The way I see the issue of nuclear weapons threat is that eventually it will reach the point that every damn country in this world will be intimidated by one another, therefore will develop their own weapons as a means of protection.
Let's not get complacent when it comes to Nuclear weapons, North Korea may still have a long way to go in developing a supreme nuclear weapon, but we need to stop them while their developing.
I don't openly support nuclear weapons and in a perfect world no one should have them, but if it means living without the knowledge of my own countries weapons, I feel a sense of securedness with an ally such as the United States. I just hope that if the United States decide to take any action that it be sensible and not cause consequences for any country. If so, there is the potential for world war III, and it will be a far different war to any other the world has seen. Unfortunately, today, the world is a very vunerable place

PACK YOUR RICE, DANDONG.

PACK YOUR RICE, DANDONG.

Pack your rice.

Pack your rice.

I read your "report" twice in hopes my second scanning would enlighten me as to your point...no such luck. Are you upset that we (military) have exercises, is it the senerio we have? I'm sure you are smart enough to understand why the military chooses to exercise, so I am at a lose as to why this article was even written. Unless you thought you sounded cool by say country code names and yearly exercise names.
I'm sure you would have been the first to complain 5 years ago if we had an exercise dealing with the flooding of New Orleans, how the city could never flood and it was a watse of tax payer dollars.
Well my friend we in the military exercise for things unseen and unknown, so when that bomb goes of in the middle of Nebraska or downtown Dallas we know what to do. War with Russia...you say it can't happen...I say anything is possible in these times, better to be safe than sorry.

You have a great site
buy viagra
http://noticeboard.calimera.org/calimera/portal_memberdata/portraits/lwc
[url=http://noticeboard.calimera.org/calimera/portal_memberdata/portraits/lwc]buy viagra[/url]

Itz coming. Pack your rice.

www.vault-co.com

The future is so bright, I gotta wear shades.

Hi, i write from Italy, i'm really scared of neo-con politic line,and the aggressive way of thinking of the ex freedom land.
Wake up!!! Eleven nine si a false-flag, you're falling quikly into fascism.
United states are today hated by all the world, from Italy to Germany, Egipt to Cina...Stop with your stupid arrogance, you are a violent country that do like an aggressive, fat dangerous child who don't respect nobody and nothing.
We know mafia in Italy very well, and i can assure you that your administration works in a mafious way... You are under the danger of terrorism, you are loosing your liberties with the war on terror, but the real terrorist is your government...you pay your government with your liberties to have the "protection". Wake up!!!WAKE UP!!! It's clear that 11/9 is a work of C.I.A.

Posted by: Drake,

"The exercises described in the article above are necessary in order to have our forces trained to succesfuly handle any situation that may arise. Please continue to mock and degrade the military leadership and Bush administration for their decisions while you are alive, free and able to write articles such as this without having your head taken off execution style."

Drake,

Nice try at fear tactics before the midtern elections. This administration is very open to debate over the course it is taking this country, very little mockery is aimed at the military. You seem to be unable to separate the military from Bush, that is alarming! Our president is a neocon, but then I sure you don't know what that is.

The exercises described in the article above are necessary in order to have our forces trained to succesfuly handle any situation that may arise. Please continue to mock and degrade the military leadership and Bush administration for their decisions while you are alive, free and able to write articles such as this without having your head taken off execution style.

-PROUD OIF VETERAN AND AMERICAN

Posted by: Matt,

" What political agenda can he have for staying in Iraq or insiting North Korea?"

The political agenda is maintaining a Rebublican controled congress for the next two years. If not, and both houses of Congress are lost, bush will face a hostile Congress ( http://www.johnconyers.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={D9835E47-A9C2-4892-9306-A50D5E1B7F58}) that will not hesitate to take action on his disobeying the law. All congressional committees will put witnesses under oath. The rubber stamp is gone.

I am fascinated with this discution thus far, of late I have read things like "Discuss facts or get off the line."
"Stand up to truth or get off the line."
I find statements like these and others of a similar nature bring some questions to mind. First, What is truth? Who's perception of this "truth" are we referring to? Finally, What is fact and how are those of us involved in this discussion to use the "facts" if not to support our argument. The questions I presented about truth I will not explore here as they are a matter of philosophy and not politics. The question about facts I am going to address. I ask, "What is fact?"
Merriam-Webster's online dictionary has 7 definitions for the word fact. The one I am going to use for my essay is the following: "A piece of information presented as having objective reality."
In light of the above definition I would like to define the word objective, again my source will be Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, which has 4 postings for this particular word. Again the following: "Expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feeling, prejudicies, or interpretations." I will not define reality as that again falls under the realm of philosophy. These definitions are only to give a common ground for my essay and any following either by others or myself and should not be taken out of that context.
Now that what can be construed as fact has been limited I will continue.
In this discussion I have read many well thought out and presented arguments, my agreement or disagreement thereof being irreverent. Many of have been backed by statics presented as fact. Statics are a wonderful tool, but can be misleading at times. To show what I mean I am going to use a medical example.
Heart attaches are said to be a major cause of death in americans.. The National Heart, Lung and Blood instiute reports that 1.1 million Americans suffer from heart attaches every year, of those they report about460,000 are fatal. Lets take this statical fact,(still fact because at this point it is only a piece of information, nothing more.) and add a little perspective. 460,000 people is about the size of a medium sized city. Denver, Colorado for example having a population of 554,636 in the year 2000 according to the United States census Bureau. 460,000 is 82.94% of Denver's total population. That is rather alarming don't you think? at the above rate in 2 years all the people in Denver plus 64% of another city(your pick) have been wiped out. Rather alarming, don't you think?
But, wait lets put a slightly different perspective on the same statics. In the year 2000 the total us population was reported as being 299,946,138 people.(source is the same as above) Take Denver, its population only makes up.184% of our total. The number of people dying of heart attaches, accounts for even less than that, about .153%, assuming the fatal numbers remain the same, it will take 100 years for 15% of our population to die of a heart attach. It is no wonder our government does not fund reacerch in this area.
By adding a perspective either for or opposing a cause I have given the statics two opposing personalities, thus making them more than mere fact based off the afore mentioned definition of the term fact. I have the statics a justification for suppositions be they right or wrong.
Back to the discussion about our current affairs concerning Korea and the like.
Fact, I do not know what will happen with North Korea in the future, I can only guess based off what I see transpiring. Same as everyone else. Fact, In armed conflict regardless of who started it people get hurt and killed. Not only the Militaries, but the "uninvolved" civilians too.
History of the Middle East, well how far back in history are we going to look? And what about the history of the Far East?
Patrick might not have meant to compare war to a chess game, I however, meant exactly that when I use the example the first time.
(No I am not presenting this as fact, rather opinion with logical backing, so don't even go there.) War is a fight on a large scale. There are tactics, stragities, planning and the like on all sides of the fight war if you like. Each side uses its militaries, still comprised of people by the way, to fortify, defend and attach as they deem nessary. the opposition does the like based off not only actual position of their enemy, but, projected future stances as well. Both sides have to plan what ground to take, give up, and defend. both sides of war also have to decide what losses are and are not acceptable in all situations. Losses in terms of equipment, supplies and militaries(people).
In chess, there are 2 players each having 16 pieces with different strengths and weakness at their disposal. The object of the game is to force your opponent king into a position where if he were to move he would be captured( everyone use your imagations after that). In order to accomplish this goal each player must vie for position on a 64 square board by attaching, fortifying, defending, and counter attaching. Each player must determine to the best of their ability the correct means and timing for all this. the one that does better wins. Sounds to me like the way I described war. In the abstract for every move there is a counter, this should go on until all legal moves have been exhausted, in this light I will agree with the statement nobody wins a war.
I do not belittle the personal sacrifice many have made. In time, in life, or in limb. All life has something unique to offer and when it is lost, those unique charistics are lost with it. This is regardless of means of death. Weather by War, car accident, shooting, old age, the poor ant that was squashed. Please morn those who have lost their lives. Remember too how armed conflict is planned.
One closing thought, We have discussed Bushes political agenda with regard to Iraq and North Korea. President Bush is a "lame duck" president. What political agenda can he have for staying in Iraq or insiting North Korea?

Patrick,

I can assure you I am not Mr. Arkin. Until Emily Messener left, I debated in her blog under another ID. A few of her debaters are still around, but most seem to have left. As for who I am, I was born in the USA in 1957. I can't really criticize the military, it's the civilian neocons and what they are doing to the military and the rest of my country that highly disturb me. I have studied history for over 30 years, always kept up with current events, especially politics. I am a moderate Democrat, both conservative and liberal, our ideas to solve our problems are like tools in a tool box, we should choose the best tool for the job as well as the best Idea for our nations problems, be they liberal or conservative. A house built with only a screw driver is not a strong house and a Nation controlled by only one political party is weak nation.

