Bowie,

Again, you seem to take alot of interest in a country that is not your own. And you continue to offer rationalizations for the ousting or overthrow of our government's leadership, even after admitting that you're not a citizen of our country. Why then should I, as an American citizen, listen to you? By rights, I would expect that a citizen of another country would have something against our country, nationalism and all that.

Having said that, I like Iacoca. In his day he difinitely had an impact on the business models here in the U.S. But I will say that being a CEO is not being an elected official at the highest levels, especially the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces. I wouldn't even compare the two as he has done, though it certainly shows the moxy he's known for. As I said before, the only people who know what it means to be the President, are the current President and former Presidents still living. Everybody else is just a spectator.

Like I stated in previous posts, only time will tell what impact the policies of the U.S. and it's leaders will have in the future. I reserve judgement until that time. Peace.

Posted by: JCM at April 25, 2007 01:31 PM

JCM,

I thought you would be interested in this. As Lee Iacocca says "I've not been Commander in Chief", but he has been CEO of Chrysler...Seems to hold the same fears and concerns as me.

Below is an excerpt from an article he has written, which is part of a book he has written called "Where have all the leaders Gone?". I've given a link to the site so you can read the whole article it is well worth it.

Thelink to the site is

http://www.ichblog.eu/content/view/1145/1/

"Had Enough? Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course." Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic. I'll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out! You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore. The President of the United States is given a free pass to ignore the Constitution, tap our phones, and lead us to war on a pack of lies.Congress responds to record deficits by passing a huge tax cut for the wealthy (thanks, but I don't need it). The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we're fiddling in Iraq, the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving pom-poms instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of America my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for.

I've had enough. How about you? I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. My friends tell me to calm down. They say, "Lee, you're eighty-two years old. Leave the rage to the young people." I'd love to, as soon as I can pry them away from their iPods for five seconds and get them to pay attention. I'm going to speak up because it's my patriotic duty. I think people will listen to me. They say I have a reputation as a straight shooter. So I'll tell you how I see it, and it's not pretty, but at least it's real. I'm hoping to strike a nerve in those young folks who say they don't vote because they don't trust politicians to represent their interests. Hey, America, wake up. These guys work for us. Who Are These Guys, Anyway? Why are we in this mess? How did we end up with this crowd in Washington? Well, we voted for them, or at least some of us did. But I'll tell you what we didn't do. We didn't agree to suspend the Constitution. We didn't agree to stop asking questions or demanding answers. Some of us are sick and tired of people who call free speech treason. Where I come from that's a dictatorship, not a democracy. And don't tell me it's all the fault of right-wing Republicans or liberal Democrats. That's an intellectually lazy argument, and it's part of the reason we're in this stew. We're not just a nation of factions. We're a people. We share common principles and ideals. And we rise and fall together.

Where are the voices of leaders who can inspire us to action and make us stand taller? What happened to the strong and resolute party of Lincoln? What happened to the courageous, populist party of FDR and Truman? There was a time in this country when the voices of great leaders lifted us up and made us want to do better. Where have all the leaders gone?

The Test of a Leader
I've never been Commander in Chief, but I've been a CEO. I understand a few things about leadership at the top. I've figured out nine points, not ten (I don't want people accusing me of thinking I'm Moses). I call them the "Nine Cs of Leadership." They're not fancy or complicated. Just clear, obvious qualities that every true leader should have. We should look at how the current administration stacks up. Like it or not, this crew is going to be around until January 2009. Maybe we can learn something before we go to the polls in 2008. Then let's be sure we use the leadership test to screen the candidates who say they want to run the country. It's up to us to choose wisely.

And by the way you can be a Christian full of hope and belief but not hold any belief in heaven. I follow Christ because a life in him gives me meaning and strength and bravery in this life, I don't need promises of heaven to do that, just the knowledge that all the evil that humans could throw at him did not stop his spirit from prevailing.

Hope you enjoy

Posted by: bowie54 at April 23, 2007 07:11 PM

Bowie,

You seem to go out of your way to make far-reaching broad-based statements of fact about which you know little. I'm insulted to some degree that you would think the majority of Americans agree with comments like Don made, let alone speaking for myself. I never liked popular opinion, but you appear to be a master of rumors and colloquialism yourself.

I don't believe that mainstream America has a voice and generally choose not to participate in it's civic duty as evidenced by the past couple of decades of less than stellar turn-out in both local and federal elections. With less than 50% normally participating, can you then say that the "majority" of Americans are not in agreement with current policy, whether right or left? My belief is that the "majority" of Americans aren't even represented in substantial way. It's only the extreme views like yours that capture headlines and lend to the perception that things are out of whack. I guess if you look at the world through those glasses, things would seem that way.

Another example of how popular opinion is captured is through using polls. Amazing things really (I'm being sarcastic.) How exactly can one surmise what 300m people think by asking staged questions of only 1,000? The percentage is so small you need a special calculator just to figure out how small the number really is. I base my opinions on my education and experience, relationships that I've had in my life (both professional and personal), and just plain old common sense.

Very little of what happens in our lives is personally directed at ourselves. For the most part, we are spectators in an elaborate game. Sometimes this makes us feel helpless and we try to compensate by reaching out farther than our grasp can support us. Such is the case, I believe, with you Bowie. I'm saddened that you don't believe in heaven. It must be difficult to endure living with no hope that something better is over the horizon of life. That's all that heaven represents, really. The belief that our lives somehow have meaning, and that any sacrifices we make for the common good will somehow be accounted for and make it all worth it.

I hope that peace finds you and leads you to a place where the world doesn't look so dreary and full of hate. I for one believe the world is a much better place, as are the people in it. Peace.

Posted by: JCM at April 20, 2007 11:04 AM

Don,

I take it that your comment " It would be my pleasure to introduce you to the 27 virgins!" is an invitation to send me to the Muslim heaven. Does this mean that you are offering to kill me?

So is this how people in the United States respond to people who have a difference of opinion? Is this how you train your soldiers? What happens in Iraq if ordinary people there dispute with your soldiers? Do you offer to introduce them to the 27 virgins as well? I'm sure it's taken as a joke there - as much as I am taking it as a joke.

JCM and others, are you comfortable with Don's comments? I would take no comment from you that you are in support. Do the moderators of this site think it is appropriate for death threats to be offered to people who post here?

Is it against the law in the United States to offer death threats, or have you descended further into fascism than even I had feared?

And by the way Don, I am not a Muslim, don't actually believe in heaven, and even if there is such a place I don't think there would be 27 Virgins there for me.

I hope one day your country returns to being the great and wonderful place it used to be, and comments and opinions I have heard here are treated with the contempt that they deserve.

May you all find peace and gentleness one day.

Posted by: bowie54 at April 14, 2007 04:03 AM

Bowie54

You are an idiot and I am thankful you are not a citizen of the US. It would be my pleasure to introduce you to the 27 virgins!

Posted by: Don at April 5, 2007 11:20 PM

The decison to advance our military power is a good thing. Would you rather fear a country that could wipe us out with a push of a botton or would you rather be the country feared. If we went to war we should be able to crush our enemy to were they wont be able to fight back ever again.

Posted by: Rocky at April 2, 2007 10:40 AM

Bowie,

I'm sorry, but as far as I know, Wikipedia is not officially recognized as a legitimate source of information by the academic world. I know this because my wife is currently in a Masters Program and her professors refuse to recognize it as a research source. So I ask your forgiveness in advance for not "checking" with Wikipedia to validate your argument.

Secondly, I'm not sure what you mean by strawmen. You presented some points of view and I presented some points of view. How is your point of view more valid than mine. The fact is, you cannot refute my position that in the U.S. we don't have a true democracy from a technical point of view, we are a republic. What does that mean exactly? Well, it means that the bullies down the street can't impose their view on others without their consent. If they try, they are breaking the law.

Being that you come from a country outside of the U.S. it doesn't surprise me that your views are different. In fact, I would expect that almost every country in the world has a viewpoint different than we do. As should be expected. My comment about your lack of understanding of my position is based on that logic.

That facts are quite clear. The U.S. was founded by, and continues to thrive because of, the oppressive governments or societies that exist around the world. In fact, in the time of our founding fathers, England was one of those states that people were fleeing from. This is something that you cannot deny, mainly because it's obvious.

When our Constitution was drafted, the authors of it took into consideration the historical failure of democracy in it's truest form. And in order to give democracy a lasting and enduring chance at success they created a representative form of democracy, or a republic. The main idea was that every citizen had inalienable rights that could not be taken away by majority vote. Since true democracy is based on a majority vote, you can then conclude that we are not a true democracy, though the word is often used to mischaracterize the U.S. and it's dealings with other countries.

In your comments you allude to my supporting Noriega. That's insulting. You allude to my supporting war crimes. That is also insulting. You suggest that we should have seat belts and motorcycle helmets, but we have had those laws for years. You address the numbers, but avoid the real issue that makes the deaths meaningless ... alcohol consumption and then operating a motor vehicle. You comment on murders, but fail to recognize that only a percentage were committed using a gun. You definitely wanted to plug your anti-gun point of view, and I was talking about bad behavior which I find much more tragic than soldiers doing their job.

