to charlesJan 17th, 2008 - 20:13:15

that washed up ODD
The only current Rogue nation, by popular concensus, is the US.

Report this comment

NoharnessJan 17th, 2008 - 23:42:56

RE:'Other than their being commies, how are the working conditions over there at Texaspro? Are you still attending the daily political re-education seminars?'

Aw, the don't have re-education seminars, but they do ask everybody to do a self-critical essay. I told them in mine that I was stupid for accepting a position with a bunch of stupidly greedy dumbasses like them. I reminded them that pigs get bigger while hogs get slaughtered. I think that they are still scratching their heads over that one.

Report this comment

Doomsday OptionJan 18th, 2008 - 10:31:44

So, if we have no missile defense, or if such a defense is worthless against multiple missiles, including dummies, then, we must have many more offensive missiles than our enemies.

Who knows what may be delivered in those missiles?

Otherwise, we could try to trust one another and pray that no one fires first.

Couldn't we all do something more worthwhile for our peoples? Whatever happened to real diplomacy or is it almost an extinct option?

RE: SOS

Report this comment

NoharnessJan 18th, 2008 - 11:27:10

Diplomacy alone will not do the job.

Report this comment

CharlesJan 18th, 2008 - 14:07:41

'Virtuous motives, trammeled by inertia and timidity, are no match for armed and resolute wickedness. [W.C.]'

Report this comment

? ? ?Jan 18th, 2008 - 17:10:34

And don't you think Iran has weighed in on what would happen if they did attack the U.S.? I doubt very much that missles will be launched!

Report this comment

NoharnessJan 19th, 2008 - 01:29:55

RE:'And don't you think Iran has weighed in on what would happen if they did attack the U.S.? I doubt very much that missiles will be launched!'

I quite agree, but if you are the guy made responsible for national defense, you might be inclined to be nervous about Iranian missiles. As mad as MAD was, it worked. I think the real problem is that the US and some of the other Western nations (in private in their case) worry that the Iranians might close the Straits of Hormuz once they have nuclear weapons. This would be especially bad if the Iranians could deliver nuclear warheads to Europe.

I will reiterate. The best answer is to make access to the Persian Gulf optional. We do that by developing better ways to take care of our transport fuel needs. We need to start working on such alternatives anyway because sooner or later the wells in the Middle East will dry up.

What has been proposed is silly for several reasons.

1) It annoys and alarms Russia, an already well-established nuclear power.
2) Missile shields are not entirely leak-proof, especially in the face of a truly determined attack. The utility of the missile shield against an Iran that is equipped nuclear warheads because no one would risk naval action to re-open the straits and bet on a leaky shield.
3)More importantly, every time there is an upset of any kind in the Middle East, the regimes causing the trouble make more money. We are helping Iran pay for these systems by keeping the price of oil high. It is one of your classic 'Catch-22's'.

Sun Tzu would find a way to get by without the oil and that is exactly what we should do. As things stand, our enemies are too important to us for us to attack them. Worse, the only reason they are able to cause us trouble is because we are enriching them. This makes MAD seem relatively sane.

Report this comment