The Day the World held its Breath

odd this is posted on a day when the diplomatic efforts seemed to have made progress.

Iran is not a direct threat to the existence of the United States the way Cuba and the USSR were in 1962. While destabilizing and possibly causinga worldwide financial collapse, their use of nuclear weapons (predicted by the way, in Erdman's "Crash of '79") is a threat to Israel, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.

We can't afford, monetarily or spiritually, to not let the diplomatic effort go as far as possible.

The U.S. Iranian nuclear confrontation is similar to the Cuban missile crisis.  However, even if  it is like the "Cuban missle crisis in slow motion," I think it is a little more frightening.  Cuba is very close to Florida, but the technology wasn't as sophisticated back then.        The pace of the event could change very easily.  All we can do is hope that President Obamba can handle this as quickly and diplomatically as possible.   

One can beat a dead Horse as much as one might like to, but the Horse is definitely NOT going to get up and run .......
 
The time for talking and attempts at Diplomacy are just as dead as the Horse captioned above ....... It is time for massive Carpet Bombing, with Neutron Bombs, and days of funeral pyres thereafter .......
 
Diplomacy is a useless as Tits on a Nun ....... No more should our efforts be like those of piss poor C-Student doctors, just Masking the Symptoms and sucking the life out of the Insurance ... It is time we attack (pardon the self-serving pun) the cause of the problem and eliminate that cause/those causes, once and for all .......
 
Islam is NOT, ....... that is, NOT ....... a Religion of Peace ... Moslems fully intend to dominate the earth and KILL ....... every thing that is not Islamic ... You, your Children, and all that you care about ....... Do you REALLY have to see it happen here, before you will believe the facts already before you ???????  If so, it is no wonder that a Arab/Moslem pretending to be Black for political advantage got into the White House ....... GOD Help Us All ... We are victims of our own stupidity, sold out to our own delusions ....... My Dad got Seven Purple Hearts, Four Silver Stars, Four Bronze Stars, and a huge number of Citations, just slightly fewer than Audy Murphy ... and I gave them thirty-one years, got no Citations, but I got two Honorable Discharges, from two different Branches of the Service(Did an Army hitch after the first in the NAVY, went back to the NAVY to finish off ... I missed the water terribly) ... expressly so that all this crap that is happening could NOT ever happen ....... And apparently it was all for nothing ....... I'll bet my Dad is more pissed than I am .......

First, the closest the U.S. and Russia came to nuclear war was NOT in 1962, but in 1983.  Those who don't know about 'Able Archer 83' should read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Archer_83 .  Only the realization by top figures in the KGB that the Politburo was convinced of an imminent attack by the U.S. on the U.S.S.R. led to top level meetings that saved both nations from Armageddon.

Second, paranoia about Soviet Communism and Islam (read Jalopkin above) are both warranted and unwarranted.  Yes, both seek to 'bury us'.  But Reagan, Nixon, and so on did NOT launch "massive Carpet Bombing, with Neutron Bombs, and days of funeral pyres thereafter" against Beijing or against Moscow.  I will let others try to imagine the world in which we live had the U.S. decided that "diplomacy is as useless as Tits on a Nun".  I tend to agree that SOME STRANDS of Islam are definitely warlike and further that Islam is not at its core a religion of peace... I'd go further and say that Christianity and Judaism aren't either.  They are all based on 'warrior gods', all male, all kings, and all bent of programs of crusade, victory, judgment, and punishment of the defeated.   

Third, humans are INDEED stupid, "sold out to their own delusions", etc.  So what? If killing the wives, daughters, infant children and old folks who inhabit the Muslim world is good, why not do the world the favor of killing the wives, daughters, infant children and old folks who inhabit the rest of the world?  Islam, like other religions, is born from the depths of the human heart, and if it is evil at its core, then humanity is evil at its core.  And if the idea is to perfect humanity by the use of nuclear weapons, perhaps suicide would be appropriate.

I've spent way too many days in the homes of Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, etc. and watched how all folks seem to dote on their little kids to think that killing humans is the answer to our inabilities to get along.  Put me in the camp that the best way to eliminate an enemy is to make him your friend.  And if that fails, muddle along until the grim reaper takes both of us and those kids learn (on their own) how to get along and become friends.  

