The Pink Mist

Alright enough, I had been privately thinking these thoughts for a while but did not wish to voice them for being illegitimately attacked as trying to keep the President of Pakistan, “An all boys club.” But We are in crisis mode now it has to be said. Benazir Bhutto needs to get gone.

As I have said before, she has stones, it takes a real piece of work to be this opportunistic. I mean lets be really serious and get to the brass tacks. She was elected twice and was expelled from her position as Prime Minister due to charges of corruption. And in that part of the world there must have been some serious corruption going on, since that is basically how they do business.

Now before the bleeding heart, “she’s a woman and thus that was why she was disposed of not due to corruption” feminist rhetoric gets spun, not this fact, the same Judicial System that is upset with Musharraf upheld these findings against Bhutto. They have this “people are equal under the law” type thing in their Judicial system, at least they are trying.

Now lets get into the current crisis. Telling the people loyal to you to start trouble by rioting and protesting, is not the best way to get a guy you think is abusing power, to relinquish it. If Musharraf was really as bad a dude as we are to believe, then he would just have his guys open fire and be done with it.

“But Musharraf was preventing democratic reforms to keep power.” Your point would be…what? That is a bad thing? Have you heard some of the rhetoric that gets spouted over there? Death to America this, Allah will smite the US that. I mean they are almost as happy 9-11 happened as Gulianni is, it gives them a platform to be relevant to the world stage.

Lets also remember that it was during the rule of Bhutto that the Taliban gained power in Afghanistan, thinking it would provide stability to the region. Her government even provided financial and military assistance so that Pakistan could trade with the Central Asian Republics. How well did that pan out for everyone involved?

This created the situation where the Pashtun, who are ethnically related to the Taliban Government in Afghanistan, started to have the loyalties strained. They have since been siding with their Afghan brethren making all kinds of problems, and possibly hiding Osama Bin Laden.

Have some decisions Musharaff made, become questionable when scrutinized? Yes, did Pakistan have a fantastic wonderland full of human right, democratic values, warm fuzzy feelings for those not of their religion until Musharraf took power? No. He inherited a bad situation and is making the best that he can.

We have to look at the alternatives of who would take power should Musharraf get sent into exile, I mean retirement after this situation calms down. A third times the charm election campaign for Bhutto? Or worse still, one of the Islamic Parties that want Pakistan to realign itself with the literal word of the Koran, rather than the capitalistic West.

We may not like it but Musharraf looks to be the best hope we have for a country that has problems feeding itself, but now has nuclear technology and the ability to launch missiles at an ally in India, or a large segment of the population who would use it for an attack on the US. If Bhutto keeps this obscenely selfish power struggle up we may have only one solution, the Marine Snipers call it, “The Pink Mist.”

Dude, Where’s my clone?

Rejoice! For the advancement in technological innovation is at hand! US scientists have successfully cloned a rhesus macaque monkey. Awesomeness. Now we don’t have to worry about extinct species anymore we can just clone them from the remaining population. We can also start dipping into that awesomeness of genetic manipulation and finally make X-Men the reality that is should be.

The technical of you may be wondering, “Bush’s speech about Human-Animal Hybrids may not seem so obviously stupid anymore.” You would be incorrect, but it was a nice thought. For this is the type of advancement that will bring the pressure to bear on the illegitimate non-use of stem cells in research.

Granted I don’t want a clone of me out there, since the universe can only create perfection once, and may turn in on itself were there to be any more of me. My true concern would be how this technology would be used against the United States. I mean think if the Republicans were to throw a Reagan Clone into the Presidential race this year, his speeches would encompass, “Bin Laden tear down this wall!” Or, “Reagan Smash!”

The upside would be he would approve stem cell research in order to cure diseases like Parkinson’s, Cancer, and Alzheimer’s stuff that you compassionate people care about. We could even salvage the failed Bush Foreign Policy.

