The Story
1. Why the hell is the woman walking her kid at 5:30 a.m.?
2. Why are they looking in people's houses?
3. What kind of stupid are these cops and DA? (I say it's either "Keystone Cop Stupid" or maybe "Dain Bread Stupid")
It's terrible that the criminal legal system fails to use enough brain power to keep people from having to spend a lot of money for something that should not have gone beyond a warning or notice that people are out and about even at 5:30 a.m. and that maybe the window should be covered if you're going to run around naked in the kitchen.
Come on, 5:30 a.m. and most people are asleep. What happens if he was out in the woods and got naked, and some stray hiker woman with son stumbles upon him... does he get arrested? He intended to be naked, but did he intend for them to see? Of course not.
This case is so stupid and needless, and perhaps an abuse of power, that the DA should have his bar license revoked right after the judge stops the farce.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Hybrid Cars May Include Fake Vroom for Safety - NYTimes.com
Hybrid Cars May Include Fake Vroom for Safety - NYTimes.com
There's this thing called a horn... I'm pretty sure blind people can hear that just as well as fake engine noise.
There's this thing called a horn... I'm pretty sure blind people can hear that just as well as fake engine noise.
Perry Losing It
Perry stays secret on many things, including forensics files | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Texas Regional News
Rick Perry is picking a bad time to act ignorant. His defense in the Willingham, "Innocent Man" execution is now not only that, "everyone else said he was guilty," but that Willingham was a bad guy... a wife beater... oh, and he cursed shortly before being put to death. For one thing, just because everone else jumps off a bridge to their death, do you feel obligated to follow suit? If so, you're not qualified to be governor. And, the guy cursed? Wow, you mean someone about to die for something they didn't do... cursed?!?! Wow, yeah, someone like that obviously deserves to be put do death. And we all know how many wife-beaters are on death row. /sarcasm
How very pathetic. Words are one thing, of course, but there are also actions. One action was Perry's removing of those commissioners. Another is that he is refusing to disclose the information he had prior to the execution. Smells of cover-up more and more.
I also read some very ignorant comments on chron.com from people who just don't get it, one actually complaining that the Hurst report had too much glorification about Hurst. Uhh... ok. Say you're Thomas Edison and you're relatively unknown. And you want to weigh in on an important matter that's within your expertise...
Hi, my name is Tom Edison, I discovered electricity. I also discovered this thing called a light bulb that will allow you to see in the dark. I also did (this), (that), and the (other) and am considered an expert in electricity. In my professional opinion, the squirrel formed a conduit and thus exploded due to electricity, and not due to tiny elves living in trees, as the original investigation determined. I base my findings on facts and the scientific method, not the old wives tales. So please disregard the prior investigation since it is not based on science, and let Bubba live. Thanks, Tom. P.S. Don't forget that the courts were all relying on the tiny elves theory as the cause of the tragedy, so this is all up to you.
So yeah, maybe Hurst tried to prove that he was an expert so that his report would be taken seriously. But it appears that either it never made it up to the Governor, or worse, it made it to the Governor and was ignored.
I'm not anti-death penalty this or pro-whatever else. This is about an innocent man getting executed. This is about fixing whatever went wrong to allow an innocent man to be executed. And more and more, it looks to be about a crumbling governor who probably didn't do his job on something as important as sending a man to his death. Where the hell is Ronald Reagan to teach these upstart Republicans about intergrity and taking bold action? Today's republicans continue to be plagued with unethical behaviour and corruption. It's amazing how far the party has fallen. I'm so disappointed with Perry that I'm getting mad. I've already decided I won't be voting for him, but now it looks like he's about to embarras himself and Texas by acting like an ignorant bafoon. "Uhhh, all the courts said he was guilty!" "Uhhh, he was a bad man! Yeah, a wife beater! A Monster!"
Uhhh, you're so fucking pathetically clueless, Perry. This is probably going to be your undoing. Fuck off now, plz k thx.
Rick Perry is picking a bad time to act ignorant. His defense in the Willingham, "Innocent Man" execution is now not only that, "everyone else said he was guilty," but that Willingham was a bad guy... a wife beater... oh, and he cursed shortly before being put to death. For one thing, just because everone else jumps off a bridge to their death, do you feel obligated to follow suit? If so, you're not qualified to be governor. And, the guy cursed? Wow, you mean someone about to die for something they didn't do... cursed?!?! Wow, yeah, someone like that obviously deserves to be put do death. And we all know how many wife-beaters are on death row. /sarcasm
How very pathetic. Words are one thing, of course, but there are also actions. One action was Perry's removing of those commissioners. Another is that he is refusing to disclose the information he had prior to the execution. Smells of cover-up more and more.
