Category Archives: WMD

2: How Do You Know You’re A Neocon? You Won’t Hogtie Nikki Haley To Save The World

Iran, Neoconservatism, War, WMD

The Global Village Idiot, neoconservative Nikki Haley, doesn’t want sovereign states to talk behind her back. Even if it’s to avert a nuclear holocaust. Via the Ron Paul Institute:

North and South Korea have agreed to hold high-level talks, to re-establish a direct communication link, and to participate in the coming winter Olympic games. Taken together, it appears a significant step toward reducing tensions on the peninsula and reducing the risk of catastrophic war. You would think the US would be pleased at the developments and hopeful that diplomacy might take over from saber-rattling. But you would be wrong. US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley has poured cold water on the developments, screeching that North Korea must first give up its nuclear program before talks can even take place.

* Haley is also Yankee supremacist who, as South Carolina’s governor, did away with Southern heroes and history. That’s very neoconservative.

* With the same oblivion she’s showing the two Koreas, Haley declared that “removing Assad from power was one of a number of priorities for the US.” Hers is Jacobin interventionism. It’s not American and it’s never “America First.”

* Congenital idiots like Haley and her neocon cohort truly believe North Koreans, upon invasion, will come to love her and hate their chubby leader. Not at all. Most people do not wish to be told how to live by foreign busybodies like Haley. And even if North Koreans wanted Americans to subsidize their freedoms with America blood, the duty of an American leader is to Americans First.

RECOMMENDED: “Classical Liberalism and State Schemes” (2005).

&

“1: How Do You Know You’re A Neocon? Hint: It Has To Do With How You See US History.”

The Nicest Letter About The Worst Of Times: The Invasion Of Iraq

History, Ilana Mercer, Iraq, War, WMD

From: TK
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 7:28 AM
To: ilana@ilanamercer.com
Subject: Thank You

Ilana,

Years ago, in the early months of the Iraq War, I read my first one of your columns. You were against the war and pretty much predicted what would happen. I was so ignorant about what was really going on, and emailed you mistakenly calling you a liberal. You responded and called me a fool! It caused me to question my position, and was the beginning of my “red pilling”. As Tucker Carlson would say, “Thank you for that!”

Thanks again for keeping your foot on the pedal against this nonsense, insanity and, well, pure evil. I don’t even recognize our country anymore. This “thought crime” stuff is getting pretty scary.

Sincerely,
TK

***************************************

This is the nicest letter. It takes a strong man to have written it after all those years. I regret calling the reader a “fool.” He clearly is no fool. (I would never do it today. It was wrong. But look at what I was dealing with. The readers were constantly trying to get me fired.)

A recent column this writer wrote hearkens to the times the reader remembers. “Beware The Atavistic Dynamics Undergirding Two American Wars” connects the “mass contagion” of the Iraq years to the “hysterical contagion” ongoing.

Support for the work done in this space is always needed and appreciated (PayPal: ilana@ilanamercer.com). It remains a largely “excluded perspective.”

Rocket Man & The Messy Calculus Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction

BAB's A List, Foreign Policy, Military, War, WMD

Writes Barely A Blog’s resident physicist Myron Pauli:

Missile defense like the Israelis had against the HAMAS missiles “worked” because:

1. The missiles were poorly guided – hence only a limited number required defense.

2. The missile attack was not near-simultaneous – hence the system was not overwhelmed.

3. The missiles did not have nukes – hence they either fell harmlessly or one or two
hit a home or building with limited damage.

However, 34 years after Reagan’s “Star Wars” speech of March 23, 1983 and half a trillion dollars, we are still as vulnerable to massive damage in a nuclear war.

The other reality is that one cannot decouple “defense” from “offense” in that the US may be more likely to be offensively “reckless” if we think (real or delusion) that we are “invulnerable.”

As to THAAD (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defence): The Department of Defense contractors believe in them, but then they are just tested in DoD controlled scenarios. Still, China and North Korea think they are aggressive and this might get them to be more on a “hair trigger” to launch if they think the US is going to start a war. It is always a messy “calculus” of mass destruction.

The history of America’s “Hitler of the year” villains like Saddam, Qaddafi, Assad, and now Kim Jong Un is that the US seems incapable of learning from its mistakes. Kim Jong Un learned to never give up nuclear weapons – they are his lifeline. Even if he fired three at Seoul and three at Tokyo and only one got to hit both cities – that is enough of a threat to scare the shit out of everyone. With nukes, it doesn’t matter if you can stop “most” or if a few still get through!

****

Dr. Myron Pauli received his Ph.D. from Cambridge MA (MIT), in 1981, and has worked on infrared sensors, mainly at Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC. He is distantly related to physicist Wolftgang Pauli. Click on the “BAB’s A List” category to access the Pauli archive.

North Korea Is Dangerous, But Hardly Irrational

America, Foreign Policy, Neoconservatism, War, WMD

What happened when Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi voluntarily rid Libya of weapons of mass destruction? The US dishonored a previous promise to lay off Libya, and sanctioned an invasion by proxy and a regime change. That turned out as wonderfully as America’s other regime-change adventures (yielding a refugee invasion of Europe, among other things).

Talking to Brooke Baldwin of CNN, DAVID E. SANGER, expert on North Korea, seconded that fear of the US’s regime-change habit is a factor in the frightening displays of military might of the ostracized North Korean regime.

“… This is all about survival for Kim Jung Un. He’s not likely to give up his only ticket to survival. His view of the world is that the US is out to topple his regime. [Is that an unrealistic view?] He looks at a country like Libya which gave up its nascent nuclear technology [but got finished off by the US]. Thus the refrain of many administrations—that Kim should give up his nuclear weapons—is unlikely to happened.”