Clones don’t have souls, neither do the Cheney’s or Robert Novak coincidentally, so they can be sent into battle without having to have the headache of casualty reports. The clones not the Cheney’s and Novak, they are too self important to get rid of. We could also interrogate our enemies however we wanted cause we don’t have to worry about clones being psychological trauma, they can just be put down and listed as “collateral damage”.

Other benefits could be utilized as well. The FDA could use clones in order to test whatever horrible medicine, or hormone injected foods could cause damage. We could then just dump them and the drugs that don’t work. It would be so much better than having to deal with the freaks at PETA complaining about testing on animal, and the lawsuits that stem from bad drugs.

Even the organ donation market would benefit. Instead of having to wait on a list we could just clone healthy organs, or if they are failing due to genetic mishaps then we could clone healthy ones from other people. Spinal cord injuries may be cured through these same measures.

We could even revamp our space program through the taxation of these clones, they can’t work for free, that would be inhumane, its not like they are illegal aliens. These brave not-really men and women could be the scout units for our exploration in space. Unforeseen events such as ejection into space, explosions, radiation poisoning, what other bad things could happen, could be tried out this way first.

Well maybe it is too good of an idea to be true. Helpful stuff like this would benefit society too much more conservatives to allow to happen. What is the point of being the elite in society if you can’t be the only ones to never suffer the consequences of your actions. Aren’t there enough clones of poor people already? So write letters to your Congressman and ask, “Dude, where’s my clone?”

Morals are What you make of them

Well I guess President Bush has had a impact on old Vlady after all.  The insistence that Tsar Putin was really a nice guy, and that all the KGB history was in the past.  Putin did believe in democracy and morality so long as they serve his purposes of expanding his hold on power.  In truth Bush saw himself in Putin, granted it was a smarter, able to drink alcohol, and be openly hostile to your opposition version of himself, but then that is almost everybody.

It appears that the Russian President/Tsar/Universal Leader has found God.  Not the “I promise to help the poor, feed the hungry, be just to my fellow man and good person” kind of God, but rather the “how can I use this for my own personal agenda” God.  You know, the things that Muslims and Republicans have been doing for years.

Putin has said that he has a “moral right” to continue to be involved in Russian politics.  Its interesting to note he did not use the phrase “moral responsibility” probably because their is no Russian equivalent word for responsibility the closest they come to it is “vodka” meaning no poor results.  Which would be debatable if you have seen the women in Siberia - Zing!

That roar of silence you hear is the hippy generation not getting upset that a man that has used strong arm tactics to get what he wants and will use whatever means possible to keep in power who also has questionable security of their nuclear arsenal, who is not of Islamic disposition.  I figured Europe would have a problem with a dude bringing back the old days, not getting upset with a Pakistani doing what rulers over their have always done- try to keep hold on power.

Author’s Aside - As I have gracefully, and effortlessly drawn Pakistan and Russia together, I would like to take this opportunity to speak with Benizar Bhutto for a moment.  I respect you.  It takes some stones to immediately turn on the guy who offered you immunity so you could come back to the dung-heap you guys call a country.  Then being more opportunistic that a fraternity finding a drunken heap of sorority girls immediately pouncing on civil unrest so you could oust that very same guy from power.  But to keep talking when you are under arrest and being told to shut up while the country is being burned down by people who hate you, and your own followers trying to prove martial law is unnecessary, is a sure way for you to find your way “falling” out of a window.  

Moving on,  what the aforementioned munchie generation needs to understand is that they should be cool with a guy keeping his population in line that has some weird ideologies that may involve nuclear holocaust.  It is for the greater good after all, the end all be all of circular reasoning.  Why else have moral standards if you can’t break them now and again when it is convenient.  Thats why morals are what you make of them.

Beware of What You Ask…

Well now, it appears as if the leaders of Hamas are learning what African rebels learned a long time ago, blowing stuff up and killing people is a lot easier than actually running the place. Come to think of it maybe we should hope that the Republicans have learned the same thing.

For those of you not in the know, the Palestinian people, also known as the pawns that the rest of the Arabic world uses to attack Israel, have two I guess we have to call them “parties” in what they consider a government. You have to have a country to have a government, but I digress, these entities are called Hamas, started by some dude that was a terrorist and that killing innocent people is the best way to get what you want.

The other is Fatah which was started by a different terrorist but because he was the only thing the Palestinians had as a leader, some smuck gave him the Nobel Peace Prize. He was then stuck in a compound cause the Israeli army had him surrounded, and as we all know, Palestinians only feel brave when they kill women and children at a grocery store.

They do this because t feel that that the best way to show they deserve to be their own country is by killing so many women and children that they will have to be taken seriously. Problem is, and its just a formality really, if you keep using suicide bombers it is kinda hard to believe that once you get that country, you will be a peaceful neighbor.

What would probably happen is they get their own country, break the peace treaty and attack Israel in some foolish attempt to drive them into the sea, and then realize your army has sandstones as weapons and the Israeli’s have fully automatic uzi machine guns. Then you get your sandbox of a country taken over and holy hell we are back at square one.

Now it may seem to some that I have a dislike for the Palestinians in particular and the Arabs in general, you would be a racist, judging me by the things I say and do rather than who I am as an individual. The problem that i have with the Palestinian people is that they leave you with genocide being the only option. Most times people when they enter negotiations have at least an idea of what they want and, depending on who they are dealing with, an idea of what they can get.

Palestinians want the freken moon, mostly because their is no western influence upon their “culture” its only resource is rocks and dirt, and there are no Jews there. There was a deal offered to Arafat that would have given the Palestinians a country parts of Jerusalem, and allowed for the West Bank and Gaza to be unified under the same government. Obviously the deal was turned down because they wanted more.

More of what we don’t know, but maybe Arafat was wise enough to know that he was close enough to the end of his life and it is much better to be thought of as a Terrorist who won the Nobel Peace Prize than the guy who is criticized for not being able to balance a budget. So of course now they are merely killing themselves to see what impossible to understand train of thought they will use to get said country.

This of course brings out mixed feelings for our Israeli friends since they are happy the terrorists are killing themselves, yet don’t want to do anything to make them reunite for one last blast. (I know that was a bad pun but with the writers strike you have to work with what you got) So remember this one simple truth, especially if you think you may recieve it, to Beware of what you ask.

Tech Support…Please Hold

Well, this is just great.  It looks as though we will finally have a conclusion to the greatest mystery in the era of modern man.  No, I am not talking about how a man can be President and at teh same time have a hard time counting his toes.  The mystery of which I speak is the moon landing. (dramatic music)

For decades the intellegent among us have had to listen to the meandering “logic” of people like Pat Robertson and his follows spout of about how the moon landing was a fake, because the moon is only made of space dust because the Universe is only 6 thousand years old.  The devil and his evil, liberal, intellectual, democrat, homosexual, “science” makes us only think it is billions of years old. 

How do you ask?  How will this truth finally be recognized?  NASA must be sending another mission to space and to solidify our supremecy over allwe survey!  Actually no, it will the Russians and the Indians teaming up to form one of the more obvious alliances known to man. 

Simply judging by stereotypes, because I am an American and going deeper than first impressions takes time and effort and I actually am kinda busy, this is a truly perfect relationship.  India has a large population that is overeducated for the menial tasks of explaining to people in Mississippi that the thing that pops out of the computer is not a cup holder.  (Think it through)

Russia on the other hand has decent production capabilities but, rarely has the ability to sustain thetechnology they produce due to the fact that Russians are usually preoccupied with the temptress known as Vodka.      K-19, Chernobyl, and Mir are all high profile cases of this, for my purposes, truth. 

