Click to bookmark this page!

- Contact Me -
Include your email address

<< October 2006 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
08 09 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31


Just in case you weren't sure...
If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:

Please sign the Ted Kennedy Resignation Petition!


rss feed

Shameless Self-Promotion

Buy this book (not just because it contains two of my op-eds):
Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture:
The 101 Best Opinion Editorials From OpEds.com


An Interview With the G-Man:
My first (hopefully not last) experience in live radio, being interviewed by G. Gordon Liddy!



Perspective
Joe Mariani

Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by precision use of American military force under George W. Bush:
50 million in just two years

Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by anti-American Bush-bashing terrorist-appeasing whining elitists:
Zero. Ever.
...

The problem seems to me to be the definition of "free speech". Liberals define it as anything they want to say or do that opposes America. I say "speech" ends where "action" begins. Once you pick up a gun for the enemy, throw a rock at a cop during a "peace" march, send money to a terrorist organisation, or travel to Baghdad to block an American JDAM with your ass, you have crossed the line from free speech to costly action.
...

Saying the War on Terror is all about al-Qaeda is like saying we should have fought the Japanese Naval Air Force after Pearl Harbor. Not the Japanese Navy, not the Japanese Army, not the Empire of Japan -- just the Naval Air Force.
...

Complaining about the "waste" when human embryos are destroyed instead of being used in medical experiments is a lot like going to a funeral and complaining about the waste of perfectly good meat.
...

Blaming CO2 for climate change is like blaming smoke for the fire. CO2 is largely a following, not a leading, indicator of a rise in temperature.
...

Cavalier's First Theorem:
Every time, Liberals will fight to protect the guilty and kill the innocent, while Conservatives will fight to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.

Cavalier's Second Theorem:
Liberals are just Socialists who want to be loved... then again, Socialists are just Communists who lack the courage of their convictions.

Cavalier's Third Theorem:
Any strongly moral, hawkish or pro-American statement by a Liberal will inevitably be followed by a "but."

Top News Headlines

Iraq Blogs

The Messopotamian
Iraq at a Glance
Iraq the Model
Hammorabi
Iraq & Iraqis
Nabil's Blog
Road of a Nation
The Sun of Iraq
Healing Iraq

Iraqi Bloggers Central

The Truth About Iraq
Liberating Iraq
Pictures from Iraq
The Iraqi Holocaust: a collection
Iraq's Mass Graves

Mudville Gazette:
News the media can't use

The Other Iraq:
The Iraq you never hear about in the MSM

Michael Yon - Online Magazine
Dispatches not filed from the Baghdad Hilton hot tub


United States Central Command


Humor

Infamous Monsters of Filmland

Day by Day: Chris Muir's witty comic strip with a political bent

The Ultimate War Simulation: Why does this scenario seem so familiar?

What Kind of Liberal Are You?
Save me the trouble of figuring out what kind of idiot you are

Blame Bush
Because Bush is to blame... for everything

Sacred Cow Burgers
Web Archive

Satirical Political Beliefs Test

Communists for Kerry

Cooper's Protester Guide

Fellowship 9/11: Sauron never attacked Rohan, Saruman did! Yet a small group of elitists convinced Middle-earth to divert resources from the real war to attack Mordor for personal gain.


Analysis

When Democrats Attack
Did prominent Democrats switch positions on Iraq just to attack President Bush for political gain? (See the updated list.)

Was Iraqi Freedom Justified?
An honest, step-by-step analysis of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq that Congress voted into law shows that it was.

Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror
Details of solid ties to organised international terrorism

How The Left Betrayed Iraq
by Naseer Flayih Hasan

Did We Botch The Occupation?
No, not of Iraq: of Germany. Read the media's take on how we "lost the peace" in 1946 and compare.

Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About the Conflict in Iraq

Pictures from Hate Bush/Hate America/Hate Capitalism/Hate Israel/general wacko rallies
- by Zombie

Jihad Watch


2004 Election Links

Looosers: Sorry, Everybody!
Winners: You're Welcome, Everybody!


2008 Election

Peace Through Strength PAC


Duncan Hunter in 2008
official site



Click to join duncanhunterforpresident2008 at Yahoo! Groups

Useful Links

FamilyWishList
Share your wish list with friends and family

Virtual Tourist
Travel tips from real travelers

RemBot.com
Appointment calendar with email/wireless notification

PriceGrabber.com
Convenient comparison shopping


Reading Material

RightWingNews
The best right-wing news and commentary

GOP USA Commentary Corner

Men's News Daily
The New Media

OpinionEditorials.com
a project of Frontiers of Freedom

ChronWatch
SF Chronicle watchdog and conservative news

American Daily
Analysis with political and social commentary

The Conservative Voice
Conservative news and opinion

News By Us
...not news bias

IntellectualConservative.com
Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics

CommonConservative.com
Practical conservatism for the common man

USASentinel
Analysis, Commentary and Opinion on the Real World

PhillyFuture.org
Philly news and blogs


Now Reading

The Fatal Conceit:
The Errors of Socialism
by F. A. Hayek



Articles Previously Published at
Useless-Knowledge.com

- When Good Liberals Go Bad - 05/29/03
- How Stupid Do Democrats Think You Are? - 05/31/03
- Who Are These 'Rich' Getting Tax Cuts, Anyway? - 06/02/03
- How Can We Miss The Clintons If They Won't Go Away? - 06/04/03
- Whining of Mass Distraction: How To Discredit A President - 06/05/03
- Liberal "Rules" for Arguing - 06/10/03
- Liberalism: Curable or Terminal? - 06/14/03
- Filibustering Judges: Hijacking Presidential Powers? - 06/17/03
- Is Hamas Exempt from the War on Terror? - 06/22/03
- How Malleable Is The Constitution? - 06/26/03
- Rejecting Our Biological and Cultural Heritage - 06/30/03
- I Need Liberal Assistance, Now! - 07/02/03
- Bring Them On - 07/03/03
- We Need You Arrogant Warmongering Americans...Again - 07/09/03
- Much Ado About Nothing, Again - 07/13/03
- Double Standard: Blindly Blame Bush - 07/18/03
- Was WWII Also Unjustified? - 07/20/03
- Clinton Backing Bush? Don't Bet On It! - 07/24/03
- How To Be A Hypocritical Liberal - 07/28/03
- The Clinton Legacy: In Answer to Mr. Stensrud - 07/30/03
-What Is 'Good News' To Liberals? - 08/02/03
- Bush's Big Blunder - 08/06/03
- The Meaning of Right - Why I Supported the Iraq War - 08/10/03
- More Liberal "Rules" for Arguing - 08/14/03
- You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take John Wayne! - 08/19/03
- Where Is The ACLU When It's Actually Needed? - 08/25/03
- Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Ten Commandments? - 08/28/03
- From The Weasels: Thanks For Nothing - 08/30/03
- The Liberal Superfriends - 09/02/03
- Liberal Superfriends 2: The Sequel - 09/05/03
- Saddam and 9/11: Connect the Dots - 09/08/03
- Throwing Away the Southern Vote - 11/02/03
- Libya: The First Domino Falls - 12/20/03
- Is the UN Playing Games with American Politics? - 03/04/04


Blogs to Browse

Across the Pond
AlphaPatriot
Arts for Democracy
Betsy's Page
Bill Karl
Blonde Sagacity
Bull Moose Strikes Back
Common Sense & Wonder
Conservative Pleasure
Dangerous Logic
DowneastBlog
ElectionProjection
Everything I Know Is Wrong
Freedom of Thought
Sally Girl
Korla Pundit
LogiPundit.com
MarkLevinFan
Mark Nicodemo
Michelle Malkin
Moonbattery
My Arse From My Elbow
QandO Blog
RadioBS.net
Rebel Rouser
RightThinkingGirl
Sally Girl
Samantha Burns
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Sighed Effects
Sister Toldjah
Stark Truth
Take A Stand Against Liberals
The Resplendent Mango
The Right Society
The YNC
Tom's Common Sense
Tom DeLay
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Trying to Grok
TS Right Dominion
Violent Daydreams
Watcher of Weasels
Word Around the Net
WuzzaDem.com



Locations of visitors to this page


Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Statecraft and Stagecraft

Less than a week after North Korea tested its first nuclear weapon, the fifteen members of the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution invoking sanctions against the regime of Kim Jong-Il. Finally, the UN has "done something" to prevent him from building another one, right? In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Yes, the resolution demanded "that the DPRK not conduct any further nuclear test or launch of a ballistic missile." It also required "that the DPRK shall eliminate its nuclear weapons and nuclear programme in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner," as well as "other weapons of mass destruction." Tough talk, to be sure. But talk is cheap.

