In the next 60 days Obama’s presidential career will finally meet that concrete wall of reality. He will either fail or survive. Trouble is, he might take many innocent people with him if he fails
So far, the most hyped-up and unqualified president in US history has shown no capacity at all to act, in the face of a do-or-die challenge. This is the ultimate test of character, the one that John F. Kennedy met well enough in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. This is the test that Jimmy Carter failed so miserably that Ronald Reagan beat him handily in the following election. This is the same test of reality that every single Democratic Administration has tried to avoid; it’s the reason why Bill Clinton refused to do anything about Osama Bin Laden when he had four separate chances to take him out.
((Heaven Help Us All!)
Walter F : My mistake, I was only thinking that He was crucified the day after the Passover meal. Too simple.
Ken Kulak: I’d rather be a dead Christian than a live Muslim. I know where I’ll be.
Can’t argue with the bit about Jimmah! Carter, but having lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis as a little kid, I have to tell some of you younger boys and girls that John F. Kennedy was a drug-addled fruit bat and very d@mn nearly got us all killed. Worse than Carter and Obama stacked on top of each other with some LBJ thrown in for seasoning.
The only reason we are all still here to talk about things is that cooler heads prevailed -in the Kremlin-. Khrushchev prevented WWIII over Cuber, not JFK. That’s some scary stuff right there.
For your consideration…
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson022612.html
Preemptive Attacks
There have been a handful of efforts to preempt and stop nuclear programs. Israel, as we have seen, has done it twice, against Iraq and Syria. America in 2003 claimed it was ensuring that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction. Note that all preemptive attacks so far have occurred in the Middle East — no surprise, given the rivalry of Israel, the Arab states, and Iran, the ubiquity of madmen, lots of cash, and 40 percent of the world’s oil.
What is strange is that Iran itself, the likely target of any future preemptive effort, was the first nation to attack another nation’s nuclear reactor. (Reports of Soviet efforts to target the Israeli reactor at Dimona during the Six-Day War are probably unfounded.) In 1980, Iran sent planes into Iraq to attack the Osirak facility, for fear that Saddam might develop a bomb during the Iraq-Iran War. That mostly failed mission damaged but did not destroy the facility, which was demolished a year later by the Israeli air force. For all the present Iranian talk of sovereignty, it was Iran that established the precedent that unhinged enemies cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons. In the very first days of its war with Saddam Hussein it sought to ensure that Iraq would not go nuclear — perhaps with some help from Israeli intelligence. As a general rule, preemption against a nuclear facility is as immediately denounced as it is over time quietly appreciated — so long as the mission was successful.
Iran
How do all these rules apply to Iran?
Tehran knows that it has enough natural gas for over a century of electrical-power production. It builds nuclear facilities only to gain prestige, expand its influence beyond what it otherwise would be, and engage in blackmail — always exaggerating the pace of its nuclear acquisition to convince potential preemptors that it may already have the bomb and therefore will retaliate in nuclear fashion. Likewise, it believes that the loonier and more suicidal it sounds, the more likely other countries are to grant concessions — successful states cannot afford to wager all that they have created on the likely hunch that a failed state like Iran is bluffing. If we cannot guarantee our allies deterrence from a nuclear Iran, then they will find a way to obtain it on their own — whether through preemption in the case of Israel or through nuclear acquisition in the case of the Gulf monarchies. Finally, Iranians understand the importance of knocking out an enemy’s nuclear facility — not least because they were the first ones to try it themselves.
©2012 Victor Davis Hanson
@ Posted by: The Phantom at February 29, 2012 7:03 PM
“Khrushchev prevented WWIII over Cuber, not JFK.”
Yes and no. JFK did not send missle laden ships to some Island 90 miles off the coast of Russia for permanent installation. Even today, 50 years later this would be seen as a act of agression. Although with the proliferation of Nuclear subs it seems like a moot point now. Khrushchev backed off because he knew JFK would go through with it. It was a pis*ing contest won by a very narrow margin. Russia was bolstered by JFK’s wimping out on the Bay of Pigs invasion, but understood that they had bit off a little more than they could chew.
peterj
“””Russia was bolstered by JFK’s wimping out on the Bay of Pigs invasion, but understood that they had bit off a little more than they could chew.”””
NO, the bay O pigs fiasco was the impetus that caused the missle crisis, Kennedy wimped out(sold out on missles in Turkey)
also it was Kennedy that caused the Jews to develope the “bomb” , as they understood that that anti semite could not be trusted (read the book “the samson option”)
Israel can look after themselves as can all the Arab countries, f*ck em all, we don’t need to do a thing but trade with those that are willing to trade goods. We keep the services and technologies.
I agree that Israel has a right to exist; historically it’s been their ancestral homeland for thousands of years. They have the ability to defend it without our troops or money. Piss on the Arab Islamic kingdoms and states, they will continue to be jealous murderous societies forever.
It’s not our problem if we cut them all off, they have zip, nada, nothing, and zero to offer us of value, especially the millions of begrudged, welfare seeking, white hating, other than Muslim hating, trouble causing squatters that infest our lands.
Let them and their gods sort it out once and for all.
NME666 at February 29, 2012 8:01 PM
also it was Kennedy that caused the Jews to develope the “bomb” , as they understood that that anti semite could not be trusted (read the book “the samson option”)
Any idea what caused Jews gave US nuclear secrets to Russia?
peterj –
anyone who subcontracts their security to others is at the mercy of their defender. No one in their right mind would hand that power to Saddam Hussein.
@ small c conservative at February 29, 2012 9:53 PM
Subcontracts ? Don’t know what you mean.
Bibi’s visit to Washington should be a classic example of reality slamming into unicorns.
As mentioned, Passover and Easter don’t always hit the same full moon. If they’re different, it’s usually Passover that’s a month later.
Jesus was able to get them to overlap … I got that part a long time ago. But thanks for the tip, sparky.
President Carter made it up, then a public statement?
~mauser98
Yes, is that all you’ve got?
There is no evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons.
It has to be proved that Israel has them before anyone can make this puerile argument “If the Let’s-Do-Israel’s-Dirty-Work crowd are so worried about proliferation of nukes in the ME, they aren’t they calling for the abolition of Israel’s nukes?”
So far, no one has risen to the challenge, today or any other day, of proving that Israel’s non-existent nuclear weapons should be removed.
How can you remove that which is not there or predicate an argument for not addressing a threat such as Iran poses based on an unproven supposition?
Oz. Mordecai Vanunu,Sunday Times says different
On October 5, 1986, the London Sunday Times newspaper headlines boldly announced, “Revealed: The Secrets of Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal.” The startling story, based on interviews with Vanunu and the 60 photographs he provided showing Israeli plutonium spheres used for triggers in nuclear warheads, revealed that Israel was fast developing nuclear weapons.
mauser98,
Nope, not convincing in the least.
Is that the best you can do?
Not a shred of evidence that Vanunu is who he says he is and the “photo proof” is as clear as the Lock Ness Monster/Big Foot photos.
Only someone who already believed that crap would think there was anything meaningful there.
Oz. UK Guardian 24 May 2010 article
Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons…
“Secret apartheid-era papers give first official evidence of Israeli nuclear weapons.”
“Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, providing the first official documentary evidence of the state’s possession of nuclear weapons.”
Fact: South Africa had 12 nuclear weapons which it turned over the the U.S. government before turning the South African government over to the ANC.
They were sold to South Africa by the Israelis?
Bullshit.
Israel, if it had nuclear weapons(which it doesn’t), wouldn’t sell them to anyone, especially not to a regime that was being sanctioned by every western nation and was about to be overthrown internally by the communist ANC.
Provide links or are you too retarded to figure out how to copy and paste?
I’m done with your B.S. and you’ve still done nothing but assert the same crap over and over with zero proof.
Secret papers my ass.
Oz. the real bullshit is between your ears. bigots like you will always be poor.you are the only one in the world not lying?????
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc-pubs/farr.htm
Oh so you do know how to link, eh Nazi boy.
You’ve been playing games.
Still, your link provides nothing but a compilation of supposition and speculation.
