Friday, May 15, 2009
"Whose side are you on, boys?"
Lets see if I follow this excess greenhouse gasses problem to it's logical conclusion: While "NerObama" fiddles, a' jawboning the Iranians, they're a' busily building nuclear weapons and testing delivery systems with a greater and longer range than necessary for their stated target for destruction, giving secondary presumed targets pause to reflect (and, hopefully, time to prepare). One would presume that the Iranians have every intention of following through with their oft stated desire to "Wipe the Zionist State off the map", or some such verbiage to that effect. One could also easily assume that the targeted country would use every means at it's disposal to prevent such an action against it. At some point, while NerObama and the UN are a' busily decrying the Iranians "success" in going nuclear, the Israelis launch a preemptive nuclear strike against them; the Taliban takes control of Pakistan and it's nukes, joining the fray. Iran also strikes out at European countries within it's range (as well as their Arab enemies); Russia takes one side or the other (most likely Iran's), China sits back grinning like the proverbial Cheshire Cat, unless attacked. (Who knows what Kim Jong Il will do while the attention of the world is distracted elsewhere.) Anyway, when all the above transpires, voila! instant "Nuclear Winter". Which means what: "End Times prophesies become true for their believers; the ending of the "Global Warming" threat; and, if we're really lucky, the Moses of the environmental movement, Algore, will go out "in a blaze of glory" (or, as It's usually called, "a puff of smoke"). The old folk song lyric: "Whose side are you on, boys. Whose side are you on", comes to mind.