Posted on 10/02/2004 12:15:23 PM PDT by Mike Fieschko
Even if they aren't ever used, just having them available would scare the feces out of anyone thinking about pulling some B.S. I don't mean SeeBS in this case. :')
Kerry's stand is easy for me to accept though it would be the ruin of this country as we know it. Peaceniks always think this way. Peaceniks hate weapons that hurt people, even one's acknowledged enemy... and Kerry is a peacenik... peace at any price. He describes that as peace achieved through "negotiation" or "summit".
The basic premise that is missed in this, or any similar stand taken by Kerry, is that he is a socialist, one world, communist at heart. I don't say that as a far out complaint. His history from youth through adulthood, ingrained in him by his father, is the proof.
Think about almost every speech, every vote, every stand he has taken over the past thirty-five years. He preached a message of brotherly communism in high school and college. He enlisted in the Navy as a means to a political end. His opposition to funding weaponry and intelligence budgets is because he does not want the US to be any stronger than any other major country.
He is opposed to the US being a threat to the world and he considers the US as a current threat.
His rhetoric during the debates about "pursuing the terrorists and destroying them" was simply a means to gain votes. Nothing in his history should lead one to believe that he will actually pursue that promise. Rather, if he is elected, it is my belief that he will immediately take action to ensure that US forces are withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan and begin a program of propaganda in an attempt to convince the populace that it is in our best interests to let the UN handle foreign powers. At such time as is convenient he will attempt to place the US military under the control of the Secretary General of the UN.
He has so stated this purpose in the past. He has taken no action in the past 30 years that leads me to believe he has changed his mind.
I really am in no position to know for sure and neither, I'm afraid does Kerry. This makes his assurance during the debate that the first thing he would do if elected would be to kill this program such a reckless threat to the security of the U.S. It's almost certain that Iran and North Korea have their uranium enrichment/nuclear weapons assembly program far underground. If it becomes necessary to take them out, Kerry will have killed the only weapon program capable of doing so.
Iran's mullahs have already urged their scientists to finish their first atomic bomb by January and, in other statements, have promised to turn the U.S. into, "a sea of fire" once they have the means. I take them at their word but Kerry is dangerous because he doesn't seem to realize the danger to the very existence of America.
I'm sure that once a major US city or two has been converted into a sheet of glass with hundreds of thousands dead and the economy completely shattered for at least a decade if not more, President Kerry will consider the necessity to "retaliate" after first of all restarting the bunker buster program so that he might have the means to do so.
Our cousin was a young soldier on a troop ship heading for Japan toward the end of WWII. His commanding officer had them line up. He told them, "Look around you. Be prepared. Out of every ten men ready to launch this invasion, there will only be ONE man left of the ten after we invade." - While they were on the way over, Truman dropped the bombs. Thousands of men were prepared to die, but they turned around and came back to America instead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.