All Re..Richard Perle v. Paul Krugman: A Debate On The War On Terror
democracynow.org;
Some interesting views put out by Perle. And, personally I thought Perle held his ground pretty well. Especially since both Goodman and Krugman were against him, as Goodman didn't ask Krugman any tough questions, and usually gave Krugman the last word.
On Saudi Arabia, both Krugman and Perle agreed pretty much. Goodman tried to bring in GB senior and juniors dealings, but Perle talked around them. Plus Goodman tried to make some hay about Saudi donations to GB senior for his library, and another to Barbera. Personally Goodman is reaching here, as GB senior did save SA a## from Saddam, for other reasons than getting donations for his library. Why make an issue of it, as it detracted from Goodman's supposed position as a moderator.
As for Perle's NK blockade idea, it may be good for show, but I doubt if it will be effective. I like GB policy, of using China to put the squeeze on. Krugman didn't woice much of an opinion either way.
All in all, I thought Krugman gave a lot of weak, wishy washy responses. Even his best position, that we don't have the military to do Iraq, much less anything else, was weak, as he didn't respond when Perle said he never ever said we should engage every madman, and force is a last resort. |
