Everyone seems to think it is a bad idea. That doesn't really matter, since it is one of the only ideas left. In essence, the idea is: scale the state down to a level where it aligns with primary loyalties and can create an acceptable level of efficiency in its problem solving. Additionally, within the context of warfare, mini states are much easier to deal with than virtual ones. Of course regional experts, particularly when they attempt to rise above their area of expertise into grand strategy, will disagree:
Cole: But aside from the selfish interests of all the political actors inside and outside Iraq, as a practical policy, partitioning Iraq is too risky. It would probably not reduce ethnic infighting. It might produce more. The mini-states that emerge from a partition will have plenty of reason to fight wars with one another, as India did with Pakistan in the 1940s and has done virtually ever since. Worse, it is likely that if the Sunni Arab mini-state commits an atrocity against the Shiites, it might well bring in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. They in turn would be targeted by Saudi and Jordanian jihadi volunteers.
BBC: Airlines account for 5.5% of UK carbon emissions, according to a recent Oxford University report, but that will rise to a quarter by 2050 unless action is taken.
A better approach for Branson is to use his green fund to invest in alternatives to aviation. For example, my current company uses a global network and process control to provide just in time/place production anywhere on the planet. The result is a massive decrease in the need for air freight within the industry we are targeting.
This from Wretchard over at the Belmont club: This means that the way forward lies not so much in creating technology heavy versions of 20th century government but of creating new versions of 18th century government; a kind of retro future where we are all settlers on the Information Frontier and Washington is but a city of marble and of dreams, and distant as only a vision can be. Nicely written bubba.
TIME: "Any kind of peace deal is now out of the question," says Talat Masood, a retired Lieutenant General who now works as a military analyst in Islamabad. "Pakistan is sliding into the same situation as we have in the southern regions of Afghanistan. Musharraf is losing control." He points out that the attacks will boost the political fortunes of the conservative Islamist opposition parties, and could even cost Musharraf support among moderates.
Musharraf is making a cardinal error: turning the plausible promise that holds together these groups onto himself instead of directing it against foreign troops in Afghanistan...
Hmmm, since it now looks like the air strike was from a predator (hmm... boys with video joysticks...), it looks like Musharraf isn't sinking himself. We are sinking him.