E-Mail 'The Editors' Quote of the Day:' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'The Editors' Quote of the Day:' to a friend

* Required Field






Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.


E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

One Comment

  1. 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.

Comments are closed.