Comments on: Friends, Foes and Who Knows?

By: western wats

western wats — Thu, 22 Nov 2007 08:30:35 +0000

[...] Friends, Foes and Who Knows? – The Moderate Voice [...]

By: Rudi

Rudi — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 03:57:02 +0000

Rudy is taking a page from the Rove playbook. I’m waiting for the McCain love child to return about his Bangli adopted daughter.

By: DLS

DLS — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 00:48:05 +0000

Rudy is listening to him and Kerik

Side note: Who did the push polling against Romney and in favor of McCain? Hmmm.

"Last year, Western Wats conducted polling that was intended to spread negative messages about Democratic candidates in a House race in New York and a Senate race in Florida, according to reports in The Tampa Tribune and the Albany Times Union, which also said Western Wats conducted the calls on behalf of the Tarrance Group. That Virginia-based firm now works for Romney's rival, Rudy Giuliani. The campaign has paid the firm more than $400,000, according to federal campaign reports. "

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:16:37 +0000

I know "Mr. World War IV" is an advisor to Giuliani. What puzzles me is that many believe Giuliani has the best chance to not only win the GOP nomination, but to beat Clinton as well. I wouldn't bet on him.

By: Rudi

Rudi — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:54:39 +0000

DLS – The Podman isn’t in favor of deterrence, for him it’s war, war and more war. And Rudy is listening to him and Kerik.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:01:50 +0000

Because thereâ€™s no fun at all in deterence. Itâ€™s just boring. And itâ€™s not very useful as a campaign issue.

We engaged in deterrence a lot in the Cold War (as well as actual resistance at times), and it was a very useful campaign issue. Peace through strength, remember?

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:00:04 +0000

Podhoretz is not a peer of the other two.

Those who can (easily) deny the false dichotomy and too-simple classification of other parties in the world with whom we deal must admit that we must at times accept as partners those who don’t appeal to you, have poor human-rights records, etc., when the present-time likely alternatives to them would be worse, or because partnership is expedient or even necessary.

By: Davebo

Davebo — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:58:10 +0000

But on a serious note, deterence is working on the Indian/Pakistan subcontinent, why should we believe the Podhertz/Kristol BS?

Because there’s no fun at all in deterence. It’s just boring. And it’s not very useful as a campaign issue.

By: Rudi

Rudi — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:39:46 +0000

Meant Osama/Obama maybe even O’Mama(Hillary). But on a serious note, deterence is working on the Indian/Pakistan subcontinent, why should we believe the Podhertz/Kristol BS?

By: Idiosyncrat

Idiosyncrat — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:20:55 +0000

If Obama bought/stole one of the handfull of Pakistani nukes, President Hillary might turn into a parking lot.

Rudi, I think you meant oSama… But thanks for the chuckle

By: Rudi

Rudi — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:53:46 +0000

Who in this list is a Mahatma Gandhi or Mandela?
Pervez Musharraf
Benazir Bhutto
Muhammad Khan Junejo
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto
Malik Meraj Khalid
General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq
All these thugs were/are our friends with India/Afghanistan as a problem. All served at the whim of the military.

Pakistan created a “nuklear program” not for Jihad, but as a deterent(MAD) to a greater armed India(conventinal and nuclear). Reagan and Pappy cozied up to some on the list, W’s just following a tradition.

Nukes are very expensive to build and maintain, why would Pakistan give Osama/Obama a Fatboy(20 Kt) when a POTUS might retaliate with a W87/88 MIRV(300-425Kt). If Obama bought/stole one of the handfull of Pakistani nukes, President Hillary might turn into a parking lot.