Yes, Israel has a French nuclear reactor, BFD.
Israel has to get the bulk of their energy somewhere.
After all, they aren’t floating on a sea of oil and natural gas like Iran is.
Oh, and I’m debt free and not at all poor, FAIL on your part.
Oz. buddy, no evidence Vanunu is who he said he is? then why was he jailed 18 years? then released and put back in jail after talking about “Dimona”. oops..Guardian,Times,Carter all lying except you.you know more than all of them.what makes you the expert? paranoid schizophrenia that’s what.Nazi boy???? help for you below’ you need it today.
http://www.blogthings.com/areyouaparanoidschizophrenicquiz/
Vanunu is a member of the Progressive List for Peace (Hebrew: הרשימה המתקדמת לשלום, HaReshima HaMitkademet LeShalom) a left-wing political party in Israel formed from an alliance of both Arab and Jewish left-wing activists whose goal is the destruction of the State of Israel.
*a goal they shared with the communist ANC government of South Africa and long time collaborators with the PLO*
Yes, Vanunu is a traitor to Israel and no, I’m not your buddy you ignorant little Nazi.
In case you’re too stupid to understand this, Vanunu can still be a traitor who worked at a sensitive nuclear facility without having been involved in a weapons program given the small size of the State of Israel.
You say Guardian,Times,Carter, CIA etc. are all lying.
I say they’re engaging in “belief” with zero proof.
Any honest summation of what these folks actually state in their reports will find the terms “believed” “assessed” “potential” with zero hard evidence.
It’s all guess work on their part and you rely on the word of a single traitor because you want to believe too.
There isn’t even any proof of Israeli acquisition of the uranium quantities necessary to produce the number of nuclear devices that are cited in the guesstimations from these varied entities.
not your buddy? sheesh, the name calling when your argument is defeated.you are the blind believer. people have been executed with less evidence.i did not write the headlines.Carter said they “have”, not believe they do. now the US Army ,US Defense Dept. all lying.trillions of $$$ spent yet you have more intel then they do. yikes. you must be James Bond x10x10.prove Obama was born in Hawaii. try this you delusional schiz.
http://www.military.com/news/article/March-2009/us-army-confirms-israeli-nukes.html
people have been executed with less evidence.
Good point.
Did you notice that Vanunu is still alive?
i did not write the headlines.Carter said they “have”, not believe they do.
Yes. Carter is the one liar out of the group of “believers”.
I was too tired to single out that point last night.
Carter is a well known anti-semite.
Why Jimmy Carter Really is an Anti-Semite
Oz Buddy,you hurt my feelings. what of military.com article?
http://www.military.com/news/article/March-2009/us-army-confirms-israeli-nukes.html
more,more lies you say?
read this one moron
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/dec/13/israel
now Olmert is lying also? Olmert is anti- semite also? wow. you are truly disturbed.
bigots like you end up in a bunker.
Oz Buddy….
Seymour Hersh
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/20/world/israeli-nuclear-arsenal-exceeds-earlier-estimates-book-reports.html
and the Samson Option
http://www.amazon.com/Samson-Option-Israels-Nuclear-American/dp/0394570065
/us-army-confirms-israeli-nukes.html
The U.S. Army confirms Israeli nukes?
Would those be the same guys that invaded Iraq in 2003 to get Saddam’s nukes? Those guys?
So how many of Saddam’s nukes did they get?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/dec/13/israel
From article:
“Israel has said many times – and I also said this to German television in an interview – that we will not be the first country that introduces nuclear weapons to the Middle East,” Mr Olmert insisted. He added: “That was our position, that is our position – nothing has changed.”
FAIL again Nazi boy.
Investigative reporter Seymour M. Hersh says that according to the hearsay he dug up that Israel has nukes and he didn’t just say it to seel books, nuh-uh.
Well that’s good enough for me…uh…no wait it isn’t.
Psyche!
Zero evidence, but keep trying, this is getting fun shooting down your pathetic ducks!
I’d like to flog the point that the U.S. Army was so sure that Saddam had nukes, they believed that strongly, that they invaded the country of Iraq in 2003 on the strength of the assessment and it turned out that they were wrong.
