An unidentified intelligence source told the [Sun] tabloid: "It is an extremely alarming development and raises the stakes considerably. In effect, it means we are in a full on war with Iran -- but nobody has officially declared it."
I pause to interject that, at least in the United States, the present War on Iraq has never been officially declared either. Of course, neither were Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf I, or any of the little skirmishes Clinton liked to fight."We have hard proof that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps have crossed the border to attack us. It is very hard for us to strike back. All we can do is try to defend ourselves. We are badly on the back foot."
I keep saying that we're going to go to war with Iran because 1) I am no longer capable of surprise when it comes to this administration. They could declare war on Poland and, after a brief scratch of my noggin, I would return to my business. This is the administration that tried to sneak Harriet Miers onto the Supreme Court; is currently teaming up with Ted Kennedy, again--the first time was for No Child Left Behind--to grant twelve to twenty million illegal aliens amnesty; are on record as saying that "deficits don't matter"; and, are in the process of firing up another Cold War with Russia. The last makes sense because we need more enemies like I need a hole in the head. Can you say Military Industrial Complex?I can't pretend war with Iran makes a lick of sense, but we're certainly proceeding in the correct manner if war is what we aim for. We don't even need to fake declare this war because we're already fighting it!
If it comes to war, I hope the Democrats have a spine, which is about like hoping the Republicans have a spine, only dimmer. At the very least my boy, Ron Paul, should be able to deliver a fine speech in the halls of Congress. A majority of Americans oppose this war, and, though I'm just guessing, a majority of Americans oppose war with Iran as well. But you wouldn't know it by looking at our representatives. At least we still have one fellow who gives two licks about the Constitution. And, much more importantly, about justice.
5 comments:
Ah, well, this is the one thing that splits Bush from Kennedy. It is also one of the things your man and Kennedy agree on, it should be noted. And I want Iran crushed as well. This time I expect to see a crushing shock and awe, before a single boot hits their filthy dirt, that will leave fools aghast and leave no room for doubt. Though, I think leaving the nation building to the natives is not such a bad plan, I doubt if that will be the case. It will either be us or the U.N., and I do have a preference. So, I suppose that will just have to be the way of it.
It is about time, I say. Perhaps we can send the boots to Syria once this is done. Then again, and maybe, why? It is a wait and see on that. Plus, with Iran and Iraq under our heel, Israel might could deal that blow. I really wish I could be there. Hmm, if not Syria, perhaps North Korea. Gee, so many places to visit and so little time. Though I think North Korea is being sacrificed for Taiwan, so that will have to wait a few years.
I enjoy the people who stand around and complain about brutality of the officer shooting and arresting the thugs who are killing them, ruining their neighborhood, and shooting at the cops themselves, while completely ignoring the thugs. I know it means something, but I do not believe I will venture there. When it is your mother who is beaten or raped, your father who is shot, your brother who is drugged out of his mind, or in this case, a half a dozen Western cities turned to muslim ash, maybe you will care too.
You'll have to address the moral issues behind invading every country with whom you happen to disagree. We can't bomb everyone who might attack us, and even if we could, it's morally ridiculous to kill millions in retaliation for the murder of a few thousand.
Tell that to God. As for me, I am satisfied in going to war for the reasons I see. God has some serious backbone, if not all his children do. Adam seems to have feared the serpent too.
Millions? Oh, like the millions who have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan by us? Kennedy numbers, I presume. And, what exactly was Sodom and Gomorrah about, exactly, even if the numbers should be true? Why didn't He just ask them nicely? Or, is that Christian fiction to you? Christ did not deny He was the King of the Jews, only that this was not His kingdom, for His minions would be fighting to free Him if it were. I believe this was more than a statement of fact, it was an admonishment to those who fail to fight for Goodness.
The main point is, those who lead in Iran and North Korea are unstable, in several ways, and they are gaining weapons they in their ignorance or through their folly will use or allow to be used by those of their ilk they are too weak to stand against. Weapons which will turn a free nation to ash, and many cities to dust. Stand and do nothing, fine, intervene in the ridding of these monsters at your own peril, here or there. Deny until the cock crows thrice, just hope you aren’t still denying should you pass before the last and your return to sense. The rest of us will get it done, if we can. And, join Kennedy on this peace at all costs issue. But then can you disclaim others for joining him on their issue of choice?
I remember when the left came uncorked because Bush said, essentially, you are either with us or against us. Me, I think that is exactly right. And, I think God will say that in the end, to a similar cacophony.
Millions? Oh, like the millions who have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan by us?
No, like the millions which would need to be wiped out in order for us to be completely safe from Islamic terrorism. Personally, I think we're safe enough already, but if we want to be absolutely sure, we should just nuke the Middle East. Or would that be too many deaths for you?
I remember when the left came uncorked because Bush said, essentially, you are either with us or against us. Me, I think that is exactly right. And, I think God will say that in the end, to a similar cacophony.
Then I'm against Bush, though, if God adheres to the Just War Doctrine, as Catholics from Augustine to Pope Benedict have thought that He might, He's on my side, which makes Him against Bush.
I don't see why we need to kill a bunch of people because of what someone might do. Since we're the only country to have actually used nuclear weapons in a war, by your logic, any number of countries could take us out to prevent us from acting again.
Also, we're not free; Bush has made sure of that.
First, we are free. At least we are free to choose to be free. Though you are right, most of do not make that choice. No one can free or own you. If Bush could do it, then I could own you.
Next, and again, Sodom and Gomorrah, that is precisely what God does. As I said, there is no indication heaven was about to be stormed or God was in any sort of danger whatsoever. It seems merely to be an example. In this case, we have more than enough reason to wage war. Far more than what your rules of engagement indicate for God’s actions. As for the Pope, he lives in a nation and region that could, and probably will, explode at any moment. The wolf isn’t at his gate or his door, it’s in his house. And, he will do what is politically expedient at the moment and work with the governments so as to not to be the "cause" of such a “bomb” going off. Beyond, your twisting of our use of the “Bomb” is so misguided there is no salvation in the debate. You are a true child of your teachings on that one. Still, you will find no remuneration, you are a sub-sector of a sub-set. At least I believe you believe, for what it is worth. I believe you are also worth freeing.
If you believe in the Second Amendment, as I believe you do. And perhaps you own a firearm of some sort, which I also thought you did, and you have ever considered why you have that item should you believe in political, social, and cultural purposes for said device, then you may have considered what you would do in certain situations. If attacked, as an innocent, and assuming you have time for these choices, do you 1.) apologize and offer to make amends, whatever is requested 2.) keep your firearm unloaded, locked, perhaps even disassembled and greased and depend upon the police and military, while railing at them for doing what you will not do yet expect done, or 3.) will you pick up your loaded gun, which you have trained with, and shoot at the attackers until you are out of bullets, dead, or they are all dead or dispersed? It really is that simple. As far as numbers, are you going to stop after the first one, since that is all you are worth? Are you going to shoot to kill, or stop, and is there really more than just a legalese non-difference which will give two men under the same indictment for the same “crime” totally different court results? Simple questions, simple answers, no real debate.
Post a Comment