Nonproliferation’s Time Has Passed
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, April 18, 2008

WASHINGTON — The era of nonproliferation is over. During the first half-century of the nuclear age, safety lay in restricting the weaponry to major powers and keeping it out of the hands of rogue states. This strategy was inevitably going to break down. The inevitable has arrived.

The six-party talks on North Korea have failed miserably. They did not prevent Pyongyang from testing a nuclear weapon and entering the club. North Korea has broken yet again its agreement to reveal all its nuclear facilities.

The other test case was Iran. The EU-3 negotiations (Britain, France and Germany) went nowhere. Each U.N. Security Council resolution enacting what passed for sanctions was more useless than the last. Uranium enrichment continues.

When Iran’s latest announcement that it was tripling its number of centrifuges to 9,000 elicited no discernible response from the Bush administration, the game was over. Everyone says Iran must be prevented from going nuclear. No one will bell the cat.

The “international community” is prepared to do nothing of consequence to halt nuclear proliferation. Which is why we must face reality and begin thinking how we live with the unthinkable.

There are four ways to deal with rogue states going nuclear: pre-emption, deterrence, missile defense and regime change.

Pre-emption works but, as a remedy, it is spent. Iraq was defanged by the 1981 Israeli airstrike, by the 1991 Gulf War (which uncovered Saddam’s clandestine nuclear programs) and finally by the 2003 invasion, which ended the Saddam dynasty.

A collateral effect of the Iraq War was Libya’s nuclear disarmament. Seeing Saddam’s fate, Moammar Gaddafi declared and dismantled his nuclear program. And if November’s National Intelligence Estimate is to be believed, the Iraq invasion even induced Iran to temporarily suspend weaponization and enrichment.

But the cost of pre-emption is simply too high. No one is going to renew the Korean War with an attack on Pyongyang. And the prospects of an attack on Iran’s facilities are now vanishingly small. What to do?

Deterrence. It worked in the two-player Cold War. Will it work against multiple rogues? It seems quite suitable for North Korea, whose regime, far from being suicidal, is obsessed with survival.

Iran is a different proposition. With its current millenarian leadership, deterrence is indeed a feeble gamble, as I wrote in 2006 in making the case for considering pre-emption. But if pre-emption is off the table, deterrence is all you’ve got. Our task is to make deterrence in this context less feeble.

Two ways: Begin by making the retaliatory threat in response to Iranian nuclear aggression so unmistakable and so overwhelming that the non-millenarians in leadership would stay the hand or even remove those taking their country to the point of extinction.

But there is an adjunct to deterrence: missile defense. Against a huge Soviet arsenal, this was useless. Against small powers with small arsenals, i.e., North Korea and Iran, it becomes extremely effective in conjunction with deterrence.

For the sake of argument, imagine a two-layered anti-missile system in which each layer is imperfect, with, say, a 90 percent shoot-down accuracy. That means one in 100 missiles gets through both layers. That infinitely strengthens deterrence by radically degrading the possibility of a successful first strike. Even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sitting on an arsenal of, say, 20 nukes, might recoil from these odds — given the 100 percent chance a retaliatory counterattack of hundreds of Israeli (and/or American) nukes would make Iran a memory.

Of course, one can get around missile defense by using terrorists. But anything short of a hermetically secret, perfectly executed, multiple-site attack would cause terrible, but not existential, destruction. The retaliatory destruction, on the other hand, ,i>would be existential.

We are, of course, dealing here with probabilities. Total safety comes only from regime change. During the Cold War, we worried about Soviet nukes, but never French or British nukes. Weapons don’t kill people; people kill people. Regime change will surely come to both North Korea and Iran. That is the ultimate salvation.

But between now and then lies danger. How to safely navigate the interval? Deterrence plus missile defense renders a first strike so unlikely to succeed and yet so certain to bring on self-destruction that it might — just might — get us through from the day the rogues go nuclear to the day they are deposed.

We have entered the post-nonproliferation age. It’s time to take our heads out of the sand and deal with it.

**
Charles Krauthammer is a 1987 Pulitzer Prize winner, 1984 National Magazine Award winner, and a columnist for The Washington Post since 1985.

Nonproliferation’s Time Has Passed
By Charles Krauthammer

I wish we could have McCain/Krauthammer 08′…actually some people with some intelligence and common sense:)

Tel

Your comments on Iran at the other blog spot were interesting…thanks.

John McCain is the older version of GWB!!!

@ Pamela

Total safety comes only from regime change. During the Cold War, we worried about Soviet nukes, but never French or British nukes. Weapons don’t kill people; people kill people. Regime change will surely come to both North Korea and Iran. That is the ultimate salvation.

Since when do we get to play God? This is the “bunker mentality” that had too many of you thinking that striking Iraq would actually mean anything to Bin laden. What it meant was that there is enough hatred in this country that we will go to war in the WRONG country to protect our….he!! I don’t know what we THOUGHT we were protecting…….this regime change thing sems to be working out just fine………for Haliburton.

HILLARY IS GONNA BE ON KEITH OLBERMAN,S SHOW TONIGHT

SO START EMAILING HIM

SEND A LOT OF LOVE FOR HILLARY

AND KICK IN HIS BALLS

HILLARY IS GONNA BE ON KEITH OLBERMAN,S SHOW TONIGHT

SO START EMAILING HIM

SEND A LOT OF LOVE FOR HILLARY

I just don’t get why Republicans feel the need to do this.

The Democratic Party is a party of JEWS and NEGROES. What makes me appreciate the Republican Party is that it is a party of REAL Americans. Not a bunch of liberal Jews and monkey-socialists.

