Wasting Time With Alex
Conflicts & Wars
About the many wars & conflicts.
Monday, March 01, 2010
Hollyweird under fire
It looks like the movie “Hurt Locker”, yet another anti-military Hollyweird fantasy where the soldiers are all idiots or prone to stupid behavior, while loved by the Hollyweirdos precisely because of the portrayal, doesn’t play well with the troops that have done the real thing, and I am not surprised the troops, and especially those with the ordinance disposal units, laugh at this dumb movie.
Reporting from Baghdad, Los Angeles and Washington - Many film critics—and awards voters—have praised “The Hurt Locker’s” depiction of the U.S. military in Iraq, often singling out the bomb disposal drama for its authenticity. But as the film emerges as a favorite to win the best picture Oscar, a number of active soldiers and veterans say the film is Hollywood hokum, portraying soldiers as renegades while failing to represent details about combat accurately.
Truthfully, my first reaction was to actually wonder how the news this anti-US military movie, which I again am pointing out portrayed our troops negatively to suit the image Hollyweird has of the military, was causing a controversy and getting front page time. I admit that was not the least bit surprised about the movie’s negative portrayal, because that seems to be SOP for the left, which while it claims to have respect for the troops and to support our men and women in harms way, also seem to feel the military is an evil entity used by evil America. That this is being pointed out, and in the lefty rags of all places, is surprising.
My guess is that it is attributable to the fact that the CinC now has a (D) next to his name and his WH, despite the facts to the contrary, is now claiming Iraq as their victory. I have already pointed out that I expect much historical whitewashing and fudging to go on about the Iraqi conflict now that we have literally made all the idiots that said a military victory was impossible eat their own words. I am admitting that I didn’t expect it this soon.
I suspect that over the next decade many will rewrite the facts to create the illusion that the left wasn’t just violently opposed to us winning, but actively took measures to force us to lose in Iraq, just like was done after the fall of the USSR to hide the role the mostly pro-Soviet left played there and then. Today we have the majority of these people that were calling Reagan a warmongering nut that would start WW3, all saying that they were right there with Reagan, pushing for the military arms race and the line in the sand that finally broke the evil empire and ended the 70 plus year suffering of millions at the hand of the first collectivist paradise. That is when they don’t try to tell you Reagan’s role in the whole thing was minimal, and the lion share of the credit should go to Gorbachev, or some such other nonsense.
Anyway, I should also mention that it isn’t a coincidence that a movie that inaccurately and negatively portrays our military, like the Hurt Locker does, is up for so many movie awards. Hollyweird loves
Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Axis-of-Evil • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Monday, February 15, 2010
How much more humane!
Liberals were up in arms about the “evils” of the Bush administration, especially in regards to the efforts tied to GWoT. Evil American troops were ordered by Darth Vader to capture those downtrodden guys that are mad at capitalist America - explains why so many on the left empathizes with these guys, huh? – and stick them in those nasty “torture camps” like Club Gitmo. But because they were so successful at selling that idiotic meme, they painted themselves into a corner. Reversing course now brings with it the risk of looking like the idiots they actually are. Admitting that the holding facilities, while not a perfect solution, were the best option where no good one existed, simply is too painful. So instead of capturing them, since now that the leftists are in charge they can’t simply demand we “cut & run” because when the next attack happens we will all know to blame them and their idiocy for it, we are only left with the option of killing more terrorists. Case in point:
When a window of opportunity opened to strike the leader of al-Qaeda in East Africa last September, U.S. Special Operations forces prepared several options. They could obliterate his vehicle with an airstrike as he drove through southern Somalia. Or they could fire from helicopters that could land at the scene to confirm the kill. Or they could try to take him alive.
The White House authorized the second option. On the morning of Sept. 14, helicopters flying from a U.S. ship off the Somali coast blew up a car carrying Saleh Ali Nabhan. While several hovered overhead, one set down long enough for troops to scoop up enough of the remains for DNA verification. Moments later, the helicopters were headed back to the ship.
