Well, thanks, Joe...

24 October 2008 | Ron Pickrell

[pickrell]

It was a time that truth may have slipped out, in an unguarded moment.

Fresh from the National Security Briefing which is given to two men- one of whom will become President in a few weeks- and apparently confided to their running mates as well, a nervous Joe Biden approached the microphones.

He had presumably heard something which had given him a dry mouth and wet pants, and so felt that the secret must be immediately compromised, in order to show how seriously he takes security.

"Mark my words, Barack will be challenged in the next six months. And it will not be immediately apparent that our response will be the correct one."

Now, what do we make of this?

If we are one of those who wait until the crisis is defined, at least by the media, then we say nothing until we are told what to think. Oh... and we pretend that we thought it all along.

But let's say that we aren't.

Let's instead examine what may lie ahead. Biden has apparently seen a National Security Estimate, in which the enemies of the United States who await eagerly the coming possibility of a Obama Presidency, have determined that they will give him just enough time in office to declare defeat in Iraq, and mire the balance of U.S. forces,(who are now suffering almost no casualties in Iraq, due to the win), deeply into Afghanistan, where they will suffer the same awful casualties that the Russians did there, due to topography. And the same depredations of "friendly journalists", who will seek out their fame by catching them out in "atrocities."

And once this neophyte has returned the U.S. to the originally Al Quaeda envisioned game plan, and begun reducing the "unneccessary and wasteful use of taxpayer money to support baby killers," they will then be free to act.

If it was enough to rattle and excite Biden into a ridiculous and incredible violation of a secret briefing he had just received, we can only wonder what he heard?

Or can we?

We know the Chinese have been steadily and seriously building their conventional forces up, now that the Clinton turnover of our nuclear secrets has rendered the "nuclear umbrella" over free Asia a moot point. And that they realize, if no liberal does in the U.S., that a properly framed intimidation of the new "Chinese" Pacific can probably be had bloodlessly now, since the U.S. can no longer guarantee the rim nation's freedoms. They were sold into serfdom over a decade ago, and haven't the political will to band together to oppose this. Like us, they have enjoyed prosperity for too long. The safe "enemy" to take on are the U.S. troops who have protected South Korea for four decades. Demonstrating is more fun that fighting to protect your families' lives, they will discover.

The Al Quaeda, who all along have waged an asymmetrical war designed to bleed and collapse the U.S. economically, being able to take advantage of the fact that conventional forces cannot be everywhere at once, have only to wait until the Community Investment Act completes its damage, and renders us incapable of funding further action.

North Korea, nearly prostrate before the mismanagement of it's economy has now only the remaining card of unpredictable insanity up it's sleeve, and the threat that unless the South capitulates, it will unleash massive death, using those weapons Bill Clinton got universal acclaim over a decade ago for preventing.

In short, there are a number of scenarios which an incoming President will have to respond to. And what tools will be at his disposal? We really need to know this. Let's examine them. Our enemies, after all, certainly have.

The President needs to have reliable information gathered by covert means. If he waits until events have happened, in order to find out about them on the Drudge Report, then he is far too late obviously, to prevent anything. Yet where will he get this information? Why, from the same sources President Bush and the Congress got the last information! Suddenly the benefit of hindsight is removed from those who rage in hindsight. Suddenly the future of millions, if not billions depend on that information being trusted and acted upon, in time for it to do any good.

But where comes that information? Certainly not through covert agents on the ground. The Democrats managed to gut our ground agents by painting the CIA as ruthless killers, and has forbidden us to employ any other than model citizens. Our capability of infiltrating and gathering information will take years to rebuild from scratch. Years we now longer have. The future many of us warned about back then, is now here.

Well then, at least from covert surveillance? No, the Democrats also managed to gut that by attempting to take telephone companies, and any others who cooperate with intelligence agencies, to court. Failing that, they have at least frantically alerted Al Quaeda to beware of where they are vulnerable.

Surely, then, at least through information obtained by countries who are still allowed to gather intelligence? No, wrong again. Liberal sympathisers in our agencies have leaked enough top-secret information to the media, who then published it, that the other countries will not endanger their agents' lives further. They finally have to admit a lost cause, when they see it.

But... is not the President to be selected for his ability to speak eloquently in majestic terms? What need he for the critical ability to issue effective, rational orders to our military, police and other security forces to take action to protect the nation? Is it not better to sit down with our enemies, share coffee and our innermost feelings? Why do we really need, when you get right down to it, to know ahead of time who intends to kill us and our friends? Isn't it better to know who loves us, instead...?