Why is it the GOP feels the need to pander to these social parasites? The Democratic Party is a moral gutter entirely because it’s run by blacks and Jews. Do we really want that for our party?

Vote Republican for Congress to keep McCain in check!

HILLARY IS GONNA BE ON KEITH OLBERMAN,S SHOW TONIGHT

SO START EMAILING HIM

SEND A LOT OF LOVE FOR HILLARY

AND KICK IN HIS BALLS

well that shows ,,her courage and electability

she is not gonna be a president just for dems but for repubs too

and she is not gonna be president for the people who voted for her or liked her but also for those who disagree ,,,,,,and she is willing to sit with anyone anyday anytine to discuss issues,,,,

i love her

In the comment section of Taylor Marsh they are talking about everyone donating at 4:44 ET. All donations should have end with .44. So, you can donate $5.44, $20.44, $44.44 or whatever you want. The goal is to raise 1 million in one minute (w/o crashing the system).

Please consider donating at 4:44 ET TODAY. Go to
http://www.hillaryclinton.com to donate.

I already called my mom in Oregon and told her to donate at 1:44 today. She says they are being bombarded in Oregon with Obama ads and would love to donate to Hillary again.

Please pass this information on. . .

Comment by Darrell
April 21st, 2008 at 3:23 pm
@ Pamela

Total safety comes only from regime change. During the Cold War, we worried about Soviet nukes, but never French or British nukes. Weapons don’t kill people; people kill people. Regime change will surely come to both North Korea and Iran. That is the ultimate salvation.

Since when do we get to play God? This is the “bunker mentality” that had too many of you thinking that striking Iraq would actually mean anything to Bin laden. What it meant was that there is enough hatred in this country that we will go to war in the WRONG country to protect our….he!! I don’t know what we THOUGHT we were protecting…….this regime change thing sems to be working out just fine………for Haliburton.

_____________________

Darrell

The Republicans and Democrats voted to go to war.

“Democrats claim the president had manipulated intelligence about Iraq weapons of mass destruction, and thus the premise of the war. But copies of the National intelligence Estimate on which the president’s decision was based were provided to every Democratic senator who voted for or against the war. The findings were confirmed by government intelligence agencies around the world, including those of France,Britian, Russia,, and Jordan. In other words, President Bush could not have manupulated the intelligence on which the vote was based and the war was actually authorized.” D Horowitz

Democrats harm our country in a time of war by down grading our commander -in chief, while our men and woman are in harms way. In attempting to make the war a sinister plot of the Bush administration they undermine our fight against radicl islamist who first attacked us in the Carter years. Bush said “you are either with us or you are against” we need to stand by our president and stop hurting our country by reckless accusations. Saddam had chance after chance to go by his agreement with the UN.

The object of war is to break an enemy’s will and destroy his capacity to fight. Therefore, a nation divided in wartime is a nation that invited its own defeat. We were attacked , we need to defend ourselves..the radical islamist have state what they wish would happen to all free men including Isreal and America..we need to listen to them,they say what they will do. American citizens have been murdered in this terror war for thirty years. The radical Islamist grievance is our freedom of religion..do you wish to give up your freedom?

Republicans do not enjoy war, but we do have the common sense to know we need to protect our great country. There are many free people around the world counting on us also.

RE: DARRELL

Interesting comments! Now get your head out of the sand!

Darrell

Also D harowitz writes ( he is much better than I):

“The critics of the White House have so distorted the reasons for going to war that a brief review in in order. UN Security Counsil Resolution 1441 was the culmination of an eleven year effort to use diplomatic means to secure Iraq’s compliance with international law, specifically with the arms-control agreements that constituted the Gulf War truce which allowed Saddam to stay in power. Resolution 1441 was passed unanimously by the fifteen members of the Security Counsil. It declared Iraq Iraq to be in “material breach” of the sixteen previous Un resolutions that had sought to enforce the truce. The Security Counsil ruled that Iraq had broken the terms of the truce and was in violation of international law.

Resolution 1441 gave Saddam a thirty day deadline to comply with its terms. These are the facts of how and why we went to war. Three months after giving Saddam chances a coalition of America, Britian, and nineteen other nations went to war to enforce it.

Iraq’s violations of the UN resolutions and the gulf war truce are not addressed in any Democratic leaders arguments against the war: not Barack Obama and not Hillary Clinton’s.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPb7rLyajXs
our girl hillary !!!
yes we will win pennsylvania

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viLuHIPbPgQ&feature=user
one day at a time
yes we will win pennsylvania

Greg,

I sincerely hope you are just being a sarcastic nincompoop. I was kind of hoping people had gotten past the whole Nazi thing seeings how it happened some 60 years ago. I will tell you why WE Republicans want African Americans and Jewish people in our party, because they are people. It doesn’t matter what color, ethnicity, economic status, or religion you are, if you believe in less government and a safer world join the GOP. I am from a small rural NC community where you dont even hear those kinds of comments around here anymore. I’m going to pray that God gives you some kind of revelation and maybe you will understand that we as white people are just that people who have lighter pigmentation. Nothing more, nothing less.

List of McCain Fund-Raisers Includes Prominent Lobbyists

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/21/us/politics/21bundlers.html?em&ex=1208923200&en=24780b6c2f928fad&ei=5087

Plane and simple…

SAW THIS ON TAYLOR MARSH

Debate Cancelled For Obama posted by OxyCon
04.21.2008 – 4:03 pm
We can’t let Barry Obama look bad, can we?
This is the debate that Obama defiantly said he would not attend, after he got his clock cleaned in Philly.
—————–

North Carolina Democratic Presidential Debate CANCELLED

We regret to inform you that the proposed Democratic Presidential Debate scheduled for April 27 has been cancelled due to time constraints and logistical issues associated with such a large, national event.

You have shown tremendous passion and interest in being a part of history as Democrats are poised this year to elect the first female or African-American President. However, there were also growing concerns about what another debate would do to party unity.

ANOTHER ONE FROM SOME ARTICLE

Let the man eat his waffle! posted by OxyCon
04.21.2008 – 3:58 pm
From NBC/NJ’s Aswini Anburajan

SCRANTON, PA — Chomping down on sausage and waffles at Glider’s Diner in Scranton today, with his Pennsylvania BFF (Sen. Bob Casey) at his side, Obama avoided commenting on former President Jimmy Carter’s meeting with Hamas.

Asked by a reporter if he had heard that Carter reported a positive outcome from the meeting, Obama looked sternly at the reporter in question and said, “Why can’t I just eat my waffle?”

Asked again by the reporter, Obama bit — not at the question but into a butter covered bite of Glider’s specialty over-size Belgian waffles. With a wink this time he said, “Just let me eat my waffle.”

Greg, you are a racist idiot, but I’m sure that you already know that. I’m a White, upper-class Republican and I’m voting for Obama! You should vote for the best candidate, not for the candidate that your same race or sex or shares the same views as you (hopefully none do). Wake up and smell the coffee, boy. The South lost and Republicans are starting to realize that black and white cultures are starting to mesh accross the country. White kids (including mine) are now wearing black hip-hop clothes, out-numbering blacks at rap concerts, and voting for black Democrats. There are more interacial couples than ever before and people like you are a dying breed. Go Obama!

Comment by Greg
April 21st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I just don’t get why Republicans feel the need to do this.

The Democratic Party is a party ….

_________________________

Your comments were racist- and I disagree with them.

The Republican party welcomes all people.

CarolinaBound,

Greg is at best a race baiter and at worse a liberal pretending to be a conservative for the sake of trying to make us conservatives look bad. If this race has shown us anything, it has shown us the democratic party will do absolutely anything to win. So don’t worry about guys/gals like Greg. That foolishness means nothing.

McCain 08!!!!!!!!!!!!

I concur the best candidate is McCain 08!

Comment by iowakaren4
April 21st, 2008 at 4:52 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPb7rLyajXs
our girl hillary !!!
yes we will win pennsylvania

**** Cut Video of Hillary! I;’m still voting for McCain but she is clearly the better choice for you democrats. But, if Obama’s name is on a joint ticket she will definitely loose.

Comment by DB
April 21st, 2008 at 5:26 pm
I concur the best candidate is McCain 08!

*** Obama blew his chance. And lets face it… He is a baby compared to Hillary and McCain and we don’t need a child to run the country.

The Republican party welcomes all people.

****** That is why we are the better party choice

I’m not sure he blew it or not but I do concur that Hillary or McCain are better candidates for the Presidency.

Obama will loose Pennsylvania tomorrow. He will be begging to join Hillary for the White House and if Hillary dares to bring Obama on board she will most certainly loose his chance for the White House.

000Comment by DB
April 21st, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I’m not sure he blew it or not but I do concur that Hillary or McCain are better candidates for the Presidency.

*** Obama has lied to frequently. Obama has made many democrats angry so much so if he is on the ticket they will be voting for McCain.

All I can say folks is there are many frauds throughout all the blogs trying to do whatever they can to influence us to either a candidate or a party affiliation. Because they are abound, it’s important for each of us to take a good hard look at all three candidates and see who we as individuals think are the best candidate. For me, McCain is far and away better followed by Hillary. Obama doesn’t even rate at this point because he seems to be anti-American and it seems the more we learn about him the worse it gets. With that said, each candidate should be looked at, vetted for his/her stance, and whomever best represents your views/moral standing/etc should get your vote. Just my thoughts.

Time will tell Obama Resign and I sure hope you’re right.

Ok, must go. Be back later.

God Bless America!!

McCain 08!

“Comment by Greg
April 21st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I just don’t get why Republicans feel the need to do this.

The Democratic Party is a party of JEWS and NEGROES. What makes me appreciate the Republican Party is that it is a party of REAL Americans. Not a bunch of liberal Jews and monkey-socialists.

Why is it the GOP feels the need to pander to these social parasites? The Democratic Party is a moral gutter entirely because it’s run by blacks and Jews. Do we really want that for our party?

Vote Republican for Congress to keep McCain in check!”
__________________________________________________________________________________

Well Greg, you have one thing right: the Republican party is the party of bigots and klansmen like yourself. But you are far from being a moral compass, as you suggest, and are in no position to decide who is American and who is not. Blacks and Jews are born here like whites, pay taxes like whites, and contribute to society just like whites; whether it is positively or negatively. The other point I am going to make is that you are not a patriot at all, and that makes you un-American. People who are patriots push this country to be better; to rise above the things that hold it back from progress, and from living up to the ideals set forth in its doctrines. Hypocrisy has loomed over this country for far to long, and it will be a much better place when views like the one you just expressed go back to whatever planet they came from.

Comment by DB
April 21st, 2008 at 5:22 pm
CarolinaBound,

Greg is at best a race baiter and at worse a liberal pretending to be a conservative for the sake of trying to make us conservatives look bad. If this race has shown us anything, it has shown us the democratic party will do absolutely anything to win. So don’t worry about guys/gals like Greg. That foolishness means nothing
_____________

DB

I think you may be right..

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/21/why-cant-obama-close-the-deal/

go blog for hillary ,,,,

cooper asking why obama can,t win or close the deal

Ok I see a lot of white people behind McCain during this little civil rights speech at Selma. Maybe they were freedom riders from the good old days. I bet the McCain people put up barricades to keep the black people at a nice healthy distance.

