As for nuclear proliferation, there was no bloody way it could have been avoided, once the damned things were invented, except by agreeing to give them up ourselves. We pretty much pissed away our chance at that a long time ago.

Once you have let the djinn out of the bottle there is no putting it back. It has become quite clear that the only protection against US aggression is to have nukes oneself.

The world we leave for our descendants is going to be inferior to the one we inherited ourselves I fear.

Eisenhower had it right, the military corporate complex will eventually prove to be our downfall.

To paraphrase Roseanne once again, I'm so far beyond enraged that the light from enraged won't reach me for ten billion years.

Curious that, in a previous incarnation on this board, I made one anonymous post and was then told that anonymous posters do not have any credibility.

And now we have a veritable plethora, nay a Niagara, of anonymous posters and yet they appear to be seen as credible by the very same people who told me that anonymity precluded credibility.

The standards are plummeting here, pretty soon it will be as bad as the MSM.

I think you have missed a essential part of the equation; and there was even a hint in this very thread. WT opined that all the handles, aliases, anonymous posts, and sock puppets that LWM uses is just wonderful since they agree on warmongering and other issues. Apparently you missed the part that only big-government liberals may use that tactic with credibility here.

Actually I did catch that, which is part of the reason I made the post I did.

Even though LWM and his aliases at times post more than everyone else combined; he is a committed imperialist that believes no part of human life should be protected from government interference --- as long as his political party is overseeing the oppression. (besides the insanity part)

LWM is secretly ashamed that he has to piss in a cup to keep his job, the "job" that allows him all day to post and read here. But LWM cannot admit his shame even to himself, for it would reveal to him the depths of slavery to which he has sunk, that he allows his employer to inspect his very bodily fluids to assure that he is not an apostate of the state religion.

Why else would he have reacted in such a childish and irrational manner to my simple question?

I hope that clears up your misunderstanding.

I thank you for your explanation but it was really not necessary, a lot of my posts are phrased in the way they are in order to encourage people to think. Out of hundreds of thousands of posts I can count the number of people that I have managed to get to think without removing my shoes, but I continue tilting.

It is curious—curious that physical courage should be so common in the world, and moral courage so rare. -Mark Twain.

Moral courage, that is what those who refuse to admit what their votes are enabling lack.

Anonymous posting, on a board on which only handles are used, shows a lack of moral courage that would make a maggot puke.

Then perhaps you should change your place of employment.

To sell your skills and energy to someone with whom you are in fundamental disagreement politically is to enable the very politics with which you disagree.

Luke 16:13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

So, who do you serve?

God?

Or mammon?

Freedom?

Or slavery?

Well, the thread is mercifully over, but a word nevertheless in your shell-like ear, bucky. It's true that L.W.M. has many strings on his guitar. You, on the other hand, have only one, and it's out of tune.

You say I'm out of tune but you fail to demonstrate or explain how.

Which is typical of those who wish to deny the truth of what I say.

Don't tell me how I'm wrong, fucking well show me. Because if you do not then it is perfectly obvious that you cannot.

Oops, you're right.

I'm on a hair trigger this morning thanks to some personal issues.

My apologies.

When it became unequivocally clear to me was when Bush 41 preemptively pardoned Caspar Weinberger in order to protect his own involvement in Iran Contra from disclosure.

Basically almost no one even raised an eyebrow.

A preemptive pardon?

When that didn't set alarm bells ringing it was obvious that the rule of law for the powerful was effectively dead and probably had been for quite some time.

Supposedly "for the good of the country"..

It has now become nauseatingly evident that the reason Iran Contra was not pursued to the bitter end was for the good of the oligarchy.

Or as I prefer to call it, the good of the theocratic corporatarchy.

We are now reaping the whirlwind of Democratic weeniedom and collaboration.

Anyone who thinks the cruise missile that went through the front door of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in 1999 was a "mistake" probably thinks Bush and the bin Ladens are not conjoined at the hip.

What better way to make it painfully clear to the Chinese leadership that they live and breathe on sufferance of the US government's good will?

And it's not just the Chinese, I imagine that little oops attracted a great deal of attention in capitals around the world.