Comment

Comment by Robert Doyle SR on February 6, 2012 at 2:46pm

We see an amazing similarity to some posers/posters, to the old schoole Soviet Intel sreamers in media. YOU know who you are, so do we. Gettafugoutaour spaces. The U.S. Navy alone can handle the ocean based destruction of any/all the Earths creepy nations . Get gone y'all, for they are coming to get you next. IDIOTS.

 

Comment by Maria De Wind on February 6, 2012 at 11:07am

In the issue of Time of January 3, 1972, President Nixon is quoted as follows: "We must remember the only time in the history of the world that we have had any extended period of peace is when there has been balance of power. It is when one nation becomes infinitely more powerful in relation to its potential competitor that the danger of war arises. So I believe in a world in which the United States is powerful. I think it will be a safer world and a better world if we have a strong, healthy United States, Europe, Soviet Union, China, Japan, each balancing the other, not playing one against the other, an even balance." ...

Foreign Affairs

... 

In addition, it negates a long-standing American declaratory position against a multiple power balance, symbolized by President Wilson's famous description of it at the Guildhall in 1918 as "a thing in which the balance was determined by the sword which was thrown in on one side or the other . . . the unstable equilibrium of competitive interests . . . maintained by jealous watchfulness and an antagonism of interests." 

It abrogates at least a decade or more in which it was the conventional wisdom in Washington that the United States should be "infinitely more powerful in relation to its potential competitor." And finally, it assumes that, as in the eighteenth century, the five powers concerned have broadly the same range of resources at their disposal. 

Why not give a shift of paradigm a chance?

A Foreign Policy of Freedom: Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship

Comment by rtaylortitle on February 6, 2012 at 8:52am

L. Guarisco...you are "dead-on" in your summation.  It's pathetic in he way we risk our lives and taxpayer funds over Israel's desires to control the whole region.  Our nation is now an empire....not a republic...an empire.  I love my country (not its govt.) and I love our soldiers in uniform (most of them), but I'm pulling for Russian and China to say "enough" and dare the U.S./Israel to cross that line.  Our aggression needs to stop and if it takes those two nations to call a halt to this...so be it.  I'd pay more at the pump as well, but I would sure like those existing patent-locks on cheaper fuel broken I don't care who "owns" them!!!

Comment by Cryptocurrency on February 6, 2012 at 2:51am

Both Russia and China have said that an attack on Iran would be an attack on their national security.

“Iran is our close neighbor, just south of the Caucasus. Should anything happen to Iran, should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security,” Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s deputy prime minister and former envoy to NATO, said in mid-January.

“China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a third world war,” said Major General Zhang Zhaozhong in December.

Comment by Maria De Wind on February 6, 2012 at 1:31am

They actually talk about Iran

Comment by apeman2502 on February 5, 2012 at 11:23pm

  My studies have most every general and admiral from MacArthur and Halsey to Eisenhower stating that the Japanese had offered surrender but the cabinet around Truman aggressively persuaded president Truman to drop the bombs. Someone blew up Fukushima. i do my home work and the USGS and Japanese earthquake monitoring systems back me up except for a penned in 9.2. Check out the Fukushim videos, ladies and gentlemen. A 9.2 earthquke less than 7 miles from the nearest monitoring station which recorded a 5,6. Impossible. The daichi landfall of the shockwave was less than 6 miles, and yet no destruction is noted beyond a minor crack in the street. Not one wall with cracked stucco. Look at every other major coastal earthquake of magnitude over a 7,0, let alone a 9.2. Numeerous 8.5s and 8.6s resulted in massive property damage including many collapsed buildings. Not Fukushima. Here, not even a broken window until the water shows up. Nukes and HAARP are evidenced by photos and seismograph readings from the USGS and Japanese government, Jay Rockefeller had threatened Japan  with a massive earthquake the previous week. The technology exists. No lie. worth a look. See: The Dimona dozen vs. the Fukushima 50 for starters.

  Iran would no more nuke the U.S. than you or I would walk into a police station and start kicking policemen in the shins or more violently attack them. Stupid to think about and false. More stupid than walking into the Patriots locker rooom and laughing while snapping beat up players with a towel.

Comment by Michael Clair on February 5, 2012 at 10:33pm

And peace can be achieved by walking away, I realize that the Japanese government would not surrender and did not want to talk peace, even after the first bomb was dropped!
Have we yet had a government on this planet that really represents the people? or really cares for them? Do we think the government there would have lasted or that they would have come out to fight more?
Perhaps they would have but I'd rather have fought that fight than have  this stain. I feel if you go against your soul and what is right you are already dead. 

Comment by Michael Clair on February 5, 2012 at 10:27pm

Think of it this way... if our government attacks Iran and they beat our socks off will they be justified in killing civilians here in a show of power with some nukes? Do we deserve that? Or would we learn and grow from it and never allow a government of ours that would do that to us again?
Maybe we would maybe we wouldn't, but I'd like the chance before being nuked. Thankfully we will not likely be at anyone's mercy I don't think. 

Comment by Michael Clair on February 5, 2012 at 10:22pm

I don't know if your defending the action really, but I'd offer that killing military or civilian as a show of power is highly immoral. If you don't need to kill you shouldn't. If we go down the path of killing those that may be a threat in the future or may attack us than we might as well invade Iran, and destroy the rest of the world while we are at it. 
I don't agree with that, I believe killing and war is only justified in defending your country from attack, and nothing more. Hitler's intentions (as with Germany the war before) of world domination were very clear, and allowed to or not Japan did attack us. Once they no longer were in a position to attack us and at our mercy we should have used peace. They may very well have only fought back so hard after because they feared we would kill them all, how nearly true.
Perhaps after we left them on their island they would have changed their views? There were many Japanese that were against the war in the first place. Shown mercy and defeat even after rebuilding they may not have attacked us and we wouldn't be seeing to their defense or guilty of such horror today.

Comment by rtaylortitle on February 5, 2012 at 8:50pm

We didn't have to nuke large civilian centers to make a point.  We obviously intended the two bombings to show which nation would be the major power force after the war ended.  It was grand power-politics strategy at its essence.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• …
• 35
• Next ›
• Page