In the scheme of things Healthcare now pales compared to the prospect of obliterating countries

[dkf]

using nuclear weapons. At least for me it does.

Hillary sounds like she is not interested in ridding the world of nuclear weapons either, but sounds like she has plans for their possible use.

I don't want this woman anywhere near the red phone, especially at 3am in the morning.

[HereSince1628]

1. US politicians have been spouting the same line of shit for years

It's all part of the facade of a umbrella application of M.A.D. that goes back at least as far as JFK.

The fact is, when the shit hits the fan, as it did when Henry Kissinger took us to DefCon2 back in the Yom Kippur war, the politicians suddenly get very very sober...even if they were doing Crown Royal and Beer before bed.

[dkf]

2. Yeah, but not in the crazy Middle East where some fanatics are perfectly

fine with suicide missions and others are fine lobbing bombs over borders.

You've got dictatorships based on inheritance and unstable governments and extreme religious sects.

This is the whole reason Bin Laden attacked us, because we were meddling too much in the middle east.

Now Hillary wants to make it worse.

She is putting us in danger.

[HereSince1628]

4. Actually, yes, in the Middle East.

Our 'an attack on an allie is an attack on us' policy is not only for NATO but also for other allies as well including Israel and it's been that way at least since JFK.

But you are correct in that M.A.D. works against states but it doesn't work against non-states. This was realized long ago and it it why we now talk about attacking state-sponsors of terrorism who allow/don't prevent terrorists attacks to be planned and executed from within their borders.

[dkf]

5. Well our relationship with states is creating instability with the non-states

And really, it is the non-states that have and will be trying to attack us.

Which goes back to how serious she is about protecting our country. She's aiming at the wrong target, same as George W. Bush and John McCain.

I don't understand why we have dropped the ball on true justice for 9/11. Obama is the only one who gives a damn.

[soleft]

3. JFK didn't have to deal with peak oil

And the last ditch grab for the world's resources.

[dkf]

6. Well nuking Iran isn't going to make their resources more available to us.

I don't get what all this aggressive talk against Iran is supposed to do to further our aims in regards to oil.

[soleft]

10. exactly

[HereSince1628]

7. No he had to deal with

the longstanding state of hostility between Israel and Egypt brought about by the Suez Canal Crisis of the 1950s and the pairing off of the US and the USSR as each took a side.

The Suez was a choke-point to western economy. We've sort of forgotten the magnitude of the strategic threat that the nationalization of the canal by Egypt posed.

[invictus]

8. K & R

[kenny blankenship]

9. I know it's incredible. Like watching a Republican primary.

(After the Republicans went Nazi)

"My opponent can't be trusted because he doesn't want to kill all the Muslims"

I guess we'll have to have people starving to death in the suburbs here before our politics focuses on our real problems.