IS A PACIFIST A WISE CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT?

There was no mention in the liberal press in the United States about this issue, but an obscure article in the January 31, 2008 issue of the Moscow Times web page tells a frightening story.

The Russian Military Leaders believe there is a real risk that terrorists could lay their hands on weapons of mass destruction in the near or immediate future. To counter this, the alliance "may consider suppressing the enemy with nuclear weapons.

Under the 2000 doctrine, Russia is ready to use nuclear weapons not only in retaliation against a nuclear attack, as was previously the case, but in response to "a large-scale conventional aggression in a situation critical for the national security of the Russian Federation and it's allies!

Though the report is likely to cause controversy in NATO countries, the authors appear to be merely echoing an idea originally broached by Russian Chief of General Staff Yuri Baluyevsky. Speaking at a meeting of the Academy of Military Sciences on January 19, "Gen. Baluyevsky declared that force should be used not only in the course of hostilities, but also to demonstrate the readiness of leaders to uphold their national interests".
"We are not going to attack anyone," he reassured his audience, "but we want all our partners to realize that Russia will use armed force to defend its own and its allies' sovereignty and territorial integrity. It may resort to a pre-emptive nuclear strike in cases specified by its doctrine."

To do this, the leaders of Russia's Armed Forces would have to establish a permanent readiness to re­solve tasks militarily - by offensive ope­rations in an indefinitely vast number of directions. This implies the permanent enhanced combat readiness of all units,world wide without exception. Otherwise the very idea of a pre-emptive strike will not work. "For such a policy to be effec­tive, Russia should be ready to deal this strike from a broad diversity of geographical locations on its own territory, in neutral air space, and on the world's oceans.
If Baluyevsky's words are heeded, Russia will have to equip all their armed services with permanently combat-ready nuclear weapons. It is any body's guess who will use them first"


If you believe the words of General Baluyevsky, you have to wonder what kind of security the USA would have if Russia should revert to the war-like power it was during the cold war, and we had a President who believes we can talk our way through all threats?. Obama is the person to whom I am referring.

For once I agree with Chris Matthews. The following is a quote from the friday Morning Joe show on MSNBC, 3/24/08: MATTHEWS: "I loved the speech by Barack Obama. I -- I get emotional when I watch these -- I mean, he gets to me. I think his statement as an American is extraordinary, it's powerful, and it's so necessary, and I -- I do think it's a Rorschach test for Americans. It's not a race test. It's a test about sensibility. And some of us are amazingly, um, um, taken by that kind of message, and others are not. It's just -- it's in our, uh, DNA, I suppose. Some people are cold to it. They don't like it. People like Rush Limbaugh, people I get along with but they just have a different sensibility. They have a different reaction to, uh, Barack Obama than -- than I do. I just do".
Yes, Mr. Matthews, it is a test, and if the American people select a pacifist over a proven warrior, it will prove Americans have lost their collective minds!