Now don’t get me wrong: most, if not all, of these bastards need a good killing. There are no compromises to be reached with them. It is us or them. They are not going to sit down with us and talk it out. Using drones to pop them when we can is a necessary step in curtailing their operations. But the largely unspoken fact is that since we aren’t willing to just wipe out everyone that lives in the swamps where these cockroaches are bred – thankfully so – we remain limited in our capability and responses. Our most important weapon, believe it or not, is intelligence. If we know what they are doing, hopefully, we can work against them. Thwart their efforts. Difficult under the best of circumstances, and even harder when you have these idiots in charge as the panty bomber proved. Sure Big Sis Napoletano will tell you the system worked, but we all know we got lucky there.
There is a big problem with this intelligence gathering strategy, as the article itself points out. No, it isn’t that we make more terrorists when we are aggressive and kill terrorists like the leftist idiots would like you to believe: it is that we are not gathering as much intel as we could because we are trying to avoid capturing terrorists. All because back when Bush was in charge, their BDS didn’t let these leftist tools see the difficult choices and options, leading them to denounce any and everything that was done by that administrations as not just bad but criminal. That stupidity has literally left them with no options of where to put prisoners now that they are in charge. Not unless they want to show how farcical and stupid their objections were in the first place. Nobody wants these bastards because they are real dangerous. They demonized Gitmo and are now looking like they were talking out of their rear ends when the promise to close it by went bye, and they are now left with no end in sight. So we are left with no options. If we are in the dark about what the enemy is doing, it makes it easier for them to do it.
So now, not only have we been forced to be more brutal – we now just kill – we are leaving a big intelligence gap that will come back to bite us in the wake of this all. But Bush was the cowboy moron….
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Axis-of-Evil • Homeland Security • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Monday, January 25, 2010
The enemy still wants to kill us
It looks like many now believe that the terrorists are gearing up for another attack and are pointing to Bin Laden’s own words for that. Despite the fact that “The Won” was supposed to fix all that anger evil Bush-Chimpy-McHitler had caused amongst the peaceful and tolerant muslim radicals, we keep seeing more and more stories like this one which shows how determined and hard the enemy has renewed their effort s to attack us. Now, I am not saying they did not try to get us when Bush was president, but they were not too good at it seeing as they went after our troops in Iraq and got massacred. Even in Afghanistan, where things are much harder and better for the enemy, the radicals were and continue to get clobbered. Maybe they are changing their MO now that it is obvious that fighting our troops is a death sentence and going back to trying more spectacular suicide attacks, but my guess is that they their likely motivation has more to do with the perceived weakness of any response to such attacks. After all, we are lawyering them up and giving these ununiformed enemy combatants that are at war with us our full legal protection to hide behind by treating them like common criminals, and too often, after the fact. And while I am not endorsing we throw away the Constitution and spy on our own citizens with drones like some are doing, we definitely should treat these people at war with us as such. I am not saying we should go as far as a Jewish friend of mine suggested – wrap the remains of every one of these bastards in pig skin and bury them upside down to deny them their illusion of heaven – we should stop making it so easy for them to come at us and try to kill us. After all, the Constitution was not a suicide pact, despite the best efforts of the idiots on the elft to make it so.
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Homeland Security • News • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Friday, January 22, 2010
What to make of this..
Well, today is the anniversary of Obama’s promise to close Gitmo. The spin about why Obama and his team can not keep yet another core campaign promise started a while back. Obama, we are told, has slowly realized that Gitmo is a complicated issue, a temporary “best case” solution to a “worst case” problem, and is impeded from making good on his promise. Of course, Bush was an evil moron for coming up with what I believe is a brilliant solution to an impossible problem. Oh the left is still claiming they are going to shut Gitmo down eventually, but I believe that reality will kind of intrude on that fantasy. I am also going to predict that those NYC show trials that Obama’s team promised us would end in convictions are going to meet with some serious difficulties. The terrorists are at war with us. The left seems to think that if they pretend otherwise hard enough it will cease to be the case. Anyway, glad to see team Obama’s actions, not their meaningless talk, again making Bush look right and good on this whole GWoT thing. Think the MSM will point out that Obama failed on yet another big promise?
Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Homeland Security • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Friday, December 04, 2009
START to expire.
It looks like despite the fact that the START treaty is about to expire at midnight tonight without a replacement agreement, that the Russians and the Obama admin have a tentative agreement to stick to it. While this is no loner a big deal these days - the Russians win big getting rid of all their older and crappy missiles that from what reports were leaked by our people would be just as likely to blow up right at launch time if not launc at all with this deal anyway - it is nice to see that Obama and his crew are not getting snowed on this issue as they have on practically everything else. At least not yet, or obviously.
Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Homeland Security • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Obama’s bum speech
There was literally nothing I was interested in watching or new on TV last night so I ended up watching Obama’s speech. I think he tried hard but came up woefully short. The speech TOTUS showed him tried to just do too many things, many of them contradictory, all at once. First he took time to rightfully point out how important and necessary our involvement in Afghanistan was, so he gets kudos for that. He of course took a dig at Iraq though, showing how he either lacks the understanding of why the that strategic shift from Afghanistan to Iraq was made, or simply showing the craven political motivations of a group of people that always talks a big talk but never do anything.
By now even the dumbest people should have realized that shifting the GWoT from Afghanistan to Iraq gave us a much better chance to defeat al Qaeda and other radicalized Islamic death cults, dealing their operations arm a massive blow by crushing them militarily, but even more importantly, by turning public opinion against them and what they stand for, as well as reshape one of the regions most dangerous and despotic nations. Not to mention that it gave us a major ally right next to Iran which is hell bent on destabilizing the Middle East for their own gain and getting support from others that also stand to profit from $300 dollars per barrel oil. Fighting in Afghanistan on the other hand comes with a completely different set of dynamics, at a much greater cost all things being equal, and with much less geopolitical and other kinds of benefits to the US or the world. Even Obama has gotten this I think, which makes his dig about Iraq seem petty if not outright shamefully stupid. But he had to throw a bone out to the BDS infected idiots that comprise his base, and making a dig about Bush or Iraq, even when the left was proven wrong, works.
For now he is bucking the radical idiots that think if you walk away from a war others have declared on you they will also walk away too, and actually going to up the ante somewhat. He is committing 30K troops and doing so to help get the Afghani military, police, and other security forces up to speed to do their won work, just like Bush did in Iraq (hey! Bush must be a genius if Obama is doing the same). The problem is how he ended that sentence about committing the troops to a fight he himself has said is critical and of vital interest to the Us, with national security implications across the region and the globe:
Barack Obama is to set an ambitious timetable for the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, with the first troops pulling out by July 2011. The announcement is aimed at countering US public fears that the country is being sucked into a Vietnam-style morass.
My response was WTF? You tell the enemy and your allies when you plan to bail? Why would the Afghani people take a risk, volunteer to join the military or police force, only to have the US abandon them in 18 months or so whether they are ready or not? And what do you think was al Qaeda or the Taliban’s reaction to this? You think they said “oh shit, we have to deal with 18 more months of these people beating us up”, or “Woo-hoo, the cowards are going to bail and all we have to do is hold out for a measly 18 months”? No wonder all these people with anti-US agendas pined for Obama to win the election. And the implications of this dumb move has consequences that extend way beyond just Afghanistan. Nobody should take US commitments seriously after something like this. Why should any NATO member contribute anything to this effort if we plan to leave anyway in 18 months? And the other Middle Easter countries were just put on alert that they have a better chance that Israel will do the hard work for them than the US. Iran take our demands seriously? Get real!
