Wednesday, December 14, 2005

Tumors

You know what I'm gonna do? I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadillac El Dorado convertible, hot pink with whaleskin hub caps and all leather cow interior and big brown baby seal eyes for headlights, yeah! And I'm gonna drive around in that baby at 115mph getting one mile per gallon, sucking down quarter pounder cheese burgers from McDonald's in the old-fashioned non-biodegradable styrofoam containers and when I'm done sucking down those grease ball burgers, I'm gonna wipe my mouth with the American flag and then I'm gonna toss the styrofoam container right out the side and there ain't a God damned thing anybody can do about it. You know why? Because we got the bombs, that's why.

Two words. Nuclear [F'in (Sorry, Denis)] weapons, okay?! Russia, Germany, Romania - they can have all the Democracy they want. They can have a big democracy cake-walk right through the middle of Tiananmen square and it won't make a lick of difference because we've got the bombs, okay?!
- Denis Leary, No Cure for Cancer.

I've been a bit behind on the news this week, what with keeping the world safe for democracy and all. I've been following some stories about Iran, however. This is a country to keep an eye on, but I'm experiencing a bit of cognitive dissonance.

December 12: Iran offers US share in plant. It sort of sounds like Iran is trying to play ball, but coupled with the recent verbal diarrhea Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has had, it doesn't seem very likely. His government's belligerence could be a factor in our not trusting him with nuclear weapons.

December 13: The U.S. won't guarantee Iran that it won't be attacked, so I guess there's your answer.

Here's the thing that makes me scratch my head, and I don't know how to resolve this internal conflict: We have nuclear weapons, our government has looked into making more nuclear weapons (but "Oh, That Mainstream Media" already reported in October that the Bush administration already dropped nuclear bunker-buster plans), other nations have nuclear weapons. Is it that Iran and North Korea are run by tyrranical madmen that we don't want them to develop nukes? It seems to me there's some conflict in current U.S. policy here. I'm not anti- or pro-nuke. I view it as a fact of life that they exist, and am fully aware that in the wrong hands, they become a problem. I need to read more about why we keep our nukes when we want to prevent others from developing them, or even building nuclear power plants; I'm not up on the policy.

December 14: Iran condemns west accusation on its nuclear program and totally burns the U.S. in the process. He may be a tyrant, but he's got a point. Whether he's honest about his country's peaceful intentions... frankly, I'm doubtful. After all, this is the guy who wants to erase Israel from the map.

Iran is also trying to clandestinely influence the Iraqi elections - surprise! I'm in no way defending Iran, they're a destabilizing force in the region, as is Syria, as was Iraq. What did we do when Pakistan and India started testing nukes? Nothing. What are we going to do if Iran suddenly announces they got 'em too? Hm.

And this is just this week. I don't have an answer for this; it's a complex moral and political situation. You get nukes and then give them up, you give up your ability for retaliation when someone decides to do the unthinkable. But would another coutnry do it? Maybe not against us, but Middle Eastern nations have a demonstrated willingness to unleash all kinds of atrocity against weaker nations with a clear conscience. That's not the kind of world I want to live in, so hypocritical or not, it seems best to make the attempt to control the spread of nuclear arms.

OBTW: I've noticed at least one visitor from Missouri, any word on the dam break out there? Kokonut Pundits has some interesting background. (TFHT: Michelle Malkin)

Labels:

4 Comments:

Blogger Crazy Politico bloody well said...

It is a dilema. I'd love to think I live in a world where we could get rid of them, but the fact is, they aren't going to go away in other places, and more are developing them.

The UN has proved itself to be totally ineffective in this area, NK and Iran being the principle examples.

Someone is going to have to take action on it.

14 December, 2005 21:01  
Blogger James Manning bloody well said...

This is the issue I have with the pre-emptive doctrine. If we invade Iraq to prevent them from developing WMD's, then how do we stop Iran and NK? I'm sure some will support an invasion of Iran - and based on the Iraq policy they could justify it.

I guess we'll see when the Iran and Israel war starts.

14 December, 2005 23:14  
Blogger Little Miss Chatterbox bloody well said...

I've heard about the dam break all day today but on Fox News. It is an hour south of St. Louis which is like 3 hrs. from me. I heard that it was a pretty remote area but that some kids had been hurt. Haven't heard much lately.

15 December, 2005 01:01  
Blogger Robosquirrel bloody well said...

James: I feel that Bush Doctrine is a slippery slope and flawed due to reliance on intelligence, which under the best of circumstances is just educated guessing.

However, I think there is currently a need for it. There may not always be a need, but right now, the need exists. The question is how to make it work better. Frankly, I don't see us overthrowing anyone else anytime soon.

In Iraq, we had been in a state of semi-war for 12 years already. UN imposed sanctions, Iraq shooting at our planes in no-fly zones while on patrol, and various and sundry other points that H.R. 114 covers. Point being that the Iraq issue needed to be resolved as a part of the overall Global War on Terror. As the situations in Iran and NK are fundamentally different, they will be handled differently.

CP: As usual, the US is going to have to drag the UN kicking and screaming into it's intended role. And that will likely backfire. I'm glad we've got a good ambassador now, but as far as being a forum to end international conflict, the UN has failed and I don't expect it to get much better.

15 December, 2005 11:20  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home