First off, this idea that MAD is tenable is absurd. The USSR is fallen and now we no longer have a world dominated by two offsetting powers but rather one superpower (the US) a handful of nuclear powers: some rational, some less than nice, and some that are raving lunatics (read: Iran and North Korea). MAD assumed rational actors, some of my fellow bloggers are willing to make this leap of faith. I have to agree that I view conventional nuclear aggression on the part of North Korea as unlikely, and that Kim Jung IL the lunatic theory is probably overstated. Yet we don't know. However, what really troubles me vis-a-vis mad is another assumption, that the actors are state actors balancing each other. If I were Kim Jung Il, and I just love causing a ruckus, what would stop me from delivering a suitcase bomb to Al Qaeda or any other Islamo-Fascist group to level a sizable chunk of D.C. Now, nukes do have a DNA, so this may mean that a suitcase nuke compared to an ICBM are essentially the same in terms of their ability to be traced. However, I do not know if this is true given that most recent proliferation is based on the A.Q. Khan network. Are Pakistani, North Korean, and eventually (hopefully not) Iranian nukes going to be sufficiently different to determine who is blowing us up? If so, MAD may still be relevant provided nuclear powers are rational (an assumption I believe to be careless). If not, MAD is irrelevant. All of that said, what to do next? Atlantic Monthly reported on a Korean War simulation (part deux) forecasting 100,000 casualties in the first day and Seoul in flames. Not a pretty scenario.
On to important things like the World Cup. Now as a conservative, it is an ideological obligation to hate the French. In fact it should be a personal one as I was denied entry as a child. Nonetheless, I am a Francophile and the soccer team is no exception. Zizou is once in a generation talent. I liked both Italy and France but rooted for France on the basis of Zizou and that the Italians are inveterate divers. I found the whole diving bit to be loathsome. If I were a soccer player I would rather castrate myself with a spoon than dive. Though, that comes from a no blood no foul perspective, which I suppose is unique to the Anglosphere (American Football, Rugby, Aussie Football, Hockey, even basketball). That said, Zizou's headbutt was not prompted by diving but some good old fashioned shit talk. I believe it to be one of the rights endowed by our creator to speculate aloud on whether one's opponent has made it with a goat or about fornicating with an opponent's wife. So, Zizou was wrong to headbutt the trash talking Italian. Instead, he should have stomped one of the diving Italians in the balls. Right foul, wrong player. All of that said, Italy deserves mad props. Their defense was incredible. Oh, and while Zizou was crazy good, Fabio Cannavaro should have won the golden ball. For a compelling defense of diving go to TNR's world cup blog: http://www.tnr.com/blog/world-cup.
Klinsman by the way would be a great get for American soccer. As would Becks for the MLS.