Our World:

If we watch the news, we learn that Brazil has quietly started enriching uranium, the same as Iran. Brazil has kept some parts of their enrichment process out-of-sight, supposedly because some of their enrichment process equipment is advanced and proprietary, and they wish to retain the commercial advantage of the exclusive use (and possible sale) of such technology. Now, Brazil has a socialist and somewhat Marxist government. Their President is good buddies with both Chavez & Castro. As such, Brazil is clearly as much of a "threat" as is Iran. However, nobody appears to be advocating using bunker buster nukes on Brazil!

The fact is that both Brazil and Iran are sovereign nations which should be allowed to go their way in peace to refine nuclear materials as they see fit. Nuclear power would allow Iran to sell more oil. Nuclear power would allow Brazil to cut the use of expensive natural gas which they must purchase from neighboring countries. If they do divert some uranium into weapons grade uranium, so what? Neither have the technology to deliver it any great distance. Iran is all but surrounded by nuclear powers: Israel, Pakistan, India, Russia, and US forces in Iraq. Correspondent Eric Margolis claims that Israel has the world's only operational antimissile system. Iran has surely noted the "respect" given to North Korea once their "nukes" came out of the closet. As such, the more we "saber rattle" against Iran, the more likely it is that they will try to speed up any clandestine program to develop nuclear weapons.

Deterence will work. We don't need to worry about Iran or Brazil developing nuclear weapons unless we plan on, some day in the future, invading them as we did Iraq. 5/8/06

 

Iran is going to build a nuclear bomb in 16 days! Yes, the same folks who told us of mushroom clouds over American cities courtesy of Saddam, of "drones of death", and of various "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and a strange love affair between Saddam and Cousin Bin, are now telling us this new story. Yes, AFTER Iran builds tens of thousands of centrifuges which they don't have now, they could, in theory, convert their process from tons of low grade uranium suitable for power plants to kilograms of weapons grade uranium. Will they do it? If so, who can blame them. Israel has over two hundred nukes. King George W. is rattling his saber. Pakistan has nukes. India has nukes. North Korea has nukes. Lots of folks have nukes.Any nation has a right to defend itself.

When is the use of a nuclear weapon justified? I can really only think of two circumstances. The first is to repel a foreign invasion of your own country. As such, the weapon would be used on one's own territory. Would Iran be justified in defending itself on its own territory? The other would be in retaliation for a nuclear strike from another country. As such, the purpose would be both retaliation and to discourage further strikes. In each case, the target should be military targets, rather than cities.

Leave Iran alone. The Iranians won't attack Israel unless first attacked. They want to sell their oil, not live a slow death in a nuclear wasteland. The fact that their President seems to enjoy making provocative statements for the enjoyment of his political constituency in Iran is no reason to kill tens or hundreds of thousands of  Iranians.                                           4/18/06

 

Spreading Democracy - It's in the news that our puppet government in Afghanistan might try and execute a man for converting from Islam to Christianity; that is, if they don't simply declare him to be "mad" and lock him away to conveniently die out of the spotlight somewhere. Why are we expending American blood and treasure to put such governments in place? The idea of "democracy" in the Middle East is a farce unless you think that empowering crazy Iranian style Mullahs or crazy Bin Laden types is a good idea. Our presence over there simply makes it easier for the crazies to gain power. We should listen to what George Washington and Thomas Jefferson told us. Let's bring home our troops NOW and leave them alone. Also, let's keep our money at home; foreign aid is authorized nowhere in our Constitution. They have oil, they don't need our money.      3/23/06

 

In their efforts to kill or capture an Iraqui resisting foreign occupation forces, our military leveled a house and killed around 13 civilians, including women and children. If Germans had done that to the French back in World War #II, they would have been condemned as war criminals. Is it not time we rediscovered our consciences, once again? Why have we allowed ourselves to become monsters? How many more "terrorists", determined to kill any American, anywhere, anytime, have been created by this incident?                     3/16/06

 

The Chinese' Communist Government is delighted to see the US remain bogged down in Iraq. That "War" is bleeding our nation both militarily and economically. 3/9/06

 

Now, the UN wants to control the Internet. Visit the links to "The New American". After you've read the articles on the subject, follow their links to online "letters to our elected officials" opposing this. 11/14/05

 

There have been offers of help regarding Katrina from various foreign lands. Many offered help out of geniune concern and the desire to do right. Thank you and God Bless You. Others offered help as a cynical propaganda ploy. They know what's in their hearts. Although, in view of how offensive our national government has been, I can't  much blame them.

We must insist: NO UN TROOPS IN THE US!    9/8/05

 

 

    It is interesting to note the differing destinations for campaign contributions from military personnel as compared to the Defense Industry. The Presidential Candidate who led in campaign contributions from Military Personel for the past two quarters was Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, who is noted for having opposed the Iraq invasion from the start and for his opposition to an unprovoked attack on Iran. He correctly notes that wars which are fought without the Constitutionally required Declaration of War from Congress are both illegal and end badly. He would follow the recommendations of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, bringing the troops home from our Undeclared Wars and Entangling Alliances.
     On the other hand, the candidate raising the most contributions from the Defense Industry has been Hillary Clinton. The "Defense Industry" apparently believes that it can make the most money from another Clinton administration. Hillary was eager to invade Iraq, with her criticism being that she would have managed it better. She is also eager to attack Iran, perhaps even with nuclear weapons. While she's at it, US military activity would increase in Africa, Europe, and just about every where else on the globe. The money would roll in to the "Defense" Industry.
      Just as our Freedoms have been attacked by the Bush Administration under the guise of the War on Terrorism/Drugs/You Name it, our Freedoms would be further attacked and eroded by the wars to be fought under a new Clinton administration (as well as under the administration of a Republican McRomnianni).
     James Madison warned us: "If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." and "The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home".
     We need more that just a Dr. Ron Paul Presidency if we wish peace, freedom, and prosperity. We also need a minimum of 218 Dr. Ron Pauls in the House of Representatives.