Now to dissect your comments.

"One small point that I was trying to make is that tragically, our country is divided, seemingly more and more deeply into right and left ways of thinking. If we can't start finding a middle ground sometime other than during crisis, we're screwed if it ever does come down to a "stand up" war."

Not just war, natural disasters should be included. An acquaintance of mine who works for FEMA asked her supervisor immediately after Katrina struck NOLA if their office was going to aid the city, her supervisor stated she called Washington and was told not to aid NOLA, because the City supported John Kerry in the election and not Bush. The nation has not been this divided since the civil war and that division did not end until the Radical Republicans lost control of congress. When Republicans took control of congress in 1994, many stated they were going to be the permanent majority. To me that is an arrogant appalling statement to make. We have always had dirty politics, but this group of republicans led by the neocons, most of whom are old Nixonites have gone to new lows and I mostly blame them for the division, for they have used divisiveness to gain and hold power. When Lee Atwater knew he was near death from cancer, he realized what he had done to people in the name of politics and tried to track them down and apologize. He found one individual and asked for forgiveness, the man replied "I can't forgive you, only God can".

"Make no mistakes, if things go down with the madman to my north, there isn't any doubt that it will be a huge costly war, more like WWII than anything else that's happened since."

I disagree, this is going to fall on China to solve. Not at all like WWII, my father was a DAV from WWII. NK is isolated, not hardly a world war. If Bush doesn't cut out the "Red Neck" threats he's going to goad NK into giving terrorists the bomb.

"These little mud wars are always a trying afair, and we lost in Vietnam, because we didn't fight the war completely. I'll agree with Willy here, if you shakle the military, they can't do their job completely."

What many don't realize about the Vietnam War is if we invaded NV, a nuclear armed China would have entered the war, as they did in the Korean War. And at that point in time they were much better equipped and trained. So no, I absolutely think this talk of if we stuck it out in Vietnam we would have won is pure fiction. There are few wars today you can describe as win or lose, usually both lose, some more that the other. It's called war of attrition, when the winner is the one that loses the least, it can hardly be called a win. THIS IS NOT A FOOTBALL GAME!

" War is in no way a good thing. People suffer. There isn't really any way out of it, when it comes down to it. Let's compare it to an unjustified fight. If you only hit your opponent a little bit then try to make friends, you're going to lose. If you hit someone until they unconditionally surrender, beat them into submission, find a way to take the fight out of them, OR disable them completely, you will definitely win. We seem to be treatingour opponents more kindly (thinking this will expedite the healing process) than actually beating them."

I disagree, if someone tries to beat me into submission, I'll retaliate anyway I can. Your comment is pure American ethnocentrism, it only recruits more terrorists. If we go around doing as you stated, then we are nothing more than Nazis. Look carefully at what you wrote and think about it. I love my country and want us to be the good guys, not the ones that going around kicking ass, because we can, that's unamerican. And not only that, it's puts a big terrorist bulls-eye on us.

"Whoever decided to jump more into topics like the power being out, and other things like that; you're right things are bad. On the other side, there are a lot of other things going on. If you live on base here in Japan, and are too cheap to spring for cable, you're left with AFN (also if you're anywhere else overseas, plan on that being the only place to watch American programing). There are constantly updates, (vice comercials) and many of some of these are propaganda. Propaganda for everything from good health to war updates about good things in Iraq/Afghanistan. It's funny, there are all sorts of hospitals, orphanages, and schools where servicemembers fixed the structures, then spent extra off duty hours helping out, and recruited their families to get supplies for the kids. Check out http://pentagonchannel.freedom.com and watch for a while for more information."

I chatted with a young soldier just out of basic training, he told how he learned in training how Iraq was connected to 911. I told him Iraq was not and bush and cheney had publicly stated so. My point is, AFN is not the best source for accurate news, it is a good source of propaganda, worse than FOX.

"Anyway, back to the debate, as I'd mentioned before, I've spent time around vetrans, both in one piece and disabled (in the Iraqi war and others). Many of them from this war publicly won't say if they think we should be there or not, or if they regret their choice of volunteering for service. Most of them when asked if they think if their injuries were worth it will simply say something to the effect of they have no regrets as long as we finish things the right way in Iraq. I couldn't imagine telling a disabled vet that we should give up a cause that they sacrificed so much for. Now please let me clarify what I was saying before. I'll agree that it was kind of extreme for me to to bring up the topic of military deaths and comparing it to the deaths in LA. That was mainly to provide perspective on the number of deaths. This isn't quite as large of a number as some journalists would have us believe,"

Your opinion based on what fact? I think casualties are probably higher than reported.

"but it doesn't really make it any less costly. It doesn't seem to slow down the amount of volunteers for the military though does it?"

Actually that is a misleading statement. It is still all volunteer, but the armed forces are having to take many much less qualified recruits to meet quotas. I have a friend whose son had been arrested several times and until recently was turned down by the army, but now has been accepted. The murder/rape that took place in Iraq was perpetrated by one of these unqualified recruits.

" I will also have to talk in a broader aspect though, and compare it to chess or some other game. You're still doing more damage than you're taking, you should see it through, to win. It's going to cost more lives, but if we do things right out there, we will also show that part of the world how the freedoms we take for granted can be theirs."

Again you speak from an ethnocentric position. Most people in that part of the world don't want our freedoms and will never be mini-Americas. I'm not sure what you mean by damage, from a dollars spent to fight this war, we are getting our asses kicked, USA $300,000,000,000 to their $250,000,000.

"I guess it doesn't really matter what you really think, but all in all there's a million reasons that you can put a spin on why we're there. But we need to finish it though, for our injured troops, to save face, and to keep our fight with Al Queda focused more overseas as much as possible. As I'd stated before, I don't think that it's responsible, just, or morally acceptable to just dump this in the fledgling government's laps yet. On the other hand, I'll actually agree with a statment that Mr. Denton made in that our occupation was less than well planned, but I will stress again, that we can't just quit now, we have to finish it!"

Patrick, you need to look back at the history of Iraq and for that matter the Middle East as a whole, not mention the Islamic culture. Finishing it for the injured troops is only going to bring more dead and injured troops????????????? and then you go back for them??????? You can look at the "keeping the fight over there" in different ways. First of all, diplomacy comes first and Bush refuses this option. Second the troops getting wounded and killed are Americans, so the argument America is safe if the fight is over there isn't true, Americans are still dieing. Fledgling government, that government will never stand on it's own, wake up! Iraq is going to be partitioned with civil war or a controlled partitioning to reduce the bloodshed. You think al Qaeda can't enter this country? If 11,000,000 impoverished illegals got in here, well funded Al Qaeda can also. Why should they try at this point, we are sending our people to them to be killed.

"Once again back to my thoughts on the DPRK (North Korea for those of you who don't know). It will be a standup war, the likes of which have not been seen before, with a madman infinetly more evil than people think. This aren't just scare tactics, nearly everything that I've added here is fact also, (although it might take a while for me to do all the research) only showing a more right wing spin. Which is as unbudging as several other people's opinions that have put out blogs here. The way I see it, they're starving in North Korea, and things are getting worse. The bird flu, typhoons, and other things are making a bad situation worse. Instead of going ahead and taking a path that the six nation's talks were asking (ie not performing missile tests) and getting aid, they've gone and alienated themselves more from a few of the countries that might provide aid. South Korea, Russia, and China are now starting to provide even less aid, so there's even less food to go around. They're getting more and more dangerous as the bellies go empty. This country will either implode (people rising against their government/leaders, then asking for aid) or explode, following that insane midget into destruction. But if we don't even have the resolve to finish things in our other two conflicts, how can North Korea take anything we say seriously. If they conduct this nuclear test, they may have finally ended their support in Russia and China, making things worse, we'll just have to wait and see..."

As stated, China will be the big player in this, not us. NK is China's stepchild, the pressure will be put on China. China will not accept an American occupation of NK and have our troops positioned on their border. And since they are our banker now, they have the clout, because bush has put us in financial debt to China.

In regard to Patricks Ranting:
The following is clear from your ranting:
1.You are a follower and have chosen the military because it justifies your personality.

Nothing wrong with that. After all, it is (still-somewhat) a free country.

2.You believe that America is "divided".

This is a problem, as those who see division among their fellow citizens feel compelled to take sides.

3.You believe that the "madman" / "insane midget" in the "north" will somehow be the provoker of a great war.