Barack Obama has cancelled the debate in North Carolina. He is afraid.

Barack Obama has predicted he’ll lose tomorrow. He is afraid.

Barack Obama has gotten very “nasty in his attacks. He is afraid.

Obama’s campaign has set an imaginary 11% as the percentage Hillary Clinton must win by tomorrow. They are afraid.

Obama mouthpiece Ed Schultz — what a bloviator — just told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto that Clinton must win by 15% tomorrow. He is afraid.

Obama’s campaign says that Hillary’s new ad (below) is fear-mongering. They are afraid.

But the worst of all their “spin” — because they are so afraid that they’re willing to lose their dignity, credibility and character — is to call Hillary’s supporters a bunch of racists. Even a heretofore respected “progressive” blogger has strongly inferred that Obama can’t win in parts of Pennsylvania because of “racial resistance,” a coy phrasing that really means that all of those white voters are really a bunch of racists.

Here’s the skinny on the racist gambit: Barack Obama’s hardcore followers have erected the lowest form of excuses, that are in fact racist, in order to pin the blame for Obama’s impending loss on “typical white people” — especially white men:

This is an election about whether the people of Pennsylvania hate blacks more than they hate women. And when I say people, I don’t mean people, I mean white men. … […]

[T]he outcome of the general election will depend on whether enough of them vote for McCain. A lot of them will: white men cannot be relied on, as all of us know who have spent a lifetime dating them.

That’s written by a highly prominent Obama supporter on the pages of Huffington Post today … Read the rest
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/21/whos-bitter-now-and-whos-race-baiting/#more-2250

Comment by Nick Mitchell
April 21st, 2008 at 6:29 pm Ok I see a lot of white people behind McCain during this little civil rights speech at Selma. Maybe they were freedom riders from the good old days. I bet the McCain people put up barricades to keep the black people at a nice healthy distance.

……………………………………………….

Nick, would you rather Michelle Obama’s “there’s not enough white people” at the recent appearance in Pittsburgh?

“While the crowd was indeed diverse, some students at the event questioned the practices of Mrs. Obama’s event coordinators, who handpicked the crowd sitting behind Mrs. Obama.

The Tartan’s correspondents observed one event coordinator say to another, “Get me more white people, we need more white people.” To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, “We’re moving you, sorry. It’s going to look so pretty, though.”

“I didn’t know they would say, ‘We need a white person here,’ ” said attendee and senior psychology major Shayna Watson, who sat in the crowd behind Mrs. Obama. “I understood they would want a show of diversity, but to pick up people and to reseat them, I didn’t know it would be so outright.””

The asian girl/pretty comment was vulgar in the extreme and dripped of condesencion (sound like a familiar Obama characteristic?..guns, god bigots?).

Did you mean like that Nick?

Here’s an interesting summary of the ‘enhanced interrogation’ business from the NYT. Is there a reasonable conservative response, leaving out the usual nonsense about left-wing bias, hating America etc? What do you guys think about torture?

The Torture Sessions

Ever since Americans learned that American soldiers and intelligence agents were torturing prisoners, there has been a disturbing question: How high up did the decision go to ignore United States law, international treaties, the Geneva Conventions and basic morality?

The answer, we have learned recently, is that — with President Bush’s clear knowledge and support — some of the very highest officials in the land not only approved the abuse of prisoners, but participated in the detailed planning of harsh interrogations and helped to create a legal structure to shield from justice those who followed the orders.

We have long known that the Justice Department tortured the law to give its Orwellian blessing to torturing people, and that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved a list of ways to abuse prisoners. But recent accounts by ABC News and The Associated Press said that all of the president’s top national security advisers at the time participated in creating the interrogation policy: Vice President Dick Cheney; Mr. Rumsfeld; Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser; Colin Powell, the secretary of state; John Ashcroft, the attorney general; and George Tenet, the director of central intelligence.

These officials did not have the time or the foresight to plan for the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq or the tenacity to complete the hunt for Osama bin Laden. But they managed to squeeze in dozens of meetings in the White House Situation Room to organize and give legal cover to prisoner abuse, including brutal methods that civilized nations consider to be torture.

Mr. Bush told ABC News this month that he knew of these meetings and approved of the result.

Those who have followed the story of the administration’s policies on prisoners may not be shocked. We have read the memos from the Justice Department redefining torture, claiming that Mr. Bush did not have to follow the law, and offering a blueprint for avoiding criminal liability for abusing prisoners.

The amount of time and energy devoted to this furtive exercise at the very highest levels of the government reminded us how little Americans know, in fact, about the ways Mr. Bush and his team undermined, subverted and broke the law in the name of saving the American way of life.

We have questions to ask, in particular, about the involvement of Ms. Rice, who has managed to escape blame for the catastrophic decisions made while she was Mr. Bush’s national security adviser, and Mr. Powell, a career Army officer who should know that torture has little value as an interrogation method and puts captured Americans at much greater risk. Did they raise objections or warn of the disastrous effect on America’s standing in the world? Did anyone?

Mr. Bush has sidestepped or quashed every attempt to uncover the breadth and depth of his sordid actions. Congress is likely to endorse a cover-up of the extent of the illegal wiretapping he authorized after 9/11, and we are still waiting, with diminishing hopes, for a long-promised report on what the Bush team really knew before the Iraq invasion about those absent weapons of mass destruction — as opposed to what it proclaimed.

At this point it seems that getting answers will have to wait, at least, for a new Congress and a new president. Ideally, there would be both truth and accountability. At the very minimum the public needs the full truth.

