23 Replies to “Operation Nero”

  1. Existential. Big word. Had to look it up.
    not facing existential threat: old Abenaki term meaning “Windigo a pretty good fellow”.

  2. Ms. Rice isn’t wrong. Terrorism, Russian belligerence, Chinese aggression, etc. — they’re all serious national security challenges, but none pose a “existential” threat to the US, let alone the West.
    Just because you’re afraid of everything, doesn’t make it so.

  3. Actually the US and the rest of the western world faces a bigger threat than previously because there are so many of the enemy within the borders of our countries.

  4. Hitler didn’t pose an existential threat in 1935 either. But look what happened.
    The problem with lefties is they can’t see the big picture inside that big tent they have.

  5. And while youre on that Times site there is a couple of Angus polls that need the SD adjustment.

  6. Yeah, the threats aren’t existential, they’re, um, real… (you’re not paranoid if they actually are out to get you). Still don’t get this governmental insistence on you having to a membership card in something to be called a “terrorist”. Terrorist is the broad brush (“broad strata” in newspeak), then you have the rest of the taxonomy, bombers, serial killers, hijackers, cyberialists, religious “devotees”, liberals…

  7. Kt, out from under that rock, and view the real world. The NME expands it’s base and eventually runs out of places to conquer, then they look at you and say yup, your time has come. World expansion, caliphate, does not end at the continental shore line.
    Ken points out that the NME within is a problem, but so are stupid ppl.

  8. The USofA has The Bomb, lots of them. There are no external, existential threats on this planet. However, internally there are many: Refusal to defend the border, an electorate that expects the government to take care of them and the idiots they elect. The financial mismanagement to hide all of the unfunded liabilities is another path to destruction.

  9. One of history’s great ironies is that MAD (in principle an insane policy)actually worked because those involved were not insane.
    OMHO it is at times difficult to decide which entity is more insane…Washington or Tehran…

  10. `to the US, let alone the West“
    Write that down and read it again in ten years. Or better yet, I`ll give you a few boroughs in London, Paris or Malmo where I challenge you to go live.

  11. Obama has been giving billions of dollars back to Iran even though they have a massive nuke program and their leaders call us the “Great Satan”. Our President plans to sign some idiotic agreement with them and everybody knows he is eager to sign something. I would call that an existential threat.

  12. I personally think Obama is America’s greatest threat followed closely by Radical Islam. However, the differences between the two is very small

  13. “U.S. not facing ‘existential’ threats”
    Sure, we can lose 50-60 million, maybe even 100 million people and there will still be a U.S.A. of some sort. Whether we will like it; or even recognize it is a question. One of Susan Rice’s and Barack Obama’s best Buddies, Bill Ayers said that killing 25 million Americans to bring the revolution is OK, even a necessary goal. Men, Women, Children, it doesn’t matter, because their goal is greater than any one person.
    To devoted socialists and communists, we are not even real people, just something to be used and used up in their pursuit of the Perfect Communist Man, and the Perfect Society.

  14. Hm. How to phrase this so it doesn’t sound evil.
    Foreign threats that could kill 50-100 million Americans are an existential threat to the nation to Ms. Rice because the bombs would be landing on people who think like her, and the remaining dominant culture would be the flyover country rubes. She needs a way to ensure that her tolerant, superior views can stay in the ascendency.
    Yes, that works much better than the earlier draft where I mused she was looking for ways to bomb Texas and Alaska instead of NY and SF.

  15. rd is right. Just because the land is still here, does not mean the ‘country’ still exists. 9/11 cost the US well over $1 trillion in lost opportunities and much more than that in direct military costs. How many hits like that can a bankrupt state endure?
    Since 9/11, we have lost much of our freedom to travel, our privacy, our security of person (now have to have our privates fondled & or photographed in order to get on a plane) and much more.
    Since 9/11, it is legitimate for the police to assume that everyone may be a terrorist, often showing up with a swat team and breaking into people’s homes for little or no reason. They now use armored personnel carriers and military gear to deal with demonstrations.
    None of this was common 20 years ago. There is a very good argument to be made that ‘the Home of the Brave and the Land of the Free’ no longer exists. Certainly won’t after a couple of more hits.

  16. Dave and rd are right. The “fundamental change” group hate liberal democracy more than they fear radical Islam.

  18. I doubt that S. Rice has thought through that far.
    Large urban coastal cities are the obvious targets for who ever uses WMD….
    There goes their base…..
    Using leftist morality…perhaps that’s not such a bad thing…probably more effective that voter ID.

  19. Like others here, I wonder what in the hell she is talking about using the term “existential”. I can only conclude that it is a meaningless term (means whatever you want it to mean) intended to make Ms Rice sound all intellectual and smart and ed u cated don cha know.
    My take on it is simple. If you can’t speak in meaningful english you’re just trying to cover up your lack of understanding. To rephrase that in precise english, you’re just putting out Bull Crap.
    And for god sakes, shave that mustache. You look like a man in drag.

  22. “Yet, few know better than we, the complexity of the challenges that America faces.”
    …few know better than we…
    Pure elitist arrogance.
    “what’s missing here in Washington is a sense of perspective… the dangers we face… are not of the existential nature we confronted during WWII or during the cold war.”
    Agreed; knowing that the perspective of the Obama administration mirrors that of Nazi Germany and the U.S.S.R.

  23. This is a tough one. George W. got the US into wars and accomplished very little. It would be fair to say that he ruined Iraq for generations. The Taliban needed to be trashed in Afghanistan, and they were, but what a mess was left behind. Al-Qaeda was hurt, but still pretty strong.
    Obama is keeping most American boots out of the war and proxies are slowly beating back ISIS. Al-Qaeda is around, but its leaders need to be pretty careful of missiles showing up at their meetings.
    Really, there’s nothing in the Ukraine worth starting a war over, and the sanctions are slowly throttling Russia.
    Maybe we need to think a bit about why the type of rhetoric in this article makes sense. I mean a slow, careful approach to diplomacy and long term results.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation