Does anyone really believe the Secret Service would stand by while "some embarrassed member of the Welsh constabulary could walk on stage, place some handcuffs on the former leader of the Free World, and take him away to be charged?" Damned unlikely, I'd say.
I am not understanding why the Afghan government finds it virtually impossible to recruit and train security personnel who can take on security missions comparable to private contractors. This, in spite of the fact that the US is pounding vast amounts of resources into the effort. What explains that the Afghan government just cannot do what private security contractors can do and what the Taliban can do? What is the explanation?
It shows a high degree of recklessness when an experienced general chooses to challenge his Commander-in-chief. It should wave a huge flag as to his fitness to command. And a retraction or apology under duress does nothing to undo the challenge. The CIC doesn't have a hair on his ass if he doesn't banish the challenger.
This is my question: how could a graduate of two major universities have thoughts like this? What do they teach at Yale? What did he learn? These are the thoughts of a simpleton at Barstool University. I don't want to believe he actually said these things, but in the past I have several times overestimated the brainpower of presidents.
“...moreover, it is mysterious to me why Washington is consumed with this issue.”
I knoooooow. For the decades of the cold war, when the Evil Empire had nuclear weapons and wanted nothing more than to nuke us, it was our own nuclear deterrence that kept us snug in our little beds at night. We were assured repeatedly that our ability to retaliate with a force that would envelop the entire planet in nuclear winter would keep us safe and sound. So why is nuclear deterrence not keeping us warm and snuggy now? If Iran develops a nuclear warhead, what would they do with it? Launch it against us or-- one of our allies? If they did that, I presume immediate retaliation would turn Iraq into the planet’s biggest hole in the ground. Surely, the Iranians aren’t missing this point.
Nonetheless, it is not enough to say it is “mysterious” that Washington is consumed by this issue. Surely there is some practical reason that various administrations continue to monger this fear. There must be some geopolitical advantage. What is it? That’s what I am trying to comprehend.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
Does anyone really believe the Secret Service would stand by while "some embarrassed member of the Welsh constabulary could walk on stage, place some handcuffs on the former leader of the Free World, and take him away to be charged?" Damned unlikely, I'd say.
60% of Americans Oppose Afghan War
I am not understanding why the Afghan government finds it virtually impossible to recruit and train security personnel who can take on security missions comparable to private contractors. This, in spite of the fact that the US is pounding vast amounts of resources into the effort. What explains that the Afghan government just cannot do what private security contractors can do and what the Taliban can do? What is the explanation?
It shows a high degree of recklessness when an experienced general chooses to challenge his Commander-in-chief. It should wave a huge flag as to his fitness to command. And a retraction or apology under duress does nothing to undo the challenge. The CIC doesn't have a hair on his ass if he doesn't banish the challenger.
This is my question: how could a graduate of two major universities have thoughts like this? What do they teach at Yale? What did he learn? These are the thoughts of a simpleton at Barstool University. I don't want to believe he actually said these things, but in the past I have several times overestimated the brainpower of presidents.
Israelis Threaten to Block it with War Ships
Isn't this blockade of Gaza similar to the "economic sanctions" that the US uses all the time to affect regime change?
I watched Karzai working his bait yesterday. I thought he was masterful. Were he an angler, he would definitely be a tournament contender.
“...moreover, it is mysterious to me why Washington is consumed with this issue.”
I knoooooow. For the decades of the cold war, when the Evil Empire had nuclear weapons and wanted nothing more than to nuke us, it was our own nuclear deterrence that kept us snug in our little beds at night. We were assured repeatedly that our ability to retaliate with a force that would envelop the entire planet in nuclear winter would keep us safe and sound. So why is nuclear deterrence not keeping us warm and snuggy now? If Iran develops a nuclear warhead, what would they do with it? Launch it against us or-- one of our allies? If they did that, I presume immediate retaliation would turn Iraq into the planet’s biggest hole in the ground. Surely, the Iranians aren’t missing this point.
Nonetheless, it is not enough to say it is “mysterious” that Washington is consumed by this issue. Surely there is some practical reason that various administrations continue to monger this fear. There must be some geopolitical advantage. What is it? That’s what I am trying to comprehend.