Fat Boy and Little Man Nuclear Threats

Trump, Keep Away From That Red Button

Amidst the rising clamor in the US over groping and goosing, America’s Congress is beginning to fret about President Donald Trump’s shaky finger being on the nation’s nuclear button.

The air force officer that dutifully trails the president carries the electronic launch codes in a black satchel that could ignite a world war that would largely destroy our planet.  This is rather more serious than groping and pinching.

The inexperienced Trump has talked himself into a corner over North Korea.  He thought bombastic threats and a side deal with China could force the stubborn North Koreans to junk their nuclear weapons.  Anyone with knowledge of North Asia could have told him this plan would not work.

Trump threatened North Korea with ‘fire and fury’ – a clear allusion to the use of nuclear weapons.  The North Koreans mooned the tough-talking president and went ahead with their nuclear programs.  So Trump’s big bluff was called.  A huge embarrassment for the amateur president who evaded military service in the 1960’s.

On top of that, the wicked North Koreans referred to Trump as ‘old.’  He riposted that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was ‘short and fat.’  It is to this level of kindergarten invective that we have sunk – idiotic kids armed with nuclear weapons.

Nuclear war is absolutely unthinkable.  Totally crazy. Yet serious discussion is underway in military and neocon war circles about a nuclear war against North Korea and, even crazier, against Iran and Russia.  Welcome home, Dr Strangelove.

Responsible people in government are increasingly worried that President Trump might ignite nuclear war to salvage his bruised ego and to show the Asians who is boss.  Trump has already ringed North Korea with heavy bombers, strike aircraft, three heavy aircraft carriers and fleets of warplanes in Japan, South Korea and Guam.

A single incident – a naval clash, a mining, an air encounter – could set the stage for war.  Senior US officers have been telling Trump the same message that this column has delivered for years: that North Korea’s nuclear arsenal is unlikely to be destroyed by even a surprise nuclear attack.

The Pentagon admits that a ground invasion of North Korea would be far too costly.  A decade-old Rand Corp study estimated US losses would be in the range of 250,000 men.

North Korea will probably retain enough nuclear-armed missiles in deep caves after a US nuclear attack to riposte against South Korea and Japan, where there are nearly 100,000 US troops and dependents. Japan, the world’s third most important economic power, is totally vulnerable to nuclear devastation.

Nuclear-armed China and Russia are right next door to North Korea.  Trump’s threats to attack North Korea might force them to challenge the US in a major confrontation.  The head of South Korea’s ruling party just insisted that the US must not attack North Korea without her nation’s prior consent – which will not likely be given.

Washington is planning large, new provocative military exercises around North Korea – just the type of sabre rattling that provoked the current crisis.  China urged Washington to call off its warlike actions and, in exchange, for North Korea to stop testing nuclear warheads and missiles.

Sensible, of course, but Chief Crusader Trump rejects such plans and keeps sending mixed messages to the world.  If he really wanted peace with North Korea all he would have to do is fly to Pyongyang, bury the hatchet, and shoot some rounds of golf with Kim Jong-un who would be thrilled to pieces.

This is unlikely to happen.  Meanwhile, senior military officers and some in Congress who actually mastered high school are trying to figure out how to keep the volatile Trump away from the nuclear trigger.

According to the US Constitution, Congress has the power to declare war.   But the president has a residual right to initiate military action in the event of a sudden threat.  The fate of the globe cannot be left in the hands of one man.  Even Russia and China require some checks and balances before nuclear war is unleashed.  The US apparently does not.

Some senior officers say they would refuse to obey an illegal order.  But none refused when it came to the unjustified attack on Iraq and war against Syria. In fact, the US nuclear attack system is designed to thwart interference with any orders to unleash war.

A no-first use pledge would be a positive step, to be sure.  A better way would be for Congress to mandate a collegial decision to use nuclear weapons that would involve the president, vice president, secretary of state, chief of staff and chief justice.  This, of course, would not apply if the US was under nuclear attack.  But even certainty of attack can be uncertain, as numerous nuclear crises during the cold war showed.

The urgent message of the day is: President Trump. Step away from that nuclear button and calm down.

From Lewrockwell.com, here.

האינתיפאדה המושתקת: יומן מתעדכן

ניתן למצוא באתר הקול היהודי (אין קשר), כאן.

הם מקדימים:

הנתונים המפורסמים כאן ביומן האינתיפאדה המושתקת של הקול היהודי, מבקשים לשקף עד כמה שניתן את המצב הביטחוני בישראל. אולם, סיבות שונות, בהן השתקת אירועי טרור בידי הרשויות, חוסר האמון של אזרחים ברשויות ועוד, אינן מאפשרות דיווח על כל האירועים.

באיסוף הנתונים אנו נעזרים במוקד הצלה יו”ש, סוכנות TPS, אושרי צימר, mivzaklive ובעזרתכם הגולשים באמצעות המייל האדום.

So What If It Doesn’t Fit the Tune as Well?!

The classical version of many Zemiros Shabbos is distorted.

One example is the diacritics for these words in Mah Yedidus:

הלוכך תהא בנחת. עונג קרא לשבת. והשנה משבחת. כדת נפש משיבת. בכן נפשי לך ערגה. ולנוח בחבת. כשושנים סוגה. בו ינוחו בן ובת

It should be “Oneg Kra”, not “Kara”. We don’t find Hashem calling the Shabbos Oneg, obviously, but we are told וקראת לשבת ענג. And the whole piece is written in the imperative, such as “Hiluchach tehei…”

The translations are horrible, too, but that’s for another time.

The Meaningless Quest for ‘True’ Cursedianity/Mohammedanism

Here is the hoped-for treatment.

Some seem preoccupied with defining the true expression of Cursedianity and Mohammedanism. Do Icicles (ISIS) count as real Mohammedans? Which mini-schism of the “Cursedian” faith is more faithful to the befuddled fide?

But in what sense does the question even make sense? Those internally inconsistent non-systems are manmade, motivated by rebellious pride, manifestly false, changing, self-serving, and so on. The phrase “the true X” implies X is out there, or this conforms to a single, ultimate standard of same.

It’s like asking about Iyov, according to the opinion in Chazal he never existed (Bava Basra 15a): What was his great-grandfather’s equity? What was Iyov’s sister’s name? Did Iyov have a good sense of direction around Utz?

I need to study Philosophy of Language

So are they asking what people with X label, in fact, do? What the various founder\s intended at various times (presumably accounting for differing instructions to different people)? What people with X label did at first? What the first version of doctrine said?

Well, why should youth matter? And who cares, exactly? If you are, uh, “in it”, well, “true” Cursedianity\Mohammedanism is whatever Cursedianity\Mohammedanism is sadly (and elsewhere incomprehensibly) “true for you“! And if you’re not, again: Please explain the question.

Q: What is true human behavior? A: Human Behavior!

Everything outside Judaism is the same story: Anti-Judaism. There is no personal subscription or commitment or “belonging” to anything beyond oneself since neither of these schizophrenic “religions” is monotheistic (even if Mohammedanism isn’t idolatrous, Chazon Ish Shvi’is 24:3). Nothing inside our panentheistic world is “beyond oneself”. (Atheistic commitment to one’s self is either a contradiction in terms or self-deification.)

Here is a related Gemara in Shabbos 116a-116b:

הוה ההוא פילוסופא בשבבותיה דהוה שקיל שמא דלא מקבל שוחדא בעו לאחוכי ביה אעיילא ליה שרגא דדהבא ואזול לקמיה אמרה ליה בעינא דניפלגי לי בנכסי דבי נשי אמר להו פלוגו אמר ליה כתיב לן במקום ברא ברתא לא תירות אמר ליה מן יומא דגליתון מארעכון איתנטלית אורייתא דמשה ואיתיהיבת ספרא אחריתי וכתיב ביה ברא וברתא כחדא ירתון למחר הדר עייל ליה איהו חמרא לובא אמר להו שפילית לסיפיה דספרא וכתב ביה אנא לא למיפחת מן אורייתא דמשה אתיתי [ולא] לאוספי על אורייתא דמשה אתיתי וכתיב ביה במקום ברא ברתא לא תירות אמרה ליה נהור נהוריך כשרגא אמר ליה רבן גמליאל אתא חמרא ובטש לשרגא.

Soncino translation:

Imma Shalom, R. Eliezer’s wife, was R. Gamaliel’s sister. Now, a certain philosopher lived in his vicinity and he bore a reputation that he did not accept bribes. They wished to expose him, so she brought him a golden lamp, went before him, [and] said to him, ‘I desire that a share be given me in my [deceased] father’s estate.’ ‘Divide,’ ordered he. Said he [R. Gamaliel] to him, ‘It is decreed for us, Where there is a son, a daughter does not inherit.’ [He replied], ‘Since the day that you were exiled from your land the Law of Moses has been superseded and another book was given, wherein it is written, ‘A son and a daughter inherit equally.’ The next day, he [R. Gamaliel] brought him a Lybian ass. Said he to them, ‘Look at the end of the book, wherein it is written, I came not to destroy the Law of Moses nor to add to the Law of Moses, and it is written therein, A daughter does not inherit where there is a son. Said she to him, ‘Let thy light shine forth like a lamp.’ Said R. Gamaliel to him, ‘An ass came and knocked the lamp over!’

And here is Percy Bysshe Shelley saying the same thing as me:

So there…

P.S.

A reader asks: Why the prejudicial words, accusations flung, and aspersions cast?

I use “prejudicial words” because of the Gemara mentioned here. I plan, hopefully, on expanding more on this soon.

By the way, we referenced the above article in our free, special ebook on answering atheists. To receive the full Hebrew ebook, subscribe to Hyehudi’s Daily Newsletter here.