Pancake City

I don’t know if this will be a regular feature or a one-time thing. But I frequently come across several interesting “info thingies” on the same subject and think it would be useful to gather them all in one place. What held me from doing it so far, and is still a hindrance, is that the thing I want to share is often from many media and time-consuming to gather and edit, like a one-minute clip from an hour-long radio show.

This mini-info bomb on rising food prices is short in scope, and all from one source as of now, although check back in a week for updates.

* A wonderful graphic outlining all of the major factors contributing to food shortages and higher prices. (Washington Post)

* Article: “The New Economics of Hunger“. (WP)

When it comes to national security, tough talk and demagoguery aren’t foreign by any means to politicians. The fear of being attacked and unknown dangers lurking in the shadows makes some people responsive to fear mongering and machismo-laden threats. Many a politician feel a need to show his or her toughness through inflammatory rhetoric and by uttering things that are likely a gross exaggeration of the politician’s true thoughts.

I’m half-Iranian though, so even with this in mind I was taken aback by something Hillary Clinton said recently:

Clinton further displayed tough talk in an interview airing on “Good Morning America” Tuesday. ABC News’ Chris Cuomo asked Clinton what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.

“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said. “In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”

I don’t know what to highlight: “obliterate” or “them”.  Can we at least acknowledge that there is a difference between a country’s government and its people? Unless all 66 million Iranian men, women, and children all press the red button to launch a nuclear attack, do we really want to destroy the people along with the Iranian government in this scenario?

Using the word “them” instead of “the Iranian government” isn’t a slip of the tongue or a random word choice. It’s reflective of a dehumanizing, us-vs-them view of the world that is bereft of nuance and lumps people and governments into “the enemy.” We had seven years of this, and to disastrous consequence. I don’t want to hear any Presidential candidate even pay lip service to this type of thinking, regardless if his or her true views are probably more nuanced.