This argument is based on 'sound bites' spoon-fed to you by the media.
Madeline Albright (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kim/interviews/albright.html), who served as a successful diplomat actually sat down in discussion with North Korea. This is what is called diplomacy (more on that later). There is no incentive for North Korea to engage any nation in war. These people want to survive, just as anyone else does. So, in order to 'survive' there is an inherent need for North Korea to defend itself.

4.You think that a nuclear test will dissuade China and Russia from supporting them.

This is more propaganda served up by the media. The Russians are actively engaged in selling the very nuclear technology that is being used to produce the nuclear material to both the Chinese and North Korea. By the way, who was the first to sell nuclear technology to North Korea? I will give you a hint: It was made in the USA. Educate yourself on the facts, it may just surprise you.

Your ranting is clearly biased and based not on facts, but on fragmented sound bites and coached thinking (that is the price of serving in the military). Your ranting sounds more like a poor attempt at propaganda dissemination.

The truth is that Bush & Co have adamantly refused to sit down in discussion with North Korea, instead they have chosen podium based finger waving as their form of (failed) diplomacy. The presidential duty is to be a diplomat first and foremost. This is where bush has failed the American people on every level. When a the government fails at diplomacy, they have failed in their duty.

Ask yourself why Bush & co has refused to sit down and talk with North Korea.

The issue with North Korea is driven by the military complex's need to justify and once again establish the military complex as a required force. The military solution is not a solution, but a means to the end....... which will be the end of our freedoms.

Stand up to the truth.....Or get off the line.....

DC,
Well I have to say, you do have some points, but then again, most of the people that have contributed more than a line or two have also. As you said, it's much better to have a reasonable debate against knowlegable opponents. Unfortunately something that we have to worry about here is when people get hotheaded, they digress into name calling and other personal insults. It seems to me that everyone here has their own beliefs, but I have to applaud you for coming up with a little bit more than only a Bush sucks kind of things, but you're every bit as unbudging as I am. While I myself can not really be above all that childish rants, I'll go ahead and tell you a little about myself, then move on to my thoughts, and opinions, while trying to keep this impersonal. I myself am currently on active duty, stationed overseas in Japan, with a mere 8 years in the military. I have been to Iraq and Afghanistan, and have lost friends there. I'm not foolish enough to say anything about any life really being above another. I'm not foolish enough to say that being crippled for life is worth only an ideal. But I still volunteer for the largest volunteer military on the planet, because I believe in what we're doing.

The fact is that opinions are like rear ends, everyone has one, and they all stink. One small point that I was trying to make is that tragically, our country is divided, seemingly more and more deeply into right and left ways of thinking. If we can't start finding a middle ground sometime other than during crisis, we're screwed if it ever does come down to a "stand up" war. Make no mistakes, if things go down with the madman to my north, there isn't any doubt that it will be a huge costly war, more like WWII than anything else that's happened since. These little mud wars are always a trying afair, and we lost in Vietnam, because we didn't fight the war completely. I'll agree with Willy here, if you shakle the military, they can't do their job completely. War is in no way a good thing. People suffer. There isn't really any way out of it, when it comes down to it. Let's compare it to an unjustified fight. If you only hit your opponent a little bit then try to make friends, you're going to lose. If you hit someone until they unconditionally surrender, beat them into submission, find a way to take the fight out of them, OR disable them completely, you will definetly win. We seem to be treatingour opponents more kindly (thinking this will expedite the healing process) than actually beating them. Whoever decided to jump more into topics like the power being out, and other things like that; you're right things are bad. On the other side, there are a lot of other things going on. If you live on base here in Japan, and are too cheap to spring for cable, you're left with AFN (also if you're anywhere else overseas, plan on that being the only place to watch american programing). There are constantly updates, (vice comercials) and many of some of these are propaganda. Propaganda for everything from good health to war updates about good things in Iraq/Afghanistan. It's funny, there are all sorts of hospitals, orphanages, and schools where servicemembers fixed the structures, then spent extra off duty hours helping out, and recruited their families to get supplies for the kids. Check out http://pentagonchannel.freedom.com and watch for a while for more information.

Anyway, back to the debate, as I'd mentioned before, I've spent time around vetrans, both in one piece and disabled (in the Iraqi war and others). Many of them from this war publicly won't say if they think we should be there or not, or if they regret their choice of volunteering for service. Most of them when asked if they think if their injuries were worth it will simply say something to the effect of they have no regrets as long as we finish things the right way in Iraq. I couldn't imagine telling a disabled vet that we should give up a cause that they sacrificed so much for. Now please let me clarify what I was saying before. I'll agree that it was kind of extreme for me to to bring up the topic of military deaths and comparing it to the deaths in LA. That was mainly to provide perspective on the number of deaths. This isn't quite as large of a number as some journalists would have us believe, but it doesn't really make it any less costly. It doesn't seem to slow down the amount of volunteers for the military though does it? I will also have to talk in a broader aspect though, and compare it to chess or some other game. You're still doing more damage than you're taking, you should see it through, to win. It's going to cost more lives, but if we do things right out there, we will also show that part of the world how the freedoms we take for granted can be theirs. I guess it doesn't really matter what you really think, but all in all there's a million reasons that you can put a spin on why we're there. But we need to finish it though, for our injured troops, to save face, and to keep our fight with Al Queda focused more overseas as much as possible. As I'd stated before, I don't think that it's responsible, just, or morally acceptable to just dump this in the fledgling government's laps yet. On the other hand, I'll actually agree with a statment that Mr. Denton made in that our occupation was less than well planned, but I will stress again, that we can't just quit now, we have to finish it!

Once again back to my thoughts on the DPRK (North Korea for those of you who don't know). It will be a standup war, the likes of which have not been seen before, with a madman infinetly more evil than people think. This aren't just scare tactics, nearly everything that I've added here is fact also, (although it might take a while for me to do all the research) only showing a more right wing spin. Which is as unbudging as several other people's opinions that have put out blogs here. The way I see it, they're starving in North Korea, and things are getting worse. The bird flu, typhoons, and other things are making a bad situation worse. Instead of going ahead and taking a path that the six nation's talks were asking (ie not performing missile tests) and getting aid, they've gone and alienated themselves more from a few of the countries that might provide aid. South Korea, Russia, and China are now starting to provide even less aid, so there's even less food to go around. They're getting more and more dangerous as the bellies go empty. This country will either implode (people rising against their government/leaders, then asking for aid) or explode, following that insane midget into destruction. But if we don't even have the resolve to finish things in our other two conflicts, how can North Korea take anything we say seriously. If they conduct this nuclear test, they may have finally ended their support in Russia and China, making things worse, we'll just have to wait and see...

Sorry willy's gone, but I'm here huckleberry....

Posted by: Willy'

"So much for reasoned debate...see ya."

Now Willy you don't have to "cut and run". This is an open debate and it's so difficult to find neocons, Republicans, or conservatives to debate with, after all it's an almost impossible job to defend the right these days. I prefer not to debate in blogs where everyone agrees with me, no challenge there. I hope you stay around to debate, if not ....see ya.

BTW, every word of my comment can be backed up with facts.

DC--wrong! And after dedicating 32 years of my life to this nation as a warrior or employee...nuc alerts, JUST CAUSE, DESERT STORM, DESERT FOX...I don't need your permission or validation to speak my mind...and I don't need some hack who lucks out working for the nation's best newspaper but who squanders his position by doing just enough research to lend some credibility to his soaring hyperbolic rants.

Truth be told the first time I read your self-congratulatory postings I chuckled to myself, convinced you were Mr Arkin posting on your own blog...too much of a narcissist to just move on...now I'm fairly convinced of it.

You know Mr Arkin, and I can see that little smirk on your face...you think you're so clever. I just don't accept your premise. Every article you write begins with the premise that DOD is a bunch of careless fools. Then you hang a bunch of BS details on the framework and people argue about the details thereby tacitly accepting your premise. I think you should show more class than that and base your articles on fact...that would generate just as much 'debate' and would be relatively free of much of the pointless yak you seem to think is a measure of success. Oh yeah, Not once did I besmirch President Clinton his authority or responsibility--I worked for the man for 8 years.

So much for reasoned debate...see ya.

The quickest way to a treaty.......

between the warring factions in Iraq, is for Uncle Sam to get out of Iraq!

Think about it, which method will result
in a treaty coming faster?

A. By the citizens of a nation who are involved in a civil war fighting it out and reaching consensus, or

B. By having an outside aggressor nation (that has its own agenda and is trying to sway the outcome), the United States, involved in the mix?