Though it may seem as though I am elated of this news, because I am, it brings with it a threat to our national security and soverignty.  For the moon which has been claimed by the universal “I planted the flag so I get to keep it” rule, in accordance with the “dibs” principle is under attack. 

For no where in my brief research did I see where these two nations asked the permission of the United States to land upon US soil.  Not once did the prospect of landing rights or docking permission even be mentioned let alone negotiated. 

This is unacceptable and should be treated with the harshest means possible.  A non-binding, non-enforcible, will probably be vetoed, symbolic gesture of a UN resolution.  Wait…my somputer keeps actiong up…”Tech support…please hold.”

Belgium Waffling?

Throughout time there have been many issues that have resulted in the need of civil war. While some issues seemed at the time vastly important, excesses of the French King for example, others have stood the test of time. Taxation without Representation was the rallying cry of our own departure of the British Empire. While religion tore apart the country of Yugoslavia, and ethnicity seems to be the driving force behind the Basque separatist movement.

Belgium has decided to cast its Constitutional government aside for an altogether different issue, Language. For while Europe is chock full of parties all along the political landscape, Belgium seems to not have a problem with what party puts forth an idea, but rather what language it is in.

For the parties tend to be divided by languages, rather than ideals. It would be like having a Spanish speaking Democrat Party and and English Democrat Party. For those in the south, an analogy would be having Black Baptist Churches, and White Baptist Churches. Both spreading the same ideology, just kinda picky over who is telling whom the message. (That is the correct usage of who;whom right?)

So while like every other democratic country instead of dealing with economic, and social issues, (Germany doesn’t look like it may invade so I don’t think any foreign policy questions are on the horizon) the government of Belgium has overblown a small issue into a monumental issue of staggering proportions.

More than 150 days have passed where the proposal of electoral distribution of Brussels, which would force inconvenience Francophone speaker, I think, and give the Flemish a possible, upper hand is ridiculous.

Whats worse is I don’t know who to really root for in this fight. Discrimination of anything French cannot be too bad can it? Yet to have another European country dissolve into ethnic and lingstical mini-states doesn’t set a good example for the rest of the world. Next thing you know, Montana will want to be its own country because they talk to God on a two-way radio.

Although come to think of it, this gives us an excellent opportunity to send NATO troops in, heavy on the Turkish of course, so they can practice before they go Kurd hunting in the spring. Well I am keeping this short because it is Friday, so I will have some Belgium Waffling.

Chicks Man

Well it was definitely a good idea in theory. But WOW has it ever backfired for President Musharraf. Here is the scenario, there are wacko fundamentalist Islamic “people” who want you dead, and the Western educated Judicial system isn’t crazy about having a President that has direct control of the army; What do you do?

You find someone that people will hate even more than you, and will deflect some of the negative attention away from you. Musharraf’s choice, a former Prime Minister in exile for corruption, incompetence, who happens to be a woman married to a suspected terrorist. What could possibly go wrong?

Turns out everything. While it is thought to be true that the Islamic radicals hate her, even maybe tried to kill her, tune in to the new series CSI Pakistan to find out. That part of the plan kinda maybe worked, but the part where the Judicial system would aim their venom at the return of an incompetent corruption laden person was not.

Instead they started to challenge the “Constitutionality” of Musharraf keeping his control over the government and the military. Leave it to lawyers to bring about the destruction of a country just because of a technicality in their constitution. Men like former Attorney General Antonio Gonzales never let technicalities of law, or justice get in the way of doing his job. Now look how much safer and well protected we are because of it? Who needs civil rights anyway, more people eligible to vote, who instead watch tv and bitch about how nothing ever gets done.

So now President Musharraf has declared marshal law because of all the riots, I mean “protesting” that is going on. So what does his supposed savior/partner/shield from assassination do? She tells her followers to “protest” that there is no need for the emergency marshal law. And by “protest” I mean attack the police, and toss Molotov Cocktails around the block just for good measure.

Now I may be an American, but I thought that kind of thing was reserved for those pointless soccer games the rest of the world plays. I am also confused on how telling your followers to riot will somehow show that the need for marshal law is somehow unnecessary. I guess it flows from the same logic that burning stuff to the ground every time someone says Islam is a violent religion, and there they go again.

It is also funny to me that the person Musharraf brought in to calm things down Bhutto, is doing the exact opposite of what he wanted. I mean, I understand the call of the independent woman, but this is ridiculous. Then I think of all the relationships I have had with the fairer sex, and realize that this is just an extreme case of a woman kinda pissed at the guy who kicked her out.

“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” the saying goes, I just hope this isn’t going to be a true nuclear winter. So good luck Musharraf, and thanks for providing us with another example for guys to drink a beer with their buddies, shake their heads and say, “Chicks man.”

Liberty and Justice For All…Who Deserve It

For the bleeding hear liberal media controlled by the secret society of American Loathers who say,”We speak of spreading democracy, yet appear to be fine with an Ally in Musharraf deposing a Chief Justice and declaring marshal law”. *yawn* So?

We need to understand, as Americans, what the term “Democracy” really means. It is a system of government that is far beyond the mere presence of elections. Even Saddam and Stalin had elections people, they even had approval ratings over 98% Bush would sell whats left of his soul for half those numbers, and I think Cheney would buy it from him. Democracy is a system of government that has at its core several principles that are unique and are though not as visible as elections are the very essence of the American system.

The first is the belief that individuals have merit, while some have more merit than others, each are endowed with a say in the type of government that they will serve. This largely comes from the principle of the Social Contract put forth by Jean Jacques Rousseau. That society as a whole has come to an understanding based upon mutual understandings of Justice, and Values. What democracy does is allow this contract to live and breathe as new generations are able to make their own decisions about justice and the values that define them.

The second principle that is necessary to have a thriving democracy is the understanding of the rule of law. This is to say that there are some things that the law cannot do. It is to be a shield against the oppression of the state, rather than a sword used to enforce it.

The third of these principles would be the extension of the previous principles stated, rights of the minority.  This ideal enforces makes it necessary that the government follow the will of the Majority, but not at the expense of the Minority.  An example here would be Zimbabwe’s land transfer program, where the people voted and the sheer numbers allowed the land, wealth, and even lives of the white citizens of Zimbabwe be taken from them.  There was an “election” that was somehow though to give legitimacy to this action, but one could never say it matches with the ideals of a Democracy.

Another crucial element necessary to have a democracy is having only those who have a stake in the system, partake in the system, at least in its infancy.  This limiting of the franchise prevents those who would do damage to the system from being allowed to do so.  Our example here can be Pakistan.  The tribal areas that border Afghanistan, are supporters of the ideology that spawned the Taliban.   Therefore it is a completely legitimate strategy to prevent them frompartaking in the system they will use simply to legitimize their own views.

This is how our country was able to get through the very harsh incubation period.  Limiting the voting public to male landholders, who would have something to lose if the system did go down in flames.  Even further checks and balances placed on the public by having an electoral college decide the out come of Presidential races.

It is when that Democracy becomes entrenched and the precedents made that the franchise can be extended to those once excluded from the system.  Their are countless examples in which the rising expectations of the populace, exceeded the governments ability to make rapid changes, leading to the collapse of that government.

While it would be nice to prevent the collapse of government and the decent of a population into anarchy, it becomes a critical import when dealing with Pakistan.  Having been aided by the Chinese to develop a nuclear program, as a check on India, the prospect that Pakistan would devolve into chaos is unacceptable.  Having already cited the obvious influence that the ideology of the Taliban has on the borderlands, to allow these people even the chance of obtaining this technology is unacceptable.

What we see in Pakistan now is the clash between the highly educated populace within Pakistan, that have been educated in the West with historical and systematic checks in balances.  Their completely understandable desire to have a government accountable  to the people, must be balanced against the obvious influence that may be gained by the extreme views of Islam.

Should Pakistan fall, it will be the largest and gravest casualty of Bush’s war in the Persian Gulf.  For we will have given the enemy we are supposedly fighting, Islamic Extremists, a path to the very weapons of mass destruction that could be used against us.  With the stakes this high we should be supportive of liberty and justice for all, who deserve it.

No Iran, You Can’t Have Any

 

Though it may not be apparent by the level of readers, nor by the comments, there has been a ground swell of people asking, nay pleading for me to explain United States Foreign Policy. “We are desperate to keep Iran from obtaining nuclear technology, and its not like they are three year olds.” *yawn* Well you would be surprised.

So here exclusively to this post will be the exact policy of the United States, as I see and understand it, concerning Iran. It is my hope that we will be able to smite, I mean convert, er form a coalition of mutual understanding on this issue. Nuclear technology is to be a right of passage that is achieved through scientific understanding, by a government that is either held accountable to its people, or through Party Leadership. It is expensive and research dependent and accidents can happen, example Chernobyl, don’t worry Ivan we can barely see the third ear and second nose. It is because of these inherent dangers that the National Interest decision must be made; Is it easier to deter a power from using nuclear technology once they have it? Or to keep new powers from obtaining the technology to start up their own nuclear program?.

Due to the possibility of “accidental” launches, nuclear accidents, and possibility of proliferation to other groups, the United States has decided to prevent new powers from eating the apple from the tree of Knowledge. (Reference to the Bible, for all you heathens)

To drive this concern even further, is the fact that nuclear weapons, after WWII have become more of a theoretical threat than actual ones. The devastation that the first generation of these weapons have only been expanded upon through the years, thus making them too destructive to be used by any reasonably sound government official. An example of this would be during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when Soviet soldiers had medium ranged weapons pointing at the Eastern Seaboard of the United States, and the very sobering death count which would have resulted, made Kruschev stand down. Mostly because if the U.S. was to get nuked he wanted it to be his decision, not by some illiterate peasant from Siberia. It is somehow refreshing to know that even communists have a disdain for the poor.

What we have with the “country” of Iran, an altogether different situation. The government is contradictory to its own constitution, and that being the least concern of its legitimacy, produces an apathetic voting public which allows a small religious conservative percentage of the population the power to elect a President like Ahmendinajad and hold him to little or no accountability. Not at all like our system of electoral governance. *wink*

This lack of accountability, as well as the vast amounts of rhetoric that Ahmendinajad spouts off about the holocaust and the need to destroy Israel, is not exactly comforting to see them obtain the means to follow through on these threats. The other principle is the United States looking to keep Iran from becoming a hegemonic power in the region. If anyone is going to tell the Middle East how to run their “countries” it will be us.

The difficulty has been that historically, Iran has been one of the dominate powers within the region. There is a reason it is termed the Persian Gulf, after-all rather than the Arabian Gulf. Other factors that make Iran an enigma is the lack of military advantages that are offered to an invading power. The first of these would be its terrain, which is very much able to sustain guerrilla style insurgent forces. The second of which is that it is much larger than Iraq, which would require a much larger pacification force. The third would be the population is much larger than that of Iraq as well.

We must then turn our attention to the personality of that population, for only then can we truly gauge the level of resistance that would exist both pre-and post invasion. While every nation believes it is the greatest, except Canada they are just interested in hockey cause I guess someone has to, the Persian/Iranians have one hell of an almost sound argument. The borders of Iran have loosely been the same since the Bible was written. So since like since the world was created for our friends in Kansas.

Iran has been the big boy on the block, hailed as the cutting edge of culture and technology and having people cater to their will.  It is from this that we see the root of the distrust and rocky relationship that exists between Iran and the United States. One had been the epitome of power and the other now is. The resentment at the loss of this position combined with a fierce desire to reclaim this status.

Having a virtual baby on the International scene telling them they cannot have nuclear weapons, won’t exactly endear them to us. With such bad blood existing between the two countries there is little communication besides the rhetoric expressed by the leadership. If by some very strange circumstances we were no longer to consider the government of Iran an enemy, or even to learn that they have no desire to use the nuclear missiles or to provide these weapons to terrorist groups that they have provided for in the past, perhaps this policy will change. Until then we still have nuclear technology, and no Iran you can’t have any.

Lead U.S. Not…

It is a seemingly simple question, “What makes a good leader?” It is a question that, in a vacuum, can have a nearly endless supply of answers. What escapes us many times is that it is the circumstances that we find ourselves often dictate the actions our leaders take. The truly great ones are able to understand the dynamic time in which they live and make their decisions accordingly.

While we may learn from the policies that past leaders ultimately implemented, we sell ourselves and these great men short by not understanding the thought process that was involved when these decisions were made. Superimposing a strategy that was successful from the past and simply implementing it without a thought to the changes in global dynamics of our modern age is not only lazy, its bad policy.

When George Washington assumed the Presidency, he understood that the United States was a weak power, in a world of the strong. Therefore an isolationist policy that allowed trade to everyone, but military ties to no one; was the best available option to navigate the dangerous times of a Democracy in its infancy. While the minutemen may have been victorious against the might of the English Empire once, due to the help of all people the French, Washington was aware that to tempt fate again would not be wise.

We see this strategy, without its recognition of the changing dynamic that is the international community, superimposed after World War I. The United States decided to turn in on itself without the acknowledgment that it had become one of, if not the dominate, powers on the international scene. This after implementing a peace agreement that would only serve to antagonize a Germany that had aspirations of regional hegemony, and leaving those unable to enforce such an agreement in charge. For if the combined efforts of the French and British could not stop German aggression during the war, what made US officials believe they could win the peace? This inability for the leadership of the United States to make their constituents realize these dangers, or even more damning, to recognizing themselves is what lead to the second World War.

So the incompetence of not being able to hold public opinion appears to again lead to a lazy policy approach. Preventing terrorist attacks is hard, tracking the number of splinting groups from a violent ideology is hard, while it is much easier to start rattling off names of those enemies we are familiar with. *cough* Iraq *cough* Easier still is to evoke a strategy from a supposed prophet of wisdom *cough* Reagan *cough* by calling for measures to be taken against “Evil Empires, or Axis of Evil”.

This without understanding the fundamental reasoning behind such a strategy. That those who believe they will eventually win, and have something to lose, are in fact deterable enemies. Men who are willing to sacrifice themselves in the name of their God, because of faith and the knowledge that this life has nothing better to offer them, are not deterable. Therefore to challenge them to a do or die scenario means if fact nothing to them, that our own drive to attack them turns the deaths of innocent bystanders into sanitized terms like, “collateral damage”.

Such actions merely give sympathy to the majority of the Muslim World that do not advocate terrorist activities but remain silent because they are glad to see a United States they see as corrupt with power taken down a notch.

It is a simple truth, that only after you understand your enemy, can you then kill him. A cold war policy that maintained our, “moral superiority” was the vast lengths the United States went to make sure that it was not the aggressor. Willing to accept the first strike, though would reciprocate without mercy, was the functional policy from which Reagan expanded upon. Though the defense budget has increased many fold, as well as a new government agency, the knowledge of root cause to the creation of Islamic Fundamentalists is no higher now than before 9-11.

The talk of Democratic principles within a vacuum has created the most volatile and gravest dangers to the United States, that as of yet goes unnoticed by this Administration. That the government of Musharraf could be toppled by radical Islamic forces that supported the Taliban in Afghanistan will come into the possession of Nuclear weapons. It is in the face of this true crisis that we need leadership that is based on the correct understanding of the world around us. Unfortunately we have to wait until January 2009 for that type of leadership, for the current Administration has made it abundantly clear that they would lead us not…