tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6427940.post5249279116494208073..comments2023-12-05T07:50:19.855-05:00Comments on No Oil for Pacifists: "Posture" Pulverizes Peace@nooil4pacifistshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16688417615117569825noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6427940.post-67384326938611235942010-04-08T13:01:32.678-04:002010-04-08T13:01:32.678-04:00Unbelievable. Can we make it till November? Will...Unbelievable. Can we make it till November? Will a change of dominant congressional parties make a difference if we do? <br /><br />http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/04/us_refuses_visas_to_all_israel.html<br /><br />"Into the best of times came the worst of times..." (apologies to the author of "A Tale of Two Cities")sueknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6427940.post-79241384735015235722010-04-08T01:10:27.014-04:002010-04-08T01:10:27.014-04:00> while ignoring the checks and balances that h...> <i>while ignoring the checks and balances that have, in fact, kept nuclear weapons in their silos for decades.</i><br /><br />Waaaaay back on August 6th, 1990, noted SF author and social critic Harlan Ellison was the chief interview on Nightline. <br /><br />He pointed out how, in the then-45 years since Hiroshima & Nagasaki, mankind <i>had not used another nuclear weapon in warfare.</i> And it was hardly a peaceful 45 years, either.<br /><br />As he noted then, <b>this is unprecedented in human history</b>. There has not been a weapon invented which was not used in any subsequent military conflict for decades. It just doesn't happen.<br /><br />... And I'd point out that it's been almost 20 years, now, since even that date.<br /><br />Ellison made the case that there was a reason for this -- that The Bomb (pick your letter) was, far from being an "immoral weapon" as it was often described, instead represented the most MORAL weapon in centuries.<br /><br />For the first time since kings stopped riding into battle at the head of their armies, the individuals whose choice it was to GO to war, would bear a substantial part of the price OF that war. No longer would the fat cats decide to fight it out, and have the "lower classes" bear the lost lives, the injuries, the deprivation of wartime. No, The Bomb placed them, their wealth, their power, right in the rifle scope's field along with everyone else.<br /><br /><br />And THAT I'd concur is a particularly relevant analysis of the role and place of nukes in the history of warfare.<br /><br />===================<br /><br />Also, as an aside --- my own adjunct analysis of the bombs being dropped on Japan -- <b>I think that action may have <i>saved civilization</i></b>. Would the Powers-that-be have been quite so hesitant to go nuclear, if they had lacked so graphic a result of what their decision would bring? Would they have hesitated when the Chinese marched across the Korean border, or during the Cuban Missle Crisis, if there had not been such a visible example of what those weapons -- by then far, far more powerful -- were capable of?<br /><br />I suggest that <b>perhaps not.</b>OBloodyHellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09992539380115488567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6427940.post-71997713591858304242010-04-07T08:25:52.065-04:002010-04-07T08:25:52.065-04:00On this posture, at least, he's consistent alb...On this posture, at least, he's consistent albeit braindamaged stupid. <br /><br />As I understand it he's been in favor of unilateral disarmament since he was a college student.OBloodyHellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09992539380115488567noreply@blogger.com