Regarding Iran, I find it bizarre that Iran (with NO nukes right now) is a target of paranoia when such nations as Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea already have them deployed and mounted on missiles.  Iran may become one more problem, but the world is a lot more threatened by EXISTING nuclear weapons than by nukes that haven't yet been manufactured.  (Frankly, humans are way too complacent about the risks, but I'm resigned to the fact that the next use of nukes on large cities is the only way to shake off the lethargy and get action.... Hopefully this will happen after I'm gone and the cities involved will not be home to any of my family....)

MMMMMMMMMMMM.... ham. Yesterday's topic was the bomb... Have a wonderful day all.

 
"Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who called for Israel to be "wiped off the map." "
 
do you think he wants to arm wrestle?
 
 
jalopkin, take one step back on the horse....how did he die?....did he not have opportunity after opportunity to drink the water?...you can lead them to water.....you just can't make them drink.....or perhaps the horse chose the kool-aid.
 
history, that kind that hasn't been cleaned up and made soft and palatable, has the answer......
 
big group hug.......
 

 

Wiping a nation off the map can involve the elimination of the nation (e.g. the partitions of Poland, the dissolution of Yugoslavia, the British colonization of the nations that populated South Asia in pre-Empire 'India', etc.).  It can also involve sweeping ethnic groups off their lands, as the U.S. did to Cherokee (just one example).  And it can involve extermination of 'nationalities' as Stalin did in the 1930s-1940s.  I doubt that Israel, with 200 nuclear missiles, both a first strike and second strike capability, and a nascent nuclear submarine capability, has anything to fear from anyone (except the suicidal).  And as for the suicidal, no one can protect himself/herself against them.  So far, no world leader in history (with the possible exception of Adolf Hitler) has deliberately tried to immolate himself, his family, his nation, and his people.... world leaders try (in the famous Patton line) to get the OTHER poor slob to die for his country....

A couple of days ago I got an e-mail from a friend asking when human beings would be able live along side of each other without fighting. I answered the first time we are contacted by life from another planet. He didn't agree, but asked my reasoning. To which I replied that will be the first time we are able to see past our own differences...color nationality religion zip code...and focus on our similarities in light of a truly, wholely different other. "We" and "They" will find a whole new definition.

One  thing  I  know  for  sure,  today's  discussion  will  be  interesting.....

Trivia of the Day: In all of recorded human history, there have been only 23 years that a war has not been waged somewhere in the world.

I think that really speaks to who and what we are, sitting alone on this little blue marble. The problem is that people have closed the focus too much to see that we are all humans, against the Universe; that we really ought to be all on the same side. But it's a problem of greed, and of power, that causes one country, or the man leading it, to decide that some people are not enough like them/him, that causes us to fight.

I think it's a matter of perspective. And too many people have obscured too much of their perspectives to really realise what the issue is.

did you know that it is also the anniv. of the first successful parachute jump? an obvious life saving device?

I would keep an eye on Israel. While they probably do not have the capability to effectively strike Iran's deeply embedded facilities, any attack by them will of necessity bring the U.S. into the conflict; and, if that happens, look forward to $10.00 a gallon gasoline.

It  seems  that  from  the  start  of  recorded  history  man  has  engaged  in  wars,  tied  into  acquisition  of  territory  or  to  control  of  existing  territory.  The  dilemma  that  we  face  now  is  that  the  stakes  have  been  raised,  due  to  the  proliferation  of  nuclear  weapons.   Rising  population  is  certain  countries  creates  the  need  for  more  land,   from  which  more  food  can be  grown.   Religion  is  often  thrown  into  the  mix,  by  both  sides,  a  perversion  of  what  religion  should  be  about.   I  need  more  dark  roast  coffee,  but  I  really  appreciate  today's  "no  holds  barred"  dialogue.

look to nature.  no politicians, no snakeoil salesmen, no weopons, no money or gold......which species survive and why ?... natural instinct?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
off topic.
http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/anomalous.htm

Diplomacy may not solve much, but paranoia solves nothing. Ever since the collapse of the Concert of Europe after the first World War and the failure of the League of Nations, the world has been stuck between two conflicting theories on how international politics should be conducted. Collective security, wherein an attack against one member state is an attack against all, will ultimately fail because, as Jalopkin has so bravely illustrated, states are made of people and people have such extreme differences in ideology that they will often refuse to cooperate for their mutual protection. Unfortunately, the classic political theory of a "balance of power" is based on the assumption that war is inevitable and states must align based on military might, to the detriment of countries that are not as developed (i.e. Europe during the imperial era practically going down in a bloc to colonize Africa, and succeeding because the "balance" was so tipped in their favor).As far as the modern age, we are struggling. Iran is not the Soviet Union. Before the Ayatollah's takeover, Iran was a largely democratic nation, an ally of the United States, and distinguished for its secular and cosmopolitan way of life, along with the predominance of a good university education among the populace. Saying relations have soured would be a gross understatement, but it has thrust us into a state of confusion. Should Iran's nuclear progress be hailed as a sign of development or feared as a sign of increased bellicosity? To indicate the direction of the prevailing wind for the past few years would be stating the obvious. Adding to the difficulty, the charismatic Mr. Ahmedinejad seems to be enjoying his reputation as a rebel, holding the Western world on tenterhooks with doubt about his intentions for the uranium-enrichment program.As for the rest of the Middle East, the the world has been playing with matches there for the past few centuries (Lawrence of Arabia, anyone?). Russia had its own adventures in the 'Stans (that Stan sure is a popular fellow) for a considerable period during the supposed "deténte" of the late '70s, playing proxy war with the CIA. So what are we supposed to do? At this point in my life, I'm afraid I don't have any practical answers. But one way or the other, the chess game has to be stopped, preferably without another war (or perhaps I should say an addition to the current conflict). As much fun as war is, it doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.

Cuukoo1:    I  just  checked  out  the  material  on  the  link  you  presented.   It  is  quite  fascinating,  assuming  of  course  that  the  articles  got  there  same  in  point  of  time  with  the  age  of  the  surrounding  strata.    If  you  know,  what  do  traditional  thinkers  say  about  these  items?

If Carter had made a swift& decisive military strike against Iran way back in 1979 whenthe hostages were taken, we may not be in the mess we are in right now. Had the United States stayed out of the Iran-Iraq war and not backed Iraq we wouldn't be in the mess we are in right now. Had Wilson's 14 Points been applied at the Treaty of Versailles, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in right now. We dug our own pit that is now impossible to climb out of. Amadinejad is a monumental jackass, but he's playing the US for suckers and pushing buttons to get the USA to do another pre-emptive strike and further isolate us from the rest of the world. Diplomacy has failed worldwide and war doesn't work. Perhaps the only way out of this is a return to isolationism.

Peter   Lake:   Nice  post,  virtual   friend.   In   1860  Abraham  Lincoln  reluctantly  accepted  the  nomination  of  candidate  for  president  of  a  troubled  Union.  That  was  the  1st  Republican  national  candidate.    Although  he  won  the  election,  it  was  a  5  person  race  (major  parties),    so  his  "mandate"  was  something  like  28%  of  the  vote.    Then  the  South  declared  themselves  to  be  a  new  nation,  and  did  so  in  dramatic  fashion,  with  military  force.   His  story  is  a  true  American  story,  one  of  many....but  it  gives  us  some  hope  for  today  &  tomorrow.  Just  when  things  look  most  bleak,  someone  of  extraordinary  character  &  vision  steps  up  to  the  challenge.   And  it  includes  women,  not  just  men.  Most  wars  were  functional  on  men  thinking    with  their  testosterone,  not  with  their  brains.

Peter   Lake:   Nice  post,  virtual   friend.   In   1860  Abraham  Lincoln  reluctantly  accepted  the  nomination  of  candidate  for  president  of  a  troubled  Union.  That  was  the  1st  Republican  national  candidate.    Although  he  won  the  election,  it  was  a  5  person  race  (major  parties),    so  his  "mandate"  was  something  like  28%  of  the  vote.    Then  the  South  declared  themselves  to  be  a  new  nation,  and  did  so  in  dramatic  fashion,  with  military  force.   His  story  is  a  true  American  story,  one  of  many....but  it  gives  us  some  hope  for  today  &  tomorrow.  Just  when  things  look  most  bleak,  someone  of  extraordinary  character  &  vision  steps  up  to  the  challenge.   And  it  includes  women,  not  just  men.  Most  wars  were  functional  on  men  thinking    with  their  testosterone,  not  with  their  brains.

BEBE:
 
Well put!!!

having been on the fence, as two magnificent arabian stallions fought, i had to come down and decide which one i could reign in to stop the eventual death of one or both. 
 
 indecisiveness is the worst place to be.  get off the fence.

I've never got the impression that the reason for all that fighting over that in the Mideast is because of their over population problem -- and they need the land to grow more food.
 
No.
 
