“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 Survival RealtyFind your secure and sustainable home. The leading marketplace for rural, remote, and off-grid properties worldwide. Affordable ads. No commissions are charged!
- Ad The world's best Fire Starters are a must-have and popular for low-cost gifts. Chosen by hit 13-year survival TV show as the finest fire steels made and given to every contestant. Ultra-versatile Gen 4 SIEGE Flat-Pack Stoves belong in every kit too!Facing AI terminators, urban zombies, wild animals, etc.? Out of ammo / sidearm locked up to comply with overlord rules? Be prepared with the essential go-anywhere SIEGE Belt.
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.