I also read some very ignorant comments on chron.com from people who just don't get it, one actually complaining that the Hurst report had too much glorification about Hurst. Uhh... ok. Say you're Thomas Edison and you're relatively unknown. And you want to weigh in on an important matter that's within your expertise...
Hi, my name is Tom Edison, I discovered electricity. I also discovered this thing called a light bulb that will allow you to see in the dark. I also did (this), (that), and the (other) and am considered an expert in electricity. In my professional opinion, the squirrel formed a conduit and thus exploded due to electricity, and not due to tiny elves living in trees, as the original investigation determined. I base my findings on facts and the scientific method, not the old wives tales. So please disregard the prior investigation since it is not based on science, and let Bubba live. Thanks, Tom. P.S. Don't forget that the courts were all relying on the tiny elves theory as the cause of the tragedy, so this is all up to you.
So yeah, maybe Hurst tried to prove that he was an expert so that his report would be taken seriously. But it appears that either it never made it up to the Governor, or worse, it made it to the Governor and was ignored.
I'm not anti-death penalty this or pro-whatever else. This is about an innocent man getting executed. This is about fixing whatever went wrong to allow an innocent man to be executed. And more and more, it looks to be about a crumbling governor who probably didn't do his job on something as important as sending a man to his death. Where the hell is Ronald Reagan to teach these upstart Republicans about intergrity and taking bold action? Today's republicans continue to be plagued with unethical behaviour and corruption. It's amazing how far the party has fallen. I'm so disappointed with Perry that I'm getting mad. I've already decided I won't be voting for him, but now it looks like he's about to embarras himself and Texas by acting like an ignorant bafoon. "Uhhh, all the courts said he was guilty!" "Uhhh, he was a bad man! Yeah, a wife beater! A Monster!"
Uhhh, you're so fucking pathetically clueless, Perry. This is probably going to be your undoing. Fuck off now, plz k thx.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Perry endorses the greatest injustice
KHOU Article
---
As if it wasn't bad enough that Perry was governor and signed off on killing an innocent person, despite possibly knowing that serious questions were raised regarding the "science" used to convict, he recently rearranged the commission looking into whether Texas, my home state, killed an innocent man. The result of the change is that the commission is no longer going to consider the report that says the methods used back then, which resulted in many convictions, was junk science.
Not only has a man died from the junk science, but many are still behind bars because of it.
You know, I liked Perry, but this really shows a lack of backbone, a lack of being proactive, a lack of leadership. It reeks of scandal, of a cover-up, and of course a continuing injustice.
Perry could have emerged fine from this if he had taken steps to right whatever wrongs were made... but instead he appears to want to cover it up... so there's something that must be even worse we're just not seeing right now.
Screw this... crap. Integrity is something you have to maintain, you can't have it and then do shadowy things and expect that your prior integrity will keep you afloat. No, it doesn't work like that. When a ship loses its integrity, it takes on water, and may even sink unless you work on restoring its integrity.
Perry would seeming have only taken collateral damage to his integrity if he just somehow misjudged the report, or he somehow never saw it... etc. But this shadowy replacement of commissioners to downplay a very significant event, killing an innocent man, is a full blown hit that punctures the hull. The Perry ship is taking water.
Whether this will cause more hits to be taken and sink him is yet to be determined of course, but it really has the smell of conspiracy to cover up something. And that in and of itself, in the context of an innocent man being executed, is enough to indicate that Perry is not worthy to govern Texas.
Texas needs a governor who not only knows how to ride and steer, but must also know when to stand. That means, even if a thousand courts have said, "This man is guilty under the law and should be executed," if a Texas governor sees that something just isn't right, be it that modern technology indicates otherwise, that he's got a pretty good idea the condemned man is may be innocent, etc., then the governor will do what is right despite the earlier decisions.
Perry said that he agreed with the courts. So what? What the hell kind of excuse is that? It simply isn't the point unless he's saying, between the lines, that he did not believe the genuine genius of a man who has debunked arson investigators who rely on old wives tales and general opinions to determine if arson occurred.