Some will call this a backward-looking distraction, but only by fully understanding what Mr. Bush has done over eight years to distort the rule of law and violate civil liberties and human rights can Americans ever hope to repair the damage and ensure it does not happen again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0s6z_drlgU
Obama’s Friends in low Places

Comment by McKee
April 21st, 2008 at 7:29 pm

Here’s an interesting summary of the ‘enhanced interrogation’ business from the NYT. Is there a reasonable conservative response, leaving out the usual nonsense about left-wing bias, hating America etc? What do you guys think about torture?

The Torture Sessions

Ever since Americans learned that American soldiers and intelligence agents were torturing prisoners, there has been a disturbing question: How high up did the decision go to ignore United States law, international treaties, the Geneva Conventions and basic morality?

The answer, we have learned recently, is that — with President Bush’s clear knowledge and support — some of the very highest officials in the land not only approved the abuse of prisoners, but participated in the detailed planning of harsh interrogations and helped to create a legal structure to shield from justice those who followed the orders.
———————————————————-

And thank goodness we have a CinC who big brass ones.

Bravo and keep up the good work.

You leftist globalists need to get your heads extracted from your rear ends.

WHATEVER IT TAKES to prevent another 9/11, another USS Cole, another 3/11 Madrid or any other attack plan.

I am sick to death of whining fools who say that our use of torture will jeopardize our troops.

GROW UP. We are fighting against people who torture our soldiers for SPORT. They don’t care about the Conventions or the Laws of War. They don’t follow any rules. They use women and children as shields. They hide in churches.

And they make plans. Lots of plans, to kill you and me.

Your daughter is in a box in the ground, running out of air. He knows where she is but won’t tell you. You KNOW he’s the one. You can do whatever it takes to get the location from him. If you fail, your daughter dies. What do you do?

Just what is McCain trying to do anyway? And why now? Does he really have a clue? They say,”it’s better late than never” but in this case, I don’t buy it!

John in Virginia writes…

Well Greg, you have one thing right: the Republican party is the party of bigots and klansmen like yourself. <<<

Actually the KKK associates itself with the Democrats

McKee writes…

How high up did the decision go to ignore United States law, international treaties, the Geneva Conventions and basic morality?<<<

The Geneva Convention only applies to soldiers of a nation. It does not apply to terrorists nor does United States law apply anywhere but in the United States…hence the reason why terrorists are rarely brought to the United States. Once they step foot on American soil they are protected by American law. Morality…well that’s open to debate. What is more moral? Allowing somone to fly a plane into a building or beating someone with a rubber hose to get information so we can stop it?

I’m not a Hill supporter, but why she would go on Keith Obermanns show is really questionable. He is a true jerk. Hope he lets her talk and doesn’t start cheerleading for his sweetheart, Obama.

You get em Andylit 4/21 8:07. We are dealing with people who have no uniforms and don’t go by rules. It doesn’t matter how we treat them, they will try and do everything vile to people they capture to get info. and mess them up so bad they are unrecognizable and hang them up in a public area for all to see by their entrails. They want to scare the sh-t out of us and the more violent and unfathomable the better for them. Liberalism is the result of shaken baby syndrome.

Arie

If you are out there.. here are some more thoughts on Iran, I know you like to stick up for Ahmadinejad (why I do not know?) but any way here goes..I think he is a psychopath who will lie and deceive to get what he wants. I do not believe he wishes to work with the US as you showed earlier, I believe he is playing a game. The American people can see him for what he truly is.. a hater of free people.

If I miss you I will try and remember this to share later My computer quit on me

I have to share this blog from Dublius, I like the part where Ahmadinejad said America uses erroneous information..shows his crazy twisting of the truth, this is exactly what he does..and his supporters.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Flaming Psychopath
Filed under: Iran
That flaming psychopath Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran is at it again.

“You may remember the incident a few months ago when he boldly declared that there are no homosexuals in Iran.

Now, if you can believe it, while visiting Iraq he has stated: “We do not care about [American] statements and remarks because they make statements based on erroneous information. We cannot count on what they say.” How’s that for hypocrisy? And then he adds that “no one likes” the American forces present in Iraq. Apparently, he’s not only in touch with the thinking of every man, woman and child in Iraq, just as he knows, Santy-Claus-like, about the sexual proclivities of every Iranian, but he seems to have forgotten the horrific wars fought between Iran and Iraq, resulting in rivers of Iraqi blood moistening the desert.

Can you imagine how it must feel to know that your country is governed by a raving madman who’s furiously striving to acquire nuclear technology?”

If any intelligent visitors to this wingnut zoo imagine they are seeing the worst, try Hannity’s friend Hal Turner’s site! Here’s a few little samples, with the odd * to get through the censor

——————————————————————————–

Look carefully at who is behind the cultural degradation in this country and you will find a j*w in the woodpile. They are the boil on the a*s of humanity and it is high time to lance this affliction to save the patient.
toecutter | 04.21.08 – 6:21 pm | #

——————————————————————————–

The only way would be with surgical, coordinated attacks. We would be slaughtered in a protracted war. C’mon Hal, you know what a Marine fire team is capable of. We would have at most 2 days to either gain a decisive victory or be crushed.
We could incite riots and let the lesser races fight it out, but would we really want what was left?
And, what if we do succeed? Who runs the new government? What plans are there to maintain infrastructure, police the nation, keep the power plants and highways operating?

Don’t get me wrong, the time has indeed come to water the tree of liberty, but we better do it right, or we’ll see foreign forces here to “assist” what would be left of the present government, as we have done in Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc, etc.

——————– Hal Turner Replies:

I have never suggested anything even remotely close to “protracted war.” In fact, I have said on numerous occasions that a “second American Revolution” could be done by as few as 1345 armed men; lasting about an hour from start to finish.

Let’s talk about this HYPOTHETICALLY.

