This Is Only A Test?
With foreign policy thinking like this in charge throughout the 1990s, it's a wonder that only three thousand American civilians had to pay for it with their lives:
At least I'm assuming that idiocy accounts for Albright not knowing that the NoKo's "pushed ahead" with their nuclear weapons program - and are a nuclear power today - because Bill Clinton capitulated to Kim jong-Il over eleven years ago, chosing to appease the pot-bellied, gargoyled communist tyrant with food, resources, and nuclear technology rather than forcing him to back down (or, even better, taking him down a la Saddam Hussein). Similar harebrained numbskullery from Mr. Bill also aided the Iranian mullahgarchy considerably in its own nuclear quest.
The common thread running throughout? It all transpired years before George W. Bush ever set foot in the Oval Office as its official occupant. Which suggests that dishonorable buck-passing may also be a contributing factor to Aunt Madeleine's "amnesiatic" blind faith that history began on Jaunary 20, 2001.
Even leaving the partisan aspect aside, the ideology is the same lib self-loathing guilt-mongering that fuels the Left's escalatingly strident, frantic demands that we quit Iraq regardless of the consequences: the notion that the despots of Iran and North Korea only sought nuclear weapons because they feared that we would topple them from power, and if we just assure them to supine lengths of our good will and back that up with endless concessions, they'll feel warm & fuzzy, abandon their aggressive, imperialistic ambitions and plant flower beds instead of digging missile silos. The possibility that Ahmadinejad and Kim might just be the epitome of evil rather than being "victims" of "American bullying" never once makes it onto Aunt Madeleine's radar screen. All of which goes to show that her detractors don't call her "Half-bright" for nothing.
It could be that she went out of her way to blame her old boss' mistakes on his successor because the NoKos, perhaps feeling left out by Tehran Adolph's grandstanding of late, are publicizing their new ICBM - and in hair-raising fashion:
Consider the worst-case scenario: Chicago, say, goes up in atomic flames. The NoKos put on a show of apologetic mortification, claiming that the ICBM went off-course "by mistake." A pathetic lie, you say? No doubt. But look at the display to which "Dear Leader" has been treated by the American Left's adamant, mindless seditionism vis-a-vie the war against Islamic fundamentalism. What, aside from fatality scale, is different about Osama bin Laden's beholding of American retreat from Somalia in 1993 after eighteen combat KIAs and Kim observing the left-wing cut & run obsession with 2,500 military deaths (not all of them combat-related, remember) in Iraq?
I've long believed that the lesson al Qaeda took from the aftermath of 9/11 was not that they shouldn't have attacked us, but that the attacks were too small. All the four Islamikaze airliners strategically accomplished was bloody Uncle Sam's nose and piss him off, leading to the decimation of bin Laden's network, the discrediting of the al Qaeda "brand," and the destruction of much of the progress Islamism had made during the Clinton detour. What the bad guys needed to do to attain their ultimate goal - removal of the U.S. from the world stage, leaving the way wide open for imposition of the Global Caliphate - was to mount an attack inside the U.S. on a scale that would leave tens or hundreds of thousands or even millions of American civilians dead, the American economy in ruins, and the demoralized survivors blaming the calamity on the Bush Doctrine and demanding "peace at any price" in the best Murthaesque fashion.
Would that be how that scenario ultimately played out? I honestly don't know. It's possible, just as it's possible that the collective American reaction might be Bill Pullman's line from Independence Day: "Nuke 'em; let's nuke the bastards." The point is the impression of softness and weakness generated by the Democrat Party and the Extreme Media is taken by despots like bin Laden, Ahmedinejad, and Kim as being the accurate measure of the American people and our resolve. Aggressive dictators are always want to think that way about us anyway, and nothing coming out of the mouths of Dems and reporters and talking heads these days is doing anything but amplifying that (heretofore) misconception.
That's what makes the DisLoyal Opposition dangerous, and ipso facto treasonous. We know the bad guys want to hit us; and we know the NoKo's, at least, have the capability. We hope they'll be deterred from doing so by the obvious ordnance disparity, but what chance is there that Kim will be dissuaded from "making a mistake" with his Taepodong-2 if he believes that we're as low on national will and, yes, martial spirit as we are high on megatonnage? Does he not, in fact, have every reason to believe that we would do nothing in response, and even rise up against George W. Bush and overthrow his Administration by force in order to curry his favor?
The only real deterrence that we have against a NoKo missile test "gone awry" is the missile shield capability Bill Clinton refused to build but which, providentially, George W. Bush green-lighted. The rudimentary first stage of that system is ready and, today, was activated to full operational status. If Kim orders that ICBM launched anywhere near our territory, we will shoot it down.
