Saturday, September 02, 2006

New York Times on the Snark Path 
George W. Bush has done more than any President in history to stem nuclear proliferation - and stopped it butt-cold in Iraq, of course, as well as in Libya.

So why would the Times publish an editorial called "Bush's Nuclear Legacy" with an appallingly stupid lede like this:

Unless something changes soon, by the end of President Bush’s second term North Korea will have produced enough plutonium for 10 or more nuclear weapons while Iran’s scientists will be close to mastering the skills needed to build their own.

That’s quite a legacy for a president sworn to keep the world’s most dangerous weapons out of the hands of the world’s most dangerous regimes.

Did I miss something? Did North Korea only embark on its nuclear program in January, 2001, when Bush took office?

Don't you think the Clinton Administration's foolish deal with the North Koreans might - just MIGHT - warrant a mention as a relevant legacy?

Well, the fucktards at the Times don't think so.

Rather, those pencil-necked dorks go even further: calling for the abject surrender of the United States and the free world to the mullahs of Iran:

If Mr. Bush has any hope of avoiding this legacy, he will have to give up his dreams of regime change, persuade his battling inner circle he means it and direct Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to do some real diplomatic horse trading — starting with a clear pledge that the United States will not try to overthrow their governments as long as they give up their nuclear ambitions.

I can think of no greater incentive for pipsqueak governments the world over to embark on a nuclear program than for the United States to guarantee the stability of the Iranian Mullahcracy in exchange for the dismantling of their nuclear program.

And why do the editors at the Times believe we can trust the Iranian mullahs to live up to their agreements? After all, they were lying their asses off all this time, to begin with.

The Times, of course, doesn't say.

But the US should surrender all the same.

Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world today. If the United States is going to guarantee the stability of the Mullahs, then that is tantamount to surrender in the war on terror.

Yet that is exactly what the New York Times is calling for.

There can be no surrender to the Iranian mullahs.

It wasn't that long ago that the corpses of New Yorkers filled the air around Battery Park up to Greenwich Village with the smell of cooking meat.

How soon the Times has forgotten.

Shame on them.

Splash, out


President Bush can do what Slick Willie did. Give NK several billions dollars so they will hide and continue to develop and upgrade their nuc programs. Not a dime will go to the people but the creep running NK will have plenty for his Nuclear program. That way he can leave the problem for the next guy to clean up.
Ah yes, it's all Bill Clinton's fault. I haven't been served that whine for a while, and was starting to miss it.
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Meter

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!