The resolution also called upon all member states to impose a massive two-way arms embargo upon North Korea, prohibiting the sale or purchase of tanks, combat aircraft, warships, missiles and other big-ticket items. If all nations follow through, this might actually damage North Korea's economy, as weaponry is its only export.

That might get his attention even more than the ban on "luxury items," which,
as US Ambassador John Bolton joked, might be "a little diet for Kim Jong-Il." But the resolution's call for every nation to perform cargo inspections was worded in such a way as to let any country that doesn't want to inspect North Korean cargoes too closely (say, for instance, China) off the hook. China does more business with North Korea than all other countries combined, supplying up to 90 percent of its oil and 80 percent of its consumer goods.

Unfortunately for all of us, UNSC resolution #1718 is all bark and very little bite, due to opposition from Russia and China. Nevertheless, the North Korean representative immediately stated that sanctions amounted to an act of war, storming out of the United Nations meeting. China then refused to impose even the weakened sanctions to which they had agreed. Of course, the Chinese government later made a show of cooperation by staging inspections of some trucks at a border crossing...but still refused to inspect cargo ships. Like the objections to North Korea's belligerence and refusal to participate in talks, the inspections were merely a ruse designed to make China look friendly and cooperative, while ultimately protecting North Korea.

The problem is that although the Chinese government may have some disagreements with Kim Jong-Il and his methods, they need North Korea to remain exactly as it is.

As long as North Korea is a harsh Communist regime under which most people live in abject poverty, China's own, slightly more moderate Communist government looks positively benign by comparison -- to American as well as Chinese eyes. While a repressive, militaristic dictator rules North Korea, China can expect friendly dealings with the United States. China fears any real change in North Korea for two reasons. On one hand, they fear that millions of starving refugees will pour across the border into an already overpopulated China if North Korea's government falls. On the other hand, democratic reform in North Korea might give Chinese citizens a place towards which to flee.

Those who think China will honestly help impose any sanctions -- much less harsher measures -- against North Korea have forgotten the long-standing relationship between those two countries. China insisted that the resolution include the line, "further decisions will be required, should additional measures be necessary," in an attempt to hamstring the United States. There is almost no chance China would refrain from using its veto to forestall action against North Korea.

With Kim Jong-Il possibly
readying a second nuclear test, the United States and her allies have to take the situation seriously, even if China and the United Nations prefer to dither and delay. We may have to arm Japan, in much the same manner that Ronald Reagan deployed Pershing-2 missiles in Europe to push the Soviet Union into a military buildup that crashed its economy. We might have to seriously consider a preemptive strike, regardless of the outcry from dictators' mouthpieces. We can't outsource our national security to the United Nations.

If China will not actively help to restrain North Korea's nuclear ambitions, we may have to choose between a North Korea armed with nuclear-tipped missiles or an angry China. At least China -- we hope -- can be reasoned with.

Posted at Wednesday, October 18, 2006 by CavalierX

elvez73
October 22, 2006   04:46 PM PDT
 
You are quite correct about China wanting to preserve the status quo on the Korean peninsula. Millions of refugees crossing the Yalu is a Chinese nightmare. If we can't lean on the Chinese economically to reign in Kim, we will really have no choice in the matter. I think in the end China will acquiesce to our wishes and lean on Kim, but like you I don't want us to limit or options, this is a real and dangerous threat to us and two of our closest allies.
roy
November 23, 2006   05:09 PM PST
 
wow.

youve never heard of a nations right to self-determination then ??

or perhaps you dont agree with it lol.
CavalierX
November 23, 2006   09:19 PM PST
 
What does self-determination have to do with totalitarian dictatorships? Nothing at all.
 

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments




Previous Entry Home Next Entry