The US House of Representatives has 435 members. The US Senate has 100 members. The US Supreme Court has 9 members.

Not ALL of them are “problems.” In fact, only about 46 US Senators, 220 Congressmen and 3 Supreme Court Justices are “problems.” That totals 269 “problems.”

Imagine for the purposes of this HYPOTHETICAL that committed Americans decide to “solve” these “problems.”

If 5 armed men targeted each problem we would only need 269 x 5 =1345 armed men.

After researching the home addresses of each problem, a date and time could be chosen to take action.

On that date, teams of 5 armed men would arrive at the home of each problem, “enter” the home, locate the “problem” and “solve it.”

From start to finish, the whole operation would take less than 15 minutes.

The local governments would be instantly overwhelmed, unable to send police to each location. By the time back-ups were called-in from surrounding cities or the feds, it would all be over.

The next day, the country would be “shocked.” The President would take to the airwaves to denounce this “dastardly act of treason” and promise the perpetrators would be caught.

But in the deep recesses of his mind, he would know that catching anyone wouldn’t make a d*mn bit of difference.

Those who were targeted would be gone. Those who were not targeted would make d*mn sure they never did anything that would ever get them targeted. Those elected or appointed to replace those killed would also make certain they never did anything which would get them killed. (A Chilling effect!)

Of course, some of the 1345 might be captured or killed during such an operation but . . . . . so what.

The results of such an act would be historic and no matter what the politicians and media say about them, they will have changed the course of American History for maybe another 200 years.

I say such a thing would be worth it. HYPOTHETICALLY.

To: John in Virginia and anyone else who believes Republicans are the party of racists and Klansmen

I am a white, middle-class (moderate) southern, and the most racist people I know are my in-laws who are northern democrats. I would go as far as to say they are rabid in both their racism, and in their support of the Democratic party. What does it mean? Well nothing really, racists exist in both parties, my grandparents who are both conservative Republicans were considered radical because they supported civil rights. To say that one party has the monopoly on tolerance seems ridiculous. I remind you Lincoln was a Republican (though he was a racist too, but at least he made a step in the right direction), and the Klan gathered at Democratic National Conventions, not the other way around. History is full of racism on both sides, and continues to be, so don’t assume Republicans are the party of racism. Racism is a problem for the whole country, and voting for a democrat won’t automatically cleanse us, even if it is a black man.

Watch this.
Obama is not good for the good people of this country!

http://election.newsmax.com/ncf_obama/

Ahm-a-din-a-jihad is history.

Iran better get ready for action.

Their goose is cooked!

Stick a fork in IRAN.

They are done!

Bush is the best president since Harry Truman!

Give ‘em hell GWB!

Liberal, Green Feeling, Sustainable Compost Pile, Touchy Feely, Liberal, William Ayers Pschyco Terrorist Obama Butt Kissing Crap Bag Global Warming Believing Foo Foo Tie Die Sissy Poo Poo Can’t Think With Your Brain To Save Your Soul, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle Wimpy Environmental Wacko.

Get off the world!

This is your stop already!

Jimmy Hendrix like rules bro!!!

Obama and Springsteen is the Dreamteam!

This is really the U.S.A of Mexico anyway,…….Right?????

Hi, I am Al Gore, the worlds smartest man.

First I invented the INTERNET.

Then I invented GLOBAL WARMING!

We are just simple Rastafarian Dreadlocks.

We will go back to Jamaica and smoke ganji weed as soon as the evil BUSH is vanquished!

Go Obooma in 2008!!!

Hi, we are liberals and as such we are a little foggy headed and can’t think of much to say.

HALIBURTON!!

HALIBURTON!!

HALIBURTON!!

SCREW AL GORE.

SCREW EARTH DAY.

SCREW LIBERALS.

SCREW GLOBAL WARMING.

SCREW OBAMA.

WAKE UP PEOPLE.

JUST SAY NO TO CLIMATE HYSTERIA!!!

Does anyone know what John McCain did to earn all of his medals in Vietnam? I’m finding it difficult to find any specifics.

PA doesn’t matter-Hmmm. You sound like Obama. We will see after today if we matter or not, won’t we?

Go John!!

Show them you don’t need to pander to the social/economic special interests–just the people. What America means, what America has to offer. Why the paradigm of socialism has failed, and why prosperity will always beat out against socialism because of the human desire to excel.

Don’t adapt your message to every listener–but reach out to every citizen who desires and still believes that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness–unfettered by an oppressive government is the best way to move forward–today…just as it was over 200 years ago when our nation was created.

I having a difficult time trying to understand the liberal point of view when it comes to “evil people”. Murder, pedophiles and terrorists are evil people and cannot be treated with a little love.

Bring the torture on when it comes to terrorists. If you can find the people to do it, let them do it. I would do a lot more than waterboarding. Try reading some novels from Vince Flynn and that’s the kind of torture that needs to be done.

These people are animals with zero thoughts of sitting down and talking things through like our liberal buddies BHO and HRC. I hope McCain comes around with his “dont’t hurt them to bad” attitude aslo. These people are dangerous folks. Let the military do the job and if you do not have the guts go to France. Maybe the national news folks need to show some of the terrorist ways instead of questioning GITMO. I’m all for blowing their little peckers off to get some intel.

I WANT TO FIX HILLARY CLINTON FOR STAYING WITH BILL WHEN SHE SHOULD HAVE DIVORCED HIM OVER:
1. HIS ANTIMASTURBATION
2. HIS CHEATING ADULTERY
ALSO IM AGAINST HER NOT LISTENING TO ME ABOUT VOTING AGAINST THE ANTI POKER BILL (PHONE CALLS, LETTERS) AND RECEIVING FUNDING FROM HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES WHEN THEY ARE ALREADY OVERCHARGING AND AGE DISCRIMINATING. I ALSO BELIEVE LIKE JOE LIEBERMAN THAT BILL CLINTON SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED AFTER ILLEGALLY CHEATING ON HIS WIFE.