They want it and they won't stop wanting it and trying to take it because they (each and all of them) think the other guy took it from them, and by golly, they're going to keep on trying to get it back from the other guy from now until for-ever.
 
They (all of them) have the mentality of the bad seed child who was given a gift of some very dangerous toys.
 
It ain't good, but reasoning and taking the high road with the brats hasn't worked, and won't work.  They're bad children whose upbringing did not include becoming civilized.
 
Why would anyone think they would want to change?  Hint: It's not about growing food for their starving population, uh uh, no way...
 
 

over there in the Mideast

A granfalloon, in the fictional religion of Bokononism (created by Kurt Vonnegut in his 1963 novel Cat's Cradle), is defined as a "false karass." That is, it is a group of people who outwardly choose or claim to have a shared identity or purpose, but whose mutual association is actually meaningless.

The really terrifying aspect about the highly volatile situation that exists in that part of the world is how can you possibly reason with those that place so little value on the miracle of human life, and in fact, seem to posses delusions of grandeur of the "after life'.  

If war and violence is the failure of using reason to resolve differences, and it remains impossible to reason with a crazy person; then unfortunately there remains but one choice which is to do unto others before the do it to you first. I would always like to be right, but then there are those situations when I'd rather win than be right and I'll jump off the fence before I'm knocked off it.

Meanwhile and faraway, I'll keep hoping for reasonable men to seek and find each other. And travel a path towards a win-win solution. Perhaps those remaining few "survivors" of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should be active in any negotiations with any nation that would cause this to happen again?

Tomorrow's topic better be about donuts! Peace out.

PETER LAKE:  All Well Put, indeed ....... Nobility Always Rises To the Occasion ....... And I am not surprised .......

In my more pessemistic moments, I often think that the world would be a great place, if it weren't for the humans.
 
 

Somewhere on the internet, I recently saw a picture of a Middle Eastern man on the street, shaking his fist toward the camera.  Chaos in the background.  Someone had written this caption on the picture, "He's looking forward to his 72 virgins in the afterlife, but he doesn't know they are 35 year old Star Trek fans living in their mom's basements."
 
When worlds collide.

 
Bebe had a point about yesterday's discussion.  Today's topic could cause a vegetarian to order a county ham sandwhich!   

Julia Masi: Can I get one of those sandwiches?  Maybe with a homemade pesto mayo?  A little provalone.  A little avocado. 
 
Excuse me, I need to go get something to eat. I just made myself hungry.

I am shocked by the naivity expressed by those who don't see Iran as a threat. Fortunately, the Israelis aren't going to sit by waiting for diplomacy to work, which won't anyway, and will bomb the crap out of the Iranian nuclear facility as soon as possible.

If I were an Israeli I would be exhorting my gov't to pull the trigger!

Bounty Hunter...

I'll take it a step beyond...

I see India and Pakistan as only a threat to one another and North Korea blowing ITSELF up.

 Is the Club Car lead lined?

with tin-foil hats for everyone!!

...and they come in all the designer colors

I  see  all  sides  in  the  Middle  East  so  polarized  that  it  is  likely  there  never  may  be  a   state  of  true  peace.   Even  children  are  indoctrinated  from  the  time  that  they  can  communicate.   Other  countries  have  an  interest  not  necessarily  for  heroic  or  noble  reasons,  but  for  oil,  as  well  as  for  oil  price  stability.
 
I  welcome  Bounty  Hunter  back,  and  I  tend  to  agree  with  his  grim  prognosis.  In  Iran,  we  have  a  nut  case  running  what  soon  will  be  a  nuclear  power.   Israel  has  known  all  too  well  what  nut  cases  can  do,  both  before  and  after  1948,  when  their  country  was  established  by  powers  elsewhere,  an  ingredient  starting  the  Arab's  argument  that  they  have  "first  dibs"  on  the  land.  This  is  all  rather  depressing,   but  I  do  have  some  superb  cognac,  and  to  both  those  with  whom  I  agree  and  especially  to  those  with  whom  I  sometimes  politely  disagree  I  say  CLUB  CAR  IS  OPEN  BAR,  compliments  of me. 