The bottom line is this, The U.S. is NOT the rest of the world. It's supposed to be different. That's why everyone comes here, because of the difference. The more we gravitate in YOUR direction, the more we cease to be different and all the benefits that come along with it, be they real or imagined. So when you start talking about how much better your position is I'm obviously going to reject that position because I don't believe it. If I did, then I'd be just like you, wouldn't I?

Only time will tell if you are right or I am right. Most likely long after we are both gone. In the meantime, we can trade points of view and entertain the gallery. Peace.

Posted by: JCM at March 30, 2007 01:18 PM

JCM,

For someone who accuses others of having a closed mind, you are incredibly selective in the people you quote. You forgot Thomas Paine - remember he was the one who coined the term United States of America - and was a signatory to your constitution, and wrote radical democratic pamphlets which would probably make you apoplectic.

You, or others who want to have an open mind, might be interested in looking at these sites:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Thomas+Paine&sourceid=mozilla-search

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_of_Man#Aristocracy_versus_Democracy

Just a little aside. Have you thought what your heroes of the American Revolution would have been called if they were fighting the english today? A few clues-they Destroyed Civilian targets (Boston Tea Party), attacked the legitimate government (it happened to be the british)I'll leave you to put a name to that.

Have you read de Toqueville - he was a frenchman who wrote about your thriving democracy in the 1830's. He was impressed with the democracy you had then. There is a very good biography of him that has just been printed which you might want to read.

I haven't accused you of being pro war, pro torture or anything else. You spend a lot of time building straw men to attack rather than answering the points I put to you. That generally shows that you are finding it difficult to put a counter view.

In my country we would welcome you even if you do have a radically different point of view to most of us. So you would be welcome in our country JCM. Its a pity that your country is so intolerant of difference. I'll put my hat on now.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 30, 2007 03:09 AM

Bowie,
It doesn't surprise me in the least that you have no understanding of what presented. Noriega and every other two-bit dictator in the world have no clue as to what I presented. But just so everyone understands, nothing of what I said was original material. Check out the Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, two prominent authors of the U.S. Constitution. The words I used to describe democracy was originally written by them, not me, over two hundred years ago. Democracy without checks and balances IS NOT a good thing for any minority opinion. The only thing that makes our form of government work so well is the protections that the law gives everyone, not just the majority opinion. So in fact, true democracy IS mob rule.

As for my own feelings, I've never been pro-war, pro-torture, or anything else you seem to think that you want to label me with. Your take is just way to easy and makes alot of assumptions and we all know about those. And to tell you the truth, I'm very happy that you don't want to live here. So don't forget to pick up your hat on the way out.

Posted by: JCM at March 29, 2007 10:58 PM

Wow JCM

Where do I begin with you? And more to the point, why aren’t there people on this site appalled at what you are saying. Lets go through your points

“The greatest evil identified by our founding fathers was democracy. They knew even then that "the mob" was the greatest threat to liberty and freedom.”

And another

“This country was founded as a republic, a representative-democracy with checks and balances, under a rule of law. But that is changing. The mob is gaining the upper hand. And my greatest fear is that democracy will prevail and destroy this great country of ours.”

Do you really mean to tell me that you consider Democracy as evil? Well that will come as news to most people in the United States. and even the "potus" might be a little surprised given some of his recent speeches. Try this one for size

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031106-2.html

The rest of the world knows that the United States holds democracy in contempt, but most Americans seem to console themselves when they realise how little they are regarded across the world that they are bastions of democracy. Well there goes that argument.

The contempt the United States holds for democracy is well documented in the regimes you support and the activities you engage in in “your hemisphere” The United States engineered a coup in Chile to install the dictator, Pinochet Heres a wikipedia reference for that one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

The United Sates supported a thug in Panama until he was of no use to them, Perhaps you were involved eh JCM? Here’s a wikipedia reference to refresh your memory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Noriega

Given your views on Democracy, I’m sure you have a lot of sympathy with these men. They were good military men, didn’t care too much for democracy and were willing to make sure annoyances like the mob were put down. Dissent wasn’t a problem when they ruled.

So is this the type of country that you want for America?

Are you sure that it is the type of state your countyrmen died in the Second World War for? They were fighting states who had a similar view of democracy, the mob and dissent that you seem to have.

Have you talked to others of your citizens lately and asked if they actually agree with you? Perhaps you ought to get out more and open that mind of yours.

I won’t go on to the other parts of your posts, apart from your murder rate. I’ll give you a hint on that- you have lots of guns in your country- get gun control. Look at countries who are much freer than yours who have effective gun control, and a very small murder rate. On your car accident statistics- what about mandatory seat belts and motorcycle helmets-it will reduce your rate remarkably.
No I have not been in the military, but in a free state the military are the servants of the people, and answer to them. I have made it clear in all my posts that I admire most probably 90% of the people who serve my country in this way, but I get very suspicious of those in the military who think they have a sole right to talk of rights and wrongs of their actions. That way leads to tyranny. Do you remember anything about the Japanese in WWII. Their military thought they had special rights and see where that led that country.
I’d also like to let you know that I am NOT a citizen of the United States, and I never want to be. If my government colluded with your government to come under your control, I would fight to the death to ensure it didn’t happen, and so would most of the people in my country. We love our freedoms, and we see your country as a place that takes them away.
And to finish. I won’t be writing to this post any more. The thought that people with the views I have seen expressed here have or have had access to Weapons of Mass Destruction, and want more fills me with dread. I’ve seen attitudes expressed here that would not have been out of place in Italy, Germany or Japan in the thirties. The views I’ve seen expressed here makes it clear to me that the sooner the United States is relieved of its weapons the better for world peace. I’m leaving this site with a heavy heart, and a feeling that the world is very unsafe with guardians like you.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 27, 2007 07:03 PM

Bowie,

I'm not assuming anything, only responding to your previous posts. You seem to think that the rest of us have no idea what's going on and that we need to be educated to the "real" state of affairs. You make your statements as if they are fact, when they are in reality just your opinion, and that of other members of the mob.

The greatest evil identified by our founding fathers was democracy. They knew even then that "the mob" was the greatest threat to liberty and freedom. That's why they created the Constitution in the likeness of a republic, so that all citizens would have protections under the law. I didn't make that up, and you can check it out from many sources. So your continued use of the term democracy and the use of "we" tells me volumes about the way you think.

The POTUS has a cast of thousands that provide him with information, much of which we probably will never see. His every speech is crafted to send a message deemed appropriate at the time it was made. This applies to every president, whether they are a Rep or Dem. Those that criticize any President's words presume to know more than they do. I for one will never make that assumption.

The issue here was about nukes. The question brought before us was our thoughts on the article presented, which I'm sure isn't all the information available on the subject. I commented earlier about this, believing that we have no choice but to maintain a position of strength as a deterent to those who would do us harm. I am not so naive as to believe that we could turn our backs on the world and it would leave us in peace to live and prosper as we would.

And you are correct, I don't know a thing about you, but for your words presented here. Are you a veteran? If so, how long did you serve? I recently retired after 24 years of service. I worked in the intelligence field. I traveled extensively in this hemisphere, and lived abroad more than 11 years. I grew up poor, worked hard my whole live, got my education at night school, and now live a modest, if not stressful life, as do most Americans I'm sure.

I believe that you Sir, are in the minority opinion. The Constitution protects your right to free speech, but not speech without consequences. You come here preaching to those who have served, knowing full well the risks involved with doing so. Most, if not all who serve, would do so again, as would I. Such is the reward of freedom, and dearly bought, as you say. I can think of no more honorable pursuit. And yet, as is your wont, come here to sow the seeds of dissension.

Soldiers are schooled to question unlawful orders only. There is no accounting for those who would take the law into their own hands and commit a crime. And I am not denying that it has happened. But the vast majority of those who serve are law-abiding citizens who conduct themselves with honor and integrity. Who understand the seriousness of their commitment and do us proud. Thier service should not be tainted by spirulous comments from the gallery as it seems to me yours are.

The vast majority of the deaths in Iraq are being committed by the Iraqis themselves, and not by the U.S. or it's agents. And these deaths pale in comparison to the atrocities conducted by the previous regime. As for the 3,000+ soldiers lost in four years of fighting, I find that an amazing statistic considering the potential for the loss of more.

But let me ask you this ... how do you account for the average 16,000 murders per year in our country? Or the 13,000 vehicular deaths per year attributable to alcohol? If you want to show outrage, why not focus your attention on that, instead of soldiers doing their job. Compare the loss of 3,200 soldiers to the 116,000 civilians who died in our country during the same time period to the themes I presented. Is that not a more real tragedy?

I refuse to harken to the minority opinion just because it's the flavor of the month. Show me facts and I might be pursuaded. We have many more serious problems in this country beside the arguments you presented here. This country was founded as a republic, a representative-democracy with checks and balances, under a rule of law. But that is changing. The mob is gaining the upper hand. And my greatest fear is that democracy will prevail and destroy this great country of ours.

