Monday, April 6, 2009

BO wants to disarm our nukes. IS HE NUTS!!!

During the latest summit, BO is considering the need that we need to disarm and eliminate, or at the very least, drastically reduce the US nuclear arsenal. It's bad enough he wants to disarm, but not shocking because he's anti-American and anyone that read his books would had known this, but since most of us votes by 5 seconds sound bites, the people either don't know, or just don't care or believe it. However, his reasoning just shows his complete ignorant of history and hatred, until he became our leader (and I use that term loosely). He feels that since we're the only country to had used a nuclear weapon, we have a moral responsibility to disarm them.

First, his ignorant of history should scare us all. He's right, we're the only country that used a nuclear weapon, let's go over the history behind that. Though Truman dropped the bomb on Japan, it was conserversial, but it's the reason why. Japan was pretty much defeated. Her navy had been completely destroyed. Her air force was reduced to a few hundred planes. Her army was cut off from supplies. Industries in ruins. Yes, Japan was completely defeated. The problem is something we just don't get to this day: their faith. They were completely dedicated, both civilian and military, to the Samurai code. The only honorable end to a conflict in war time was either victory or death. This country wasn't going to go down without a fight and were willing to lose a million lives in the futile defense of the homeland. Truman had to choose to hold the weapon and have a million Japanese and Allies lives killed in the invasion. Also, and this is hardly ever mention, Russia has just gotten into the war in the Pacific and would had been part of the invasion force. This was going to lead, like in Europe, a split in the country after the war's end. The prospect of a North and South Japan was going to create a cold war nightmare. With this in mind, Truman decided that the war needed to be ended ASAP and keeping Russia out was of the up most importance because of what was going on in Europe. So he figured that he should used the weapon to put the war to an end because once civilian are no longer be able to be protected, under the Samurai code, the honorable action is to protect them and surrender.

When the bombs were dropped, three things happened, two were definitely good, and one will depend on how you look at the situation. The first, the war finally ended. The second, we won. The third, though the horror and destruction of the bomb did so much damage and death, in the end, with over 300,000 dead, there would had been at least 700,000 more dead had we not and the million of Allies soldiers as well as the Russians would had been occupying their northern half. I'm not going to go into the ethics of this decision. In war, one makes decision that delivers death. That's what war is. It's why it needs to be avoided by everyone on both sides. To make it nice and civilized is just morally and intellectually wrong. We basically had the lesser of two evils because in this war, there were no good results or decision. Only death and destruction and Truman wanted to take the one of least destruction.

Now, BO wants to disarm US. Iran is going to pursue them, North Korea has got them, Pakistan is fighting to keep them from jihadist, India won't give them up with their Islamic enemy, as well as others. These countries aren't going to give them up because it would be suicide to do so. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) has to be one of the most completely insane political strategy in history. However, when the Russians had to choose between their ideals vs. their lives, they choose their lives. We now face enemies that would rather die and will not hesitate to murder by the millions of civilians while taking their own lives to promote their evil agendas. Keeping us armed won't necessary will bring peace or prevent an attack against these insane lunatics. One thing for sure, disarming ourselves definably will not. Using moral relativism isn't going to change the fact that many of our enemies are just plain evil and would gladly murder us by the masses and deem themselves righteous.

To make us immoral because of this terrible chapter of human history distorts the facts and circumstances. It's the height of arrogance to state otherwise. It shows a complete disregards of history and it lessons. Now because we ended this terrible war by using this weapon, and don't forget we were at war against a fanatical enemy that was willing to fight us to the bitter end, and ended up, ironically, saving lives on both side just show the complete hatred of America and will use any method to smear her. It's bad enough to fail to learn from history. It's worse to distort it a liberal moral relative agenda and commit societal suicide.

BO can go and disarm the US. It won't make us look more moral, in fact, we'll appear more immoral because we won't fight for our principles. It won't make the enemy think we're righteous, in fact, they think we're weak and worthy of our our destruction. It won't make us more loved in the world, in fact, we'll be more disdained because we won't be trusted to protect them or be vulnerable. It won't make BO look like a moral leader. It will make him look like what he is: a weak, miserable, pathetic excuse of a leader that knows nothing of history.

No comments: