(Via Texas Scribbler; and Mr. Stanly will likely have some choice words for me, no doubt.)
Beyond his shallow and self serving guffawing regarding the possible impending cataclysm facing New Orleans in the form of hurricane Gustav, Moore actually managed to emit a sentence of clarity. I'll be charitable and imagine Moore's logic stems from critical thought and not the political, self induced slavery that has marked much of his career. To wit:
He defended Iran’s aggressive tactic with nuclear weapons by suggesting that if Iran invaded Mexico and Canada, as we had with Iraq and Afghanistan, even he and Olbermann would “build whatever we could do defend ourselves.”The cause of Iran's aggression is manifold, but the heart of it lies at the fact that the US has hammered two of it's bordering neighbor's governments to dust. I'm not defending Iran here but merely pointing to a more logical course of thought regarding their increased aggression and rhetoric. Moore's analogy is sound, whatever scrambled ideology it's based upon. Iran's elevated aggression is likely due more to geo-political strategy and not the "Armageddon" popularly embraced by various talking heads. Iran should be dealt within the realistic accordance of a state reacting in a strategic fashion and not the fantastic and mystical vision some (including John McCain) have afforded.