 |
|
Add to My Group
|
September 12, 2008 at 06:37:08
Promoted to Headline (H2) on 9/12/08: by Steven Leser Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
 
|
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists' Nuclear Notebook, as of 2008, Russia is estimated to have around 14,000 nuclear weapons, although total stockpile size is uncertain because there is no accurate count of tactical nuclear weapons. Under the provisions of the START I and the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (Treaty of Moscow), the Russian nuclear arsenal has been reduced to approximately 5,200 strategic nuclear warheads. The SORT Treaty requires Russia to reduce the number of deployed strategic warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 by the end of 2012. ---------------- Palin has casually talked of war with a country that has thousands of nuclear warheads each many times greater than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and this same country unequivocally has the ability to deliver these weapons to every part of the United States. In fact, Russia has a triad of methods to deliver these weapons similar to the US’s own triad, that of Land Based, Undersea submarine based and Aircraft Launched or Dropped weapons. 
I’m only surprised Palin didn’t start mentioning precious bodily fluids (look it up if you don’t understand the reference) and how Fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face. Wherever Peter George, Stanley Kubrick, and Peter Sellers are, they must be smiling and shaking their heads.
The other item of note from the ABC interview is that she couldn’t even describe what is meant by the Bush doctrine of preemptive war. Is there any question that McCain and his campaign didn’t do the necessary work in vetting this person, a person that former Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee has characterized as “a Cocky Wacko”? A person about whom independent minded Ed Koch, the former Democratic Mayor of New York who endorsed Bush in 2004, was prompted to say that the thought of her as President “is Scary”? Perhaps so.
Did John McCain choose a running mate that takes the lives of all human beings on this planet lightly? Perhaps so. Is Sarah Palin a far right wing religious nutjob? Perhaps so. Did John McCain fail to spend the necessary time and effort vetting his choice for Vice President? Perhaps so. If Palin likes references to God so much, I’ll give her one. God help us if this crazy inept person becomes one heartbeat away from the Presidency.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 16 comments |
|
Palin Casually Speaks of War with a Nuclear Armed Russia
This story is truly frightening. Does Palin have any idea of what a Nuclear War would mean? America could lose hundreds of millions of lives, and those left would wake up to destruction beyond their worst fears. It would be hell on earth! Palin is not fit to be the Vice President of the United States. Wake up America! by Rolland Miller (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments [78 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:56:21 PM  (0+)
|
|
POEPOEPOE
Maybe she's too young even to remember the cold war. I was similarly taken aback by the casualness of that answer. We're not even talking about building missile bases in Cuba, we' re talking about a territorial dispute with one of their former possessions, in their neighborhood of the globe. Go to nuclear war over that? by Maxwell (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 409 comments [85 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 1:38:32 PM (0+)
|
|
Both US parties want Georgia & Ukraine admitted to NATO
Steve, the basic idea of NATO is the agreement that if one member state is attacked, the others must defend it. So that means Palin's position is basically in line with both US parties, right? If you want Georgia to become a member of NATO, that means you agree to defend it, if Russia (or anyone else) attacks it. So is your objection here only to the casual tone of Palin's voice, when she said the word "perhaps"? Was that really very different from when Hillary let drop the phrase in April about "obliterating Iran"? It would have been more artful, in Palin's interview with Gibson, to avoid saying out loud that war with Russia might indeed be a consequence of Georgia becoming a NATO member. But it wouldn't alter the fact that that indeed might be a consequence. (If Palin had a bit more polish at dealing with the media, she might have said, for example, "Well of course, we'd want to use diplomacy to insure that it would never come to that..." ) I'm no defender of Palin. But I think many people are correctly sensing that she's exceptionally dangerous, yet are attacking her for the wrong reasons. The main reasons she's dangerous is that she's a theocrat, & that many of her beliefs are fully in line with the worst of the Republican Right. // However, the fact that she's "inexperienced," while true, is not that big a deal. For instance, Cheney & Rumsfeld were very "experienced." So experience by itself is not necessarily any virtue; a very inexperienced person might well have done better than Cheney. by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 2:55:06 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Logic does not apply
To those blinded by party loyalty. We should ban both Democrats and Republicans from voting (fat chance), and then maybe someone who is loyal to America might become President. Both Parties have been hijacked by the Globalists who simply use the US to do it's dirty work. by pft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 601 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 13, 2008 at 3:50:35 AM (0+)
|
|
We're Still on the Brink
Thanks for this, Steven. The issue of nuclear destruction -- whether planned, the result of escalation-out-of-control, or accidental -- is central to our national government's competence in foreign affairs. And our government's conduct of foreign affairs is the most important and most serious (as well as the last, due to the nature of the beast) subject that progressive Americans must begin considering within our own area of competence. American foreign policy is way too important to be left to the clowns in Washington. by GLloyd Rowsey (104 articles, 65 quicklinks, 60 diaries, 828 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:36:18 PM (0+)
|
|
Absolutely not!