Now I am sure the leftists will come out of the woodwork and defend this idiotic idea of a deadline with the concept that the Afghanis have wasted 8 years already and are not taking us seriously without this kind of commitment, and I am inclined to call bullshit and point out this is just an exit strategy excuse used by those that thing we should just leave. The reason things are taking longer in Afghanistan is precisely why we moved the focus of the GWoT from there to Iraq in the first place. But if we leave Afghanistan unfinished we will be back there sooner than later, at a much higher cost – another 9-11 style attack, or even worse, one with WMDs – to us than staying the course would be. Then again, with a weak ass loser like the current presidents calling the shots, it might behoove us to incur this cost anyway just to avoid the unnecessary deaths of our troops that will be followed by a cut and runs strategy anyway. Then again, since the left considers the military to be the enemy anyway, I understand why they don’t mind wasting their efforts.
Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • All Things Government • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Monday, November 23, 2009
Who would have thunk so?
Looks like the terrorists that killed 3000 of us on 9/11/2009 are just as excited as the radical America hating left is about their opportunity to spout their views of the evils of our great nation.
NEW YORK (AP) - The five men facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday. Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks but “would explain what happened and why they did it.”
The U.S. Justice Department announced earlier this month that Ali and four other men accused of murdering nearly 3,000 people in the deadliest terrorist attack in the U.S. will face a civilian federal trial just blocks from the site of the destroyed World Trade Center.
Sure makes Holder’s choice of this venue very obvious now. It is a bone thrown out those that like them think it is America’s fault for being or doing whatever they don’t like. All the usual Bush and America hating turds can rejoice in the crap these idiots will spout and secretly, or not in many cases, nod in agreement. Of course, not even the Obama people are so stupid to believe that these people should be able to go free. That’s why Holder has promised they will be found guilty. BTW, if that claim by Holder is not a clear indication of a rigged trial and a huge problem with our justice system, I don’t know what is.
Critics of Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try the men in a New York City civilian courthouse have warned that the trial would provide the defendants with a propaganda platform.
And also the losers that agree with them. That’s how this should read. But it won’t. We all know it, but we will not say it out loud. Need to give these shlobs something to feel good about considering they are front and center for the destruction their kind of thinking is wreaking on our country these days.
The attorney general said he does not believe holding the trial in New York - at a federal courthouse that has seen a number of high-profile terrorism trials in recent decades - will increase the risk of terror attacks there.
Doesn’t matter that Osama said he targeted new York for this very kind of stuff. Watch these idiots blame Bush for this too.
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
I TOLD YOU SO!
Time to gloat a little. Maybe a lot. I pointed this exact issue out to many that then proceeded to made fun of me and joked that I should tell them such things as what lotto ticket to buy after looking into that glass ball I used to glean this tid-bit from. There is another prediction here: Club Gitmo will not close next year either. Obama’s refusal to give a new date all but proves that these bumbling idiots have realized after the fact that Gitmo was a stroke of brilliance when confronted with a near impossible situation. Suck on that lemons you losers.
Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Homeland Security • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Friday, November 13, 2009
Circus comes to New York..
Well it looks like Holder has decided to bring the terrorists behind the 9-11 attack to justice in a US courtand people already are pointing out the politics and stupidity of this move. I watched Holder get lobbed a bunch of softball questions while working out at the gym this AM and simply could not believe the crap he was saying. First off, I was baffled how he talked about bringing them to justice and having a fair and impartial trial, only to then assure the mouthpieces playing at reporting that expressed the concern that trying war criminals (my words not theirs) in a civilian court could see them getting off, that he was certain they would be found guilty.