So please Sir, show me not the minority opinion presented as a popular vote. The largest portion of voting Americans aren't even represented (40%) as compared to the fringe elements (Left or Right) who are fairly balanced. We don't know what the majority of Americans think because they don't participate in the process. So it's impossible for anyone at this point to take the high road. Would that we had true representation in this country versus the political nightmare it has become.

Like it or not, nukes are here to stay. Like it or not, we are world leaders. Like it or not, the global economy is here to stay. Like it or not, there are those who will always oppose us. Why would anyone want to help them, unless they belong to the clamouring mob? Fear the enemy from within.

Posted by: JCM at March 19, 2007 11:40 AM

JCM,

You are making a whole heap of assumptions in your post. You don’t know what I am or what choices I have made. I could be rich or poor, I may well have been the president of a large corporation or a senior person in my country’s political process. You don’t know. And it really doesn’t matter in a democracy anyway. In a democracy it is not good enough for a politician, especially a leader to say that he (or his coterie) alone knows what is good for the country. That is the difference between a tyranny and a democracy. It is also not good enough for us as citizens to allow ourselves to give up our power to decide what is good for our country. We all have the right to decide what is good for the country and that has been fought for with great loss of blood.

I’ll do you the courtesy of going through your points one by one, because I actually want to understand where you are coming from, and hopefully understand more clearly your point of view. You quite rightly can see that I would be more comfortable on more “liberal” sites, but I can’t be sure that my points of view are correct if I don’t engage and discuss my views with those who may virulently disagree with me. You are helping me to hone and perhaps even change my points of view. Thank you for that.

Now lets start:
“People work at Walmart because compared to other similar businesses, they're actually pretty decent jobs. People shop at Walmart because they provide goods that people want at a price they can afford. Who cares what exemptions they are given? That's reality.”
OK. So are you comfortable that to get those low prices your manufacturing jobs are now off shore in China, and that many of the small businesses that were the backbone of your country are no longer viable? Have you thought that maybe the goods are not being priced at Walmart to actually reflect their value- both in labour, in the cost of the goods within them, or the cost of the good to the planet as a whole? Perhaps some goods are meant to be too expensive to buy, because they are very costly.

Would you be comfortable in a situation where you had no real ability to bargain for your wages so your employer could name the price of your labour? I don’t know about you but that doesn’t sound fair to me.

Have you talked to workers at Walmart or listened to their complaints? There are some good sites on the Internet where you can if you are interested, and many of those people have a different story to yours. We don’t have Walmart in our country but I have talked to people who are or who have worked in similar stores, and for those who are not managers, most see it as a desperation job, and very few like the company.

“Your soldiers weren't lied to any more than our soldiers were lied to. It's not their job to pick and choose what they do. Soldiers follow orders. Period. They are not paid to question the motives of their leaders, just as they are free to vote for whomever they think will do the best job.”
The bottom line is JCM, that your politicians and the politicians here lied to our country and to our soldiers to get them to go to war. In my book that is the worst possible lie, because as a result of it, more than 3000 of your compatriots have died, many many more have been wounded, and many many thousands of innocent Iraqis have died. (JCM, I’m talking of young children and women here, not insurgents or terrorists). Making a lie to send that many people to their deaths is unacceptable to me, regardless of what ends the politicians may have wanted to achieve. Is it unacceptable to you?

Like I said in my last post I have nothing but admiration for some one who is prepared to give up their life to defend another person. When that person is in the service of a State, I would hope the State would respect that person enough only to send them to war when it is absolutely necessary, and to never lie to them. I would also hope that those people would be given the respect of wholesome adequate food, good drinking water, and the best possible medical and psychological treatement when they return from war. Look at the recent reports in say the New York Times, and read about how returned soldiers are getting medical treatment in your country. Are you really comfortable JCM, to say that Halliburton knew what is what is doing, and therefore should not be questioned when it engaged in questionable practices in supplying your troops or overcharging you, an American taxpayer, for the services it provided.

Have you heard of the Nuremburg defence JCM? That was where Nazi war criminals tried to say that they were just following orders. It was soundly rejected. Soldiers are there to follow orders, but they must know that does not excuse them from criminal acts or war crimes. Those who were prosecuted and imprisoned for their actions at Abu Ghraib also realised that “I was just following orders” was not a defence. So yes, Soldiers must follow orders, and go where the politicians tell them, but they also have an obligation not to engage in war crimes or unethical conduct, and have a duty not to follow orders that may make them do such a thing. On the other side of that obligation is that the State only puts them in harms way when absolutely necessary and never on the basis of a lie.

I hope I haven’t maligned you JCM, and if I have it was certainly unintentional. I hope that we might be able to have a good discussion where perhaps we can see and respect each others point of view

Posted by: bowie54 at March 16, 2007 05:57 PM

bowie54,
The easiest thing in the world is to be an arm-chair quarterback, criticizing someone else's work from a safe distance. The second easiest thing in the world is to blame other's for your lot in life.

I could spend all day describing how and why I disagree with almost every premise you made in your comments, mostly because it's probably a waste of my time. Mostly for the following reasons:

- You can never understand what motivates a person to serve unless you yourself have served.

- You can never understand what it means to be a President unless you yourself have been one.

- You can never understand what it means to run a company like Haliburton unless you actually do so.

The fact of the matter is, you probably wouldn't accept anybody else's reality because your mind is already closed and regurgitating the old arguments and cliches you've been presenting here.

People work at Walmart because compared to other similar businesses, they're actually pretty decent jobs. People shop at Walmart because they provide goods that people want at a price they can afford. Who cares what exemptions they are given? That's reality.

Your soldiers weren't lied to any more than our soldiers were lied to. It's not their job to pick and choose what they do. Soldiers follow orders. Period. They are not paid to question the motives of their leaders, just as they are free to vote for whomever they think will do the best job.

Bottom line is, you appear to spend alot of time maligning what you can't understand while blaming others for your own choices. What's so hard to understand about that? Believe what you will. It doesn't mean that anyone else has to, or needs to, believe it too. Peace.

Posted by: JCM at March 16, 2007 03:09 PM

Joel,

No the next bit is up to you. One of your other duties as a citizen of the United States is to make sure that your politicians meet your aspirations and standards. My duty is to ensure that the politicians in the country I live in do the same.

As a military person you are duty bound to serve the politicains, but as a citizen you can make sure that they do not betray the sacrifice you are prepared to make. Make no mistake, I have nothing but admiration for a person who will put their life on the line to defend another. Until my country was lied to by its politicians and went to Iraq, our soldiers had a wonderful tradition of being "Diplomats with guns". Now, for the first time in our history our soldiers have benn betrayed and used to invade another country.

OK. So what needs to be done. First make yourself really aware of what your politicians have led your country into. Not just the wars you are involved in, but the economic mess that they have made. Your children and your grandchildren are going to be affected by that.

Ask why Vice President Cheney’s company Halliburton has decided to make its corporate headquarters in Dubai. While you are looking at that question, find out why they have overcharged you r army for the “support” they are giving in Iraq, which includes providing food which is unfit for consumption, and unfiltered water from the Tigris.

Have a good look at your housing market. Ask why it is collapsing and who is responsible for it.

Take the time to talk to some of the poor in your cities and find out how they see the country you live in. Here is a sample:

The problem in America is not just the Direct taxes but all the
imbedded taxes, fees, permits, regulations, inspections, etc. (each
with a fee attached) that are especially hard on those of the Lower
and middle classes. But, also many of the regulations are just insane.
PS. The major companies like Wal Mart get Exempted from most of them
and if you want to open a small local store will pay massively more
than they would pay to open a Wal Mart.

Let me give you an example: a year ago, before we got married, my wife
bought this house. It would by US "standards" be in a poorer
neighborhood and it is an older house of approximately 830 feet (I
thought it was about 900 but was corrected a few weeks ago). Being an
older house the water heater went out over a month ago. The water
heater "price" was $269 (could not dream of the cost of a tankless
model they started at $1300) the total including the tax was $316. Not
bad... except we had to break the law and ILLEGALLY install it
ourselves because we could not afford to have purchased the Permits to
install as well as the water heater as they added up to $180. We both
work for around $8 per hour before taxes. And in the US... we pay for
our own health insurance. My wife had a Seizure last year... spent 4
hours in the hospital... the bill is over $8500! It is nuts!

Amerika is Marketed that way to INDUCE CHEAP FOREIGN LABOR TO KEEP WAL
MART STOCKED WITH CHEAP EMPOYEES! A Great Grip because the one Home
that I had almost paid off, less that 6 months to go, is now a Wal
Mart Parking LOT! I wish i were kidding!

The Company that I worked or in 1980 use to pay me a percentage to
haul Tomatoes and other farm products to the caneries. Now those
products are coming out of CHINA! And if I want to work instead of
being able to make about $350 a day for the season working 20 hour
days and getting my health insurance for the year... I can now haul
the processed foods for $8.00 per hour at the absolute most and forget
about health insurance... even if it is offered it is beyond affordable.

Also Entire industries are Exempted from Labor Laws. Example TRUCKING
and Farm Labor and the wages are falling as fast as the Price of going
to work is Rising! It is a no win situation!