Until this woman (or whatever it is) has been removed from the public consciousness-no one should sleep at night! by Raffie Azariel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 61 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:37:34 PM (0+)
|
|
Russia's capabilities
To all of you posting here, there is almost zero possibility Russia will rain nuclear bombs on us, and that is because they don't need to. They have weaponry we have only dreamed off, and it's used on their large fleet of cosmopheres, which are antigravity craft. Russia would only counter nuke us, and stilll they wouldn't if we nuked them first because WE can't nuke them first. We also can't nuke Iran first and it's time to stop playing this game. Russia also has plasma shield technology, as does China, and Iran has been provided this shielding. Nuclear weapons, any type of bomb or missle entering a plasma shield disintegrates and is rendered harmless. While the USA has developed some laser weapons and some particle beam weapons, a lot of ours have been "deaded" by the Russians. We stand still many, many years behind them in quite a variety of technologies besides weaponry. One who came through Edgar Cayce said Russia, after it got rid of its Bolseviks, which they have, would save the world and they are. Bless them everyday. Russian cosmopheres and laser and beam weaponry can take care of any missile flying through the air anywhere the cosmospheres are positioned around this world, and they are positioned over any potential hot spot. In fact several months ago, the USA did attempt to do its nuclear attack on Iran, and the plasma shield made short work of the missiles and we limped home, and then gave up and decided we could possibley seige Iran instead, which is being prepared for. Blockade I think it is called. That won't work either. The Straight of Hormus and the Persion Gulf as laced with plenty of easily activated bombs, and if we try that, we are likely to find our entire fleet on the bottom of the sea in that area and we deserve it. So be it, I kinda hope it happens, a little karma needs to return here for what we have done, and the blood we have shed around the world. We have a bunch of insane nutcases running the show who have had as their mission and they can't get the idea out of their heads, to destroy Russia for a long time now Putin and the new President of Russia are a fine team, they are truly christian, spelled with a small c, nor the big corporate C, and serve holy god now. They are keeping the powers of the west contained, and will continue to do so. They own space also, took out our moon base in 1976 or 77, forget the exact date. We keep playing games against Russia and she check mates us every time. Either premtively as a warning to foil a plot in the making, or a counter attack. I will be putting up a piece shortly on my site called Fire from the Sky, written in 1994 with a lot of very interesting material about the United States efforts to start Nuclear War One with Russia in the 1980's, and every attempt has failed., Totally thanks to Russia! Also covered in the file are what happened at Jonestown, and I already published that part yesterday. That was one of our wars with Russia, Gyhana was the new location of missles after the Cuban Crisis during Kennedy's presidency. We did successfully remove the missles, but at the cost of Jonestown, which our black ops SET UP prior to taking the missles. Very interesting story. And I am sure Russia evened the score. But I don't know. There are several very interesting stories in the 160 page file I will likely put up today, or early tomorrow. Take care, Candace www.abundanthope.net/pages by Candace Frieze (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 30 comments) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:39:09 PM (0+)
|
|
Does Palin
know about these cosmosheres, Candace? What is a one...anyway? by GLloyd Rowsey (104 articles, 65 quicklinks, 60 diaries, 828 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 8:18:46 PM (0+)
|
|
Utterly Irresponsible
Someone who would say something so utterly irresponsible as Sarah Palin about war with Russia is not merely stupid but also deeply perverted in conscience. Makes me wonder if this woman isn't some kind of MK-ULTRA plant. Also, with regard to Candace Frieze, she is repeating almost word-for-word stories told by one Dr. Peter Beter (pronounced "Beater") who wrote years ago about the supposed Russian cosmospheres. Beter also said that the Carter and Mondale families had been murdered by the Soviets who substituted for them robotic clones. (I am not making this up.) by Richard C. Cook (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:12:51 PM (0+)
|
|
Did anyone besides Richard see the interview???
Palin said that if Georgia and Ukraine were part of NATO, we would have to defend them from ANY attacker.... Anyone who would think this a bad policy NEEDS to re-think the NATO Treaty, and explain to your party leaders that we can\t possibly be part of a treaty that could get us into war... Democrats want Georgia and Ukraine as a part of NATO... If you are afraid that we would wind up in a war with Russia should be banging on your representative's door expressing your concern... (BTW, I would be willing to bet he/she will NOT take your call seriously... Mister Gibson really screwed himself last night because HE did not understand the questions he was asking, and looked like a buffoon with his judgements about how Palin answered. Ciao, CZ by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 829 comments [52 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:40:28 PM (0+)
|
|
it's more than just America
A nuclear exchange wouldn't just harm Americans and Russians. As far as direct strikes go, not all the missiles would hit their targets which is really bad news for us in Canada (think of us as 'flyover country'). And the radiation and possible climactic effects would be global in scope. by lwarman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 98 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:12:17 PM (0+)
|
|
it's more than just America
A nuclear exchange wouldn't just harm Americans and Russians. As far as direct strikes go, not all the missiles would hit their targets which is really bad news for us in Canada (think of us as 'flyover country'). And the radiation and possible climactic effects would be global in scope. by lwarman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 98 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:15:09 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Good piece Steve
I have asked this question quite a bit since the trouble in Georgia: If the U.S. is the world's only super power, what the hell is Russia? When Rice told Saakashvili that "we suport our friends" some observers (me included) thought he may have taken that as a sign we would face off with the Russians. I thought then how stupid can you get, here we are stuck in Iraq, making noise about Iran, the Afagans, and now Russia? This poor woman has as much grasp of what she speaks about as that of an 8 year old. That probably insults a few 8 yr. olds. by virginius "gin" arnold (18 articles, 7 quicklinks, 47 diaries, 516 comments [22 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 13, 2008 at 12:12:18 AM (0+)
|
|
Steve
The issue isn't isolationism versus foreign entanglements. It's this crazy country's trying to EXPAND NATO and it's military presence into every possible place. My understanding is that last week Condo signed an agreement with Poland (as a member of NATO) under which the latter has allowed "The Shield" - meaning, nuclear weapons - to be installed on their soil. My understanding is that Bushco is similarly working to convince Japan to do likewise, despite the fact the Japanese constitution prohibits nuclear weapons from Japanese soil. On the broader issue, I couldn't agree with you more: the American public has to pay very close attention to what politicians with power in this coutnry are saying about foreign affairs. I also agree that if this is taken to mean people in this country should anticipate that the sort of politicians we now have will listen to them, they are sadly - no ridiculously - mistaken. by GLloyd Rowsey (104 articles, 65 quicklinks, 60 diaries, 828 comments [4 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 13, 2008 at 12:38:43 AM (0+)
|
|
We Dead already
The plan from the beginning of the nuclear age was and continues to be to destroy the mass of humanity in an all out nuclear war. Our nuclear war fighting elite have not built these massive underground shelters for the heck of it, they plan to hide while they smoke us all. . by Patrick (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 519 comments [22 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 13, 2008 at 1:54:37 AM (0+)
|
|
Interesting
Many comments with suggestions about how we should "control" the government agenda. Since when has American Public Opinion mattered? Have you all forgotten about Vietnam? Afghanistan? Iraq? The only available method for public interdiction in government agenda is to close your bank account and withhold taxes. Anything less is specifically designed NOT TO PRODUCE RESULTS. Here is a list of alternatives that DO NOT PRODUCE RESULTS: Democrats Republicans Alternative Parties Tell me, what means of producing results do YOU suggest? Obama? Give me a break, he's already discussed both Afghanistan and Iraq. McCain? There's a nightmare just a bit worse than Obama, but the same hangover when awakening. Alternative Parties? Right, like the system has a chance of allowing one of them to actually be elected. How many times do you have to hear "wake up America" before you realize the barns burning? by jeff prager (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 188 comments) on Saturday, Sep 13, 2008 at 10:54:47 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