What other tools does he have?

1... Well, he controls what is now a greatly diminished military in terms of troop numbers. But how did these numbers get diminished? Also, another easy one. Clinton decided to "balance the budget" in his last term, which is a code phrase for jumping to take credit for what the Republican Congress had set into motion in beginning the dismantling of the welfare state. The number of troops was pared down dramatically during his tenure. It lead to the pained statement that Sec. Rumsfeld had to make, when he admitted, "Sometimes you go to war with the military you have, instead of the military you want."

But what did Rummy mean by this? Was he forced to admit publically that Clinton has cost us much of the military that Reagan left us, and now we face a new and urgent threat with insufficient troops to deal with it? Was this Bush's fault for having failed to prevent Clinton from gutting our military? After, while he held no elective office at the time, the press has been quick to point out that Bush was, in fact alive during that period. Yet our enemies have been shocked (and awed) to realize that, though their numbers be far fewer, our troops are the best educated, the best armed and the most effective we have ever fielded. Volunteers are like that; they protect what they value, and under Gen. Patraeus' management, they weren't forced to fight an LBJ-styled, one-arm-tied-behind-your-back war. At least... up until now.

So, the President has an Armed Forces decreased in number but fiercely motivated by the notion that they are supported by the folks back home. But are they? Is this support a mile wide and 3 weeks deep? Will folks while they are afraid, call out from hiding in the tall grass, "Please save us! But if it takes more than 5 weeks, understand that our Congressmen will call you thugs and Nazis when you begin to win. And our Senators will claim the war cannot be won, and that you are all dying needlessly, and ineffectively. And we know you brutalize the enemy. But other than that- could you save us please? Oh, and don't bother to vote because the Democrats have a plan to deal with that, also..."

2... Well, we have the assurance of the alliances we have cultivated. But do we?

The problem with alliances is the same as the problem with health insurance. We assume that when trouble comes to us, we will spread out the risk, the cost and the pain among all of those "policy holders." That somehow, they will back us when things seem the worst.

What we will find is that most of our "allies" have their own yellow press, and cannot wait for their chance to watch the world's economic superpower brought to it's knees, so that their chance at ascendency arrives. No matter that they, in their blindness, will suffer the same fate as their grandfathers did, militarily. Only then... the U.S. was there to help. No longer, Jaques.

3... He has the bipartisan support of the responsible members of Congress. The problem is that both of them are retiring soon. The rest will throw anyone under the bus if they perceive a gain to themselves. The idea of the nation first, is now a hollow joke.

4... Well, at least he has the unwavering support of the American people. And this is the saddest of all illusions. The American people have grown used to the idea that they are entitled to the good life- that somehow it is inconceivable that things will not eventually get back to the debt-financed economic good-times of the eighties and nineties. They have been told that the mess left by Clinton has now been cleaned up, the blame and the cost successfully pinned on the inarticulate Bush, and so it is time to return to the comfortable era of legislating and borrowing our way back to wealth.

What will the next President be armed with? Sadly it will be the remnants. The remnants of what we had taken for granted and allowed to be trashed, under the orchestration of the liberal media. Our soldiers will still be the best in the world, but probably too few. Our remaining wealth has in the past bought weapons systems which enabled us to avoid cannon fodder in those troops, but probably no longer. Our intelligence used to forewarn us about possible threats, but now ineffectively. Our people used to be adults, but now are consumers. Our Congress used to put the safety of the nation first, and understand that we live in a dangerous world. But now, well... it's election time.

And now that the "Borking" of Bush has been completed, the next President needs to learn quickly that the public has no patience for truth, no stomach for military reality, and no comprehension that our wealth came from overseas trade, as well as domestic consumption.

And both "next Presidents" and their running mates know this.

Only one of them has the weak knees to ask for your forgiveness ahead of time. Only one of them has said that in front of the world's cameras. Only one of them thinks that this will somehow insulate him from all that his party is, and will be, responsible for.

Would he have done the same thing in 1929, when he was FDR's Vice-President?

[Perdogg]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgbS-vy9_Sk

[perfect_rovian_storm]

W O W!!!

[RasterMaster]

Well, at least the opponents are entertaining....

Joe “Plugs” Biden plugs for THE VILLAGES retirement community....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmRXH7RkCZQ