Answer: "A", the United States presence only prolongs the conflict!

By the way, does the NRA support Iraq, Iran or North Korea's rights to bear arms?

DC--wrong! and so much for reasoned debate

On 6/14/06 VAFB launched an ICBM, despite the fact that this test was only recently scheduled. This launch was obviously a move to flex our military muscle.

Why is it permissible for the US to test its arsenal as a deterrent and not permit others to do the same?

Is the current administration/military complex so naive to believe that our constant gesture of war will go without response? I think not.

It is clear that the military complex is building up to something more heinous than we could even wrap our minds around, without first understanding their motivation.

Based on my personal dealings with those in the science/military complex and keeping an eye on the related military/science sectors over the years, pre-bush history tells us that the military complex was being re-allocated to serve rather than lead the civilian sector. This led to declining profits for the military complex support system (large corporations), which also threatened the ability of the military to maintain its strategic weapons planning directive.
This further led to the military complex itself having a vested interest in making and preparing for war to achieve its goal of dominance (a self-fulfilling destiny).

These war games have more to do with justifying budgets and fear mongering for control than they have to do with protecting or 'preparing' our country.

Real protection can only come in the form of effective diplomacy and empowering the people, not increasing the arsenal and decreasing our liberties.

The quickest way to a treaty....

between the warring factions in Iraqis for Uncle Sam to get out of Iraq!

Think about it, which method will result in a treaty coming faster?
A. By the citizens of a nation who are involved in a civil war fighting it out and reaching consensus, or
B. By having an outside aggressor nation (that has its own agenda and is trying to sway the outcome), the United States, involved in the mix?
C.
Answer: "A", the United States presence only prolongs the conflict!

By the way, does the NRA support Iraq, Iran or North Korea's rights to bear arms?

Willy and Patrick,

Personally I think you are the same person, double posting under two ID's, because you can't get anyone to accept you're stance. So, I'll address you as Willy, your conservative hack ID to insult President Bill Clinton. To say that there will be victory in Iraq, you must have your head in the sand. Personally I have deep disdain for people like you that support a war, but are to cowardice to fight it on the battle field yourself. But then you are follower of three deferment coke-head Bush and five deferment Cheney that supported the Vietnam war, while nearly 60,000 American were killed, and well over 200,000 wounded. If you think American lives are as disposable as you say and are unwilling to fight in battle for this war you support, then you are no different than a terrorist in regard to American life. As for being an arm chair quarterback, I am, you like bush are nothing more than cheerleader, I pay attention to whats happening on the field, you make up your own fictional score and cheer and think no will notice we are in trouble.

What a moron you are to state American troop deaths are acceptable in Iraq, because it's less than the number of American deaths in automobile accidents or deaths in L.A.. That is an insult to the brave Americans that have died in Iraq and their families. So you're telling the children, parents, spouses, and other loved ones of our fallen troops that the deaths of their loved one is acceptable because it less that some other number of deaths? Willy, what are you going to say a year from now as the death rate increases: "It's acceptable because it's still less than the 600,000 to 700,000 that died in the American Civil War"?

How sloth in the brain you are, to think the Iraqi National Police and Army are going to disarm the militia without American help. Get this straight in your head, many of these death squads are the Iraqi National Police and Army. We need to change course in Iraq, because "stay the course" is nothing more than "Stand and Die". It's easy for conservative cowardice hacks like you to scream "Cut and Run" when you're not the one doing fighting and dieing.

>>>Modern war is far more complicated than your simple description.>>Unfortunately the Bush administration thinks like you and we are mired in an Iraq war that can not be won. Iraq is a war of attrition, that in my opinion can only get worse. The Shiite militias all but control the Iraqi Army and National Police. The militias are well armed and WILL NOT give up those weapons without a fight, that fight will be another insurgency, this time by the Shia and the Shia are three times as large as the Sunni. A Bush administration supporter stated there was no civil war in Iraq, because to call it civil war the Iraq Government would have to be dissolved. Well I have to say when a government can't even come out of the Green Zone and has little control of the country it's just the same as dissolved. Afghanistan is rapidly also becoming another Iraq. We know what happened to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. I mistakenly thought our country would not get into another Vietnam situation, but Bush has us in two at the same time.

Fortunately--the administration doesn't get its current information from newspapers and blogs. Unfortunately they must deal with contrarian armchair quarterbacks from all quarters who, when the going gets rough (even before as they reflexively pick the opposite side of any argument because so much of our political debate is an exercise in red-blue fission)rationalize the effort away as too hard or not worthy and then become apoplectically angry when their solemnly given rationalizations are rejected.

I might remind you that most of Iraq is pretty peaceful. There is Baghdad and a sliver of western towns that are in uproar. There are parts of Baghdad that US forces don't enter by Iraqi government request--namely Sadr City--where much sectarian violence takes place. Disarming the militias won't be done without a fight!! Duh! No miiltia can stand for long against a well-trained, well-supplied and well-led military that is given the mission and authority to 'disarm' that militia. The US military hasn't directly been given that mission. We have been given it indirectly by being tasked to train an Iraqi police and military force that should do the job. At some point that force has to take the reins and get the job done...or not.
That isn't the same as the President deciding that the goals he set have been met...a stable, elected (non-Baathist) government with the capability to run its own affairs...even if it isn't as pretty as he originally envisioned...or worse... that government screws it up by the numbers after we go. In my mind we're still on track with the basics in order to pull out in the next year or so. Not only that but we would have left much of the infrastructure better than when we found it. We're not trying to make Iraq the 51st state. I just hope Saddam has been tried, convicted and hanged by the time we leave...or failing that the last officer to leave personally puts a bullet in his brain.

It is obvious that there are young minds out there who do not understand the grave nature of the destruction, which we are engaged in.
To compare the willful killing and maiming that a war has to car crash statistics is willful ignorance at it's best and at the very least, misguided.

The number of soldiers killed is over 5,000 (Americans) and over 22,000 (Americans) wounded, if you count Op Desert Storm, Op Enduring Freedom and Op Iraqi Freedom and this is only what is reported by the Dept. of defense. The actual numbers are far greater. This also does not count the other nations soldiers or the civilians. The civilian deaths are estimated to be over 150,000.

Does our society accept just 1 willful killing is permissible? I think not. The practice of not tolerating willful killing is the most basic cohesive bond, which enables our society to exist.

As for making Iraq better; anyone who believes this propaganda has either not been there or has at the very least not done their homework. While there have been over 300,000,000,000 (three hundred billion) spent on war reparations by the US, much of the money has been taken by contractors with little to show and was paid in cash.
Water, electricity, schools, hospitals and government infrastructures have not been repaired or re-instated, despite what you hear in news reports. Iraq is worse off now than when insane Hussein was in power.

Discuss the facts.....or get off the line............

I don't usually get caught up in debates such as this one. I will thank my friend later, back to the debate.
Regarding the up comming exersise refered to in the article, When the navy's ships are away from their home ports they perform exersises all the time. For multiple reasons, First and formost training of its members, many times diplomacy is the primary motivation, sometimes to help push our intrests abroad. Rember a ship is designed to float on the water. Here are a few examples: Speed boats are made for recreation, fishing boats, well self explanatory, cruise liners; again, well. Navel vessels are designed to wage war, weather that intails defencive or offincive actions. It seems to me a ship regardless of its function serves little benifit if it is not afloat. Again I reitterate in order to stay efficent a military must practice, err go any time our navel vessels are afloat it is safe to assume that they are either activally engaged in combat situations or training for combat. I am going to revisit yet another point brought up earler: "a military by its inherent nature trains to kill people."
Keeping all of the above in mind, I believe there is a political motive for making one of our exersises public months before it occures. I also belive that motive is to send a message to Korea that we will not be going away and we are watching them extreamly close. This exersise does cost money though, and as tax payers we fund our military as a whole. The exersise involves multiple branches and facets of our armed forses because all will be involved in a real life war. Early warning,Missle defence even satalite technology as this is how we get a large portion of our intelligence theese days. NORAD, ect... All will be involved in actual combat therefore, all must train together. My opinion about North Korea, Iraq and world politics aside, this exersise will go on as scheduled just as I believe it was Patrick that mentioned ever since the Korean conflict still under ceacefire and not treaty.
Our armed forses train off past experiences so that they may better handle the present and future. Just like when we drive an automobile(the number one killer of Americians, civil and military) we draw off past experiences and events both good and bad in order to help us handle present emergencys. Does it always work? Odviously not. Same with war games. It is also true we have, at present the single largest military in the world, but we are not invincable, nothing and no body is, so to run a war game with no casutalies is arrent! Case in point, Chess. I don't know how many of you are familer with how to play, but chess is a war game, plane and simple. In chess the opponets must vie for position on the board using ever changing stratagies, weighing options such as when to attach, retreat or defend. When and what losses are acceptable. When a pawn, or rook is taken in the game it is dead and the player must do without.
This brings me to Iraq. First, I want to state that my oppinion about the Iraq wars is irrevelent. They happened,and nobodys view of them will change that. I do,however, believe that the world is better off without the Hussain family in power. Speaking only of our occupation in Iraq. Of course there are going to be casulities. We are a foreign government imposing our selfs on another soverign nation, call me crazy, but I would expect that to be met with resistance and I would expect a certian ammount of atrition in the forses over there. As Patrick so stated, we are doing much good over there, and our presance in Iraq is to help stablize the country. The country is not stable, so we have not compleated our post war mission, therefore, we stay. This loss of presonal is well below the casuality rate of any other conflict before. as a matter of fast the number of people lost due to Iraq since 2002 when we forsed Sadam Hussain out of office is less thn that of the entire United States due to automobile accidents and the like each year. I guess it is lust as safe(or safer) to live in a hostile Iraq than it is to live in L.A. In terms of chess that is like taking every one of your opponates pieces except for the king and a few pawns, wile only loosing a bishop and a knight your self. I fail to see how this compairs to the vietnam conflict where we waged a restricted warefare campaign.
As for nukes, well they are still around and just as deadly regardless of who ahs them, terrorists or another soverign nation.