Of course Holder avoided answering what they would be tried for and kept mouthing off that he was going to ask for the death penalty. But in the end there was no clear charges mentioned, and that was obviously on purpose. And the obvious thing to me here is that this is all a meaningless but dangerous political act of contrition intended to appease the left, and it shows. Obama, have no doubt that even though Holder is doing the talking that Obama is pulling the strings, is going to give the left that circus to paint America as the bad guy he promised. I wonder if they no longer feel this sort of stuff makes terrorists like they used to tell us back when Bush was in charge and we tried to fight these terrorists.
Also, what nobody also asked was how long this Kabuki dance would take to play out. Considering the back and forth that is sure to follow between the lawyers defending these scumbags and the Justice Department, it could take a decade or more before these trails happen. In the mean time Obama and Holder are not just (hopefully) likely to be long gone, but they score cheap political points by claiming they brought these terrorists to trail even if they are going to be locked away for another decade or more, put us all at in danger. Remember that Bin Laden pointed out the reason he chose the Twin Towers was that he wanted to amongst other things punish us for trying the other bearded camel humper that tried to blow the place up in 1993. I wonder if these Ivy league geniuses know that or simply don’t care?
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Axis-of-Evil • Homeland Security • News • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Twenty years ago today….
While most people on the right are spending today basking in the many crushing defeats handed to demcorats around the nation, and democrats and their MSM consorts spend the day spinning away the meaning of these results, we should bear in mind that today marks the 20 year anniversery of a great event: the fall of the Berlin wall, and the beginning of the end for the old USSR and it’s client state prison farm. Claudia Rosett over at Forbes has a great article discussing that topic.
Conflicts & Wars • Old & New Empires • News • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Told ya so…
Looks like that promise by the Russians to take Iranian Uranium and thus limit their enrichment capabilities and thus the collection of material needed to build a nuke the left was so proud to get, is just more smoke up our arses. How does that saying go again? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. This is episode/blunder 462 for the Obama team dealing with the Iranians. Only idiots think diplomacy works when one side, despite all its might is unable to act if the others are not willing to meet them in the middle, and the other has no interest in any kind of compromise. What’s the definition of insanity again? Do the same thing over and over, and expect a different result. And before you start saying this is just incidental and not yet official policy, think how hard I am going to rag on you when that excuse too falls short.
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Axis-of-Evil • News • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Kharma
Talk about having the country with the greatest support for terrorism getting a little of their own medicine. In an act that I am sure is Ironic to most of us but likely got missed by the Iranian monsters oppressing the people of Iran, we get this tid-bit:
TEHRAN (Reuters) – A suicide bomber killed six senior Revolutionary Guards commanders and 23 other people on Sunday in one of the boldest attacks on Iran’s most powerful military institution. The attack, in the country’s turbulent southeast, came as Iranian officials were to meet Western counterparts for a second round of negotiations in Vienna on Monday intended to help resolve a standoff with the West about Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
State media said a local rebel group called Jundollah (God’s soldiers) claimed responsibility for the attack, the deadliest on the elite Revolutionary Guards in recent years, which also wounded another 28 people at a meeting of tribal chiefs. “Rigi’s terrorist group has claimed responsibility for the attack,” said state television, referring to Abdolmalek Rigi, leader of Jundollah which is linked by some analysts to the Taliban in neighboring Pakistan. The Guards themselves accused “foreign elements” linked to the United States of involvement. Tehran accuses the United States of backing Jundollah to create instability in the country, a charge that Washington denies.
What’s hilarious is that the blame the current panty-waste do nothing cowards in DC for the attack, be it directly or indirectly, after these crooks in DC removed all aid for Iranian dissidents in the hopes of kissing up to these evil men! If anything these Sunnis are going to be backed by Saudi Arabia, where Sunnis are in the majority, but Iran is not ready to blame them yet it looks like.
I guess the mullocracy is still brutally oppressing, but the people are using some of the mullah’s own tactics against them now.
Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Axis-of-Evil • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Thursday, October 15, 2009
That’s how you do it: money for nothing and chicks for free!
Remember when the democrats where all up in arms that evil BushMcHitler sent our troops to Iraq without adequate equipment? The endless stories about the lack of body armor, mine resistant trucks, inadequate armoring on Humvees, the overstretched military which lacked enough manpower, bad MREs, or adequate internet connections so the troops would not have to watch slow loading porn? OK, that last one was a joke, but you get my drift. All that sudden caring about the troops, seemed to take a back seat to the obvious fact that it was these same democrats that defunded and drastically reduced the size and fighting capability of those troops they now worried about, so the money could be funneled elsewhere. Increased social spending that buys them votes, being the most obvious and likely target. And we will avoid the whole rigmarole about if they actually were worried about the troops or just playing politics and hurting the troops efforts because they had a vested interest in making the mission fail for now, because this would just cloud the issue I want to bring up.
Anyway, so now that they are in power and able to “help” those troops fill those gaps they agonized over and do their jobs better, this is how they choose to do it:
Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis. Among the 778 such projects, known as earmarks, packed into the bill: $25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.
While earmarks are hardly new in Washington, “in 30 years on Capitol Hill, I never saw Congress mangle the defense budget as badly as this year,” said Winslow Wheeler, a former Senate staffer who worked on defense funding and oversight for both Republicans and Democrats. He is now a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information, an independent research organization.
I guess those democrats really knew what the troops really needed now that they are in charge. Educational institutes named after the U-Boat commander of Chappaquiddick and museums are essential war fighting materiel. And I am sure the MSM will report how much better off our troops are, now that they are still fighting a war these people tried their best to make us lose, with these guys calling the shot. Don’t worry though! Just like the big O plans to use the power of government to make jobs - because this has always worked so well every time it was tried and never ended up costing the tax payer a fortune while bloating up government with more useless people that just happen to vote for democrats – I am sure he will magically find a fix for this stuff too.
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Homeland Security • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
About that help from Russia…
A couple of weeks back all the libs were pointing out how diplomacy and talk had finally made stuff happened - the US gave up efforts in putting a missile defense shield in place to shoot down Iranian missiles to please the Russians in return for them backing us up on the initiative to confront Iran with the knowledge of their new illicit nuclear processing plant - and pointing out how the Obama WH was finally going to get though on Iran. Most of us that live in the real world laughed at this ridiculous notion and pointed out Obama was likely scammed. Well, here is the proof:
BEIJING (Reuters) - Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warned major powers on Wednesday against intimidating Iran and said talk of sanctions against the Islamic Republic over its nuclear programme was “premature”. Putin, who many diplomats, analysts, and Russian citizens believe is still Russia’s paramount leader despite stepping down as president last year, was speaking after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Moscow for two days of talks. “There is no need to frighten the Iranians,” Putin told reporters in Beijing after a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. “We need to look for a compromise. If a compromise is not found, and the discussions end in a fiasco, then we will see.”
Looks like we lost again. We gave up something for nothing, and Iran is still going to build its nukes. I can not believe that the idiots in the WH have not already figured out Russia has weighed the risks of a nuclear armed Iran vs. the benefits of a nuclear armed Iran and decided the later works just fine for them. A nuclear armed Iran would drastically alter not just the composition and balance of power in the ME, but it would also drastically reduce US influence, and open the door, at least in their eyes, for Moscow to come in and fill in the vacuum. A nuclear armed Iran will also immediately affect the price and availability of oil: the price will go up drastically, and actions by Iran, hiding behind its new found security and nuclear umbrella, would/could disrupt the flow as well. Russia will make a lot more money when that happens. We are talking the potential for trillions of dollars more. And in the end, Moscow is not as reluctant to nuke iran first if they feel there are risks.
