Iran

So, it seems that Dodge has not seen fit to reward me with a free Dodge Challenger as yet for my earlier unsolicited non-celebrity endorsement of this fine car. With that in mind, I will do so again, and will keep doing so. Dodge Challenger. Dodge Challenger, dammit! BLACK. DODGE. CHALLENGER. Oh yeah, and if you'd like to give me an R/T model for this unsolicited endorsement, which I'm sure few will see, I'd happily accept. Yes, I do know how to drive manual... and love it!

Moving on from this shameless and I'm sure futile attempt to pander to Dodge to get a free car... my modern dream car, that is (I like the classic ones)... back to the subject at hand: Iran.

The short of it is that US intel experts are pretty worried that Iran could strike pretty hard if we keep pressuring them. That much seems like a headline straight from the "No shit, Sherlock" magazine. Of course they may strike if we keep pissing them off.

What's more important however is that they are developing nuclear capabilities. That, and that when they have them, they're fairly likely to use them... stupidly.

The argument could and has been made that being that we have nuclear weapons ourselves, we've no right to keep other nations from having similar weapons. This logic is perfectly fair. I mean, who are we to have guns, but deny them to the murderers and rapists who would kill us in our sleep?

Yes, yes... I do have a sarcastic streak in me. But the point remains. Fair is not always workable or safe. I think it's safe to say that the majority of us have no desire to live under Sharia law... and indeed, many of us simply wouldn't live. While I do not believe that all Muslims are out to force conversions, keep in mind what regime is running Iran at the moment. It is a theocratic one.

Perhaps this is where the difference between fair and just becomes more clear. We do need to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions... for our safety as well as that of our allies. While they may not have missiles capable of reaching the US from Iran, there are other ways... and what would stop them from procuring a few missiles that could reach the US from other nations that don't like us?

Obama on Security

Despite what I may think of him on other aspects, I do have to give Obama props on security. At least to a greater extent than with Bush Jr.

For those who may have missed it, just before the State of the Union address, two hostages were rescued from Somalia. It's also not the first time that Obama has succeeded where Bush Jr. has failed. Let's not forget bin Laden being taken out of the equation and the hostage "negotiations" with Somali pirates in 2009.

Bush did have opportunities for heroism like this. Remember Daniel Pearl? Remember that 9/11/2001 happened toward the beginning of Bush's first term, and he never did catch bin Laden? In fact, he stated (paraphrasing) that bin Laden wasn't really a priority of his.

The argument could be made (and has) that bin Laden was far from the only concern of ours. However, he did kill a few thousand people, and tends to be responsible for some pretty massive attacks. Just because he wasn't throwing everything he had at us didn't mean he wasn't planning something bigger and more significant.

This illustrates Bush's short-sightedness. He didn't put a lot of thought into his policy, he just focused on the here and now... at the best. At the worst, he was deliberately negligent and aided enemies of the US. He did seem pretty interested in "preventing" an attack from Iraq, thus putting us at war on two fronts. But he didn't seem too concerned about preventing more attacks from bin Laden?

What I do know is that a group of terrorists - the ones who bombed Madrid in 2004, stated that they wanted Bush to win re-election. They said that he was too stupid to beat them, and that the Democrats showed a lot more cunning in eliminating them and turning otherwise likely allies against them. The truth in that statement has become very apparent.

That's not to say that I really like what Obama's doing. He has disappointed me on a number of other things in regards to national security. Didn't he say that he would eliminate the Patriot Act? Didn't happen. And of course, there's the NDAA.

Remember what the wise man (Benjamin Franklin) said: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."