DC,
as it seems that you're more interested in attacking how the plan went down in Iraq, I have to ask you, where were you right after 9-11? Are you one of the fair weather supporter of the troops who truly hates every decision that runs through our government only because they differ with yours? Let's talk about these American casualties.

Since the war began in 03, there have been around what 2,740 or so people that have died. In LA alone last year about 647 people died just last year. that means that at that rate somewhere around 1900 people were killed in LA alone! That's one US city. AS far as our casualties are concerned there's about the same as a large American city, but that's for the entire country. Saying that Iraq and Afghanistan will turn into another Vietnam is going to be made true because of Americans like you. Your lack of resolve is going to cost us even more enemies, and us to lose even more face around the world. When we pack up our tents and head home without taking care of the Iraqi people we're just creating another place for people to think that Americans aren't interested in keeping their word. They only want whatever they want sometimes, and at the first sign of trouble, we'll leave them on their own. Why don't we just set back and leave them on their own? Let's wait until these insane Islamic extremists are on our doorstep again. Let's look at something else, the Hussein family. They were monsters. They used rape, murder, beatings as a normal form of dicipline. They also used chemical weapons to put down a riot. Not the normal tear gas kinds of things like everyone else does, but serious horrible things that no civilized country has used since World War I. We did the right thing to take them out, and it's the right thing to be helping the people there. At least this way we take the fight to the extremists! At least this way we can keep our families safer by keeping the terrorists on the move. If they constantly have to move their base of operations they will have a more difficult time planning attacks in the US. It makes life safer for my family that is stateside. As for where I am now, I'm stationed here in Japan, as a deterent against DPRK aggression.

Back to the original topic of the DPRK. The Korean war has never actually ended. There was only a ceasefire. and this madman over there will do anything. A few years ago Prime minister Koizumi decided to take pity on the North Korean people, but knew that any money that he would send for aid would simply end up going to the DPRK military. So he sent tons of rice. After doling out meager rations to them military, the rest of the rice was sold on the black market, in return for even more weapons. This madman is beyond help, and unfortunately unless his people rise up against him, so are his people. I've been watching them starve on Japanese news for years. The bird flu was a huge blow to Kim Jong Il's plans on how to feed his country. I thought that bad turn of luck would force him into drastic measures, but it didn't. It was a huge shock. I hope that it doesn't come to an open war, but I have little doubt that that madman to my north would rather die in all out war than surrender his power. It is inevitable, unless his people do something.

God help the US if we can't finish these few little wars in Iraq. As for what Mr. Denton said about flawless takedown, but flawed occupation, the only thing I have to say is, that's the only reason the French were our friends.... We take down the country, they peacekeep. Too bad they didn't want any part of this.

I also have a challenge for the journalists out there on a military smear campaign. Why aren't there any articles about how the Army is building schools in Iraq. Not only are they building schools, but their families are pitching in money for the school supplies. The same goes for orphanages, and other things. Why is there only bad news coming from there. What about all the great humanitarian things that we're doing there?

That's all for now, I'm looking forward to see what your opinions are....

Posted by: Willy

"To Gary Denton--this old saw wasn't true when first written and it surely isn't true now. No military force on this planet...not one...innovates, acts, communicates, trains, researches, develops, or thinks about any aspect of warfare better than the US miltary...not one. Find me one...name one. The fundamental meaning of asymmetric warfare as executed today against US forces is nothing if not a universal acknowledgement that attempting to outfight the US military on a military only playing field is suicidal and that being the subject of a DOD OPLAN is a death sentence. Additionally, nobody knows asymmetric warfare better than us and nobody studies it more than we do. Your goofy little platitude only demonstrates mental sloth."

Dear Willy,

I have to agree with the technical aspects of your comment, but you mislead the reader just as you have mislead yourself. Modern war is far more complicated than your simple description. Opposing forces seize what advantages they can against an enemy. Where we have broken down in Iraq is knowing our enemy, I don't fault our military for this, however I do fault the Bush Administration who pressured us into this war. Your statement was proven wrong in Vietnam where we lost nearly 60,000 dead in a war that could be won. The Viet Cong knew this, they had a saying "hold on to their belts and you can defeat them" in other words don't take on the U.S. in an open battle. Vietnam was a war of attrition, the longer we stayed the more troops we lost and more money we wasted. Gary Denton is correct and Iraq, increasingly Afghanistan, and Vietnam are his proof.

Unfortunately the Bush administration thinks like you and we are mired in an Iraq war that can not be won. Iraq is a war of attrition, that in my opinion can only get worse. The Shiite militias all but control the Iraqi Army and National Police. The militias are well armed and WILL NOT give up those weapons without a fight, that fight will be another insurgency, this time by the Shia and the Shia are three times as large as the Sunni. A Bush administration supporter stated there was no civil war in Iraq, because to call it civil war the Iraq Government would have to be dissolved. Well I have to say when a government can't even come out of the Green Zone and has little control of the country it's just the same as dissolved. Afghanistan is rapidly also becoming another Iraq. We know what happened to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. I mistakenly thought our country would not get into another Vietnam situation, but Bush has us in two at the same time.

Go Vols! Tennessee 51 Georgia 33

Posted by: Willy,

"DC--I'd like to read that job description. There is plenty of controversy surrounding factual information that doesn't require the deliberate baiting of the reader with BS. Tell me how misinforming people to elicit a higher quantity of responses is in any way a public service or a useful measure of success? Unless of course you merely want to cheer mindlessly for your side regardless of any critical thinking."

Mr. Willy,

This is a debate blog and Mr. Arkin has done just that, facilitated debate, thus I have to say, job well done Mr. Arkin. It's not a matter of agreeing with what he writes, it's challenging what he writes and his thoughts as well as other debaters. Here is the job description

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/delphi/delphirules.htm

The point is not taking my side or your side, it's discovering the correct side.

>>>North Korea maybe asking for foreign help/aid in an indirect way by threatening to launch nuclear tests; it is trying to ask for financial help/aid in a face-saving way. The country has nothing except its military and nuclear weapons so it has nothing to offer in exchange for financial aid. The country is starving. what do you all think about this?<<<

To Psych Person--Yeah...you may be right that there is some face saving attempted here, but you err greatly when using "the country" as a description. The only face saving here is for a small tight group of megalomaniacs...headed by Kim Jong Il...that doesn't want to admit they are abject failures as leaders and have run their little corner of the planet into a deep ditch.

This gang has been allowed plenty of opportunity to save face and switch directions--most recently by the Clinton administration in an attempt to persuade them that nuclear weapons were not the best path to security and by the Bush administration in 6 party talks that elevated NK to equal status with us and their Asian neighbors. Kim and his gang have only scoffed. Yes the country is starving. Yes we can give them food and have done so...the bulk of the food has gone to fill up NK military bellies first...while the remainder trickles to the general populace. Why should NK's neighbors continue to subsidize the NK military's capbility just because NK throws a tantrum whenever their supply chain runs low on essentials?

