I was interviewed on Thursday by Scott Horton for Antiwar Radio. The interview can be listened to here:
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is
enabled in your browser.
Or downloaded as an MP3 file here.
I’m grateful to Antiwar.com for picking up one of my articles a couple years back, which got it in front of a lot more eyes than usual. But I have to say that the interviewer here (is it the same guy who interviewed Gharib?) disappoints. It’s like listening to some guy on a college radio station. No real depth or thoughtfulness, trots out some leftist phraseology, etc., etc. Too bad since Clifton obviously has quite a bit too offer.
Geez, have I just ruined my chances of getting posted on Antiwar.com again? Ahh, that big mouth of mine . . .
I wrote a post wondering about you Jon. Got deleted. I wonder what you make of this Iran bluster. I agree with your skepticism regarding an impending attack, perhaps we’re seeing these wingnuts finally marginalized. But, all this fuss does make me wonder.
As to Justin Raimondo–who I assume interviewed Eli, he considers himself Libertarian not liberal. He does keep it pretty black and white, though.
Where you been? You’re my favorite foil. lol
If you must know, I was on vacation. You wrote a post about me and it got deleted? Sorry I missed it.
If I was less than just to Mr. Raimondo (assuming he was the interviewer), I apologize. I wasn’t impressed with his questioning. But then it’s a major event when anyone impresses arrogant, elitist me.
As to being your “foil,” don’t flatter yourself.
On the important point I’m starting to believe that everyone (except maybe John Bolton) has gotten the message that there is no military solution to the Iran “problem,” and that some other way must be found to resolve said problem. For the Israelis and the neocons this means deterrence comes more into focus, with (if a Republican gets elected in 2012) a ramping up of attempts to subvert the regime. For Democrats it means deterrence plus looking for a chance to achieve some sort of detente.
War could still happen, obviously. But in my view the chance is receding, and fairly rapidly too. Eight months ago I would have said there was maybe a 70% chance Israel would strike in 2010 or 2011. I think the odds now less than 50-50 and declining. An American attack I would rate barely above zero per cent possibility (that’s through 2012). The change has everything to do with the proponents of war starting to perceive reality. That’s why the odds have shifted.
Correction: it was one Scott Horton who interviewed Clifton. This is what I get for reading your comments without referring back to the original piece.
Maybe I misuse foil, but I enjoy responding to your comments.
I see one scenario where WE might attack, call it the TS Eliot option, that is if the economy becomes so desperate that we go out with a bang and not a whimper. Our reserve currency role could be jeopardized with our inability to reform our policies and correct our course. We’ve not yet decided whether to turn left or right. It’s looking like we’ll keep tacking right into the cliffs. Of course this is a big ship of state and will take a while to turn around once we chart a new course. But, I have little faith anything will change until everything changes.
Comments are closed.