tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6034478.post108951250178467753..comments2024-03-28T03:23:26.359-04:00Comments on Doug Ross @ Journal: Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6034478.post-1089760734846819292004-07-13T19:18:00.000-04:002004-07-13T19:18:00.000-04:00Good comments.
Pete, I agree - the book _Endgame_...Good comments.<br /><br />Pete, I agree - the book _Endgame_ spells out what a president would be forced to do in the event one or more US cities were hit with a catastrophic nuclear attack.<br /><br />It ain't pretty.<br /><br />You're also right in that's it almost impossible to stop such an attack. The same book points out a new, once-classified technology that renders nukes inoperable. So there's a little hope in a technological solution.<br /><br />My feeling, though, is a pair like Kerry & Edwards (who are to the left of Ted Kennedy & Hillary according to the non-partisan National Journal!) endanger the American people through their stated willingness to "build coalitions" against terrorism, work for appeasement, and avoid confrontation.<br /><br />Evil people understand one thing: brute force. The bad guys want Kerry to win because they won't survive four more gears of George W. Bush.directorbluehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00205733284944340787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6034478.post-1089757747878597182004-07-13T18:29:00.000-04:002004-07-13T18:29:00.000-04:00Unfortunately, I don't believe the choice of Presi...Unfortunately, I don't believe the choice of President will have any bearing on the eventuality of nuclear or biological terrorism. If someone has them and is determined to use them they are just too small and powerful to really defend the US against. <br /><br />My one hope that guards against this pessimistic view is that the terrorist realize, that regardless of who is in office, if such an attack happened and was reasonably successful , meaning multiple city sized population were killed, the US population would demand a near genocidal level of nuclear attack on Syria, Iran, Sudan, along with a future guarantee that if any Muslim theocracy formed in the future it too would be annihilated. <br /><br />There was a weak but audible call for such a response after 911, I am sure that given the level of devastation of such an attack, in both human and economic costs, the cry for revenge this time would be deafening. If Kerry is President at the time and did nothing I wouldn't be surprised if there was a direct military coup or an assasination. I really think people would be that pissed off.Pete Lyonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08129198124713707459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6034478.post-1089594581289116182004-07-11T21:09:00.000-04:002004-07-11T21:09:00.000-04:00If this war had ANYTHING to do with oil, we'd have...If this war had ANYTHING to do with oil, we'd have been in Venezuela when it was undergoing its internal turmoil. A lot cheaper and easier to go in there. There's absolutely zero basis for the contention this war had anything to do with oil.<br /><br />It's about combatting the unchecked rise of Wahhabism since the Jimmy Carter days.<br /><br />Let's review Bush' record...<br /><br />Where is the Taliban? Decapitated with no base of operations.<br /><br />Where is al Qaeda? Scattered to the four winds with no base of operations.<br /><br />Where is Hussein (one of the major state sponsors of terrorism world-wide - harboring Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, a Boeing 707 used to train hijackers, who funded suicide bombers, etc.)? On trial.<br /><br />We need a beachhead against Wahhabism. Now we have one. THAT's the only thing the war was about.<br /><br />And what about Mr. Kerry...<br /><br />Kerry's record is as far left as it gets, with the added bonus of bowing to political expediency. He's changed his position dramatically, sometimes within weeks. He might be the most wishy-washy opportunist _ever_. His record spells it all out for us. And he would never have taken these aggressive moves. He is certain to dismantle the Patriot Act... undermine our defense (ask the military who it wants to win?)... and rely upon conflicted countries like France for counsel.<br /><br />It's a recipe for disaster. It's Jimmy Carter Part Deux, with someone even worse than Carter on deck.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com