Comments Posted By KC
Displaying 1 To 5 Of 5 Comments
RAGE AGAINST THE NIGHT - AND GLOBAL WARMING
"...that the Earth Goddess will be angry at us and punish us by cancelling the Winter Olympics in 2050? "
Huh? Should we instead believe that the "real" God is going to send us hurricanes because we allow homosexuals to live among us? The "right" is the side really caught up in supernatural mythology.
Comment Posted By KC On 9.07.2007 @ 15:15
I wonder if the incoming congress could possibly be any worse than this:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12055360/
cover_story_time_to_go_inside_the_worst_congress_everp.s. - please link to similar stories about a democrat controlled congress.
Comment Posted By KC On 28.12.2006 @ 11:10
CIA VS. THE WHITE HOUSE: TY COBB AIN'T NO BENCHWARMER
Jumping on the RW bandwagon is easy. Unfortunately, it hasn't even been substantiated (not even by the administration) that she was leak. She denies it, BTW.
Comment Posted By KC On 25.04.2006 @ 14:09
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12466719/site/newsweek/
THE MEDIA AND THE LEFT GO NUCLEAR
I'm a very hard liberal, can't bash President Jr hard enough or often enough
Having said that, I part company with my fellow libs about this issue
I'm in agreement with Rick's overall view, that any US military strike on Iran will be self-defeating, and there will be absolutely NO nuclear strike against Iran
First off, there's more anxiety on the part of the Iranian Mullahs now than at any time since the Shah's overthrow, as the majority of Iranians weren't even born at the time Khomeini came back to Iran in 1978. The citizens are growing increasingly restless with their theological overlords, and present a REAL opportunity for change from the current regime's day-to-day operations
More & more, the Iranians are standing up to, and challenging, the Mullah's tightfisted grip on power
A US Military strike would have the disastrous effect in that it would rally enough of the citizenry to their leaders to be able to marginalize those still speaking out for more freedoms in Iran
Let's look at this with some logic
The first target Iran would retaliate against if it was hit, would be the US troops in Iraq-they're already battling a Sunni insurgency, Shiite militias/death squads and foreign terrorists going into Iraq for real-world terrorist training. I'd say, and I'm thinking most of the politicains on Capitol Hill would say, that the US Troops in Iraq already have more than enough to worry about without adding Iran to the mix
But there's two other reasons why any military strike is just rhetoric
Russia & China
Russia's got Iran on board as a major business partner, and the nuclear might to dissuade the US from launching any military strike, let alone a nuclear one
China would present even more of a problem, as not only do they have nuclear missiles, but a devastating nonmilitary weapon as well
China is one of the largest holders of US debt currently (only Japan holds more US debt), and all they would have to do is tell the Administration that it would be such a shame if they weren't able to buy up US notes anymore when auctioned off by the US Treasury Dept.
And since I post like you do Rick-taking hard shots at the other side while doing more analysis than emotion for a particular post, and rather numerous profanities-I say don't change your style at all
If your post is well-written, people will still process it no matter how many other shots-hard, cheap or otherwise-you take at your opposition
So, while I'll disagree with much of your asides in this particular post, I completely agree with your overall point about there being, logically, NO military or nuclear strikes against Iran
And I thank you for making the soapbox available-via Comments-to all interested enough to share their views, as there can never be enough free speech
Comment Posted By KC On 11.04.2006 @ 10:45
The Telegraph in London is covering it. I thought it was a hoax, apparently NOT?
Comment Posted By KC On 23.05.2005 @ 12:04
