In fact, I was replying to awb’s comment in which he points out the obvious moral superiority of the United States to countries like Cuba.

There seems to be an instinctual urge to the very opposite among those on the paleo-right. Not only do they place every crackpot dictator on a equal moral plane with the United States, but generally, they’ll place them higher. It befuddles the mind really.

If some of you took offense at the comment, I suggest you examine your own consciences. It may be that you have indicted yourself.

As for your sarcastic intro, I am simply pointing out that the missile defense which is to be installed in the Czech Republic is intended to protect Europe from missile attack, ostensibly from the Middle East. Last time I checked, Russia was a part of Europe. Stating the obvious, I suppose, is a sign of American arrogance.

You fling the word hate around quite freely, so touche. If Dean May hates Americans, then you hate Russians. You did propose conflict with them over missiles in the Czech Republic!

I think I suggested bombing the Cubans. I distrust the Russians – hate might be too strong a term. I find their act of placing strategic bombers 90 miles off our coast in retaliation for the installation of a defensive missile battery to be somewhat provocative.

Perhaps you should inquire of your comrades as to why they have adopted such an agressive stance over a defensive measure that, quite frankly, would also benefit Russia.

Brush up on your definition of idolatry. St. Paul was inspired to link infidelity quite closely with idolatry. If the Church calls us to be faithful to Her teaching on war, and we take exception and invent novel justifications for preferring the secular state instead, are we not committing idolatry? There isn’t a reasonable case for the Iraq debacle as a just war. There have been Weigelian and Novakian attempts but they fail under scrutiny. So. It seems to me that Mr. May has raised a legitimate concern.

You, I’m sure, will differ. Try to do so with some substance, if that’d be alright. Accusations of neo-donatism seem… oh, ad hominem.

Personal space? What about Russia’s? What about China’s? What about North Korea’s and Iran’s and Saddam Hussein’s? Is that the peg you’re hanging your coat on? Really?

The neo-donatists are among us . . .

Why do we get to tell other countries where to put their nukes?

Call it America’s “personal space issue” with Russia and Cuba.

wac

You keep on setting up that strawman, Dean.

That strawman is tired and weak.

Give it a rest. None of us are idolaters. We just (generally, not religiously) support and love our country, which is natural, good, and eminently human.

What do you think the insane rush to create new NATO countries will mean if one of them has a “color” revolution Moscow doesn’t like or that we don’t like? Why should it matter to us? What, specifically, is our national interest in keeping the Sudetenland free from non-existent agression? Or writing checks to Poland and Hungary with our mouths that our ass can’t cash?

We are discussing a non-nuclear missile defense shield. The only talkin’ nuclear is, well, you and the Russians. Interesting.

Bill you can holler defensive all day long. But one Ohio class sub carries 24 Tridents, each one capable of deploying 12 nukes. And we have 18 Ohio class. Let’s see, that’s over 5000 nukes that are definitely not defensive, capable of being launched against Russia from pretty much anywhere in the world. Of course that is only a part of the nuclear arsenal capable of being delivered against Russia. But since we’re the good guys in the white hats they don’t need to worry.

I’m curious to know how the only country to ever deploy nukes against civilian population centers could hold the moral high ground? This same country spends more on military hardware than the rest of the world combined. But it’s all good since we are benevolent and beneficent. Must be that America is right by definition thing again.