>>>North Korea maybe asking for foreign help/aid in an indirect way by threatening to launch nuclear tests; it is trying to ask for financial help/aid in a face-saving way. The country has nothing except its military and nuclear weapons so it has nothing to offer in exchange for financial aid. The country is starving. what do you all think about this?<<<

To Psych Person--Yeah...you may be right that there is some face saving attempted here, but you err greatly when using "the country" as a description. The only face saving here is for a small tight group of megalomaniacs...headed by Kim Jong Il...that doesn't want to admit they are abject failures as leaders and have run their little corner of the planet into a deep ditch.

This gang has been allowed plenty of opportunity to save face and switch directions--most recently by the Clinton administration in an attempt to persuade them that nuclear weapons were not the best path to security and by the Bush administration in 6 party talks that elevated NK to equal status with us and their Asian neighbors. Kim and his gang have only scoffed. Yes the country is starving. Yes we can give them food and have done so...the bulk of the food has gone to fill up NK military bellies first...while the remainder trickles to the general populace. Why should NK's neighbors continue to subsidize the NK military's capbility just because NK throws a tantrum whenever their supply chain runs low on essentials?

To Patrick--good post

Part of Mr. Arkin's job is to peak reader interest and judging from the size of your post he played you very well. Good Job Mr. Arkin!

DC--I'd like to read that job description. There is plenty of controversy surrounding factual information that doesn't require the deliberate baiting of the reader with BS. Tell me how misinforming people to elicit a higher quantity of responses is in any way a public service or a useful measure of success? Unless of course you merely want to cheer mindlessly for your side regardless of any critical thinking.

The Pentagon always prepares to fight yesterday's wars with weapons built to counter yesterday's threats.

To Gary Denton--this old saw wasn't true when first written and it surely isn't true now. No military force on this planet...not one...innovates, acts, communicates, trains, researches, develops, or thinks about any aspect of warfare better than the US miltary...not one. Find me one...name one. The fundamental meaning of asymmetric warfare as executed today against US forces is nothing if not a universal acknowledgement that attempting to outfight the US military on a military only playing field is suicidal and that being the subject of a DOD OPLAN is a death sentence. Additionally, nobody knows asymmetric warfare better than us and nobody studies it more than we do. Your goofy little platitude only demonstrates mental sloth.

With so many great socialist and communist states to choose from it is a paradox as to why so many leftist journalists choose to remain it the United States.

North Korea maybe asking for foreign help/aid in an indirect way by threatening to launch nuclear tests; it is trying to ask for financial help/aid in a face-saving way. The country has nothing except its military and nuclear weapons so it has nothing to offer in exchange for financial aid. The country is starving. what do you all think about this?

My appoligies, I was under the impression that the Roman Catholic church fell under the catagory of christians. Further more Christians, Jews, and Muslems all have war mongers that use there respective religions as an excuse to commit atrocities. If we keep to doctorine only then my statment about muslems and violence applies. The example of the crusaides illustrates that muslems too have recieved a bad reputation due to radicals that use faith to hide horable acts. Further more the Knights Templar and The Knights of St. John were fearsome and ruthless in battle. both contianing Knights of many christian faiths therefore the term "christians." My arguments do not slander, the christian belief system or any of the others mentioned thus far.

A religious debate was not the origional topic of duscission. The origional topic of duscission was the military exersises in the pacific. In order to be efficent a military must practice. This is no different than practicing the saxaphone, learning to ice skate, a football team prepairing for the season. Yes it is true we use the past to train for the future. that is all we can do, the past gives us a reference point for what may happen in the future, since the future has not occured yet and there any number of possible outcomes for any current event, the past is all we have to go on. In this case Norh Korea and Nuculer Weapons. The exersise is only a game, designed to scare anyone watching away from actually waging war against the U.S, her allies or her interests abroad through projection of power. As powerful as Nucler weapons are it is in the worlds best interest to limit the continued proliferation of them.

First off the military excersize that is the original topic of debate has gone on for years. Every year like clockwork, almost since the uneasy ceasefire that ended the Korean war. That is one thing that needs to be remembered with North Korea. The Korean war never truly ended in that madman's (Kim Jong Il) head. This is an opponent who has kidnapped scientists, engineers, and anyone else of value from Japan, and other nations. This is a country that believes in the use of chemical weapons, and has experimented on people that it has sentenced to death. They truly have so many different things that can only be construed as evil that there isn't enough time to say it all here.

A reason that we need to keep this wild country from forcing their will on Asia is the Japanese. If Japan would build their self defense forces into an army there wouldn't be a need for the US presence here, we could let things play out on their own. Unfortunately, not only are the Japanese unwilling to reenter a military presence into world events, but if they did, diplomatic relations would be even more strained here in Asia.

As for the what's going on in Afghanistan and Iraq, I have some more opinions. It's very simple, the why of the war should be this: We're forcing at least some of these terrorists to fight against military targets, away from our homes. No matter how else you feel about it, it's better to fight a guerilla war in someone else's back yard, than in your own.

Here is one thing about the people of our great nation that I don't understand. When faced with an enemy that wants nothing more than to strike fear into people's hearts, where nothing is sacred, and nothing is safe from their murderous intent, why give them quarter? Is there any reason not to pursue these fiends to the end of the earth? Why shouldn't our resolve to keep our families safe from them not push into a total war? We must destroy any place which supports them, that harbours them, to destroy their will to fight without building support for them. I guess that our parents and grandparents made things too easy for us here. We've gotten to the point where whenever a problem asserts it's head, whenever there is opposition to way we want things, we lose all resolve. We aren't as tough in the face of adversity as those people from who faced a sneak attack in Hawaii over 60 years ago. Why don't we react the same way to a sneak attack against our citizens by an evil enemy? Why is it that as soon as we hit a bump in the road we want to call an end to the war and just dump everything in the laps of the newly formed governments so they can fester into governments who also hate the US.

everybody has a right to make comments here, whether you agree to them or not; just as I have to tolerate your comments and not tell you to "get off the line", you have to tolerate mine.

please differentiate between christians and Roman Catholics; the Crusades were launched by the Roman Catholic Church, not the christian churches. Dont mislabel and slander the Christians by your ignorance of who were actually behind the Crusades. The christians cannot and wouldnot be behind it, for they had/has no army, unless you are mistakenly calling all who believe in a god and not muslims , as christians.
Second, if your statement of "islam/muslim teaches religios tolerance and abhores violence" are true there would be no September 11, no Osama Bin Laden, no muslim terrorists, no British Imams advocating terrorism, unless you prefer to overlook these facts.

Tocritics Said "If you vehemently oppose almost everything about this country and the way it's being run, why dont you set up your own political party and run for president? or leave this country and join the muslims, North Koreans, Iranians etc."

Actually, WE THE PEOPLE started this country without a party system. The 'Wigs' were the first party, which has led us down the road, at which we currently reside.

In the year 2006, does anyone still 'believe' in the party system or his or her party for that matter?

It can be said that this is part of the problem; "play one side against the other". It is perhaps the gravest mistake in our countries/peoples history.

None of us have the need to travel to another country to live in a police state or one that attempts to silence the voice of The People. The police state is here, now.

You would have had to be asleep or drunk for the past month to not hear the news that we have had our liberty taken, not by an invading country, but by an invading army of pseudo politicians and geo-industrial consortiums. And yes, the military complex IS a geo-industrial consortium.

Before you assume the liberty of others, perhaps you should assume yours first...... or get off the line......

To all who insist on bringing the various world religions into a socio/ppolitical discution I wish that you would back your statments with fact instead of mindless ranting.
First, to the so called christians, before you start bad muothing other belief systems the least you could do is learn a little about your own. Rember the Crusaides? There were 4 of them and were all started by christian governments supported and funded primarly by the catholic church. To refresh everyone's memory the christians attached the muslems.
Next please stop taking the bible quotes out of context and start looking at christianity as a complete belief system.
Further more How many of you would turn the other cheek if your family were voilently murdered in front of your eyes?
Remember "as above so below?" Are you trying to tell me that if we are that screwed up here, there is not a war going on in the heavens?
Next Korea is not Christian or muslem.
Get over it!!
Oh by the way islam/muslim teaches religios tolerance and abhores violence, so these terorists are no different than the crusaders, if the United States is so high and mighty all I can say is that it was an awfully christian thing we did to the native indians.

As for waging war, a military by inherent nature trains to kill people, but most people seem to enjoy having one, isn't that a little hypocritical?
To conclude, a master of war is one who can win without raising a weapon.

Posted by: fromPatBuchanan,

"Rather than speak directly to the charge against him -- that he is a homosexual with the hots for teenage boys -- Foley's lawyer is entering a plea, in the court of public opinion, of diminished capacity."