You know, technology isn't static... in an age where AMD and Intel are both constantly improving, in a country where the standard of living increases about as fast as the technology does, how stupid is it to rely on stuff a decade old compared to stuff that can proved today? DNA testing anyone? Hello? So when Perry said he agreed with the courts, he was basically saying he did not believe in modern technology. That's just idiocy. Is he a Luddite? WTF?
So, I'm no longer going to support Perry. I simply cannot believe in someone who either 1. Lied; or 2. Lied. Yes, no matter how you cut this, there is a lie in there, and that is not tolerable on something as important as the execution of an innocent man.
So, who to vote for. Certainly not Perry anymore. And no, not Kay Bay Hutchinson either. I'll have to look into it more, I think Kinky is running as democrat, and he seems to be someone who would actually have the mind to act on something that would cause the greatest of injustices. And if he were to execute an innocent man and then realize it later, then he seems like he would try to make sure it never happened again. But, there may be other candidates like that as well, I need to look and figure out who else.
---
As if it wasn't bad enough that Perry was governor and signed off on killing an innocent person, despite possibly knowing that serious questions were raised regarding the "science" used to convict, he recently rearranged the commission looking into whether Texas, my home state, killed an innocent man. The result of the change is that the commission is no longer going to consider the report that says the methods used back then, which resulted in many convictions, was junk science.
Not only has a man died from the junk science, but many are still behind bars because of it.
You know, I liked Perry, but this really shows a lack of backbone, a lack of being proactive, a lack of leadership. It reeks of scandal, of a cover-up, and of course a continuing injustice.
Perry could have emerged fine from this if he had taken steps to right whatever wrongs were made... but instead he appears to want to cover it up... so there's something that must be even worse we're just not seeing right now.
Screw this... crap. Integrity is something you have to maintain, you can't have it and then do shadowy things and expect that your prior integrity will keep you afloat. No, it doesn't work like that. When a ship loses its integrity, it takes on water, and may even sink unless you work on restoring its integrity.
Perry would seeming have only taken collateral damage to his integrity if he just somehow misjudged the report, or he somehow never saw it... etc. But this shadowy replacement of commissioners to downplay a very significant event, killing an innocent man, is a full blown hit that punctures the hull. The Perry ship is taking water.
Whether this will cause more hits to be taken and sink him is yet to be determined of course, but it really has the smell of conspiracy to cover up something. And that in and of itself, in the context of an innocent man being executed, is enough to indicate that Perry is not worthy to govern Texas.
Texas needs a governor who not only knows how to ride and steer, but must also know when to stand. That means, even if a thousand courts have said, "This man is guilty under the law and should be executed," if a Texas governor sees that something just isn't right, be it that modern technology indicates otherwise, that he's got a pretty good idea the condemned man is may be innocent, etc., then the governor will do what is right despite the earlier decisions.
Perry said that he agreed with the courts. So what? What the hell kind of excuse is that? It simply isn't the point unless he's saying, between the lines, that he did not believe the genuine genius of a man who has debunked arson investigators who rely on old wives tales and general opinions to determine if arson occurred.
You know, technology isn't static... in an age where AMD and Intel are both constantly improving, in a country where the standard of living increases about as fast as the technology does, how stupid is it to rely on stuff a decade old compared to stuff that can proved today? DNA testing anyone? Hello? So when Perry said he agreed with the courts, he was basically saying he did not believe in modern technology. That's just idiocy. Is he a Luddite? WTF?
So, I'm no longer going to support Perry. I simply cannot believe in someone who either 1. Lied; or 2. Lied. Yes, no matter how you cut this, there is a lie in there, and that is not tolerable on something as important as the execution of an innocent man.
So, who to vote for. Certainly not Perry anymore. And no, not Kay Bay Hutchinson either. I'll have to look into it more, I think Kinky is running as democrat, and he seems to be someone who would actually have the mind to act on something that would cause the greatest of injustices. And if he were to execute an innocent man and then realize it later, then he seems like he would try to make sure it never happened again. But, there may be other candidates like that as well, I need to look and figure out who else.
Monday, October 05, 2009
Get Rid of Romo
Romo's performance yesterday was not only pathetic, but it got people hurt. No better example was his high pass to Williams that caused Williams to need help walking to the sidelines and to not be able to play.
That's unacceptable. When you have a QB who not only throws interceptions, but passes wildly enough that your star receivers are getting injured because of those passes, then you need to get rid of QB for the sake of the people who would otherwise be playing just fine.