Here is why EARTHDAY and GLOBAL WARMING is a crock of excrement.

http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n2/ant_v1n2_environ.html

McCain’s Divorce
Before John McCain’s tour of duty in Vietnam, he married Carol Shepp, a model from Philadelphia. On his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam in 1967, McCain was shot down and captured.
While he was imprisoned, Carol was in an auto wreck (1969), thrown through her car’s windshield and left seriously injured. Despite her injures, she refused to allow her POW husband to be notified about her condition, fearing that such news would not be good for him while he was being held prisoner.

When McCain returned to the United States in 1973 after more than five years as a prisoner of war, he found his wife was a different person. The accident “left her 4 inches shorter and on crutches, and she had gained a good deal of weight.”

Yearning to make the grade of admiral, McCain enrolled in the National War College at Fort McNair in Washington, D.C. and underwent physical therapy in order to fly again. The Navy excused his permanent disabilities and reinstated him to flight status, effectively positioning him for promotion.

In his book, The Nightingale’s Song, Robert Timberg chronicled McCain’s post-Vietnam military assignments and some of his “adulterous” behavior leading to his divorce from Carol and marriage to Cindy Hensley.

Timberg wrote, “in the fall of 1974, McCain was transferred to Jacksonville as the executive officer of Replacement Air Group 174, the long-sought flying billet at last a reality. A few months later, he assumed command of the RAG, which trained pilots and crews for carrier deployments. The assignment was controversial, some calling it favoritism, a sop to the famous son of a famous father and grandfather [both were Navy admirals], since he had not first commanded a squadron, the usual career path.”

While Executive Officer and later as Squadron Commander McCain used his authority to arrange frequent flights that allowed him to carouse with subordinates and “engage in extra-marital affairs.” Such behavior was a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice rules against adultery and fraternization with subordinates..

Timberg wrote, “Off duty, usually on routine cross-country flights to Yuma and El Centro, John started carousing and running around with women. To make matters worse, some of the women with whom he was linked by rumor were subordinates . . . At the time the rumors were so widespread that, true or not, they became part of McCain’s persona, impossible not to take note of.”

In early 1977, Admiral Jim Holloway, Chief of Naval Operations promoted McCain to captain and transferred him from his command position “to Washington as the number-two man in the Navy’s Senate liaison office. It wasn’t long before the “fun loving and irreverent” McCain had turned the liaison office into a “late-afternoon gathering spot where senators and staffers, usually from the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, would drop in for a drink and the chance to unwind.”

In 1979 at a military reception in Honolulu, McCain met Cindy Hensley, an attractive 25-year-old woman from a very wealthy politically-connected Arizona family. Cindy’s father, Jim, founded the Hensley and Company, the nation’s third-largest Anheuser-Busch distributor.

McCain described their first meeting, “She was lovely, intelligent and charming, 17 years my junior but poised and confident. I monopolized her attention the entire time, taking care to prevent anyone else from intruding on our conversation. When it came time to leave the party, I persuaded her to join me for drinks at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel. By the evening’s end, I was in love.”

While still married to Carol, McCain began an adulterous relationship with Cindy. He married Cindy in May 1980 — just a month after dumping Carol and securing a divorce. The newlyweds honeymooned in Hawaii.

McCain followed his young, millionairess wife back to Arizona where her father helped catapult McCain into politics,

Today, Cindy Hensley McCain is chairwoman of Hensley’s board of directors. Hensley and Company financial reports show assets worth a minimum of $28 million for the McCains

McCain Divorce Settlement Outlined
By BILL KACZOR
Associated Press Writer
February 24, 2000
PENSACOLA, Fla. (AP) – John McCain gave up his interest in two homes and agreed to pay $1,625 a month in alimony and child support when he divorced his first wife 20 years ago, court records show.

The senator and Republican presidential candidate divorced his wife Carol in 1980 when he was a Navy captain with a home of record in Orange Park, Fla., about 12 miles south of Jacksonville.

McCain, 63, gave her his interest in homes in Alexandria, Va., and South Ponte Vedra Beach, Fla., according to records of the divorce settlement obtained by The Associated Press and other newspapers.

The Arizona senator agreed to give her their furnishings, $1,325 a month in alimony, $300 in child support. He also agreed to pay an additional $500 monthly if she couldn’t find a job.

She was subsequently employed in the Reagan White House, according to George “Bud” Day, McCain’s attorney during the divorce. Day also was one McCain’s cellmates when they were prisoners of war in Vietnam.

Carol McCain, who has remained friendly with her former husband, did not immediately return a phone call to her Virginia home Thursday seeking comment.

McCain filed for the divorce, stating in court records that the marriage was “irretrievably broken.”

Under the settlement, McCain maintained insurance policies worth $64,000 with their children as beneficiaries, agreed to pay for their daughter’s college education and paid $3,005 in joint debts. Carol McCain got the family’s Audi, while McCain was allowed to keep a Datsun 810 and his personal belongings, the records show.

A month after the divorce, McCain married Cindy Lou Hensley, heiress to Phoenix-based Hensley & Co., the nation’s second-largest Anheuser-Busch distributor.

Carol McCain was seriously injured in a traffic accident on Christmas Eve 1969, but her husband did not find out about it until he was released from Vietnam, Day said.

In the settlement, McCain agreed to provide insurance or pay medical bills for additional treatment she was expected to require.

