doublegunshop.com - home Forums Nukes

My wife and I spend a fair amount of time in Italy. I'm writing a book on the Canadian campaign in the Liri Valley leading to Rome, and my wife's 10 large paintings of the campaign will be exhibited by the Beaverbrook Art Gallery in Fredericton next year. Lord Beaverbrook started the war artists program in WW1.

South of Naples gets gritty in places but much improved over five or 10 years ago. Last year we spent three weeks in Puglia on the east coast mostly from the heel to the toe, allegedly Mafia country, poor and uninviting. Can't speak about the Mafia but it was beautiful and tidier than most places in North America.

If it's not local or federal governments, who makes it look good? It's probably all you say about corruption and bad government but it's still a mystery to me that it works so well for visitors. For authentic warmth and generosity in all of Europe, I don't think there's a better place than Italy.

As an aside, I said to Nancy years ago, Why are people so good to us? Is it because we're old (in our late 50s at the time). She said, No, it's because we are polite. On a whimsical note, black and white gets boring. Maybe it's the mystery that keeps us going back!

Regards, King

Now I understand your position. Yes, the US reasoned the fallout would outweigh any advantage to the American people. Russia reasoned similarly and threw Obama a lifeline. They didn't have the will to risk Armageddon. My guess is the terrorists tore their hair out and the world sighed with relief.

Unless you are stupid, and naive, and extremely short-sighted, one can see that the greatest risk to Armageddon in the Middle East is a radical Islamist Iran with nukes.

The centrifuges are still spinning, Arak is still under construction, and Syria is probably busy hiding part of it's chemical stockpiles before U.N. Inspectors can see them. Iran and Syria are breathing a sigh of relief because we still have a weak willed Barack Hussein Obama in the White House, and they can continue on their same path. Fools are also breathing a sigh of relief. But no one who has learned anything from history is breathing easier.

I like your lifeline repetition. Didn't putin say a day or two after he saved the US, that he really can't confirm if all syrian chemical weapons will be turned over or destroyed. Maybe you could call some of you media colleagues and ask them to hold bo accountable for the poor enforcement of his red line.

I also think you may be guessing wrong. The terrorists and putin can rest easy that there will be no disruption with their arms supply deals. And the left sighed with relief.

On a side note, good for you and Mrs. Brown on the painting showing and your book.

No one knows how it will turn out, Craig. Some here would rush in with all guns blazing, as we did with awful consequences recently in the Middle East, while the major world powers say proceed with caution.

There's Pakistan, the shaky Islamist country with nukes which hid Osama bin Ladin from us, and Iran, a religiously different country from Arab and non-Arab countries which may or may not be building a bomb.

To keep nukes in their silos and clip the influence of Israel and Saudi Arabia from jerking US strings and draining Fort Knox, the US is trying to engage Iran in some sort of entente to change the regional balance of power.

No place for hair triggers or hare brains.

Why does this hare brained Canadian see a need to clip the influence of Israel and substitute Iran, a known sponsor of terrorism?

Obama's brilliant changes to the balance of power in the Middle East have been to strengthen and embolden Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood, while pushing our only true allies, the Israelis, aside by insulting and snubbing Netanyahu.

There's little doubt that Islamic "factions" in Pakistan hid bin Ladin, but Pakistan still isn't a known sponsor of terrorism who have threatened the destruction of Israel and the Great Satan, the U.S.A., as Iran has.

You really have to have your head up your ass to think Iran may not be really building a nuke. They could have had crushing sanctions lifted a decade ago if they had nothing to hide and merely allowed International Inspectors to verify peaceful intent.

A past or present journalist who steadfastly ignores the truth is both incompetent and shameful. Any historical book he might write would be very questionable as far as being factual.

Maybe, you just told us how it turns out. Aren't you saying that we end up with another shaky nuclear power. Do the iranians become coequals in the region, world.

If we're 'trying to engage', what happens if it doesn't work out. Or, more importantly if you get your change, does the flaunting of the balance of power hinge on a handshake or some piece of paper.

Is your entente between the US and iran, or do the regional neighbours have any say, except for Israel and the saudis. To shift the balance of power, why shouldn't US just give iran a few old nukes and the plans for some precision short range delivery system.

Does it concern you to demonize, sorry to snip that part out, friends and accommodate enemies. Are there any consequences to inaction or ineffective action. Why is there a assumption that the US risks acting with a hair trigger, and that a nuclear iran would be responsible. Is syria and chemical weapons a good example of the US putting the genie back in the bottle.

Thanks for your views, Craig. The US try at entente has nothing to do with me; it's been going on for years by the US administration. I'm not saying the US will succeed or the world end up with another nuclear power. No one can possibly know how it will turn out. Nothing is safe or certain.

Israel and the Saudis are not happy, as indicated in our mainstream media. But google Israeli public opinion as expressed in Israeli newspapers. Israel is divided on the issue as your country and mine. Canada is moderating its pro-Israel position to nearer that of the United States.

There's a tiny minority here that would love to see bombs falling in violation of international law in spite of the cautionary strategy of the major powers, east and west, our allies and China and Russia. This minority knows what's best for us. It's in no position to pull any strings, hair-trigger or otherwise.

World opinion is the other way entirely.

King, there's another lie. The only "tiny minority" is you and Jaegermeister who both think that engaging the Iranians with diplomacy would be productive. Opinion of Security Council members China and Russia are almost universally on the opposite side of U.S. and Western interests. Most people with a brain, here and abroad, can see that Obama is being played by the Iranians... and can also see that his foreign policy has been a big failure, other than those things which were merely a continuation of Bush policies, i.e., the surge, the hunt for bin Ladin, the drone program to exterminate Al Qeada leadership, etc.

For God's sake craigd, ed, or canvasback, please say something... anything... so that Burger King can indirectly answer me through you! He's still pretending to ignore me after I busted him in all his lies.

Of course not King, but doesn't the mindset elect decision makers. Decision makers who have no answers, but tell us don't worry about it, all's well.