The Economist Sets a Low Bar

I was reading last month's Economist and came across this passage that struck me as hilarious. Like Bill Kristol, the writers for this magazine can say the most ludicrous things and yet somehow sound perfectly reasonable while doing so. Case in point:

In this maelstrom, what can the Americans do? Since this summer they have defined their military "main effort" as the build-up of the Iraqi army and police. Although the police have proved a disappointment...the army is a qualified success. Though plauged by poor discipline, inefficiency, corruption and desertion, it has so far remained politically reliable. And although not nimble or numerous enough to prevent low-level, day-to-day killings, it is probably now strong enough in most cities to prevent the militias and insurgents from simply taking over.

P.S. As ridiculous as that is at first reading, read it a second time. Note the two qualifiers ("probably" and "most") in the last sentence.


  1. Here's a couple more bits of nonsense

    "politically reliable"
    Does that mean it's otherwise unreliable?

    "simply taking over"
    Does that mean that the militias can take over, if they put in a little effort or does it have to be a lot?

  2. Anonymous8:10 PM

    That's pretty funny.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fiat Currency

Central Planning Works!