The right wing Republican propaganda machine wants to falsely portray this as a gay issue. This has nothing to do with being gay, it has everything to do with being a sexual predator to minors and the Republican leadership having such knowledge conspiring to cover up Foley's actions to leave him free to prey on more children. What is even more disturbing is that some of the MSM knew of these actions, did not investigate further, and report to the public. Getting way off topic here.

For "Vigilant Shield" to be released to the public, it must have been intentional to provide an indirect warning to Russia to not interfere and support U.S. efforts to stop NK's nuclear ambitions.

Posted by: dontgeneralize,

"dont mislabel all christians for a few who lost their minds to the enemy and done murders, etc. which are not acts condoned or commissioned from our God. Acts to murder are sins and are violations of God's commandments. The actions of those few who lost their way are not the christian ways and although these few might think that they did it for God, but actually they were deceived by the enemy, as the muslim terrorists who carry out suicide bombings. The only difference between the two is the christian who lost his mind/way and murdered was not taught/ordered to do so by the christian church while the muslim terrorist were by their corresponding Imams/muslim church."

No one is mislabeling all Christians, I am a Christian myself. I don't know who you are referring to as the "enemy"? I do disagree with you on referring to people as Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolf as Christians that lost their way, they are and were not Christians at all! The right wing conservative Christian base that has propelled Bush to the Presidency and blindly supported his policies that resulted in the invasion of Iraq has caused the deaths of between 40,000 and 100,000 civilians. Your argument about the difference of being told to kill and doing it on your own to separate Christian from Muslim is meaningless. The end result is the same.

another one who lost his way.

"Having checked in to "rehab," after it was revealed that he had written salacious e-mails and instant messages to pages, Foley shoved his lawyer out front to say he was an alcoholic, gay and had been abused by a clergyman as a boy.

What is Foley up to?

Rather than speak directly to the charge against him -- that he is a homosexual with the hots for teenage boys -- Foley's lawyer is entering a plea, in the court of public opinion, of diminished capacity.

Foley is portraying himself not as a sexual predator out to pick up boys, an unappealing figure, but a victim of compulsive forces over which he had no control and for which he cannot be held accountable.

Call it the Larry King-Oprah defense. Even as he takes "full responsibility" for his lewd and lascivious conduct, his lawyer implies he didn't know what he was doing. The e-mails and IMs were sent in an alcoholic-induced stupor -- between votes on the House floor

Will it work? Perhaps. The shamed and shunned Foley will appear increasingly as a figure of interest, and then of sympathy, in our forgiving society. Offers of six-figure book advances are probably in the mail.

What does the episode say about Speaker Hastert and the GOP? Surely, it speaks poorly of their executive decisiveness, though, thus far, it does not speak all that badly of them as human beings.

All of them knew Foley was gay. All of them had to recognize that the early e-mails -- where Foley was asking for a picture of a departed page now 1,000 miles away -- were warning flags.

With this limited knowledge, Foley's colleagues did what Fox News and the Miami Herald did. They chose not to reveal the e-mails, which would have outed Foley, ruined his career and destroyed his life, as they had no evidence he had committed any indecent act with the pages under their supervision.

Two decades ago, Gerry Studds of Massachusetts attempted the seduction of several pages, and had an affair with one and took him off on a European tryst. Though censured, Studds was re-elected five times and given a chairmanship by the Democratic Party of Nancy Pelosi -- which now professes itself sickened at how Denny Hastert and Co. tried to protect the homosexual in their midst, who, while committing sins of desire, has, as far as we know, committed no lewd or indecent act.

Would this be the same Democratic Party that supports giving condoms to junior-high students and booed the Boy Scout honor guard at its Los Angeles Convention in 2000, because the Scouts refuse to permit homosexuals to be scoutmasters and take kids camping?

Hillary Clinton has marched in the annual New York Gay Pride Parade. For years, that parade had a float carrying members of NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, whose monomania is the elimination of the age of consent for sex between men and boys.

Alfred Kinsey in "Sexual Behavior and the American Male" reported on experiments he himself oversaw to prove the psychic benefits of sex between men, boys, tots and even infants. And this sicko had a Hollywood movie, "Kinsey," starring Liam Neeson, celebrate his genius.

In Washington, D.C., the most Democratic precinct in America, the age of consent is 16. Had Foley and his heartthrob skipped off to a motel, there would have been no crime involved. Yet Foley has the FBI on his trail for sending lewd e-mails to a 16-year-old.

If the Republican House leadership is guilty of anything, it is of being too tolerant, of allowing Political Correctness, a fear of being called homophobic, to trump common sense.

Whether we admit it or not, many male homosexuals have a thing for teenage boys, which is why so many of them wind up with black eyes when they try to pick them up.

The GOP leadership should have seen instantly, from the early e-mails, that Foley was one of these, and followed up to see if there was more than one page with whom he was flirting. If the pages knew Foley was someone to steer clear of, why did not the leadership?

Yet, even if the GOP takes the hit in November for this sordid, squalid mess, the party of gay activists is setting the bar mighty high for its libertine wing. If salacious e-mails to teens are now a capital crime, Foley is not going to be the last congressmen outed and ousted."

To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

there are so-called christian churches who also lost their way( deceived by the enemy) and had became cults- for example the Davidians of WACO.

Posted by: tocritics,

"If you vehemently oppose almost everything about this country and the way it's being run, why dont you set up your own political party and run for president? or leave this country and join the muslims, North Koreans, Iranians etc."

Tocritics,

The fundamental breakdown in your comment is that these patriots that post here do not oppose this country, they oppose who is running the country, Bush. In your logic of thought you think the country belongs to Bush. Any village idiot can make war, but it takes true leader to win peace. The village idiot of Crawford, TX has been missing since 2000.

dont mislabel all christians for a few who lost their minds to the enemy and done murders, etc. which are not acts condoned or commissioned from our God. Acts to murder are sins and are violations of God's commandments. The actions of those few who lost their way are not the christian ways and although these few might think that they did it for God, but actually they were deceived by the enemy, as the muslim terrorists who carry out suicide bombings. The only difference between the two is the christian who lost his mind/way and murdered was not taught/ordered to do so by the christian church while the muslim terrorist were by their corresponding Imams/muslim church.

Posted by: Willy,

"If Arkin would take the time to look...which he hasn't demonstrated a propensity to do yet, he would find that there are other exercises on the books that deal more with homeland defense in a way he envisions. But exercises do need to be scoped."

Part of Mr. Arkin's job is to peak reader interest and judging from the size of your post he played you very well. Good Job Mr. Arkin!

If you vehemently oppose almost everything about this country and the way it's being run, why dont you set up your own political party and run for president? or leave this country and join the muslims, North Koreans, Iranians etc.

Mr. Arkin,

We and the Russians still fall under Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), so this is not a very likely scenario, a better scenario would be the Pakistani government being toppled and replaced with a nuclear armed radical Islamic republic that has nuclear weapons and the will to use them or give them to terrorist organizations that can against the United States.

These are military bureaucrats spending/wasting as much money as they can to justify an even larger budget next year. Why didn't they run these war games on Iraq, before invading?

Posted by: Robert Avila,

"The exercise demonstrates one reason American military success continues - preparedness. I thank God we have responsible leaders.

Thumbs down.
- Robert Avila
Sgt, USMC
Sgt, GANG, volunteer for OIF
Member, MENSA
Active Christian"

Robert,

I strongly disagree with you. There are many much more likely events that could happen to us in the future. I see you are an active Christian, tell the justification from God of calling a doctor who preforms abortions a murder and a bomber who kills a pregnant woman in collateral damage a hero? In pure Christianity both are murders.

Clarified:

A mindless drone stated: "My honest opinion is that if you do not agree with our President and/or military:
A) Leave our country! (you only bring the nation as whole down)
B) Stop complaning in Posts and do something about it!"

1. Get a 'basic' education and learn what it is to be an American and what it takes to maintain freedom and for the sake of all those who died before for our freedom, learn your history.
2. Realize that the president is a public servant who, by the very nature of his servitude, serves the people.
3. The military is there to serve the will of the people, not the president.
4. The people's voice is what is supposed to drive this country.

Being an American means having the ability to say what one believes. To say that someone should "Leave 'our' country" only proves that you know not what an American/Freedom is.

A mindless drone stated: "My honest opinion is that if you do not agree with our President and/or military:
A) Leave our country! (you only bring the nation as whole down)
B) Stop complaning in Posts and do something about it!"

1. Get a 'basic' education and learn what it is to be an American and what it takes to maintain freedom and for the sake of all those who died before for our freedom, learn your history.
2. Realize that the president is a public servant who, by the very nature of his servitude, serves the people.
3. The military is there to serve the will of the people, not the president.
4. The people's voice is what is supposed to drive this country.

