| Author |
Nuclear, climate perils push Doomsday Clock ahead |
carkitter
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Auckland, NZ
PM |
Found this on http://www.tammybruce.com
I think it's relevant to our discussion.
Newt Gingrich bluntly described Iran's threat to the West in general and America and Israel in particular in his speech to the Herzliya Conference held by the Institute for Policy and Strategy.
"Three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust," Gingrich declared, adding: "People are greatly underestimating how dangerous the world is becoming. I'll repeat it, three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust. Our enemies are quite explicit in their desire to destroy us. They say it publicly. We are sleepwalking through this process as though it's only a problem of communication."
"Our enemies are fully as determined as Nazi Germany, and more determined that the Soviets. Our enemies will kill us the first chance they get. There is no rational ability to deny that fact. It's very clear that the problems are larger and more immediate than the political systems in Israel or the US are currently capable of dealing with," said Gingrich.
"We don't have right language, goals, structure, or operating speed, to defeat our enemies. My hope is that being this candid and direct, I could open a dialogue that will force people to come to grips with how serious this is, how real it is, how much we are threatened. If that fails, at least we will be intellectually prepared for the correct results once we have lost one or more cities," Gingrich added.
If history repeats — and let's pray it does not — then Gingrich would find himself in the position that Churchill got to in 1939, when his correct assessment of the Nazi threat was tragically validated, and 60 million people (!) died horribly and unnecessarily.
Funny how this should pop-up on the same day I watch the DVD "The Gathering Storm" about Churchill leading into WWII...
| |
|
goldenface
Joined: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Liverpool City Centre
PM |
@Carkitter
Very interesting but that seems like 'sooooo last century' 
One of the main differences in these immediate times is that war doesn't have to be declared - the way it was in 18th, 19th and 20th century. Countries then came out forthright and 'declared' that they were in a state of war with another country. So governments and citizens were mentally and strategically prepared for the worst to happen.
Today, it seems that although we are in a high state of alert, countries and governments are sleepwalking until something dreadful happens and they all 'react', when it is too late.
Like Newt has pointed out in your post - countries are desperately trying to get the upper-hand and there is always one on the offensive. If you wiped America/NATO/UN out of the equation there would be so many wars it would be hard to keep up with who's fighting who.
|
Residentevil
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Raccoon City, USA
PM, WWW
|
It is a mad world out there.
Tough times don't last, tough people do!
Free Tibet |
Evilchap
Joined: Aug 25, 2006
Posts: 57
From: New Zealand
PM |
@Goldenface, spot on, and as far ass America goes better the evil you know I say | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2007-01-25 03:41