Actually I was divorced a little over a year ago, mostly over
economics... and lost my two Step Daughters in the process. My son
died in 2003 at the age of 22 weeks. So I can more than understand the
life is a bitch and then you die theory.

I keep working and trying to make a difference in my own life, the
lives of my family... and the community... But, it seems like the
attitude of people today is that if you cannot do it all and do it
now... it is not good enough... it gets old after a while. And sadly
drives more and more people away from caring about the massive trouble
that we are facing in the Future. I hear all the time "why bother" or
"than I better get it while I can" we need positive solutions, not
Zealotry...

Once you have done that get involved in the political life of your country and make the politicians into your servants. I can’t understand why Americans think that the president is someone they have to be loyal to. He is YOUR servant, make him do what you want. Allowing a man to be your ruler is getting yourself on the highway to tyranny.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 15, 2007 05:14 PM

MY NAME IS WAR!?

Sorry to go off-topic, but I read an amazing piece posted here by Sunshine/Rainbows called "My Name Is War." Call me ignorant, but I had never read it before and couldn't find any information about it online. Is it an excerpt from something famous? Who wrote it? I HAVE to know because I'd like to cite it for a project I am working on. If anyone knows, please email me at matt.bohicastudios@gmail.com!

Thanks!

Posted by: Matt R at March 14, 2007 05:34 PM

Bowie-You are obviously learned and eloquent. So I will give this ext bit to you. The duty of the soldier is sacrifice of all for someone else you do not even know. You will not win the "minds and hearts" of those here running down their leaders or their countries policies. The soldiers here know duty and live it. I did my duty and did it well. Do yours for humanity and get the ears of the worlds leaders with your words. Get me and my brothers and sisters out of a bloody and destructive job. You can not just "take" nukes from anyone with a "please" or anything like that so use that big brainpan of yours and become the worlds hero and figure out how to make world peace. All human beings have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (cornerstone of democracy that the villified US is trying to spread) and that applies to all. Some countries do not believe that women have these basic human rights. Other countries see it as where you are from inside the country on what you are allowed or your color. The US is just trying to give that ideal of freedom to everyone that WANTS it. You think of that when looking up at a soldier you have not "liberated" since his point of view is not correct with the rest of the "world" or you.

Posted by: Joel Shock MTC/SS USN (ret) at March 14, 2007 01:33 PM

Jim,

I'm all for a civilised conversation.

First what about remembering the beatitudes? like the meek shall inherit the earth- A United States that forgot about manifest destiny, and its place in biblical prophecy, but sat, was quiet and listened to the rest of us living on this planet could learn much and do amazing things, perhaps even get rid of nuclear weapons.

The United States had two wonderful opportunities to show the world the best that you could do in the last twenty years, and you have blown both. When the Berlin Wall came down, and the Soviet Union collapsed, you could have used the Peace benefit to show what the undoubted wealth you had then could do to undo some of the injustices that still plaqued the world. When September 11 happened, there were very few people in the world who did not support the United States. Within two years you had blown this as well. What could the States have done differently in these two cases?

In the late 1980’s you could have used the money you no longer had to spend on weapons to change swords into ploughshares. Instead you went out of your way to find new enemies. I remember so clearly reading a “Time” magazine at that time where there was a quote from a senior person in the CIA saying that now that they didn’t have anything to do in Eastern Europe, they would have to find enemies in the middle east so they could maintain their budget. This was when Saddam Hussein was a moderate Arab leader that was supported by the US. Within a year, he was the new Hitler.

Imagine what the United States could have done if you had reduced the budget of the CIA, and given that money to working with countries that could possibly be threats later on. Imagine developing such a strong positive view of the United States, that no-one would want to attack you. You can’t do this by lecturing people, or telling people what their morals should be or thinking that what is good for the US of A is good for everyone else. You need to be humble, sit down and listen, apologise for your mistakes, and be careful who you choose to be your friends. Guns make people hate you, coming with open hands and humility will give you respect and friends.

You didn’t learn the lessons of the eighties when September 11 happened. That was inexcusable and those who were responsible needed to be punished. It happened that the responsible people were citizens of one of your allies, Saudi Arabia, and you were not prepared to bring that country and its political and religious leaders to account. Instead your leaders used September 11 as a pretext to settle some old accounts with Saddam Hussein, and to control the oil in Iraq. You actually did the right thing in Afghanistan, but you made the mistake you always make- you think that once you have won the shooting war, you won the war. NO the shooting war is the easy bit, then you need to spend huge amounts of time and energy winning the hearts and minds of people. You can’t win any hearts and minds with tanks or soldiers strutting around with M16s. All that does is make people fear and loathe you. Take the armour off the soldiers, remove the sunglasses, get them hot and dirty working with local people building sewers, bridges, roads. Bring in the best of your engineers and your scientistsand even perhaps your economists and make them available to build up the country in ways which is appropriate to those who live there. This requires humility. You need to sit down with the women and the farmer working his land NOT the leaders: they are often the ones that have stolen from the women and the farmers, and listen to how they have solved problems perhaps for millennia, and be their companions rather than their leaders. If you listen carefully and cultivate a real friendship with these people you may find that they have real wisdom, and perhaps can teach even the United States something.

If you are careful, and are prepared to not preach, you may find that you have friends in the world rather than enemies, and you don’t need your weapons.

Remember also that even the most inexcusable act gives you the opportunity to reflect on why it happened to you. You had every right to be angry, but your country didn’t reflect on why people thought that they could justify September 11. You need to ask why Palestinians despise you. There are very good reasons, and honestly you are not God’s chosen people, and making dispossessed people suffer needlessly will not bring the God of Love to Armageddon any earlier. In fact I would hope that he is appalled that anyone could think he would want any such thing.

Anyway this sounds all very lovely and I am sure your friends will wave their guns at me and say there are enemies out there that have to be defeated, and I am naïve, but so was Christ. He didn’t walk around with an army, and when someone tried to defend him he told him not to be so stupid, and healed the centurion’s ear. He took a huge risk and walked to the cross not knowing whether love would win or not. His last words before he died showed his despair. But remember the spirit of love and strength that he represented grew from the hate around him, and he is remembered as the winner rather than the representatives of the army or the established church that condemned his ideas.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 14, 2007 04:33 AM

Bowie,
I hate nukes too! I wish they didn't exist or that we could at least get rid of them. When you figure out who's going to drop his gun first without becoming the target, let us all know. The problem is, someone's going to still have one. Who's it going to be? I'm going to stop being critical of you and agree to disagree on some points, however, the question I posed above is at the root of the problem of complete disarmament. As long as we still have the gun, it has to be maintained and updated with technology unless everyone else decides not to modernize or else take a chance and drop the gun. Again, who's it going to be? Should we do it first? Please don't respond negatively as I really want to see your opinion on this question. This was my last entry on this site.
Respectfully,
Jim

Posted by: Jim Stephens at March 13, 2007 10:11 PM

I'm sorry that this is such an emotional issue for so many people. Fear of the unknown, fear of sudden incineration can do that to normally rational people. When it comes to nuke weapons the fact is most people don't know as much as they think they do.

First, there is the extremely high tech knowledge that is over most people's head. I know it because I worked in nuclear power for twenty five years. Next there is the historical development, use and outright angst so many people suffer from when you even mention the word nuke. Finally, there is the political angle: can nukes be used without creating worse problems than they solve? And should we even have them in the first place?

The issue is far too complex for one side to think they are exclusively right. Everyone needs to deal with facts as they are and not as we want them to be. Nukes are here to stay, like it or not. Until some brilliant scientist develops a nuclear damper (a device that prevents nuclear reactions, it only exists in the mind of SF writers - for now.) The political expedience of possessing nukes goes beyond the Bush administration. My angry fellow who was so pissed at GW needs to recall Clinton had nukes too, so did every president going back to Truman. Don't get so twisted around semantics. Don't anyone forget that the point of this article was the fact that the Bush administration approved a new , safer design that is cheaper, easier to secure and requires less maintenance. Most importantly, the older, more unstable nukes are being withdrawn from service making the world a better place to live.

BTW: the German scientists who worked on the early nukes were neither Einstein or Von Braun. The US government didn't trust Einstein and von Braun came along after the war. He helped develop our space program. The guys you referred to have names like Neils Bohr, Frank and Robert Oppenheimer and many other famous physicists.

One last remark for the Apocalyptic fellows. Just as the anti-nuke crowd believes, you also make the mistake of believing that man can destroy the world. We can't. Our planet is much too well designed to sweat anything humans can hope to do. Remember most volcanic explosions are orders of magnitude greater that man's nuclear arsenal. And earthquakes well above that. The only thing man can do to the Earth is remove his place in it. Long after we are gone, life will continue, it always does. We are just not that important.

Thanks for your time.

Mojo, ELT-USN (ret)

Posted by: Morgan Johnson at March 13, 2007 09:58 PM

Dan,

So you think that God is responsible for all this destruction and pain?