Being an American never means having the ability to say what one believes. To say that someone should "Leave 'our' country" only proves that you know not what an American/Freedom is.

My honest opinion is that if you do not agree with our President and/or military:
A) Leave our country! (you only bring the nation as whole down)
B)Stop complaning in Posts and do something about it!

Your words= ignorence

Americans displaced Briton after its demise in the Second World War to start the New Great Game.

They forged a close alliance with Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey during the Cold War to contain Russians.

People of this region turned against Americans because of their support for dictators.

The Great Game was used as a term to describe the struggle between Briton and Russia who were vying to colonize this region since Tsarist Russian Empire in early nineteenth century.

Read More ...

http://pakistan1947.blogspot.com/2006/08/shadows-of-great-game.html

Gary Denton wrote:
--The Pentagon always prepares to fight yesterday's wars with weapons built to counter yesterday's threats. They have Russia attacking for no reason in a nonsensical way because they want to use all their systems set up to counter Russia.--

I see it differently. I see it as preparing for a war that could destroy the US. While many believe the pentagon should practice against smaller attacks (e.g., 911) the one that will really destroy the US would involve Russia or Europe attacking the US with nukes. Even China could not do that amount of damage. So this I see as a fight to the death type of scenario. But, I hope they are doing other scenarios of all sizes. Gezz, we give them enough money to play all size conflicts, and our immediate success in Afganistan and Iraq show playing war games works. Too bad they don't play an "occupation" game to see how we can properly occupy a defeated nation and win the peace. Maybe that's too forward thinking...but what's the point, Bush would declare victory anyway and go on a 4 week vacation wraped in a Mission Accomplished banner and leave it to the next president, just like his failed business ventures.

- With regard to R Avila -
With ignorance comes a veil of false knowledge.
Anyone who has actual field experience and has witnessed the carnage of war knows, whole heartedly that any war, which is fought to suffice the corrupt is one not worth fighting.
It is also true that anyone who has a 'basic' understanding of tactical politics understands the purpose of this drill; To offer a token to those ill-experienced military dictators in the form of pretend war., much the same way that a child is sufficed by the offering of a 'treat'. It serves to bolster the military minds into believing that they have 'control'.

I would caution those who so easily forget that during the events of '9-11', this country was also running 'mock events' in order to be 'better prepared'.

And when someone holds their 'credentials' up as a form of cohesion, it is a sure sign that the words to follow are but an indication of a weak mind.

Actions do speak louder than words.

I have a hard time visualizing experienced military officers wasting their time on such idiocy. It must be inspired by the civilians running the Defense Department. More bang for the buck is useful when dealing with massed enemy forces on a conventional battlefield. They are useless in dealing with insurgencies who do not mass in the numbers that would justify such weapons. It is boots on the ground that are needed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since the Iraqis don't want us there, we better leave and let them handle the mess. We didn't belong there in the first place.

The Pentagon always prepares to fight yesterday's wars with weapons built to counter yesterday's threats.

They have Russia attacking for no reason in a nonsensical way because they want to use all their systems set up to counter Russia.

If they updated their scenario instead to a few terrorist nukes going off and a few more suspected around the country while at the same time North Korea goes active and Iraq has a wave of Iranian equipped revolutionary attacks 15X the current numbers the exercise would just expose systemic weaknesses in dealing with the modern world.

I'm still betting on a live fire bombing exercises in Iran within four weeks 'planned' for only a few days.

Reading Arkin, I am reminded of the old adage that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I can't for the life of me figure out why, in a city teeming with sensible men and women who understand how DOD works, that the Post couldn't find somebody with a broader knowledge of DOD affairs.

Anybody with even superficial knowledge of the combatant command system would understand exactly why VIGILENT SHIELD is planned and executed the way it is and would be able to explain it to the others. Arkin's tack is rather not to let factual information intrude upon his chance to ridicule. He only demonstrates his agenda, not any useful knowledge.

NORTHCOM has many roles that need to be exercised so that its people can maintain a necessary level of competence. However, it also is subject to fiscal realities. The constant challenge is to keep folks trained (They do rotate around the world you know, so there is always a need to train new folks) in how to plan and execute theater level warfare up and down the chain of command including coordinating with participating Service staffs that have competing priorities and have limited time and resources to focus on any particular mission area. An exercise, like VIGILAENT SHIELD, is constructed to attempt to train as many people possible in procedures that translate well to a number of different contingencies (bang for the buck). Planners get together with designated training audiences to collect and collate training requirements within the boundaries of the general scenario that interests a COCOM commander. An exercise like this one is more an exercise in deliberate planning...not crisis planning. In deliberate planning, the process is of overiding importance...who talks to who, when, with what forces, etc. In crisis planning the plan is way more important and its success weighs heavily on how well people get to know each others (personal, service, unit, etc) capabilities and limitations during a multitude of deliberate planning cycles. VS attempts to do all that.

If Arkin would take the time to look...which he hasn't demonstrated a propensity to do yet, he would find that there are other exercises on the books that deal more with homeland defense in a way he envisions. But exercises do need to be scoped.

Gee

May I suggest the pentagon review the movie "Dr. Stangelove or How I learned to Love the Bomb"....

Warefare today is more about economics than soldiers. We are now trying to implement the Vietman Pacification Program in Iraq. It will not work because in both cases we did not have stong local support.

We are now doing in Afganistan as Russia did. We will probably be burned again.

Why is the US squandering resources? The constitution says "Defend the United States".

The day the Bush twins join the military to support Daddy's War is the when I believe King George 43rd really wants to win the war.

Bah Humbug

go back to "Behind North Korea's Nuclear Gamble" and read a post about you.

- Robert Avila
Sgt, USMC
Sgt, GANG, volunteer for OIF
Member, MENSA
Active Christian

Posted by: Robert Avila

Hey Active Christian,

I suppose that what people told me about some marines was true. Which Christian group are you from, certainly not the one that Jesus started:

Jesus rebuked his followers for wanting to call down fire from heaven (today's bomb and missile equivalents), in order to destroy the opposition.

Jesus rebuked his Chief Apostle Peter for cutting off a man's ear, with his sword!

Jesus encouraged his followers to find ways to make peace with their enemies, as opposed to what what some of your just war killing churches are teaching today.

Of course it was also misguided religious people and a military serving a former Republic that were responsible for the death of Jesus.

Jesus instructed his disciples to leave
thir 'swords' at home and to put their trust in him. His folks were not, to borrow a phrase, to 'study war'.

Jesus himself, an innocent, experienced the mocking tenor and the blade of a soldier who was probably just like you.

You need to wake up for you sound to me like one of the misguided of the arrogant breed of new name-only Christians who have truly never been born again. Jesus said one day that he would tell them that, I never knew you!

Serve your country if you must, go and kill people if you like, but leave Christ out of it, he never believed in what you are proposing.

America...wants the fight(s)!

I am furious now not only over 400B that has been borrowed to wage unjust wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but over the unneccsary loss of human lives in both theaters.

It has appeared to me for some years now that the only nation that wants war, is the United States of America itself.

If you think about it, one of the reasons that the so-called terrorists attacked America was because the nations that they come from along with their leaders, like Saudi Arabia, would not break relations or begin to resist United States hegemony or interference. Were any of these folks from say, North Korea?

And who believes that either nation, Iran or North Korea, wants to attack the United States of America? These nations are interested in improving the lots of their citizens and the national standings of their nations, and supporting their friends; and they have that right. Everyone knows that only one nation in the world will stand in your way if you attempt to do any of the above.

What your article tells me is that the United State's strategy is to continue the present course of antagonism and threatening behaviors, until one of these nations like North Korea will 'make America's day', and react. America is chomping at the bit for a pretext to justify going to war and killing more innocent people.

What a rogue nation we have become? Will America ever get it right? Factually it has long since been time for a Federation of Nations to stand up to America and to tell America 'anough, now stand down'.

Exercises such as the one denigrated here are extremely valuable. I am pleased that our leaders see the need for exercises. Many today suffer a myopic tunnel vision, a focus nearly exclusive to the Mideast.

The exercise demonstrates one reason American military success continues - preparedness. I thank God we have responsible leaders.

I disagree with this article, "Early Warning", which mocks an intelligent comprehensive view of potential threats and intimates money should only be spent on terrorist action currently underway.

Thumbs down.
- Robert Avila
Sgt, USMC
Sgt, GANG, volunteer for OIF
Member, MENSA
Active Christian

Holy cowl Batman, our country is being run by mad men.