Over the years I've met and chatted with moms and dads (and their kids) from Kerala, Baluchistan, Iran, Israel, Punjab, Beijing, Madrid, Shanghai, Osaka, and zillions of other places.  I've discussed halakhah with rabbis, and sharia law with a Pakistani psychologist.  I've listened to a Bahai woman from Iran denounce Khomenei, and I've discussed politics with a very bitter Palestinian engineer on his way to Thailand to direct a very complicated construction project.  I've had arguments with a hate-filled secular Jew who criticized 'the way Arabs dress' and had never heard of the Satmar Hassidim of Williamsburg, (Brooklyn, NY) and refused to believe there were co-religionists of his who still 'dress funny' as my sister would say when we drove through that neighborhood years and years ago.  I've argued about communism with a guy from Azerbaijan (him in favor; me against).  And I had to talk an ex-air traffic controller from Khazakstan out of becoming my 'computer consultant' (as he installed co-axial cable for my Comcast service).  Etc, etc, etc.  Frankly, I find all the talk about dropping nuclear weapons on one year old babies, pregnant moms, 75 year old grandmas, grumpy old grandpas (a lot like me!), smart-ass teenagers, and so on and so on simply and plainly DISGUSTING.  If you want to live in a perfectly safe place where everyone is perfectly quiet and all get along without disagreements, there's a name for that place.  It's called a cemetery.  I'll take the rough and tumble, risks and dangers, human idiocies and affections, etc over any cemetery plot, no matter how well landscaped.  Ditto walled communities in which identical families of similar economic circumstances, all sharing the same religion and all having the same ethnic and racial characteristics.  It's way too boring living inside a closet, no matter how well appointed (and padded?)  As for the words 'WE' and 'THEY', I'll only say I'd rather be in the home of an Indonesian mom and dad, with their two-year old kid bringing me his favorite stuffed animal to show it to me -- than to be invited to some 'cocktail party' where all the stuffed shirts try to impress me with their new car, barbeque, or flat screen TV.  I have ZERO interest in turning the  7,800,000 residents of Tehran into walking and screaming flames or radioactive dust.... So Ahmadinejad is a jerk (duh!); so because Dick Cheney is one too, we're going to drop a nuke on Wyoming?  And because Berlusconi is a crook, we're going to drop one on Rome?  And because Robert Mugabe is a raving psychopath we're going to nuke Zimbabwe?  Gimme a break.... 

Sorry to rave, but there's way too much 'loose talk' about using nukes!  It was NOT acceptable behavior, but about ten years ago in the house of an Indian customer I took the parents to task when their kids began to make jokes about nuking the Pakistanis and mom and dad said nothing.....  (Scr..w the commission!)  I was polite, but I was on the point of walking out of the house.  There's a limit! 

Doc~If it weren't for sabre rattlin', you wouldn't know the nuts were around....even Primates exhibit the same behaviors...and if you ever watched a cage full of birds--many birds in the same cage- - you would see all these behaviors played out exactly the same...as a matter of fact, you would laugh and name them for the exact(pun warning) poloticians they resemble...

To limit the view of Islam to the extremists is the same as limiting Christians to Evangelicals, Jews to Hasidic, or Hindus to Jainism.  The people of Iran are not our enemies.  The LEADERSHIP of Iran, who are basically holding their own people hostage are the enemies to all.  The people of Iran live in constant fear of being dragged off to prison for the crimes of owning a satalite dish, reading western books, or listening to Michael Jackson CDs.  Female students are routinely strip searched by female members of the police because they looked too pretty for going to class.  They have to enter by a side gate, because the main entrance to the University of Tehran is reserved for men. 
 
To bomb Iran is to destroy the decendants of one of the oldest continuous civilizations on earth.  There are people who still worship the way their ancestors did 5000 years ago, raising their hands to Mithras and Zoroaster. 
 
I will not join in on the Israel/Palestine debate, because I do not have the wisdom.
 
There is great evil in Iran, at the top.  We see Ahmadinejad on TV, dressed in his ridiculous jacket and denying the Holocaust, and we forget that he is nothing but a lackey.  There is nothing that happens, politically, in Iran that is not the wish of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hoseyni Khamenei, successor to Ayatollah Khomeini.  
 
I do not know what may happen. 
 
I hope for peace.

MICHAEL- it's not pessimistic at all. Humans should learn from animals... much more civilized.
 
mmmmm....ham.

bebe: More civilized, perhaps, but they don't know how to make gravy.

...monkeys who get crazy drunk on power, and unfortunately the craziest ones want to be in charge, carry the football, be the deciders...

...to follow Olivia's analogy:  it seems the solution would be to figure out how to sack the quarterback, and still go on to win the game.