Doesn't sound like the God of Love and Peace that I worship. He has sent his spirit into me to bring the good news that hatred and dissension and war were destroyed on his cross and his resurrection and that we can know that those who follow the path of hatred and war will not win.

Good luck with Armageddon. Just don't try to bring it on with your nukes.

Per

Posted by: bowie54 at March 13, 2007 09:48 PM

I want to make another point (indirectly related to my response to Jim Stephens) about Iraqi atrocities, and to all on this thread who keep belaboring it. All these atrocities did in fact take place...all before 1991. All before the Gulf War. We didnt give a shit then, why do we all of a sudden care now? Because its because its an excuse. Its a smoke-screen to hide the ineptitude of our current president. We have tons to worry about and Bowie54 makes a brilliant point about China and our National debt. Wake the hell up people!!!

Posted by: Jim at March 13, 2007 09:44 PM

Jim Stephens - You are living in fantasy land. Reply to me, call me names, but you are a clueless, ignorant person. History always, and will in this case, shows the errors of ones ways. I hope Im there when you are still trying to convince anyone, or yourself for that matter, that what we're doing (in Iraq)is(was) the way to go.
Bush is a goddamn liar, plain and simple, he is a liar and has done nothing but try and cover his ass since he landed on that flight deck declaring victory. Victory? Victory over what? WMDs, Saddam Hussein, The Terrorists, Iraqi Freedom? The bullshit has been twisted at every step. Im surprised "W" can keep it together. Theres been more twists on it than in the barrel of my M1A. We kept Saddam in check like no ones business, and he didnt make a move without our knowing about it. If we're all about "De Oppresso Liber", we sure arent doing a hell of a lot in Darfur. Saddam and Osama are two completely different individuals. Osama used to condemn Saddam. On the topic of Osama, give it up, the man is dead.

Just so you know:

-Im all for what we're doing in Afghanistan.
-Im all for the upkeep of our arsenal.
-I worked in Baghdad and watched the bullshit up close and personal for a damn long time.

Posted by: Jim at March 13, 2007 09:17 PM

Do we really need more nukes??? This world is insane enough already. Yes I agree with some of the comments that say Nukes are here to stay, but get real. We need to reduce the quantities, not devise new ways to destroy the planet.
I think Bush is a lunatic, he is trying to turn the US into a George Orwell "1984" Big Brother state; trying to rewrite the Geneva Convention on Prisoner abuse - Now he wants new Nukes?

Posted by: Richard at March 13, 2007 08:19 PM

Do you two or three here that I see posting, actually believe that "man" is orchestrating what goes on in the world?

Judgment Day began in 1988. The Latter Rain began in 1994. The end of time and the trial begins in 2011.

Read The Bible
Read The Bible
Read The Bible

Very Truly yours,

Dan Hall
www.ReadTheBibleNetwork-DanHall.ws
www.DanHall-SupportsOurTroops.ws
www.GasolineIncome.com

REF:
www.FamilyRadio.org

TIME HAS AN END

Posted by: Dan Hall at March 13, 2007 08:08 PM

Wow Jim,

With friends like yours I hardly need to say too much, but what about emigrating to a more peaceful, saner place than the United States?

Your friend Gen Puckett sees the US as part of biblical prophecy – Armageddon anyone? You’ve got the nukes to do it. I’m not too sure what to make of the rest of the post – but I am sure it is profound- perhaps some of those tranquilizers that Gen talks about might help me to become enlightened. Do they give you visions as well?

And then there is Joel Shock MTC/SS USN (Ret) This gentleman furthered his career as a nuclear weapons specialist to bring about world peace. I wonder what George Orwell would make of that? But lets get down to his arguments.

“I am a fanatic” And exactly how does Joel sort that out from my post? I expressed an opinion which is shared by most people in the world that nuclear weapons are things that we don’t need, and said that I would like the United States to give up theirs. Nothing too fanatical there. Perhaps you or Joel could define exactly what was fanatical in my posts – or was that just a straw man?

“…if the US had NOT used the weapons that the GERMAN scientist had developed (that you somehow seem to think you should personally own).”

No Joel. I said no-one should own them. The last thing I want for Christmas is my very own nuke either nicely wrapped or delivered by one of your special delivery systems. And the German Scientist (I assume you mean Einstein) made it clear that it was the biggest mistake he had ever made. If you are talking about von Braun, well if the United States wants to use Nazi war criminals to build weapons of mass destruction, what would you expect?

Joel, you might want to read the article I cited in my second post which made a strong argument that the nukes used on civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were more to signal to the USSR that you had the weapons, than to stop the war.

“I am pretty sure any of you or me would not fit the blonde hair blue eyed super-race he was after so this discussion would be a mute point if the US and it's "unpopularity" had not intervened.”

Please Joel. The United States came into the second world war two years late, and was unpopular because it was not willing to intervene before Pearl Harbour. Yes there was some covert support for the war by Roosevelt, but there were many opposing him, and many of those supported the Nazis.

Hitler himself was of course neither blond nor blue eyed, and I am yet to meet any Japanese person who meets this description.

Isolationism.

This post is getting long, so I won’t go into that part of your post, but Joel, the United States does not have trillions of dollars to do with as it will. China and Japan has trillions of dollars of your debt. Your budget is in dire straits. Read the papers today, and see what is happening to your stock market, and hear the pop of your housing bubble. You are a debtor nation, and even if you tried to close your doors, they would be trampled down by your creditors. By the way your country was in credit, before your great president George W Bush.

And then you Jim!!! Did you take some of Gen’s tranx after your first post to me? Perhaps staying in the madhouse is best after all. The tranx must have worn off in your next post, but please don’t take them again, especially if you’re near nukes. The last part of your post sounded deeply disturbing – just the sort of thing a fanatic might say as he let loose the nukes.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 13, 2007 05:40 PM

Jim I gotta agree with you, nukes unfortuantly in most cases are here to stay and we should work with our allies to make sure nobody uses them on each other. Also Iraq, it isn't a question WILL Iraq colapse if we pull out, its a question of WHEN, and if it would, then we'd likly have anouther 9/11. People always seem to blame the president for whatever happens, and only if it's bad, Bush is here to stay for a little longer and he's going to make sure he does his job. I don't mean to sound mean or anything, but most democrats don't understand anything with goverment, if they increase minimum wage, they increase taxes and the value of the dollar will dramaticly fall, and they don't understand tactics, if we pull out of Iraq, or stop pressuring Iran & N. Korea then thats going to leave us open for many, many attacks worse than 9/11.

Posted by: Cody at March 13, 2007 04:20 PM

Sorry if I offended anyone's sensibilities. Nukes are here to stay. We can't just go back and change all of history, but we can do our best along with our allies to ensure nukes stay out of the hands of people who appear to be insainly set on destroying thier percieved enemies. I wish we could have peace all over the world, but that's not possible. Right now, some people think our president is doing things wrong. That's not the way the majority saw it the day after 9/11. He had to act quickly and decisively and did so showing great leadership. Now some want to bale out when the going gets rough. We as a nation supported him the day after 9/11. He needs our support now just as much as he did the day after 9/11. If we were to leave Iraq in the next year, it would collapse and fall into the hands of another tyrant. Our president is not a quitter and he won't leave Iraq to the wolves. I sincerely hope that our next president will be as careful as Bush about the withdrawal timing.

Posted by: Jim Stephens at March 13, 2007 03:41 PM

However much I wish to disagree with you Bowie, I do agree. There are a lot of things wrong with America (then again it is a very large country).

Wow. Jim Stephens..

"based on biblical principles and good ole' fashioned sanity is the way to go"

And that's what starts prejudices.

Posted by: Kakeru at March 13, 2007 02:40 PM

Bowie,
I'm sorry for hurting your feelings. It's nice to know there are some "Nut Jobs" out there who monitor military.com trying to further thier cause only to find that our resolve is firm in defeating terror wherever it may be. I live in the greatest country on earth. I've been all over the world, but for me our way of life, based on biblical principles and good ole' fashioned sanity is the way to go. Please stay wherever you are and enjoy the insanity. Regardless of the skewed polls, we do have a great leader. He has the nerve and resolve to face consequences, good or bad in the name of freedom and democracy around the world. Under his leadership, this country is well underway in defeating terrorism. I can't wait to see Osama's demise displayed on CNN just like his demon brother Sadam.
God Bless America!!!!
God Bless our Allies!!!!
We will prevail!!!!!!

