licentious radio

Thursday, March 6, 2003
[10:19:06 PM]

"Dramatically raising his right hand, the president [sic] said that he had swore to defend the Constitution and protect America's security. 'That's exactly what I am going to do,' he said."

Note the future tense.

This is from the guy who wouldn't let the FBI investigate terrorists, resulting in the September 11 attacks. This is from the guy who called Kim Jong II a "pygmy" and an "axis of evil", and threatened preemptive attacks, even with nuclear weapons.

[10:11:27 PM]
In honor of Delay:

Nation's fascists, political whores, and morons support pledge: "The various Citizens who believe in Democracy and the Constitution were, like: 'There you go again.' "

[5:40:47 PM]
I think I've finally got the picture: why Bush thinks we need to invade Iraq. It looks like you can just take (some of) his words at face value. In a world of terrorism against nations -- us -- any leader of a state is a threat. Saddam could disarm today, but re-arm in three years. So we ex Saddam, and install US-friendly leaders.

The problem is that this grand strategy means we go around conquering any country that *might* be a threat to us someday. It makes us the mortal enemy of anyone we don't like.

It almost sounds good, frankly, until you think about applying it to the world. Pakistan is a proliferater. It supplied North Korea with nuclear technology, and it appears that Pakistan is willing to supply nukes to other countries. (How about Syria, or Egypt?) Pakistan's leader is a brutal dictator, who seized power in a military coup d'etat. Pakistan is practically the epicenter of militant Islam. Saudi Arabia may fund and export hate-based religion, but Pakistan has the large population headed into hatred. Bush's friend, General Mush, can barely control the country. Next week or next year, the fundamentalists could take over completely -- including the nukes. And for that matter, the Taliban were sponsored by Pakistan. The Taliban sponsored the September 11 attackers.

So Pakistan is really threat number one. North Korea is threat number two. But you won't see us conquering Pakistan or North Korea. Whether or not *oil* plays into that, we just don't have a big enough army to force "democracy" on either.

The fact that we *don't* regime change Pak or N. Korea makes the world a *far* more dangerous place after we invade Iraq. When it's clear that we invade Iraq because it's an easy target, every country in the world will be forced to become a harder target for us. They'll have to go out and get nukes quick. If you think your neighbor is getting nukes, you need them, too. And all the countries with nukes could someday-maybe hand a nuke to a terrorist to use against us.

With everyone rushing for nukes, the whole world spins out of control. And with all the countries with nukes could someday-maybe hand a nuke to a terrorist to use against us.

So conquering potential enemies turns out to be the simpleton's answer -- Bush's answer. Instead of making the world safer, it makes the world more dangerous.

[4:45:24 PM]
Bye bye Estrada. We hardly questioned ye.