Re: a dumb query? pls humor me

[Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca>]

Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:21:54PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> 
>> I'd feel a lot better about the American military protecting Americans if
>> they were actually stationed where they can defend Americans.  How many
>> soldiers are stationed in Rammstein?  How many hours is it to a military
>> base of significant size?  I mean, this is Oregon, we were bombed by the
>> Japanese in World War II and we're in nuclear range of North Korea.
>> 
>> So what happened to the fighter wing stationed at Portland, where there
>> might be some hope of stopping an inbound airborn threat?  It got shipped
>> to bumfuck nowhere Oklahoma.  Nice show of strength, guys:  Hide behind
>> the civilians instead of where the potential threat is.
>> 
> Oh my goodness.  Paul, you are not that ignorant.  I know it.  Any
> attack from NK would have a hard time getting past Alaska and Hawaii
> undetected.  Besides, if it was an ICBM attack, having fighters in
> Portland wouldn't help.

ICBMs are closer to an aircraft size object, and so far when it comes to
moving aircraft sized objects, you just can't beat human aim.  Those
missile tests don't particularly inspire much confidence.

>> Go back to the Reagan Administration and the first Bush Administration
>> and you'll see "aid" going to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein even.
>>  
> Nice revisionist bit of history there.  If you go back to the Reagan
> Administration (and less so the first Bush administration), you will see
> that the Soviets were a much greater threat (short term and long term)
> than even Hussein and bin Laden.

Two wrongs don't make a right.