Posted by: Jim Stephens at March 13, 2007 02:11 PM

I find it appauling that some fanatics try to tear down the President of the US at every turn. Bowie-You are a perfect example. Even your views would be in japanese or german if the US had NOT used the weapons that the GERMAN scientist had developed (that you somehow seem to think you should personally own). The pressure from the US military in another "unpopular" war (the US did not want to fight in) allowed some of the German scientist to make it to the US with their work (spoken nukes). The "civilians" you refer to in Japan, that continued to fight after their ally Germany fell, supported Hitler and his idea of ethnic cleansing and I am pretty sure any of you or me would not fit the blonde hair blue eyed super-race he was after so this discussion would be a mute point if the US and it's "unpopularity" had not intervened. If it was not for the US playing Big Brother in the world today it would have been nukes instead of fueled passenger planes crashing into our cities. Ask yourselves who is footing the bill to feed countries that have been in the middle of a civil war for the last 20 years like Africa for instance? What is the US getting from that country in return, since the US is supposed to be some greedy monster? Where was all this worldly concern when Hurricanes and snow storms ravaged and destroyed large portion of states inside the US just this past year? Nukes have been out there since the late 1940s, and by the way, the US does not have all of the nukes that are out there. The US can at least account for all of their nukes that they own. The US has always been a target for the worldly vocal minority until a natural disater hits somewhere and then the question is how much will the US foot the bill for these haters with their hands out? Lets play your games and make the US leaders "popular" with everyone. We close our borders, stop all aid outside the US, (including the aid to places like North Korea for 50 billion barrels or crude oil for them not to develope nukes since they have already developed ballistic missiles to put those weapons on. You have fun dealing with those guys on your own.) and become isolationist again. The US president can decide what to do with the Trillions of US tax dollars inside US to feed US citizens who do not have jobs. Rebuild US cities that have been decimated by natural disaters and fanatical racists and let the rest of the world take care of itself with it's "United Nations" that somehow is propped up yet again by the US money and military. Get it through your heads people. The president of the US is trying his best to meet the concerns of the world, not just the peoples of the US. There might be some countries that feel slighted because they do not get more from the US but look at the US congressionally approved budget and ask yourself where a Trillion US tax dollars go? The US president approves checks daily to help others in need and yet he is "unpopular" in the world. I did not like getting shot at by men wearing womens robes when I was deployed but I did love my job and respect my leaders even if I do not agree with some of their decisions. I know that they are made with a greater good that I might not know about so I trust my leaders since I voted for them. I furthered my career as a nuclear weapons specialist jsut to be in the position to help ensure a "world peace" by orders of my President. I did not threaten like some countries do with posturing and bluster about building nukes but through a promise that any country looking to hurt the extended family of the US and it's allies would have great violence visited upon them and I was the one who would get to do it by orders of the same "unpopular" President that has all these opponents out here in the world.

Posted by: Joel Shock MTC/SS USN (Ret) at March 13, 2007 07:29 AM

The President is a good leader some are made about all the tranquelizers they have to take to sleep at night but owell those are the meds of choice for now. The United states is apart of biblical prophecy like Israel-Jewish people are disperced thru out the would everyone cannot just crash in there we have to watch imagine how many mega structures it would take to house all twelve tribes of Israel. Why do we fight each other by the way the twelve tribes of israel spread through out the world thats everyone? We come from Father Abraham any how another brother was saved to day he chose to go to Heaven he has Eternal Life symbols tatooed all over him but I had to explain what his tatoos mean like the scareb beatle.

Posted by: Gen Puckett at March 13, 2007 06:09 AM

Jim,

Lets go through your points one by one:

"We (That is I - He is not my President)have a great president."

I think that is a minority opinion even in your own country. The last polls I saw showed that less than 40% of those in the US thought he was a great president. Most people had no faith in him at all.

Have a look here for the great presidents job rating:

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

"your disrespectful tone towards his religion is appalling"

Exactly what is disrespectful? His supporters on the religious right would have no problems being called fundamentalist (in fact the term was coined in the United States by christian fundamentalists, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist) and so I am sure he would have no problems with the name either. So what are you getting at here?

Is it something to do with what your politicians have been trying to make the word into when it is paired with muslim? Remember it is an american word, coined by your coreligionists.

and this:

"Yes we unleashed a horrible weapon in the 40's, but the result was exactly as intended. Our nation was made safe again and who knows how many lives were saved on all sides.We are now friends with a former foe, because they had the sense to realize their mistakes and get in line with a nation that wants what is good for the world."

hmmmmmmmm. Where do we start with this one. Perhaps with Einstein "'I MADE ONE great mistake in my life, when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made..." but then again he was a pinky lefto, so perhaps not... what about Oppenheimer...no you made it clear he was another pinky lefto in your fifties show trials. So many pinky leftos in the US...

What about an article that appeared in the Boston Globe just recently. http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0806-01.htm.

that might help you to see that most poeple do not support your view on Hiroshima.

Many would call it a war crime but then again you have made it so that alone in the world, excepting that other bastion of freedom - Libya - the United States cannot be brought before the International War Crimes Tribunal. You really choose your friends well.

But then again you don't want your crimes in Iraq to be brought before the International Community for judgement do you? To get an idea of what those crimes might be you might be interested in this site:

http://www.thebukowskiagency.com/The%20Deserter's%20Tale.html

Read it and weep for your once great and generous country.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 13, 2007 12:03 AM

Bowie, we have a great President. Your disrespectful tone towards his religion is appalling. Yes we unleashed a horrible weapon in the 40's, but the result was exactly as intended. Our nation was made safe again and who knows how many lives were saved on all sides.We are now friends with a former foe, because they had the sense to realize their mistakes and get in line with a nation that wants what is good for the world.

Posted by: JIM STEPHENS at March 12, 2007 11:02 PM

Question: which country is the only one to use nuclear weapons against civilians Answer
The United States

Which country is actively planning to use nuclear weapons against a country which does not have them?

Answer:The United States

Which country has a religious fundamentalist leader with access to thousands of nuclear weapons, and who is actively planning to use them?

Answer: the United States

And then you wonder why people fear and loathe your country. Your leaders cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons, and they need to be taken from you, and the sooner the better.

Posted by: bowie54 at March 12, 2007 10:00 PM

Im all for anything that keeps our nation safe. I do feel that our current stockpiles being updated or modified from time to time is a valid requirement which should not be looked on as an intimidation ploy. We are a responsible nation.

Posted by: JIM STEPHENS at March 12, 2007 09:03 PM

This is for those who forgot to study history, expecially you *=ACE=*

A show of strength is a deterrent. It matters not what form it comes in. Like it or not, nukes are out there. Managing the nukes we have is important and giving away the ones we have is not only impossible, it's pointless.

As I pointed out earlier, human beings find lots of ways to kill each other. Show me where having nukes has caused more deaths. If anything, they have stopped large-scale aggression. That's what the cold war was all about. And until there is a replacement for them, nukes will continue to be the number one deterrent from those who would have us go away.

And for those who have any doubts, answer me this. Why, in this day and age of instant information, micro-technology and designer vitamins, is the U.S. still unable to cope with the number of people who want to come here from other countries? Hmm ... maybe because the countries they are in fail miserably when it comes to the human condition. Why would our enemies want to do away with us? Hmm ... maybe because we make them look bad in the eyes of their own people.

As long as we exist we are a burr under the saddle of every two-bit deranged dictators that exist, just because of who we are. History has shown us that wars have begun for less than that. So until such time as every citizen of every country in the world enjoys that same basic freedoms that we do here, we are at risk from some looney tune that would bring us back to their level to justify their own existence.

But hey, don't believe me. Just take a look around. Better yet, why don't you travel around a bit and check it out. I've traveled in my share of third world countries and lived in four for more than a decade. I know what I'm talking about. Why don't you check it out for yourself?

Posted by: JCM at March 12, 2007 03:38 PM

Boy are some of you off base. How do you think we won the cold war? It wasn't through playing games like you see on TV. We was through people like me standing the watch for the last 21 years on a TRIDENT submarine. The Tip of the Spear. Sometimes at hightend DEFCON for what ever reason. The threat of mutual destruction actually worked back then and will continue to work. Yes, the threat of the cold war was different. Today we have radical extremists that would love nothing more than to gain power through the use of (read into this - ON the USA) Nuclear Weapons. And will die for the cause, but having the security to counduct a counter-strike ensures they think twice before using NUCs themselves. Look, Our fleet of NUCs are getting older. older means possibly not as reliable. Equipment and delivery systems get old and worn out. They need to be replaced....And yes, that means the Nuc itself has a shelf-life, so it too needs to be replaced. The USA IS a world power, and we must continue to be a world power. We will never enter a fight to protect our rights and way of life with roses and gifts. We must continue to have muscle behind our words or we will no longer be the free, strong, world power that we are. - Just my opinion.
TRIDENT Submarine Naval Officer

Posted by: Leo at March 12, 2007 02:30 PM

Lori,

My Dear, thank you for being sensitive to people who do have handicapped children.
Please, go ahead and dazzle us with your all brilliance.
You appear to be quite versed in National Security issues and International Politics.
I am all ears...........................

Noel

Posted by: Noel Torres at March 12, 2007 01:29 PM

We are entering into a new age of technology that makes nuclear power obsolete. I don't know why our energies for those deveopments for better technology are being derailed just because the big kid on the block want's a better block-buster. (say that five time's fest.) We don't need to nuke our kid's back to the stone-age just because our higer up's are at a loss for intellectual development's instead of digressing to almost a hundred year's of old school mentality and inferior war fair. Here we all are trying our asses of to better our enviroment and now this guy wants us to support nuclear arms development again? WE DO NOT NEED NUKES IN THIS WORLD ANY MORE!!! Next thing you know, he'll be putting control of those nukes in the hands of monkeys. Oh ya, we where there, and did that, that did'nt work either. I'm no passafist, but I am a naturalist, I had eight years of active service, some of which was spent in hostal theater's. We should spend our effort's in way's other than makeing our world as we know it GLOW!

