By Barry Secrest

Excerpt:

This new philosophy which our esteemed leaders espouse appears to be a "New Age" look at military "strategery."  Apparently, the US now wishes to disarm possible enemy states by reducing them to hysterical, roll-about-the-floor, convulsive laughter.

In fact, the new defensive paradigm essentially redefines US policy by graciously providing our possible attackers a checklist of how the US might respond to a given attack scenario.  The point that stands out indicates that the US will not react via a nuclear response in the event of a biological or gas attack (Weapons of Mass Destruction) by our enemies.

So, to logically interpret this particular stance, the US is officially stating an "acceptable" way to kill Americans without the attacking Country having to worry about being turned into a heap of smoking cinders.  No doubt, the Administration's preoccupation with environmental impact plays into this particular mix.  Certainly, a nuclear detonation could substantially increase ambient environmental temperatures for a time. thereby boosting the possibility of man-made Global Warming--which is an emphatic Liberal  No-No.  Gas or biological weapons, on the other hand, will primarily affect human individuals, which are expendable to the Statist collective, as a whole.  Sarah Palin took issue with the new "defensive stance" which then resulted in a media-driven game of verbal give and take between the two.

The Nuclear Playground

The Obama/Palin exchange was comical as Palin had initially indicated that Obama's strategy was akin to kids fighting on a playground and one kid stating to the other:  "Go ahead and hit me--I won't hit back."  Obama responded as follows:  "Last I checked, Palin's no expert on nukes."  We find it fascinating that the President's philosophy as it regards Foreign Security Threats seems to be totally at odds with his stance on Domestic Political Threats where he stated:  "If they bring a knife to the fight--we bring a gun."

At any rate, the President went on to state that the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs were comfortable with his position--that being "fetal" no doubt.  Our particular understanding of the military mind would suggest that the Joint Chiefs are concernedly ashen at the thought of this new policy, despite their being unable to voice their concerns as to the mindset of their Commander-in-Chief.

In the President's nuclear summit meeting, which had been highly touted by "most" members of the Mainstream Media, despite  their being dismissed from reporting it, the President came away with what was thought to be an achievement worthy of crowing about.  The main impetus of the meeting was to make sure that nuclear states "would be careful" to lock down nuclear materials in the future in order to keep such material away from the terrorists.

read more:

The Wounded Land: Affixing the Shroud of Hegemony