Join the U.S. Veteran Dispatch Eagle message board.

Did you have a point?

A conclusion?

You report…..we decide?

Kappa…I thought messy divorces were OK with Democrats, it sure never effected the Kennedys

Is there anything else to say but WOW!!! I guess it’s ok to leave you spouse if he/she has an accident and gets disfigured. What ever happened to “FOR BETTER OR FOR WORST”? I guess you’d like to have a guy like McCain running this Great Country? If you do, that’s your choice, you are an American, but I also am American and will excersie my right to vote for someone else. You see, I’m not a Dem nor Rep…I just simply vote for the candidate that ideas best fit my own, and sir cheating on my wife, then divorcing her after she gets hurt, and then marrying another wife before the ink dries is not my idea of a Commander In Chief.

Jeff,

I see thru the BS of both parties, There are great Rep’s as well as greart Dem’s just like there are awful one’s on both sides. Like the Pol’s that sleep with hooker’s or little kids, Or those whom try to push their idealoligies on you. It seems as if you don’t know how to look at the news with a subjective view, you let the tube dictate to you that what is reported is ALL real, and it is simply not. Not all people of color are bad, thugs, of whatever. Regardless of whomever wins this election, one day in the very near future there will be a minority in the Presidential Office. Maybe Hil or Obama are not the ones, and that’s ok because once again…in the very near future THERE WILL BE A MINORITY as Commander In Chief.

Heres a little something I found read it in peace…

April 07, 2008
Election 2008

The 23/6 John McCain Blunder-o-Tron

Don’t give McCain any hints. He’ll get it. At today’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, blunderin’ John McCain made the latest in a series of mistakes on basic facts surrounding Iraq. It was just a few days ago on “Fox News Sunday” that he made yet another blunder on foreign policy. In that instance he claimed that Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr was the one responsible for declaring the ceasefire in Basra last week, but the facts tell a different story: It was actually brokered by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

One little mistake in your early 70s and you can chalk it up to a senior moment. However, this was the third time in the past month were he didn’t get his facts straight. Joe Lieberman had to correct him when McCain stumbled during his Iraq trip in March. McCain said “Iran trains Al-Qaeda” members when he meant to say “Iran trains extremists”.

Wow, I guess man diaphers and spoon feeding will be next…

Kappa..I’m a bit confused…I saw a huge post by you regarding McCains divorce, etc. I just found it a bit hypocritical that a DEMOCRAT would use a persons “personal business” to rail against him. Wasn’t it the DEMS that told us Bill/Monica, as well as Bill/Other women was HIS personal business?

As far as attacking McCain..go for it…I’m a conservative. I don’t like McCain, I don’t like the far lefties he has in congress as friends, Feingold, and I don’t really think of him as a Republican, at least the Republican Party of Reagan. He’s a Democrat-Lite. The ONLY reason I’d hold my nose and vote for the man is I’ve not missed an election since 1972, and I can’t stand either Democrat Commies or the Democratic Party MORE then I can’t stand McCain.

Kappa..as far as the point about ME supporting a minority..I have NO problem with that. I’d care more about a persons ideals than skin color. (By the way, why isn’t a conservative Black person not “black enough”, but a half-black liberal Commie IS “black enough”?)

Jeff, I get the feeling that you and I are more alike than we both knew. I think all 3 candidates are weak as Hell, and it’s scary that one of them will be president. I like you have never missed an election since I’ve been voting, and it pains me to have to vote for a weak candidate.

To answer you question in regards to conservative “black” and liberal “black” how would I know, I’m white.

but to asked you a question “why are liberal’s commie”?

President Bush Job Approval
RCP Average: Spread -34.7%

Approve30.8% Disapprove65.5%

This according to foxnews!!!!

WOW!!!

After you guys vote him back in, now you’re mad at him…

Comment by Kappa_10 to Jeff X
April 24th, 2008 at 11:04 am

Jeff, I get the feeling that you and I are more alike than we both knew. I think all 3 candidates are weak as Hell, and it’s scary that one of them will be president. I like you have never missed an election since I’ve been voting, and it pains me to have to vote for a weak candidate.

To answer you question in regards to conservative “black” and liberal “black” how would I know, I’m white.

but to asked you a question “why are liberal’s commie”?
___________________________________________________________________________________

Hmm…I wonder why a liberal is a Commie…well let’s see, could it be that Obama, a liberal, has grown up with and associates with communists. Then there’s Howard Dean, another liberal, meets with socialists/commie groups at DNC headquarters in Washington. In fact, both Dean and Obama has associated with a person that was proven to be a “mole” for Moscow.

LOL..I suppose next you’ll tell me that there are conservative Commies…LOL

McCain trying to court black voters. Not a bad idea, kinda like Bush in 2000. the same repub play book. Look inclusive for moderate to liberal whites and blacks. next thing you know there will be a lot of black performers at the GOP convention as in the GOP convention in 2000. Here is some free advice for McCain. why don’t you visit with the blacks in Arizona. You can Google it, but blacks in Arizona say he has ignored them for years, despite getting invitations to a number of events. Kappa_10, I didn’t know all of those details of McCain’s past. Too bad Obama won’t exploit that in the general. I support Obama, but I do like the fact that Hillary is willing to knife fight the repubs and go dirty first in order to win.

A Brief for Whitey
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted 03/21/2008 ET
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America .

Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.
This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.

Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American com munity into the mainstream.

Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks — with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas — to advance black applicants over white applicants.

Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to supp ort soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?

Barack talks about new ‘ladders of opportunity’ for blacks.

Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown , and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for ‘deserving’ white kids.
Is whi te America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ? Is it really white America ’s fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent ?

Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?

Is Barack aware t hat black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.

Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.