Posted by: D- at March 12, 2007 11:24 AM

I think we are a little off point here. This is supposed to be a discussion on a new generation of nuclear weapons
In our nation's history we very much did need nuclear weapons. I will even say that it was VITAL to our country's security. At htis time I do not see the need. We have technology we could not have concieved when we produced the last generation of nuclear warheads. I do not see a need for them now. There are very effective conventional options available.
The United States is currently the world leader. We need to lead by example. I would suggest we phase out all nuclear weapons.
Retired army officer and current U.S. Army weapons developer.

Posted by: John at March 12, 2007 11:23 AM

didn't we learn are lesson from the Cold War? this is just going to lead to more hostle action toward the U.S. Also, why should Prez. Bush get all up in Iran's, and N. Korea's face about devoloping nukes when that is what we are doing. People the signs have been all over the place, whatch for more violence that MIGHT just lead up to a 2nd cold war, or even WW3.

Posted by: *-=ACE=-* at March 12, 2007 10:15 AM

Peace cannot be acheived through war. It has to be taught. Maybe our government should spend our money on teaching the nations a peaceful solution, instead of blowing them up.
www.peacefulsolution.com

Posted by: Karatyah at March 12, 2007 08:19 AM

James Brent -

You didnt read the article....

Posted by: Shooter at March 12, 2007 08:01 AM

Why is the U.S. bulding Nuclear Weapons? I'm at a loss here. The U.S. expects other countries not to build "Nukes", but the U.S. is building them. What am I missing?

Posted by: James Brent at March 12, 2007 01:57 AM

Winning an argument in here would be like winning in the Special Olympics...

Even if you WIN...you're still retarded!

None of you can spell, form sound ideas, or use correct sentence structure. How are you going to possibly convince another person of your viewpoint, when you write as if your IQ was 80?

Posted by: Lori at March 11, 2007 09:35 PM

Aging nukes are dangerous. With uranium prices rising from dozens of new plants coming on line from emerging markets its is very smart to hit two birds with one stone and not Panic the public. We need to re-craft our weapons to make them efficient stable and take the bulk of the leftovers and power our nations energy needs. Oil is not the only resource getting hard to produce and without energy any county falls. Our enemies are taking advantage of our Achilles heal.
Its not rocket science :-) ex-UASF

Posted by: George at March 11, 2007 08:10 PM

The word FACT is a dirty word. Some of you need to learn the definition of what a FACT is, and CONVERSELY what an OPINION is. They are are not equal. They are polar opposites.

Posted by: James at March 11, 2007 07:33 PM

Some of you really do need to get your facts straight and what in the hell does religion have anything to do with building nukes... and by the way those who say President Bush is a terrible president just because he wanted the oil. If we wanted oil, they would have taken in in Kuwait or Afghanistan back in the previous war. And those who say that the corrupted politicians and blah blah blah your full of crap stuff. Okay, say we take over, then what? who will run the country. Think some of you could... heh most of you have no f-in clue It would be just another war to try and figure out who the damn leader would be. And history repeats itself so some of you pricks really need to look into your history and news more before you go judging. And one more thing.... THE FOUNDING FATHERS WROTE THE CONSTITUTION WHEN THEY COULDNT EVEN COMPREHEND THE POWER OF A NUKE AND HAD NO IDEA IT WAS POSSIBLE.... SO ITS OK TO MAKE SOME NECESSARY CHANGES AS NEEDED TO ADAPT TO OUR CONDITIONS TODAY.

Posted by: anonymous at March 11, 2007 06:39 PM

Call it religious or fanatism, nothing is going to change the trajectory of this governments. I am worry about those who blindfold themselves and do not want to see the truth...Jesus the Christ our Lor and Savior can change your trajectory. I am not worry at all about the future.

Jlopez Eng

Posted by: Juan at March 11, 2007 06:02 PM

"I suggest you read you Bile" Dena - you better check yourself...

Posted by: James at March 11, 2007 05:35 PM

Pres. Bush has it right. We are to fight evil"Satan" as long as we are a notion. We are to protect Israel, God's chosen people, for as long as we live. The evil one's leader, the anti christ will come out of the area that we are fighting from, so it is best that we keep him and his followers at bay. If you don't believe any of htis, I suggest you read you Bile, it's in there and it is all coming true, as predicted as far back as 6 thousand years ago, when God created man.
I too, believe the weapons were there, and as the satelites showed, the movement of caravans while we kept giving them one more chance to comply, they moved them into Syria, probably the seat of Satan, the antichrist, that is. Fight them there or fight them here, it's coming either way. The only way to get out of this world and not suffer eternally is to know JESUS as your savior! The only one who can save you!

Posted by: Dena at March 11, 2007 05:16 PM

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=

Posted by: McLaren at March 11, 2007 04:35 PM

Matt F.

I respect your religious stance and opinions but we are not all Bible "thumpers", and at the same time no less human than thou. Religion is one of the reasons the world is in the mess its in right now. The other is "corporatism". You existence for being as a US Citizen is to provide for the corporations. When was the last time you bought a car with 100% of your hard earned money. Why do have to work for a company to have affordable health insurance. And again on the religious note, your religion is no more right or wrong, true or false than the next guy's. Why are we aligned with Saudi Arabia, they are not a democratic society, and barely above fully corrupt. Im fine with maintaining our weapons for same reasons I change my oil in my car, but man, save the "burning bush" rhetoric for an assembly of your religious faith.
This country is a mess no matter how you look at it whether you are democratic, republican, (libertarian like me), or anything else. Our forefathers, gave us a Constitution that has been corrupted, abused, downplayed, and outright amended to the point that they would wishing that they had never bothered. Its time this country was taken back from all politicians, lobbyists and corporate monsters.

Posted by: James at March 11, 2007 04:17 PM

I say hoorah. It's only a matter of time till Iran,China,Russia,South America comes after us.

Posted by: achilles at March 11, 2007 03:52 PM

ofcourse they have WMD..the tecnology today alows even average citizens to use google programs that use satelites to zoom in on any one particular house anywhere in the world, just punch in the address, can you imagine what the government has?? they have nukes!!
granted someone screwed up when it came to finding them..doesnt mean they are not there...
why shouldnt we have the Bigger Better Deal?? personally i wouldnt trust those arabs with safety sizzors.. and when i was in kindergarden and a kid had a pair o those and threatened to stab me with them, id say 'OK' and get the ginormous pair from the teachers desk and say 'lets dance fucker!' why shouldnt we upgrade??

Posted by: Talkalot at March 11, 2007 02:13 PM

to ScB

whoever thinks that you can't talk to God is a blasphemer, 'cause I talk to Him all the time. I never implied that God "spoke" back, but perhaps President Bush asks for signs, and, oh, I don't know, recieves them! How many times in the Bible did God send men into battle, and tell them to destroy everything and leave nothing alive. So you see, as America is one of Israel's biggest,and only, allies, perhaps fighting her enemies, and finding new ways to protect her is not so out of line.

Posted by: Matthew Flournoy at March 11, 2007 02:11 PM

to those of you who think you know nukes shut the fuck up cause, i was a nuclear weapons supervisor when i was in the navy. the nukes need to be inproved and safer for us, not the ones were nuking so i say it's a good idea and fuck the rest of the world !!!!!!!!!

Posted by: stevewally57 at March 11, 2007 01:57 PM

i believe that if shit ever hits the fan i don't want to be caught with our pants down, and if the democrats what to yell at us for our nuclear program they should go have a talk with Korea or Iran.

Posted by: jim at March 11, 2007 12:05 PM

Why not upgrade now? We stick our heads in everyones business, trying to run the world. It's only a matter of time until everyone comes after us. With that said, keep your pepper spray nearby.

Posted by: randy at March 11, 2007 11:17 AM

Everyone gets so heated in their opinions with Iraq. This is a nuclear weapons upgrade post, and you guys found a way to turn it into another Iraq forum...................hmmm kinda like the democrats in congress, doesn't matter what the issue is, as long as they can find someway to get back to the only issue they even bother to pay attention to (and they barely pay attention to that, like how when Gen. Petraeus gave a status of Iraq speech last week and not a single congressional democrat attended) then somehow they seem like they know about every issue.
Sounds retarded kinda...............but more people die a year of heart disease then die in Iraq, so should i clog up a forum about nuclear weapons with information about heart disease? NO and neither should you ALL.

But I think the upgrade is a good idea, if we are going to have nukes, we should at least have safer nukes that don't have cracks or any of the other problems that our weaponry is currently faced with.

Posted by: Mitch O at March 11, 2007 08:12 AM

For what it's worth. I don't really support "upgrading" nuclear weapons, but I do understand the truth behind the whole concept. The fact is that a nuclear weapon hasn't been used against humans since WWII, and at the current time all a nuclear weapon really is, is a giant "don't fuck with me or I'll blow your ass and your whole family's ass to hell" sign. So really, they're bargaining chips. As if to say "You got beef? I got chicken! Whassup now?!"