But, just as with Iran, a missile shield is not enough. No defense is fool-proof, and the chance would always exist that a rogue nuke could get through. And suppose that it was not intended to incinerate an American city, but fry our entire electrical/communications grid in an EMP (electrromagnetic pulse) attack?:
You wonder why I keep thumping the tub for invading Iran and topping the mullahs before they can get nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them? Or why I have flayed Sick Willie for years for his failure to do the same with the NoKos before they got nukes? Now you know.
The point was made well in this New York Sun editorial:
And that goes double for Iran. Unfortunately, I think the answer to that parting question is, "Not until after we're massively hit again." And if Hillary Clinton is in the White House, probably not even then.
Assuming she survives.
Former Secretary of State [Aunt Madeleine] criticized the U.S. invasion of Iraq, saying Monday it had encouraged Iran and North Korea to push ahead with their nuclear programs.I have long referred to Albright as "Aunt Madeleine" because her appearance reminds me of the Aunt Bea character from the old Andy Griffith Show. When it comes to brainpower, though, Bea leaves Maddie in the deep, deep shade.
Albright, who served under President Clinton, said "the message out of Iraq is the wrong one."
"The message out of Iraq is that if you don't have nuclear weapons, you get invaded. If you do have nuclear weapons, you don't get invaded," she said after an investors' conference in Moscow.
At least I'm assuming that idiocy accounts for Albright not knowing that the NoKo's "pushed ahead" with their nuclear weapons program - and are a nuclear power today - because Bill Clinton capitulated to Kim jong-Il over eleven years ago, chosing to appease the pot-bellied, gargoyled communist tyrant with food, resources, and nuclear technology rather than forcing him to back down (or, even better, taking him down a la Saddam Hussein). Similar harebrained numbskullery from Mr. Bill also aided the Iranian mullahgarchy considerably in its own nuclear quest.
The common thread running throughout? It all transpired years before George W. Bush ever set foot in the Oval Office as its official occupant. Which suggests that dishonorable buck-passing may also be a contributing factor to Aunt Madeleine's "amnesiatic" blind faith that history began on Jaunary 20, 2001.
Even leaving the partisan aspect aside, the ideology is the same lib self-loathing guilt-mongering that fuels the Left's escalatingly strident, frantic demands that we quit Iraq regardless of the consequences: the notion that the despots of Iran and North Korea only sought nuclear weapons because they feared that we would topple them from power, and if we just assure them to supine lengths of our good will and back that up with endless concessions, they'll feel warm & fuzzy, abandon their aggressive, imperialistic ambitions and plant flower beds instead of digging missile silos. The possibility that Ahmadinejad and Kim might just be the epitome of evil rather than being "victims" of "American bullying" never once makes it onto Aunt Madeleine's radar screen. All of which goes to show that her detractors don't call her "Half-bright" for nothing.
It could be that she went out of her way to blame her old boss' mistakes on his successor because the NoKos, perhaps feeling left out by Tehran Adolph's grandstanding of late, are publicizing their new ICBM - and in hair-raising fashion:
North Korea is accelerating preparations for testing a missile that has the potential to strike the United States, a U.S. government official said Friday. A test of the Taepodong-2 long-range missile may be imminent, the official said.That was late last week. This morning, Pyongyang blew off its missile testing moratorium with Japan, indicating that its launch may be imminent. Why is this hair-raising? Think about it: what better guise would there be for an actual nuclear strike against the United States than a missile test? And as Cap'n Ed soberly notes:
The official agreed to speak but only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.
The official said the Bush Administration is very concerned about activities that point toward a test, but declined to elaborate.
Japanese and South Korean officials also have expressed concern in recent days about the reported North Korean missile launch activities. Kyodo News agency in Japan reported that an additional rocket section had arrived at a North Korean launch site within the past two days.
The Taepodong-2 missile has Alaska in easy reach for a direct targeting profile. Depending on the configuration used, however, the Taepodong-2 can hit targets in the continental US using a ballistic polar route for its flight. [emphasis added]
Consider the worst-case scenario: Chicago, say, goes up in atomic flames. The NoKos put on a show of apologetic mortification, claiming that the ICBM went off-course "by mistake." A pathetic lie, you say? No doubt. But look at the display to which "Dear Leader" has been treated by the American Left's adamant, mindless seditionism vis-a-vie the war against Islamic fundamentalism. What, aside from fatality scale, is different about Osama bin Laden's beholding of American retreat from Somalia in 1993 after eighteen combat KIAs and Kim observing the left-wing cut & run obsession with 2,500 military deaths (not all of them combat-related, remember) in Iraq?
I've long believed that the lesson al Qaeda took from the aftermath of 9/11 was not that they shouldn't have attacked us, but that the attacks were too small. All the four Islamikaze airliners strategically accomplished was bloody Uncle Sam's nose and piss him off, leading to the decimation of bin Laden's network, the discrediting of the al Qaeda "brand," and the destruction of much of the progress Islamism had made during the Clinton detour. What the bad guys needed to do to attain their ultimate goal - removal of the U.S. from the world stage, leaving the way wide open for imposition of the Global Caliphate - was to mount an attack inside the U.S. on a scale that would leave tens or hundreds of thousands or even millions of American civilians dead, the American economy in ruins, and the demoralized survivors blaming the calamity on the Bush Doctrine and demanding "peace at any price" in the best Murthaesque fashion.
Would that be how that scenario ultimately played out? I honestly don't know. It's possible, just as it's possible that the collective American reaction might be Bill Pullman's line from Independence Day: "Nuke 'em; let's nuke the bastards." The point is the impression of softness and weakness generated by the Democrat Party and the Extreme Media is taken by despots like bin Laden, Ahmedinejad, and Kim as being the accurate measure of the American people and our resolve. Aggressive dictators are always want to think that way about us anyway, and nothing coming out of the mouths of Dems and reporters and talking heads these days is doing anything but amplifying that (heretofore) misconception.
That's what makes the DisLoyal Opposition dangerous, and ipso facto treasonous. We know the bad guys want to hit us; and we know the NoKo's, at least, have the capability. We hope they'll be deterred from doing so by the obvious ordnance disparity, but what chance is there that Kim will be dissuaded from "making a mistake" with his Taepodong-2 if he believes that we're as low on national will and, yes, martial spirit as we are high on megatonnage? Does he not, in fact, have every reason to believe that we would do nothing in response, and even rise up against George W. Bush and overthrow his Administration by force in order to curry his favor?
The only real deterrence that we have against a NoKo missile test "gone awry" is the missile shield capability Bill Clinton refused to build but which, providentially, George W. Bush green-lighted. The rudimentary first stage of that system is ready and, today, was activated to full operational status. If Kim orders that ICBM launched anywhere near our territory, we will shoot it down.
But, just as with Iran, a missile shield is not enough. No defense is fool-proof, and the chance would always exist that a rogue nuke could get through. And suppose that it was not intended to incinerate an American city, but fry our entire electrical/communications grid in an EMP (electrromagnetic pulse) attack?:
[T]he Taepodong 2 launch may portend Pyongyang’s determination to be able to inflict the single most devastating sort of attack on this country: detonating a nuclear weapon high in space over the United States in order to unleash an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP). Such a burst of immensely powerful energy would devastate our power grid and damage, if not destroy, all unshielded electronic devices coast-to-coast.
A blue-ribbon commission tasked by Congress with assessing this threat found in 2004 that it could have a “catastrophic” effect on this 21st Century superpower, possibly reducing it in the blink of an eye to a pre-industrial society (not unlike much of North Korea). Interestingly, the commission also established that the Soviet Union’s foremost experts on this phenomenon were in North Korea. Collaborative missile testing with Iran may signal that Kim Jong-il is even farther along than we suspect in operationalizing such a capability. [emphasis added]
You wonder why I keep thumping the tub for invading Iran and topping the mullahs before they can get nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them? Or why I have flayed Sick Willie for years for his failure to do the same with the NoKos before they got nukes? Now you know.
The point was made well in this New York Sun editorial:
But most of all a priority should be placed on preparing a military response to North Korea's nuclear program so that the moment intelligence discovers that the communists who run the North Korean state have been cheating, its atomic weapons program can be dealt with directly, before things reach the point that more countries than South Korea and possibly Japan are within range of North Korean guns.
The pacifist argument that has been circulating since President Clinton first started appeasing Kim Jong Il and set North Korea down the nuclear road is that any action against the communist state would endanger nearby countries. But the flipside is that inaction just lets North Korea build up its strength and have more countries in its sight. And now America is threatened. Now will America prepare for war?
And that goes double for Iran. Unfortunately, I think the answer to that parting question is, "Not until after we're massively hit again." And if Hillary Clinton is in the White House, probably not even then.
Assuming she survives.
posted by JASmius at 4:02 PM
<<< Home