He died in a auto accident late last night. If not for Kiel's arrest for shipping cough medicine two years ago, I would most likely not even remember him. RIP....
5:13 PM |
0 comments
It's a tragedy that still eerily lingers within the entertainment industry. And six months after his tragic death, Heath Ledger's parents are getting ready to celebrate his role in "The...
2:32 PM |
0 comments
There are no plans for a rumoured big-screen version of Friends, film studio Warner Bros has told the BBC. Since the success of the Sex and the City movie,...
2:03 PM |
0 comments
She defeated her sister Serena for her seventh career grand slam title. WIMBLEDON, England - Venus Williams beat sister Serena 7-5, 6-4 Saturday for her fifth Wimbledon title and...
2:01 PM |
0 comments
Government's role regulating free speech needs to be as limited as possible. The freedom allowed under the 1st Amendment isn't always attractive, yet to limit free expression is always the worst possible option.
12:29 PM |
0 comments
Certainly all right thinking persons regret the death of anyone. And best wishes to anyone in the Helms family need to be extended at this sorrowful time for them. However as a lawmaker, Helms was one of the very worst...
7:34 PM |
4 comments
Christopher Hitchens, a writer for Vanity Fair magazine, underwent waterboarding to experience it for himself firsthand. What more can be added to the debate over U.S. interrogation methods, and whether waterboarding is torture? Try firsthand experience. The author undergoes the...
6:10 PM |
5 comments
Police say a South Florida woman stole a couple's cat to get them to return her dog. Linda Urioste's black Labrador was recently picked up by animal control officers...
11:45 AM |
1 comments
Here come the moving vans. After 41 years in Seattle, the Sonics are moving to Oklahoma City. The City of Seattle settled its Key Arena lease dispute with the Sonics...
11:36 AM |
3 comments
Peter Cook testified that he and Brinkley used pornography "to get the mood going." He also acknowledged spending about $3,000 a month on pornographic Web sites in 2005. Alexa...
11:34 AM |
0 comments
Comments (13)
Does the left think that we... (Below threshold)1. Posted by JD | March 13, 2006 11:13 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Does the left think that we should just wait for Russia and China to come around before the international community does something about this?
Not that anybody needs any more proof, but doesn't this just clearly illustrate the fundamental problems with the UN ?
1. Posted by JD | March 13, 2006 11:13 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 13, 2006 23:13
2. Posted by JEFF | March 14, 2006 12:12 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Oh my , what a surprise Russia and China can sucker-up to the islamic hoards oil supplie,s while continuing to supply the weapons and fuel the anti west hatred that these barbarians have.. pretty clear isn,t it.
2. Posted by JEFF | March 14, 2006 12:12 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 00:12
3. Posted by Cybrludite | March 14, 2006 6:23 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Can we now dispense with the whole UN bunraku show and get on with it?
3. Posted by Cybrludite | March 14, 2006 6:23 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 06:23
4. Posted by LJD | March 14, 2006 7:14 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
We can always just veto their veto...
4. Posted by LJD | March 14, 2006 7:14 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 07:14
5. Posted by Charles Bannerman | March 14, 2006 8:02 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The UN has proved time and again that it is incapable of solving problems yet we continue to pour US tax dollars into it's coffers to be used in many cases on things that are counter to our best interest.
With the advent of the blogosphere, I wonder if it would be possible to get a grass roots movement started to get us out of the UN? It seems that if enough people e-mailed their congresscritters and senators such a movement could take hold.
At the very least, it seems such a movement would cause the UN to realize who is buttering their bread and make them be a little more responsive to the US.
Just a thought.
Chuck
5. Posted by Charles Bannerman | March 14, 2006 8:02 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 08:02
6. Posted by jpm100 | March 14, 2006 8:03 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Their missles will likely only be able to reach Russia and China for some time. I say we call their bluff and walk away from the situation.
6. Posted by jpm100 | March 14, 2006 8:03 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 08:03
7. Posted by Mac Lorry | March 14, 2006 11:24 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I wonder if it wouldn't be best to just engage Iran. Engage them in an arms race I mean. Let them know that we believe they have nuclear weapons, and thus, they are subject to a preemptive nuclear strike, just as all other declared nuclear powers are. It's part of the price of being a nuclear power.
Given the accuracy of U.S. nuclear weapons, their underground facilities are not anywhere near adequate. Even a facility so deep that it could survive would be useless as all access shafts and tunnels would collapse. They also have to assume the U.S. can drop more than one warhead on the same spot if needed.
The only current viable way to survive a nuclear preemptive strike is for Iran to develop a nuclear submarine fleet capable of eluding U.S. hunter/destroyer subs and keep some of them on patrol constantly. They also have to figure out how to penetrate the U.S. anti-missile shield, which should be deployed long before Iran commissions it's first sub. Iran has to work hard to catch up and reach parody with the U.S., otherwise all they get is the A.D. part of M.A.D.
To pay for a nuclear force that can credibly threaten the U.S., Iran would have to increase oil production and insure it's uninterrupted supply for decades. Unless we elect a series of left-wing presidents, Iran could never be sure that the value of all the oil it has would be enough. If Iran wants to play with the big boys it's going to have to spend like the big boys.
7. Posted by Mac Lorry | March 14, 2006 11:24 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 11:24
8. Posted by mantis | March 14, 2006 3:03 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Mac,
If Iran wants to build a nuclear weapon with the intention of using it (and not for deterrence as they claim), it will be against Israel, not us. A much closer, smaller, and easier target. It would only take one, and it would be the largest suicide bombing ever. Which is of course why it won't happen; authoritarian regimes don't like to give up their authority by being dead.
8. Posted by mantis | March 14, 2006 3:03 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 15:03
9. Posted by JD | March 14, 2006 3:44 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
So, mantis, should we just sit back and wait for them to do that ?
9. Posted by JD | March 14, 2006 3:44 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 15:44
10. Posted by Oyster | March 14, 2006 3:56 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
They're vetoing a "stern letter"? Did I get that right?
10. Posted by Oyster | March 14, 2006 3:56 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 15:56
11. Posted by mantis | March 14, 2006 4:33 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
So, mantis, should we just sit back and wait for them to do that ?
Is that what I wrote? Gee, I could have sworn it was something else.
11. Posted by mantis | March 14, 2006 4:33 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 16:33
12. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | March 14, 2006 6:28 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Mantis,
You're theory breaks down when dealing with insane leaders. Iran's president is a couple of Lego's short of a kit, in case you haven't noticed
12. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | March 14, 2006 6:28 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 18:28
13. Posted by mantis | March 14, 2006 6:57 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I personally believe his rhetoric is just that, given what I know about Iran and Ahmadinejad himself. Added to that is the fact that the president doesn't even control Iran's nuclear policy, but rather the more worrisome Supreme National Security Council. In any case, I think the possibility of Iran passing a nuclear weapon to a terrorist group is a far greater concern than Iran overtly attacking Israel. They know they would be annihilated if they did that, and you can rest assured they don't want to be annihilated, even if it meant the destruction of Israel. Why do you think the terrorist leaders never participate in suicide bombings themselves? Power. Power in this life is worth more than the promise of paradise in the next.
13. Posted by mantis | March 14, 2006 6:57 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 14, 2006 18:57