“Vietnam should remind conservatives that whenever you put your faith in big government for any reason, sooner or later you wind up an apologist for mass murder.” – Karl Hess
The Editors’ Quote of the Day:
- Ad Click Here --> Civil Defense ManualNOW BACK IN STOCK How to protect, you, your family, friends and neighborhood in coming times of civil unrest… and much more!
- Ad Sale extended on SIEGE Belts & Stoves! SIEGE Stoves: ultra-versatile, compact & high performance. SIEGE Belts: ultimate go-anywhere personal preparedness. Our wearers won't leave home without one. Stunning gifts!Why waste $ on gifts that break down or get little use when you can get ultra-durable US-made gifts that last lifetimes and can save lives?
A catchy phrase. But look at NK, perhaps our next Vietnam or worse. On retired general has said that the best possible outcome is that we attack them first and destroy their military might and nuclear arsenal. The downside is that likely the North could effectively attack Seoul and kill millions of civilians before we could effectively destroy them. His reasoning for calling this the best outcome is that the worst outcome, likely if we do nothing, is that eventually NK attacks South Korea, Japan, Guam or even cities in the U.S. with nukes THEN we attack them, destroy them but they still attack Seoul killing perhaps millions of civilians.
History says we will choose option 2. Why? Because of fear of “mass murder” if we did choose option 1, and because it is politically easier (and sometimes more profitable) to be that politician that gets us out of a terrible disaster rather than that politician who got us into it.
I dread waking up one morning to turn on the news and discover that NK nuked Tokyo or Seattle. It is very possible, mostly because NK is controlled by lunatics but certainly partly because we have mishandled NK for 65 years. Gen MacArthur was right.