The Russians, stealing a page out of the Bush doctrine preemptively book, have taken the whole concept to a new level and now want everyone to know that they have the right to use nukes preemptively. I am sure the left will now call Putin the next coming of Hitler, fill the news 24/7 with the arrogance and lunacy of this escalation of a doctrine they didn’t agree with before, and break off all attempts to talk to the Russians, like they did with Bush. They will suddenly realize Iran is our problem and deal with it too. Ok, I was being facetious. But the point is that the Russians want everyone to know – and especially Iran – that they are not worried about a nuclear armed Iran at all. In fact, logic points to the fact that they welcome it.
In the mean time the WH response is to grab their ankles and spread even wider.
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Axis-of-Evil • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Monday, October 12, 2009
Here comes the new spin…
Here comes the left’s new spin on why Iranian nukes are actually going to be a great thing. Suddenly the nutjobs are no longer demanding a nuke free world - with the US of course being the first to unilaterally disarm, as a token of good faith, and a fantasy that this will somehow make brutal and evil thugs follow along - but embracing the reality that in our world nukes now serve an indisputable function. In fact, now that Iran is heading that way and none of their jabber-jabber has made a difference, they are all for it:
President Barack Obama was surprisingly given the Nobel Peace Prize “primarily for his work on and commitment to nuclear disarmament,” according to Agot Valle, a Norwegian politician who served on the award committee. Valle told the Wall Street Journal that the stewards of the prize wanted to “support” Obama’s goal, as expressed recently at the U.N., “of a world without nuclear weapons.”
It’s tough to think of a goal more widely espoused than the dream of an H-bomb-free planet. President Ronald Reagan and activist Jane Fonda, political opposites, came together on this one — in his second term, Reagan stunned his advisers and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev by suggesting a treaty that would take nuclear arsenals down to “zero.”
As long as a nukeless world remains wishful thinking and pastoral rhetoric, we’ll be all right. But if the Nobel Committee truly cares about peace, its members will think a little harder about trying to make it a reality. Open a history book and you’ll see what the modern world looks like without nuclear weapons. It is horrible beyond description.
During the 31 years leading up to the first atomic bomb, the world without nuclear weapons engaged in two global wars resulting in the deaths of an estimated 78 million to 95 million people, uniformed and civilian. The world wars were the hideous expression of what happens when the human tendency toward conflict hooks up with the violent possibilities of the industrial age. The version of this story we are most familiar with is the Nazi death machinery, and we are often tempted to think that if Hitler had not happened, we would never have encountered assembly-line murder.
Yeah, really. A nukless world is suddenly wishful thinking – and yet Obama is lining up and giving away the game to everyone in the hopes he can convince the Russians to lower their warhead count so we can do the same (and my bet is this idiot reduces our arsenal even if the Russians don’t because he is just that full of himself) – and these twerps sudden understand the role of nukes. Know what this talk reminds me off? The whole “détente” bullshit that these same leftists bring up when discussing SDI and our scrapped Missile Defense plans. Do they even realize how stupid this 180 looks like?
Anyway, get used to it. These collectivist apologists are laying the ground work for the Obama administration to drop the ball on Iran: letting them go nuclear. I wonder why the leftists that love to claim the North Koreans went nuclear with Bush at the helm, ignoring bill Clinton’s role in that affair, don’t give him the honor of the same defense. And credit the Bush administration with never trying to pull this ridiculous line that a nuclear armed North Korea – or Iran - was a good thing.
So, after the left has tried to talk strong while acting as weak as possible, showing strength only when they could help prevent any action against Iran that might have made a difference, they now drop even that pretense. Now a nuclear armed Iran will suddenly help bring stability to the world! I am sure that’s why the Saudis told MI-6 they would allow Israeli over flight to attack those facilities even if they later denied they said so. They still have to keep appearances for the locals I guess. But in the mean time the left is getting ready to make the Middle East become a much more dangerous place, and this article showing the left suddenly engaging the nuclear reality is nothing but the precursor to our capitulation on this issue. Talk failed.
Blogging • Insane Stuff • Conflicts & Wars • War on Terror • Homeland Security • News • Liberal Media • The Left • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink