<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Den Beste: the sun will shine tomorrow, even if it rains</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/</link>
	<description>Just another Pajamasmedia.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:00:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ms. Know</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-22188</link>
		<dc:creator>Ms. Know</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-22188</guid>
		<description>Glad someone realizes we&#039;re going to lose the war, both of them at that.  You can&#039;t shake hands with terrorist, even if the left-wing illuminati have and think they can worldwide.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glad someone realizes we&#8217;re going to lose the war, both of them at that.  You can&#8217;t shake hands with terrorist, even if the left-wing illuminati have and think they can worldwide.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Murphy</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-21096</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Murphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 12:33:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-21096</guid>
		<description>46. John Lynch
&quot;China is actually much better placed than Japan was in 1941.&quot;

Crap. China&#039;s Achilles Heel, like Japan&#039;s is oil.

They don&#039;t have enough to wage a major war as long as we hold the sea lanes.

They do have enough to invade Taiwan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>46. John Lynch<br />
&#8220;China is actually much better placed than Japan was in 1941.&#8221;</p>
<p>Crap. China&#8217;s Achilles Heel, like Japan&#8217;s is oil.</p>
<p>They don&#8217;t have enough to wage a major war as long as we hold the sea lanes.</p>
<p>They do have enough to invade Taiwan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashcat</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-21061</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashcat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 00:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-21061</guid>
		<description>@ 46--John Lynch
None of those 5 unthinkables you contemplate would be unmanageable for a United States of America that was committed to its own survival. The real problem, from my perspective, doesn&#039;t need to be predicted because it&#039;s already happening, but we are too blind to see:  we have so overvalued the idea of being non-discriminatory, that we are unable to see real danger when we are confronted with it. We can contemplate no alternative to the idea that all people and all cultures are the same; that they differ only because of the particulars of their unique histories of oppression and abuse by stronger nations/cultures/individuals.  Accompanying and supporting such nonsense is the Zero-Sum Illusion: if one individual/nation gets ahead, it could have occurred only at the expense of someone else.

We are, collectively, being tied in logical knots by these two issues.  Why is it that we have the most compassionate but deadly military in the history of the world, yet would be loathe to use it to its anywhere near its full capacity against foes in your 1-5 scenarios?  Because we have almost completely trapped ourselves in the above logical cages.  Domestically and internationally, unless we can break free, we are cooked.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ 46&#8211;John Lynch<br />
None of those 5 unthinkables you contemplate would be unmanageable for a United States of America that was committed to its own survival. The real problem, from my perspective, doesn&#8217;t need to be predicted because it&#8217;s already happening, but we are too blind to see:  we have so overvalued the idea of being non-discriminatory, that we are unable to see real danger when we are confronted with it. We can contemplate no alternative to the idea that all people and all cultures are the same; that they differ only because of the particulars of their unique histories of oppression and abuse by stronger nations/cultures/individuals.  Accompanying and supporting such nonsense is the Zero-Sum Illusion: if one individual/nation gets ahead, it could have occurred only at the expense of someone else.</p>
<p>We are, collectively, being tied in logical knots by these two issues.  Why is it that we have the most compassionate but deadly military in the history of the world, yet would be loathe to use it to its anywhere near its full capacity against foes in your 1-5 scenarios?  Because we have almost completely trapped ourselves in the above logical cages.  Domestically and internationally, unless we can break free, we are cooked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john lynch</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-21050</link>
		<dc:creator>john lynch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 23:07:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-21050</guid>
		<description>Predictions are almost always wrong, and long term predictions are the most likely to be wrong.  I don&#039;t know what is going to happen.  I doubt anyone predicted that W&#039;s first term would include the worst terrorist attack in history and an invasion of another country.  So let&#039;s stop kidding ourselves that we know what&#039;s going to happen.

Den Beste was usually wrong in his predictions back in the days of USS Clueless.  That&#039;s not a hit on him, since everyone else was, too.  I&#039;m a huge fan of his, but there are some things no one can do.

What I can say is that something important will happen, it will be drastic, no one will see it coming, and we will be utterly unprepared.  Vague enough for you?  

Stuff we should be prepared for, since it&#039;s &quot;unthinkable.&quot;

1.  A major conventional war with Russia and China.  At the same time.  

2.  A war with Iran.  With nukes, blockades, and invasions.  

3.  A nuclear attack on the United States by a nonstate actor.

4.  A war with some state that we don&#039;t take seriously as an enemy.  Perhaps Venezuela.  Even if we don&#039;t take them seriously, that doesn&#039;t mean they are smart enough to see that.  Remember, Iraq suddenly attacked Kuwait out of nowhere in 1991.

5.  A nuclear war between two other countries.  Maybe Pakistan and India, or maybe Pakistan and Afghanistan.  Why not?  Stranger things have happened.

Whatever happens is going to hit us from a blind spot, so thinking way, way outside of the box is the best way to protect ourselves.  That&#039;s why I think the US armed forces should be prepared for a large conventional war.  Counterinsurgency is important, but you don&#039;t lose a counterinsurgency campaign in a week.  You have time to learn.  In a conventional war, you can lose very quickly and the consequences are far more dire.  So, we need a bigger army that can fight the worst possible war we can think of.  And we need a reliable nuclear deterrent.  We&#039;ve been letting it decay for almost 20 years now.

Just because a scenario is really bad or really stupid doesn&#039;t mean it can&#039;t happen.  Germany decided to take on the whole world, and Japan went to war with a country with 10 times the industrial output.  China is actually much better placed than Japan was in 1941.  Al Qeada, with no country at all, attacked us.  Always prepare for the worst.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Predictions are almost always wrong, and long term predictions are the most likely to be wrong.  I don&#8217;t know what is going to happen.  I doubt anyone predicted that W&#8217;s first term would include the worst terrorist attack in history and an invasion of another country.  So let&#8217;s stop kidding ourselves that we know what&#8217;s going to happen.</p>
<p>Den Beste was usually wrong in his predictions back in the days of USS Clueless.  That&#8217;s not a hit on him, since everyone else was, too.  I&#8217;m a huge fan of his, but there are some things no one can do.</p>
<p>What I can say is that something important will happen, it will be drastic, no one will see it coming, and we will be utterly unprepared.  Vague enough for you?  </p>
<p>Stuff we should be prepared for, since it&#8217;s &#8220;unthinkable.&#8221;</p>
<p>1.  A major conventional war with Russia and China.  At the same time.  </p>
<p>2.  A war with Iran.  With nukes, blockades, and invasions.  </p>
<p>3.  A nuclear attack on the United States by a nonstate actor.</p>
<p>4.  A war with some state that we don&#8217;t take seriously as an enemy.  Perhaps Venezuela.  Even if we don&#8217;t take them seriously, that doesn&#8217;t mean they are smart enough to see that.  Remember, Iraq suddenly attacked Kuwait out of nowhere in 1991.</p>
<p>5.  A nuclear war between two other countries.  Maybe Pakistan and India, or maybe Pakistan and Afghanistan.  Why not?  Stranger things have happened.</p>
<p>Whatever happens is going to hit us from a blind spot, so thinking way, way outside of the box is the best way to protect ourselves.  That&#8217;s why I think the US armed forces should be prepared for a large conventional war.  Counterinsurgency is important, but you don&#8217;t lose a counterinsurgency campaign in a week.  You have time to learn.  In a conventional war, you can lose very quickly and the consequences are far more dire.  So, we need a bigger army that can fight the worst possible war we can think of.  And we need a reliable nuclear deterrent.  We&#8217;ve been letting it decay for almost 20 years now.</p>
<p>Just because a scenario is really bad or really stupid doesn&#8217;t mean it can&#8217;t happen.  Germany decided to take on the whole world, and Japan went to war with a country with 10 times the industrial output.  China is actually much better placed than Japan was in 1941.  Al Qeada, with no country at all, attacked us.  Always prepare for the worst.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bvw</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-21046</link>
		<dc:creator>bvw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 22:40:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-21046</guid>
		<description>Iran has no nuke bombs?  Are you willing to bet a weird decay mode meta-stable radionuclide on that?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Iran has no nuke bombs?  Are you willing to bet a weird decay mode meta-stable radionuclide on that?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roderick Reilly</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-21025</link>
		<dc:creator>Roderick Reilly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:22:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-21025</guid>
		<description>&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;The other day I [made fun of] my mom by telling her she looked like Sarah Palin”. &quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;

Tina Fey looks remarkably like Sarah Palin, a fact that had been noted as far back as last year, and was exactly the reason why she played her in skits. Do these women consider Tina Fey &quot;unatracive?&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"The other day I [made fun of] my mom by telling her she looked like Sarah Palin”. &#8220;&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;"&#8221;</p>
<p>Tina Fey looks remarkably like Sarah Palin, a fact that had been noted as far back as last year, and was exactly the reason why she played her in skits. Do these women consider Tina Fey &#8220;unatracive?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roderick Reilly</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-21022</link>
		<dc:creator>Roderick Reilly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 21:12:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-21022</guid>
		<description>How can Iran have a nuclear exchange with Israel if it has no nukes?

It has a nuclear weapons program, but -- to date -- no bombs. Now, if they could buy some black market bombs -- if such actually exist or might be available -- then they would have to have an effective delivery system.

Pakistan isn&#039;t going to give Iran any interim nukes, and N. Korea doesn&#039;t have any to sell, either. I have no idea if anybody knows if N. Korea has any actual bombs other than that cruder-than-Trinity semi fiasco &quot;test&quot; they did a couple of years ago.

Every rogue country that choses to build its own nukes has to reinvent most of the wheel to make it happen, and then they have to manufacture operational bombs, which is not a rapid, high-production assembly line process, especially if you&#039;re new at it.

Iran has a mediocre Air Force, and while its ancient F-4&#039;s may be able to deliver a nuke (if said nukes aren&#039;t too heavy for the Phantom), it will be intercepted and shot down, along with its escort planes, before it reaches Israel. Missiles, you say? Do they have one that can carry what is likely to be a fairly large, heavy bomb anytime in the near future? I remember when the media showed us that pencil-thin N. Korean missile that was dubbed a nuke delivery system. It looked to me like it could handle a few hundred pounds at best, and I had to shake my head at the ignorance.

Will they have multiple bombs with which to overwhelm little Isreal before it can strike back? Probably not for a long time. A single nuke would not destroy Israel, although it would be catastrophic. Nukes are not the Shiva-like world-ending weapons people paint them to be. Israel would definitely be able to strike back at Iran even after an Iranian first strike. Israel has an arsenal ranging from scores to hundreds of nukes in various sizes, and the means to deliver all of them. They only need to deliver 5 to 10 to end the whole affair in their favor, even if Tel Aviv is gone.

A terrorist nuclear strike on a major U.S. city will not kill 6 million people -- not even close. It will be devastating, of course, and tens of thousands are likely to die immediately, with thousands more to follow. A large portion of Manhattan -- or other burrough -- would be pulverized and the rest (which would still be most of it) made uninhabitable. Catastrophe and tragedy enough, but not the huge wound that some posters here prophesy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How can Iran have a nuclear exchange with Israel if it has no nukes?</p>
<p>It has a nuclear weapons program, but &#8212; to date &#8212; no bombs. Now, if they could buy some black market bombs &#8212; if such actually exist or might be available &#8212; then they would have to have an effective delivery system.</p>
<p>Pakistan isn&#8217;t going to give Iran any interim nukes, and N. Korea doesn&#8217;t have any to sell, either. I have no idea if anybody knows if N. Korea has any actual bombs other than that cruder-than-Trinity semi fiasco &#8220;test&#8221; they did a couple of years ago.</p>
<p>Every rogue country that choses to build its own nukes has to reinvent most of the wheel to make it happen, and then they have to manufacture operational bombs, which is not a rapid, high-production assembly line process, especially if you&#8217;re new at it.</p>
<p>Iran has a mediocre Air Force, and while its ancient F-4&#8242;s may be able to deliver a nuke (if said nukes aren&#8217;t too heavy for the Phantom), it will be intercepted and shot down, along with its escort planes, before it reaches Israel. Missiles, you say? Do they have one that can carry what is likely to be a fairly large, heavy bomb anytime in the near future? I remember when the media showed us that pencil-thin N. Korean missile that was dubbed a nuke delivery system. It looked to me like it could handle a few hundred pounds at best, and I had to shake my head at the ignorance.</p>
<p>Will they have multiple bombs with which to overwhelm little Isreal before it can strike back? Probably not for a long time. A single nuke would not destroy Israel, although it would be catastrophic. Nukes are not the Shiva-like world-ending weapons people paint them to be. Israel would definitely be able to strike back at Iran even after an Iranian first strike. Israel has an arsenal ranging from scores to hundreds of nukes in various sizes, and the means to deliver all of them. They only need to deliver 5 to 10 to end the whole affair in their favor, even if Tel Aviv is gone.</p>
<p>A terrorist nuclear strike on a major U.S. city will not kill 6 million people &#8212; not even close. It will be devastating, of course, and tens of thousands are likely to die immediately, with thousands more to follow. A large portion of Manhattan &#8212; or other burrough &#8212; would be pulverized and the rest (which would still be most of it) made uninhabitable. Catastrophe and tragedy enough, but not the huge wound that some posters here prophesy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bvw</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-20898</link>
		<dc:creator>bvw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-20898</guid>
		<description>wretchard, Den Beste can tell you the role of the &quot;low life&quot; in Shingu.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wretchard, Den Beste can tell you the role of the &#8220;low life&#8221; in Shingu.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: slade</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-20885</link>
		<dc:creator>slade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:04:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-20885</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;So if we do turn out to be right about BHO, it won’t be because we’re better than those who believed in him but rather because we were worse.&lt;/i&gt;  Wretchard

Well that&#039;s honest.

boghie wheel - it&#039;s called the triumph of hope over experience.

Like second marriages.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>So if we do turn out to be right about BHO, it won’t be because we’re better than those who believed in him but rather because we were worse.</i>  Wretchard</p>
<p>Well that&#8217;s honest.</p>
<p>boghie wheel &#8211; it&#8217;s called the triumph of hope over experience.</p>
<p>Like second marriages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wretchard</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2008/11/05/den-beste-the-sun-will-shine-tomorrow-even-if-it-rains/#comment-20865</link>
		<dc:creator>wretchard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 06:25:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/?p=802#comment-20865</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;“I think he’s a fundamentally honest man.” I laughed. Because needless to say, I’m a strong skeptic on this one.&lt;/i&gt;

If you leave aside the question of whether or not BHO is a conman -- an issue which will be decided empirically by events and not worth discussing here; simply consider conmen in general. I think it&#039;s generally true that conmen are more successful among good and decent people then they are with low-lifers. In fact, when two conmen find themselves in a room they almost instantly aware of each other when nobody else notices them. A real conman must pitch high; appeal to the best in humanity. To self-sacrifice, duty, rights of man, motherhood and apple pie. That&#039;s why religion and charities are such good fronts for swindlers. Someone once wrote that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels and that&#039;s why. No better place to hide than on the pulpit or behind the bunting.

But to return to the low lifers. Many of them have met conmen before, because they have a greater familiarity with unsavory characters. The line of patter is familiar; they&#039;ve heard all the big promises before. They know, for example, how utterly sincere the mass murderer who has suddenly found Jesus in the stir can sound. And so they are innoculated against the type.

That doesn&#039;t mean that low-lifers can&#039;t make mistakes. Sometimes they are so cynical they pass up the real deal. But the &quot;creepy&quot; feeling that people sometimes get warning them off isn&#039;t pure subjectivism; it is really your consciousness putting together signals and interpreting them as a danger signal. So if we do turn out to be right about BHO, it won&#039;t be because we&#039;re better than those who believed in him but rather because we were worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>“I think he’s a fundamentally honest man.” I laughed. Because needless to say, I’m a strong skeptic on this one.</i></p>
<p>If you leave aside the question of whether or not BHO is a conman &#8212; an issue which will be decided empirically by events and not worth discussing here; simply consider conmen in general. I think it&#8217;s generally true that conmen are more successful among good and decent people then they are with low-lifers. In fact, when two conmen find themselves in a room they almost instantly aware of each other when nobody else notices them. A real conman must pitch high; appeal to the best in humanity. To self-sacrifice, duty, rights of man, motherhood and apple pie. That&#8217;s why religion and charities are such good fronts for swindlers. Someone once wrote that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels and that&#8217;s why. No better place to hide than on the pulpit or behind the bunting.</p>
<p>But to return to the low lifers. Many of them have met conmen before, because they have a greater familiarity with unsavory characters. The line of patter is familiar; they&#8217;ve heard all the big promises before. They know, for example, how utterly sincere the mass murderer who has suddenly found Jesus in the stir can sound. And so they are innoculated against the type.</p>
<p>That doesn&#8217;t mean that low-lifers can&#8217;t make mistakes. Sometimes they are so cynical they pass up the real deal. But the &#8220;creepy&#8221; feeling that people sometimes get warning them off isn&#8217;t pure subjectivism; it is really your consciousness putting together signals and interpreting them as a danger signal. So if we do turn out to be right about BHO, it won&#8217;t be because we&#8217;re better than those who believed in him but rather because we were worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