Posted by: Justin at March 11, 2007 05:58 AM

There truly is nothing more repulsive than those who use the line "...I'd rather fight'em there then here..."

Truely, this person has no idea of the concept of how modern wars are fought. 9/11 showed americans what most of us in uniform already knew, war at any scale is ugly and deplorable. Civilians that support a soft line in dealing with foreign threats should wake up and pay attention. The attitude that we would be left alone if we just stuck our head in the sand, is one of contemptible ignorance, and we paid the price for that. Making matters worse, those families demanded that our government pay them, some receiving more than a million dollars at tax payer expense, because they were victims. Those of us that actually are willing to stand up for ourselves and our country will only get what we pay for in life insurance benifits. I truely regret the suffering and loss of life that day. As a serviceman, those attacks were a blow to my pride and professionalism because myself and my "Brothers in Arms" had the Watch, even if the instruments to counter those terrorist were in the hands of elected officials playing politics and "playing nice" so nobody had their sensibilites offended. History will prove we will make this mistake again, in the interest of preserving our civil liberties. But if you are repulsed by those of us that would rather "fight'em there then here...", I suggest you move to where ever "there" happens to be because I'm tired of supporting with my tax dollars and occassionaly putting my life at risk for MY country so blubbering idiots can tell me how repulsed they are. But hey, it's your freedom of speech, just remember, if you're not willing to also use your right to bear arms, it might be better to just keep your trap shut.

War is an ugly thing no matter how you look at it. Lives are lost, families are distroyed, dreams are shattered. This is more true if you happen to be the innocent bystander while war happens around you and your family. To protect those innocent lives many americans volunteer to wear the uniform of their country and actually take a stand to protect those innocent lives as well as our own families. Being proactive in defense and not waiting for a self proclaimed enemy to strike first in my house is paramount to protecting all that I hold dear. If it means going back to Iraq, well, been there 3 times already, I still say it was worth it to keep my family from having to endure what myself and my Brothers-in Arms had to endure. I'd do it again to keep those lunitics out of America.

"War is best played as an away game because bullets and bombs don't care if you're on a team or just living next to the stadiem."
Author Unknown

Posted by: Ken M at March 11, 2007 12:45 AM

There truly is nothing more repulsive than those who use the line "...I'd rather fight'em there then here..."

I hope you got the MOS you wanted because it would be such a shame if you got stuck back in Kuwait as a quartermaster or some shit loading MRE's into trucks for your "Brothers in Arms".

Posted by: James at March 10, 2007 09:46 PM

FACT: Bush - "We are not in the nation building business..."

FACT: No weapons of mass destruction of any real capacity were found. Publicly admitted by current
administration officials

Corollary: If they were found, as some have stated, they are now destroyed.

Conclusion: We are in the nation building business and it is quite sad when our elected leaders leader cant admit their ignorance, their mistakes, and their guilt.

Posted by: James at March 10, 2007 09:20 PM

Looking left, you see what's to the left.
Looking right, you see what's to the right.

All beings form habits of action influenced by subjective feelings and affections based on ignorance of the essence of awareness.

Posted by: James at March 10, 2007 09:01 PM

Now people are coming out saying we do not need any more nuclear weapons, and that is true. If anyone actually reads the story at hand they will notice the current weapons are being replaced by the new design. A nuclear bomb is a nuclear bomb, but how the it is delivered and detonated depends on the rest of the weapon. So, there must be some difference in the new weapon to ensure we never have a situation as depicted in "Dr Strangelove or how I learned to love the bomb and stop worrying." Granted, that was fiction, but there needs to be safegurads to ensure only one person can order the weapon to explode. Also, Saddam Hussain had and used Weapons of Mass Destruction. The UN inspection teams managed to eliminate them, but Saddam would not allow the inspectors to finish their job, and verify the weapons were destroyed and no new ones were being built. Saddam still had equipment for making new ones, which he would have done if the UN resolutions would have been med and removed from Iraq. It is time to stay and finish the job, which can only be done if the Iraqi people are willing to do. Please remember, they had been under Saddam's control for a very long time and do not know any other way. Forces outside Iraq are also afraid that Democracy will spread and remove their power.

Posted by: Dave at March 10, 2007 08:37 PM

Dave in WA, you are right on my brother.

Most Americans are too weak to stomach the sacrifices that must be made for our liberties.

Posted by: James A. Martin at March 10, 2007 08:10 PM

People !!! NO My Fellow AMERICANS (military or militia or civil), PLease for your own and your childrens sake GROW UP!! DO you really think Our BEFUDDLED GOVERNMENT (who are ONLY Professional Polititians) would EVER drop a NUKE!, that would be absolutely Politicly Incorrect. "They" just need another excuse to add or justify a larger tax base and to SCARE the HECK Out of Society in general, basicly people who are truely Ignorant, because they HAVE NOT ACTUALLY READ OR WATCHED ANYTHING PAST THE DAILY MEDIA (which IS controlled by the "Upper Eschalone") and stuffed down your throte 24/7. Final Words "GET EDUCATED, SEEK THE TRUTH, READ OUR U.S. CONSTITUTION AND YOUR STATES ALSO", and as it does say TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK and put some REAL MEN/WOMAN in Office with some real common sense.

P.S. They don't need Nukes anyway, their doing just fine poising our Air Water and Food supply. Don't think so, when was the last time you or someone you know didn't have some sort of Disease, Illness or Conditition??

Posted by: Fred at March 10, 2007 07:31 PM

Before you bash Bush/Congress Think about our History. People believed that Hitler was harmless, so they waited until he was in their back yards and it was to late!!! In the Pacific we thought that there was no way anyone could attack us to far away. Saddam didn't have any
WMD's We no that for sure now. If we had never kicked his Ass out of IRAQ and he got them we would have alot more dead today. Putting our heads in the sand does not make problems go away. Standing up to them does. Will pulling out of Iraq stop the violence? NO. It will make the US look weak when the going gets tough. We are not cowards although we have some in our mists. Name one country we have not givin freedom too. All this talk about US bad policy. Yea we have made mistakes but the good have always out done the bad. Don't be stupid find the truth for yourself instead of what someone say's. You have the freedom in this country to read and learn and then teach or inform. Just remember:
It is the SOLDIER and not the poet who gives freeom of speech.
It is the SOLDIER and not the reporter who gives freedom to the press
It is the SOLDIER and not the campus demonstrator who gives the right to demonstrate.
It is the SOLDIER who fights under the flag, who salutes the flag, and who's coffin the flag is draped over that gives the protestor the right to burn the flag.
TO All WHO SERVE AND HAVE SERVED THANK YOU FOR YOUR SACRIFICE AND FOR OUR FREEDOM.

Posted by: Dave In Wa. at March 10, 2007 07:10 PM

What ever happened to stepping back from the brink? Or disarmament as laid out by the NNPT?

The only way I'd swallow this "modernization" is if it's accompanied by a significant nuclear "force reduction".

Posted by: Andrew at March 10, 2007 05:58 PM

"any nuclear attack against the USA will result in total annihilation of the attacker!" Any questions???
ANY of you anti-bush/military can move if you dont approve ---lets support our LEADER!!!
Lets make some glass!(if needed)

Posted by: david at March 10, 2007 05:49 PM

For all of you people who think they know why people and goverments do things the reason they are up grading our warheads is because (1) More electronic controls will be added such as a after lanch dissarming switch (so if we for some reason launch one by mistake or the situation changes in flight we don't start WW III or destroy the planet) (2) Our old designs deteriorate over time and need to be replaced so radiation contamination does not occur (3) More presicion guidence and impact to limit collateral damage and enviromental impact.

Posted by: Ray at March 10, 2007 05:45 PM

Whats the point? We don't have enough? Fancier design? Plenty more free land to pollute for centuries to come? The government needs to spend more taxpayer dollars on something we don't need? again? "mine's bigger and newer than yours"? Please clue me in on this one.

Posted by: lzzlie at March 10, 2007 05:11 PM

Saying that Bush has heard from the man upstairs (i.e. GOD) that building new nukes is the right thing to do is absolutely absurd. Whoever believes this is a blasphemer. No one can talk to God. And if he is receiving heaven-sent messages they would be from an angel and then he would be a prophet...is Bush a prophet? I think not.

Posted by: ScB at March 10, 2007 05:06 PM

Upgrading our nukes is a must. This is why. For those of you in la-la land, President Bush does not control the world & we are not the worlds' protector/supplier. Any country has the option to develope nuclear energy - not out problem. But, what we must make the world understand is that "any nuclear attack against the USA will result in total annihilation of the attacker!" Any questions??? Comment: We need to get our own house in order first. If that ever can happen, then we can 'help' other countries/peoples.

Posted by: RNL at March 10, 2007 05:04 PM

only thing i have to say is i think its a great idea. rest of you anti-bush/military can dig a hole and bury yourself already.

Posted by: Navy Nuke at March 10, 2007 04:50 PM

BUSH is nuking futs. For those of you not as intelligent as others, switch the f and n.