But wait, there's more.
When you have a team that can run the football, and that team is just a few feet from a touchdown to send a game into overtime, and you have a QB that sucks, what do you do? Well, if you're watching the Cowboys, you watch in disbelief.
Yesterday was the stupidest Cowboys game I've seen since a couple of weeks ago. It was even worse than in the early Jimmy Johnson days when the Cowboys were lucky to win a game. Why? Because at least Johnson had the great excuse that he was rebuilding a team. And later, when that team was built and went on to win Superbowls ad nauseum, it was definitely justified.
But this year's team was supposedly supposed to be good enough to finally win a playoff game, if not much more. Unfortunately, Romo is doing everything in his power to make sure the Cowboys don't even get to the playoffs.
I believe that benching Romo for a series of downs will no longer do the trick. I believe benching him for a game won't do the trick. The only fix for Romo, to put an end to his streakiness, is to get rid of him for someone who is a really good QB. If Dallas wants to go places, they've got to get a good QB. The team is actually really good, with the exception of Romo.
Wade Phillips has other problems too. Like the game clock. One thing you do NOT do, is let the opposing team get a free kick at the goal posts. A couple of weeks ago, that's exactly what he did. He was trying to time when to call timeout by... something... whatever it was, he didn't call timeout until just before the ball snapped. Nobody heard the whistle of course so it simply was ineffective and gave the kicker a "practice shot" at getting 3 points. They do it over and he kicks it right down the middle.
Offensive Coordinator Jason Garrett may have some blame too. Is he the one calling pass when it should be run? If stroking Romo's ego is behind the play calling, time to get a different play caller. I hate to say that because Garrett seems to be a good guy. But it's time to wake up.
But you know what, if Phillips would simply take control of Romo and get the guy straightened up, he'd probably be saving both their jobs. The team is stinking up the NFC, get back on the ball and do some good, it's not too late to win games. Here's how:
1. Replace Romo - Replace him with someone who actually wants to impress, someone who is hungry and doesn't have multiple millions to cushion the fall. Someone who is eager to play and just needs a chance. Or, someone who's already proven that they have what it takes. Unfortunately those are already taken right now, so the eager new guy is the best bet. Now is the best time for it because the running game gives a new QB time to learn.
2. Look at what is going right (running game), and expand on it for game days. Look at what is going wrong (passing game), and fix it on practice days.
3. Temporarily take control of anything and everything else that needs attention. Show everyone that you mean business, that your team will not become the Detroil Lions, that you're angry, and that you won't be happy until everyone gets serious about having a solid game. You don't even have to win, just play solidly and winning will happen afterwards. See item 1 to help with showing you mean business.
Come on Cowboys, get your shit together.
That's unacceptable. When you have a QB who not only throws interceptions, but passes wildly enough that your star receivers are getting injured because of those passes, then you need to get rid of QB for the sake of the people who would otherwise be playing just fine.
But wait, there's more.
When you have a team that can run the football, and that team is just a few feet from a touchdown to send a game into overtime, and you have a QB that sucks, what do you do? Well, if you're watching the Cowboys, you watch in disbelief.
Yesterday was the stupidest Cowboys game I've seen since a couple of weeks ago. It was even worse than in the early Jimmy Johnson days when the Cowboys were lucky to win a game. Why? Because at least Johnson had the great excuse that he was rebuilding a team. And later, when that team was built and went on to win Superbowls ad nauseum, it was definitely justified.
But this year's team was supposedly supposed to be good enough to finally win a playoff game, if not much more. Unfortunately, Romo is doing everything in his power to make sure the Cowboys don't even get to the playoffs.
I believe that benching Romo for a series of downs will no longer do the trick. I believe benching him for a game won't do the trick. The only fix for Romo, to put an end to his streakiness, is to get rid of him for someone who is a really good QB. If Dallas wants to go places, they've got to get a good QB. The team is actually really good, with the exception of Romo.
Wade Phillips has other problems too. Like the game clock. One thing you do NOT do, is let the opposing team get a free kick at the goal posts. A couple of weeks ago, that's exactly what he did. He was trying to time when to call timeout by... something... whatever it was, he didn't call timeout until just before the ball snapped. Nobody heard the whistle of course so it simply was ineffective and gave the kicker a "practice shot" at getting 3 points. They do it over and he kicks it right down the middle.
Offensive Coordinator Jason Garrett may have some blame too. Is he the one calling pass when it should be run? If stroking Romo's ego is behind the play calling, time to get a different play caller. I hate to say that because Garrett seems to be a good guy. But it's time to wake up.
But you know what, if Phillips would simply take control of Romo and get the guy straightened up, he'd probably be saving both their jobs. The team is stinking up the NFC, get back on the ball and do some good, it's not too late to win games. Here's how:
1. Replace Romo - Replace him with someone who actually wants to impress, someone who is hungry and doesn't have multiple millions to cushion the fall. Someone who is eager to play and just needs a chance. Or, someone who's already proven that they have what it takes. Unfortunately those are already taken right now, so the eager new guy is the best bet. Now is the best time for it because the running game gives a new QB time to learn.
2. Look at what is going right (running game), and expand on it for game days. Look at what is going wrong (passing game), and fix it on practice days.
3. Temporarily take control of anything and everything else that needs attention. Show everyone that you mean business, that your team will not become the Detroil Lions, that you're angry, and that you won't be happy until everyone gets serious about having a solid game. You don't even have to win, just play solidly and winning will happen afterwards. See item 1 to help with showing you mean business.
Come on Cowboys, get your shit together.
Where's the Commander-in-Chief?
War advisers must be candid but discreet - Gates | Reuters
It has been over a month since our top General in Afghanistan requested more troops. No answer. The silence is deafening.
Last week I watched the "60 Minutes" interview with Gen. McChrystal, and was impressed. No double-talk or other political BS. He just wants to be honest and serve his country as honorably as possible.
Unfortunately, Obama seems to want to delay action. I suppose all the effort to promote Chicago for a Summer Olympics was a more urgent priority than acting diligently and promptly to approve or deny a request for more troops. Given what we saw in his campaign, it should have been a no-brainer.
While running for office, Obama seemed exasperated that too much military attention had gone to Iraq and that Afghanistan is where the war should be fought. Now he's waffling. What's up with that?
Well, McChrystal is the Afghan man, not the entire Military. We have forces all over the world and we would be remiss if we didn't account for possible actions against Iran and North Korea, and probably a few small hot spots.
So, our Commander-in-Chief is probably trying to learn as much as he can about all the different scenarios, strategies, priorities, etc. ...or he's simply waiting for a more favorable time to announce something new. He's ok as long as we don't lose Afghanistan... if we lose, Obama will be blamed no matter who is in office at the time. So Obama had better get it right.
It has been over a month since our top General in Afghanistan requested more troops. No answer. The silence is deafening.
Last week I watched the "60 Minutes" interview with Gen. McChrystal, and was impressed. No double-talk or other political BS. He just wants to be honest and serve his country as honorably as possible.
Unfortunately, Obama seems to want to delay action. I suppose all the effort to promote Chicago for a Summer Olympics was a more urgent priority than acting diligently and promptly to approve or deny a request for more troops. Given what we saw in his campaign, it should have been a no-brainer.
While running for office, Obama seemed exasperated that too much military attention had gone to Iraq and that Afghanistan is where the war should be fought. Now he's waffling. What's up with that?
Well, McChrystal is the Afghan man, not the entire Military. We have forces all over the world and we would be remiss if we didn't account for possible actions against Iran and North Korea, and probably a few small hot spots.
So, our Commander-in-Chief is probably trying to learn as much as he can about all the different scenarios, strategies, priorities, etc. ...or he's simply waiting for a more favorable time to announce something new. He's ok as long as we don't lose Afghanistan... if we lose, Obama will be blamed no matter who is in office at the time. So Obama had better get it right.
Friday, October 02, 2009
The Polanski Case
Op-Ed Contributor - The Polanski Case - NYTimes.com: "Two major flaws instill doubt about the legitimacy of the request to extradite Mr. Polanski. The first goes to the very aims of criminal law. Those are usually stated as revenge, deterrence, punishment and rehabilitation. Revenge is widely recognized as illegitimate. In Mr. Polanski’s case none of the legitimate aims seem applicable."
---
The guy who wrote that is a "lawyer in France," as footnoted in the article. That seems a weaselly way of not calling him a "French lawyer," because they know it'd be an obvious indication of his bias. But you need not even decipher the footnote to figure that out, just look at the glaring example quoted above.
Punishment. That's a phase of trial that has been lacking in the case. It's the most obviously legitimate reason to go after Polanski over 30 years after he ran. Polanski went through the process of doing everything but paying the bill, he skipped out on tab that the judge was bringing to him. Well, the merchant was slow and it took him a while, but he finally caught up with the dine-and-dasher.
30 years ago you could also presume deterrence, but as far as we know Mr. Polanski hasn't been hooking up with tweens since then. But then, what about deterrence to other famous would-be tween rapists? Yes, that's the real deterrence, and it's every bit as legitimate as punishment.
Doesn't take a law school prof to see that. But it's pretty hard to see if you're unreasonably biased. But he's French, so... maybe it's expected over there. Who knows.
---
The guy who wrote that is a "lawyer in France," as footnoted in the article. That seems a weaselly way of not calling him a "French lawyer," because they know it'd be an obvious indication of his bias. But you need not even decipher the footnote to figure that out, just look at the glaring example quoted above.
Punishment. That's a phase of trial that has been lacking in the case. It's the most obviously legitimate reason to go after Polanski over 30 years after he ran. Polanski went through the process of doing everything but paying the bill, he skipped out on tab that the judge was bringing to him. Well, the merchant was slow and it took him a while, but he finally caught up with the dine-and-dasher.
30 years ago you could also presume deterrence, but as far as we know Mr. Polanski hasn't been hooking up with tweens since then. But then, what about deterrence to other famous would-be tween rapists? Yes, that's the real deterrence, and it's every bit as legitimate as punishment.
Doesn't take a law school prof to see that. But it's pretty hard to see if you're unreasonably biased. But he's French, so... maybe it's expected over there. Who knows.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
LT back at practice for Bolts - Sports- nbcsports.msnbc.com
"LT back at practice for Bolts
By BERNIE WILSON
Associated Press
updated 7:48 p.m. CT, Wed., Sept . 30, 2009"
---
Wow, Lawrence Taylor out of retirement and playing for the... what? No... who the hell is LaLamian Tomlinson? That's not LT. LT is one of the greats... who is this Tomlinson wannabe?
I know who he's not, he's not LT.
By BERNIE WILSON
Associated Press
updated 7:48 p.m. CT, Wed., Sept . 30, 2009"
---
Wow, Lawrence Taylor out of retirement and playing for the... what? No... who the hell is LaLamian Tomlinson? That's not LT. LT is one of the greats... who is this Tomlinson wannabe?
I know who he's not, he's not LT.
Shocking
VOA News - US, Iran Hold Rare Bilateral Meeting: "A top Israeli official dismissed the talks as futile. Vice Prime Minister Silvan Shalom told reporters in Jerusalem the discussions are a 'waste of time.'"
---
How can Israel say such a thing? Easy, it's true. People in that region of the world don't do anything of their volition unless it's to cause trouble elsewhere. If you want them to do something for the good of the region or to comply with international standards or to not cause trouble, then you have to speak with military action, period.
Take Iraq. We talked and talked and they didn't do jack shit about giving us the information we requested or allowing nuclear inspectors until we had already placed the force over there. Saddam simply acted too late to save his skin. Now, we have Amahdinadirkajihad in Iran, who is doing the same thing Saddam did. However, he doesn't believe the USA will respond militarily... umm, neither did Saddam, neither did Kaddafi, neither did Hitler, neither did Japan, so on and so forth.
It's amazing really how these countries continually underestimate the USA's capacity to go abroad and kick some ass. Sure, we have our anti-war protesters and all that crap, but there's a tipping point. And once that point is passed, then there is no stopping us. I don't think Iran has passed it yet, but they probably will, and we'll have to join forces with a bunch of other nations, except Israel because that would be politically incorrect in that region, to bring about change in Iran that Iranians can't seem to bring themselves.
Iran has time of course to change, but will they? I think it would take a coup of sorts to do so. The real power seems to be with their Military. Yeah, supposedly it's the Supreme Leader, aka Ayatollah Khomenei, but come on, he sure seems like he's a puppet.
So here we go again, much like Pak not that long ago, Iran has no choice, it will have to change. Option 1 is a small change, allow unfettered access to nuclear inspectors. Option 2 is a huge change, get your ass handed to you by military force. And it doesn't matter whether Iran really does want peaceful nuclear energy, remember Weapons of Mass Destruction? All we need is probable cause to invade, nothing more.
The risk of Iran making nuclear weapons is alarming enough to invade, without a doubt. They support terrorist groups... remember? Do you think we are going to let a country develop a nuclear device so that they can give it Hezbolla? Hell no. That would be the beginning of a new, much bigger war, where a lot more people would get killed than if we just took out Iran in a timely manner. Insurgency is bad, yes, but distributing nuclear warheads makes dealing with an insurgency very acceptable to those who can realize what the alternative would have been.
If Israel sees an imminent threat, of course, then they'll probably take their own action. Which is option 3 I guess (get ass kicked by Israel). That would be a huge embarrassment for Iran, I would think. Yet, I believe Israel has the capability and certainly the moral imperative to defeat those who have publicly called for the extermination of Israel.
So yes, discussions are a waste of time because everything that can be said, has been. Iran has taken the vow of pursuing nuclear technology and will continue to say that it is only for peaceful purposes, while launching missiles, calling for the destruction of Israel, refusing inspectors, and building secret nuclear facilities. 'nuff said.
However, this time, unless Israel acts first, the US will wait for Europe to cough up resources. No more hiding behind the USA, it's time for Europe to step up to the plate and place a significant force and significant money to the cause. We've spent plenty, and have sent plenty to Afghanistan and Iraq, time for Europe to either bring it, or STFU.
Of course, if they STFU and decide they don't care if Iran has nuclear weapons, then it'll be just the USA and Israel... which is fine by me.
---
How can Israel say such a thing? Easy, it's true. People in that region of the world don't do anything of their volition unless it's to cause trouble elsewhere. If you want them to do something for the good of the region or to comply with international standards or to not cause trouble, then you have to speak with military action, period.
Take Iraq. We talked and talked and they didn't do jack shit about giving us the information we requested or allowing nuclear inspectors until we had already placed the force over there. Saddam simply acted too late to save his skin. Now, we have Amahdinadirkajihad in Iran, who is doing the same thing Saddam did. However, he doesn't believe the USA will respond militarily... umm, neither did Saddam, neither did Kaddafi, neither did Hitler, neither did Japan, so on and so forth.
It's amazing really how these countries continually underestimate the USA's capacity to go abroad and kick some ass. Sure, we have our anti-war protesters and all that crap, but there's a tipping point. And once that point is passed, then there is no stopping us. I don't think Iran has passed it yet, but they probably will, and we'll have to join forces with a bunch of other nations, except Israel because that would be politically incorrect in that region, to bring about change in Iran that Iranians can't seem to bring themselves.
Iran has time of course to change, but will they? I think it would take a coup of sorts to do so. The real power seems to be with their Military. Yeah, supposedly it's the Supreme Leader, aka Ayatollah Khomenei, but come on, he sure seems like he's a puppet.
So here we go again, much like Pak not that long ago, Iran has no choice, it will have to change. Option 1 is a small change, allow unfettered access to nuclear inspectors. Option 2 is a huge change, get your ass handed to you by military force. And it doesn't matter whether Iran really does want peaceful nuclear energy, remember Weapons of Mass Destruction? All we need is probable cause to invade, nothing more.
The risk of Iran making nuclear weapons is alarming enough to invade, without a doubt. They support terrorist groups... remember? Do you think we are going to let a country develop a nuclear device so that they can give it Hezbolla? Hell no. That would be the beginning of a new, much bigger war, where a lot more people would get killed than if we just took out Iran in a timely manner. Insurgency is bad, yes, but distributing nuclear warheads makes dealing with an insurgency very acceptable to those who can realize what the alternative would have been.
If Israel sees an imminent threat, of course, then they'll probably take their own action. Which is option 3 I guess (get ass kicked by Israel). That would be a huge embarrassment for Iran, I would think. Yet, I believe Israel has the capability and certainly the moral imperative to defeat those who have publicly called for the extermination of Israel.
So yes, discussions are a waste of time because everything that can be said, has been. Iran has taken the vow of pursuing nuclear technology and will continue to say that it is only for peaceful purposes, while launching missiles, calling for the destruction of Israel, refusing inspectors, and building secret nuclear facilities. 'nuff said.
However, this time, unless Israel acts first, the US will wait for Europe to cough up resources. No more hiding behind the USA, it's time for Europe to step up to the plate and place a significant force and significant money to the cause. We've spent plenty, and have sent plenty to Afghanistan and Iraq, time for Europe to either bring it, or STFU.
Of course, if they STFU and decide they don't care if Iran has nuclear weapons, then it'll be just the USA and Israel... which is fine by me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
