A few days ago a Pentagon specialist, Keith B. Payne, testified before a U.S. Senate committee that the administration's Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty offers numerous loopholes to the Russian side. ... Meanwhile, Russia is bolstering its road mobile ICBM forces, developing a new strategic bomber, new ICBM forces, and a cruise missile with a 3,000+ mile range. The U.S. doesn't even possess a road mobile ICBM, and has no plans to develop new strategic forces. How can this happen? Is it the stupidity of one party over another? Here is a reminder, however, that should be noted: Both parties share the same mentality, which was molded by television instead of books, and by the experience of shopping instead of war.
The logic of going downhill, the logic of decline, ... signifies a softening. It is known, as well, that soft people no longer have the stomach for what is necessary.
There it is, that's the line: Soft people no longer have the stomach for what is necessary. I would suggest (and JR does further on) that not only do soft people lack the stomach, they have lost the ability to discern what is necessary. Case in point, criminal gangs from another country are putting bounties on US law enforcement officers. Is this acceptable? What is the necessary action here? And yet a whole host of people will fail to discern a problem there.
What occurs is a form of denial, in which the realities of politics and war are cast aside in favor of fantasy substitutes, heavily laced with ideological logos of the kind that paralyze all thought....Here is a failure of imagination alongside a dismissal of the concept "enemy," done without any hesitation, with the survival instinct overridden by the daily corruption that attends absolute comfort. Those who are soft cannot see into an enemy that emerges from totally different conditions of life.
Cannot conceive of an enemy. Maybe that partially explains 'a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged' idea. Once the idea gets through that some people either actively have it in for you, or simply have no consideration of you except as a source of funds or goods, this precipitates some other changes in world view. Not that conservatives have a stellar record of choosing a path sans the rose-colored glasses. Remember 'compassionate conservatism'?
