Mideast heads for policy revamp under Biden. “Contrary to Donald Trump’s impulsive policies in the Middle East, Joe Biden is expected to shift back to a more conventional US stance and re-engage with Iran, redrawing regional geopolitics.”
Me, back in August on “Trump and the Art of the Middle East Peace Deal”:
That’s not to say that peace and love and happiness will break out throughout the Middle East, or that the peace will last forever. Trump is a dealmaker, not a miracle worker.
But the theater we just witnessed — which will create genuine benefits for Arabs and Israelis alike — was a very stable genius bit of kabuki:
• Launch a peace initiative designed to induce the Palestinian leadership to indulge in their usual bad behavior
• Give Israel the backing it needed to ostensibly take dramatic action in the Jordan River Valley
• Watch as Israel and Arab governments practically fall over themselves to “give up” the land Israel never annexed in exchange for the peace the Arabs need in order to face Iran
Nobody actually gave up anything, and everybody is getting what they wanted.
Well, except for the Palestinians, but yet again, they have only themselves to blame for that.
Maybe Trump just lucked out, somehow bumbling his stupid way into peace.
Maybe the Bolshoi Ballet is just an infinite number of hyperactive spider monkeys in leotards.
Nothing this well-orchestrated happens by happenstance.
I hope you have plenty of fresh unexpectedlies ready in case Biden lets Iran back out of the box Trump put them in, as he seems inclined to do.
If I’d known Biden was open to ‘lockdowns’ as he now states, which is something historically unprecedented in any pandemic, and a terrifying practice, one that won’t ever end because elites love it, I would never have voted for him.
— Dr Naomi Wolf (@naomirwolf) November 9, 2020
WHAT COULD GO WRONG? Biden’s Pick for Coronavirus Task Force: ‘Living Too Long Is Also a Loss.’
This morning, President-elect Biden announced that his coronavirus task force would include Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, chair of the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania.
In a 2014 essay in The Atlantic, Emanuel, explained why he hoped to die at age 75, and why he finds the idea of living past that date to be morally problematic:
As Jim Geraghty writes, it’s curious choice by Biden, considering the virus is “particularly dangerous to the elderly.”
Later in that above Atlantic article, as PJM’s Tyler O’Neil spotted, Emanuel wrote that in his opinion, for someone over 75, “Flu shots are out:”
What about simple stuff? Flu shots are out. Certainly if there were to be a flu pandemic, a younger person who has yet to live a complete life ought to get the vaccine or any antiviral drugs. A big challenge is antibiotics for pneumonia or skin and urinary infections. Antibiotics are cheap and largely effective in curing infections. It is really hard for us to say no. Indeed, even people who are sure they don’t want life-extending treatments find it hard to refuse antibiotics. But, as Osler reminds us, unlike the decays associated with chronic conditions, death from these infections is quick and relatively painless. So, no to antibiotics.
Obviously, a do-not-resuscitate order and a complete advance directive indicating no ventilators, dialysis, surgery, antibiotics, or any other medication—nothing except palliative care even if I am conscious but not mentally competent—have been written and recorded. In short, no life-sustaining interventions. I will die when whatever comes first takes me.
The dark winter. t.co/VIkkFrjbDj
— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) November 9, 2020
h/t Stephen Green