It not only made them look like A-holes but, and I think this needs re-emphasis, it cast some serious shadows on their credibility insofar as guessing who has nukes and who doesn’t.
One more time, I don’t think the U.S. Army lied about Saddam’s nukes.
I think their assessment was wrong and they firmly believed it to be right.
You see they didn’t have any actual proof, yet they invaded Iraq and had until just recently occupied Iraq for nearly 9 years at the cost of considerable blood and treasure based on an unproven belief based on slim to zero evidence.
Oz,buddy stop being a jackass racist bigot. US army did not say Iraq had WMD, Bush,Cheney,Powell,CIA did. you think the army could tell Cheney anything? so now Army/Dept of Defense is lying,made up report from thin air and only you exposed it?get medication quick bigot racist boy.
Seymour Hersh,NYTimes award wining author made up info in book from heresay,became bestseller, and only you exposed this??? now Hersh and US Army are lying anti-semites. you are super bigot,crawl back into your bunker. Israel nuke proof overwhelming
Oz buddy, take off you robe and hood http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/israel/nuke.html
and back to South African deal.
“What is proven by this is that Israel was, even 35 years ago, a nuclear state, in direct violation of numerous international treaties. It also proves that Israel offered nukes to South Africa, a rogue nation under sanctions that covered not only any weapons but trade as well.”
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_zion68.htm
Gordon Duff is Veterans Today editor,US Marine vet,diplomat,etc. not a squeeling pig flake like you.
Oz buddy, grab some prozac quick
http://www.amazon.ca/Israel-Bomb-Avner-Cohen/dp/0231104839/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
http://www.amazon.ca/The-Worst-Kept-Secret-Israels-Bargain/dp/0231136986/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330782185&sr=1-2
Avner Cohen is another lying anti-semite???? chrisssake they are everywhere.what should we do?
“What is proven by this is that Israel was, even 35 years ago, a nuclear state, in direct violation of numerous international treaties.”
This is the type of reference you cite?
Name one single treaty on nuclear proliferation that Israel is a signatory of.
The experts you trust are biased fools who do not even know that Israel has signed NO RELEVENT TREATIES and therefore Israel cannot possibly be in violation of an agreement to which Israel is not a party or signatory?
You’ll have to do better than that to damage Israel’s security and reputation, Nazi boy.
Oz buddy, that new diaper feels better doesn’t it?
i am damaging Israel’s reputation????????????? you are doing the best job in history with your deranged diseased logic and insane lies.i am just providing truth to a bigot.what of Avner Cohen? he proves it.
“Israel has made a unique contribution to the nuclear age. It has created a special “bargain” with the bomb. Israel is the only nuclear-armed state that does not acknowledge its possession of the bomb, even though its existence is a common knowledge throughout the world.”
http://www.amazon.ca/Worst-Kept-Secret-Israels-Bargain-Bomb/dp/0231136986
thats all for now,must attend a rally with a few thousand friends.
Yes, you are damaging Israel’s reputation.
Giving credence to false claims that Israel is a treaty violator and siding with those who would destroy Israel.
Why do you hate Israel so much?
Why do you have so little respect for the nation with the highest quality of life, the only democracy in the Middle East?
What’s in it for you that you want Israel destroyed so badly, Nazi boy?
Oz buddy… you are slicker than snot on a doorknob.
i do not hate Israel,anybody,even you! am not anti-Israel am anti-war.no one wins
Carter,UK Guardian,BBC,USarmy,Olmert,Hersh,Cohen etc. Israel has nukes. now what? so what. nothing can be done to change it.
in fact i was in Israel last summer.Tel Aviv,Jaffe,Jerusalem.stayed beachfront Renaissance.excellent. Ben Gurion is best airport.
am not anti-Israel am anti-war.no one wins
No one wins?
Tell that to the Carthaginians.
What a trite way to think, you really are ignorant.
War is the natural state of mankind, peace is an aberration.
Read a history book sometime.
Being anti-war means, by default, being on the side of the aggressor.
There is no peace movement in totalitarian nations.