public, politicians and self described "talking heads" on political/public affairs programs.

Seriously, try it some time. I have been quit surprised at how widely used this phrase really is. After reading an article in the Daily News about a week ago that the public image of the Valley from the 1950's is gone -- whites are less than 50 percent of the population now -- can we officially kill the "like" metaphors and insert the phrase "you know" as a cultural faux paux?

Hey, just a thought.