They are under your sink now, in the bottle labeled 'ammonia'...Go ahead - sniff. Blaahch!

Jan

Hell with the parties, they are both evil... get the most qualified Candidates and work like hell to get them elected.

first of all, "Stupid is as Stupid does", and I don't think any one can make a case for rational thinking regarding the Iranian theocracy.

Second, throwing National Sovereignty aside for a "fixed or coherent" policy fits perfectly with the concept of One World Government or New World Order. The Iranians would argue that their view of a coherent foreign policy is much better for them than the US idea of coherent. I believe the policy will be set or approved by the UN, negating the need for US congress and ultimately constitutional government...all for the sake of a unified and coherent policy. I believe this will happen because our fearless leader has already floated many trial balloons to test the American people's willingness to surrender their sovereignty. a.) in going after Khadafy, Obama chose to confer with NATO, the UN, and other governments rather than his own congress. b.) during an oil shortage in his first term he acted on the advice of the International Energy Commission to release large quantities of oil from our strategic reserve. These decisions were not the business of foreign influences until our leader chose to allow this influence, or maybe preferred to respond to world influence. More recently, he writes in secret to the Ayatollahs to pave the way for his great "agreement" with Iran and openly leaks plans to seek approval from the UN, rather than seek advice and consent from the Senate.

I already know I am a knuckle dragging Neanderthal when compared with "Mr. Nuance", John Cary. A student of the dynamics of free markets, human nature, and the freedom offered by the US Constitution could never understand something as complex as US foreign policy. I'll stipulate all of that. However, I am a US citizen before I am a world citizen. I read my Constitution often and marvel at the simple language guaranteeing my freedom from government and sovereignty, both personal and as a Nation. I don't see a benefit gained from losing it.

It is true wars are fought differently these days. Wars once were fought to win, and to the victor went the spoils. Now wars are fought to feed the military/industrial complex, relieve local political pressures, topple unfriendly regimes, and most important, there can never be a clear winner; we must fight to a draw. That is a dreadful waste of blood and treasure, and nothing is really solved.

My bottom line is we should run our railroad and let the rest of the world run theirs. If that results in a conflict between Israel and Iran, they will solve it. Our involvement only leads to the next crisis of resentment in the area. The more energy independent we become, the less relevant the middle east problems are in out life. Truly, if the whole region becomes nuclear that's fine, until they come our way. Then, if they really want to go nuclear, maybe we would be justified in giving them more nuclear energy in a day than they can comprehend. Just an armed society is a polite society, the Saudi's having a nuke may do more for Iran's behavior than anything we have to offer.

and if they send us a few icbms, we'll probably
turn their cities to green glass. . next president. -- j

The medals he tossed through the fence were his brothers.

He might have thrown them away, but he sure ran his mouth about his 5 Purple Hearts when he made his last run for the White House. As I recall, there was some difference of opinion as to how many of them were legitimate.