Democrats Hoping For A Missle Attack Against The U.S.?
After North Korea fired a long range missle a few weeks ago I thought it would be unanimous that we needed a defense missle shield. Even though the missle failed what will happen the next time? I can't think of any other reason to be against this other than wishing for Americans to be attacked.
Democrats are still trying to strangle the program. In the House, John Tierney of Massachusetts this year proposed cutting the Pentagon's missile-defense budget by more than half. His amendment was defeated on the House floor, but it won the support of more than half of his Democratic colleagues, including would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Meanwhile in the Senate, Carl Levin (D., Mich.) offered in June to cut off funds for the ground-based interceptor program that Mr. Bush recently activated in Alaska in anticipation of the North Korean launch. Mr. Levin wants to stop new interceptors from being built, but Senate Republicans wouldn't bring his proposal up for a vote. Mr. Levin has been waging his own private war against missile defenses for a generation, to the point of outflanking Russian objections on the political left.
Can someone explain to me why democrats want the United States to be hit by long range ballistic missles? Do they revel in the slaughter of fellow Americans?
Can we question their patriotism yet?
Democrats are still trying to strangle the program. In the House, John Tierney of Massachusetts this year proposed cutting the Pentagon's missile-defense budget by more than half. His amendment was defeated on the House floor, but it won the support of more than half of his Democratic colleagues, including would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Meanwhile in the Senate, Carl Levin (D., Mich.) offered in June to cut off funds for the ground-based interceptor program that Mr. Bush recently activated in Alaska in anticipation of the North Korean launch. Mr. Levin wants to stop new interceptors from being built, but Senate Republicans wouldn't bring his proposal up for a vote. Mr. Levin has been waging his own private war against missile defenses for a generation, to the point of outflanking Russian objections on the political left.
Can someone explain to me why democrats want the United States to be hit by long range ballistic missles? Do they revel in the slaughter of fellow Americans?
Can we question their patriotism yet?
posted by Capitalist Infidel at Saturday, July 22, 2006
6 Comments:
I sit here and shake my head in amazement, too, Cappy. What the hell could Levin's possible motivation be?
Blake is correct, we all will be equally dead upon missile impact.
While it seems utterly ludicrous that these people could be in favor of an attack upon their own countrymen, what other possible explanation makes sense? Does it cost so much that it relegates the move as too expensive to keep us alive? When did Dem's start worrying about spending too much of our money?
I'll just say this, guys. In the modern nuclear era, "progress" in nuclear technology - both offensive AND defensive - seems to be a fool's errand. Why? Because it's unlikely a missle defense shield could ever be 100% effective.
Think about it - even if we did develop a magic laser that could shoot down every single missle, we're still not out of the woods. Remember 9/11? Devastation no longer requires a missle. All one needs to unleash tragedy these days is a shoddy port security system and a pair of boxcutters. Point is, even the most impressive defense system can come up woefully short when put into practice. Case in point? The Maginot Line. The French thought they had it all figured out, then looked like idiots as the Germans simply outflanked the so-called impregnable line from the north and steamrolled down into Paris.
The key to the North Korea problem, of course, is globalization. Specifically, China. While they must save face with their North Korean allies, we must ALSO impress upon them the importance of keeping Crazy Jong-Chillin' on a leash. China's economy is exploding, and I don't think they'd be too happy if North Korea torpedoed their burgeoning spot in the limelight of international business.
Les, that could be the dumbest comment I've ever read. Are you saying the system has to be 100% effective? How completely idiotic is that??? If they're were 10 missles launched and we were able to knock 8 or 7 or 6 or 5 or....I'll take it and I bet anyone living in the area those missles were destined for would too. Is there a reason you want Americans slaughtered? It's almost unbelieveable that you would want that just to bash Bush with it....Dude, that's just sad and pathetic!
As usual, CJ, you completely missed the point of my comment. I'll try again...
Let's start by going back to the Maginot Line example. The French thought they'd built the most amazing border defense in history. They thought any advancing Germans would get mowed down like grass if they ever tried to thwart the Line. Unfortunately for the French, the Germans felt the same way. So what did the Germans do? They simply went around it. Problem solved.
Same thing with the missile shield. Even if the actual system itself WERE perfect, do you really think the terrorists would just give up being terrorists?!? Of course not! They'd just find another means of completing their objectives!
While I would never say that a nuclear strike against the United States is an impossibility, I certainly don't think the threat is as pervasive as you do, CJ. Remember when those big bad Commies launched all those nukes at us 30 years ago and our amazing nuclear missile shield saved us all? Neither do I, cuz it never happened. Mutually assured destruction is a powerful psychological deterrent, folks. If we ARE ever hit by a nuclear strike, my guess is that it would be the result of a smuggled/stolen weapon detonated from within our own borders.
"It's almost unbelieveable that you would want that just to bash Bush with it..."
I love the lengths to which you go to get me all riled up, CJ. It's quite endearing.
I tried ignoring your comment about the fighting capabilities of the French. You are dismissed out of hand after attempting (quite poorly) an analogy that doesn't even come close to adding up. The French were handing over Jews before the Germans even made it to the border.
It is perplexing why you want North Korea to hit the United States with a long range ballistic missle. Can you explain that to me please?
Perhaps instead of ignoring the portions of my comments you don't like (by your own admission), you should try to read them in their entirety. Take a look at the end of my first comment. Where did you find me endorsing a missile strike against the United States?
Economic diplomacy is more powerful than you might think, friends. China finds itself in the unique position of maintaining positive relations with both the North Koreans AND the rest of the world that they now do so much business with. They don't want to see that dynamic screwed up by their North Korean allies. It's in their best interest to prevent such a catastrophe.
Post a Comment
<< Home