Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz

Post Reply
johnkarls
Posts: 2034
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm

Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz

Post by johnkarls »

.
Suggested Answers to the Second Short Quiz

Question 1

Does the first paragraph of the U.S. Department of Defense 1/19/2018 press release accompanying the first National Defense Strategy in more than a decade say --

“The new National Defense Strategy announced today is aimed at restoring America’s competitive military advantage to deter Russia and China from challenging the United States, its allies or seeking to overturn the international order that has served so well since the end of World War II.”

Answer 1

Yes.

Question 2

Does this make sense in the light of MAD?

Answer 2

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 3

Isn’t MAD (the Cold War doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction) the policy that has worked so well for the more-than-half-a-century that Russia and China have had nuclear weapons?

Answer 3

Yes.

Question 4

In the case of Russia and its USSR, isn’t it true that the reason why MAD was so effective is that virtually all of the top Russian/Soviet leaders had agrarian roots as a result of which they loved the Russian workers and would not have risked their destruction in a nuclear holocaust?

Answer 4

Yes.

Question 5

Ditto China?

Answer 5

Yes.

Question 6

Is there any reason to think that the current leaders of Russia and China are any less rational than their nuclear-age predecessors?

Answer 6

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 7

BTW, doesn’t any world-class sailor (and former light-aircraft pilot) know, as a matter of “life and death,” that prevailing winds anywhere in the world come from the west?

Answer 7

Of course!!!

Question 8

And isn’t this fact an additional MAD deterrent for Russia and China because THEY ARE DOWNWIND from any nuclear blasts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East?

Answer 8

So one would think!!!

Question 9

Does U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis, in his introduction to the Unclassified Summary of the National Defense Strategy, broaden the focus from solely Russia and China by saying --

“China is a strategic competitor using predatory economics to intimidate its neighbors while militarizing features in the South China Sea. Russia has violated the borders of nearby nations and pursues veto power over economic, diplomatic, and security decisions of its neighbors. As well, North Korea’s outlaw actions and reckless rhetoric continue despite United Nation’s censure and sanctions. Iran continues to sow violence and remains the most significant challenge to Middle East stability. Despite the defeat of ISIS’s physical caliphate, threats to stability remain as terrorist groups with long reach continue to murder the innocent and threaten peace broadly.”

Answer 9

Yes.

Question 10

Haven’t we studied on numerous occasions how in a 2/4/2004 television appearance, Abdul Qadeer Khan, the “father of the Pakistani nuclear bomb,” admitted that during the previous two decades he had secretly provided North Korea, Iran and Libya with the “know how” for producing nuclear weapons?

Answer 10

Yes.

Question 11

And haven’t we studied how Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have taught Iran and North Korea (and other wannabe nuclear powers such as the followers of Osama bin Laden) that they would have to be insane to give up their nuclear weapons programs?

Answer 11

Yes.

Question 12

Re Q-11, haven’t we studied how the break-up of the old Soviet Union left Ukraine with 1,900 Soviet multiple-warhead nuclear missiles and the Ukrainians were stupid enough to surrender them pursuant to a 12/5/1994 agreement of Bill Clinton (as U.S. President), John Major (as U.K. Prime Minister), and Boris Yeltsin (as President of Russia) TO GUARANTEE THE INDEPENDENCE AND INTEGRITY OF UKRAINE???

Answer 12

Yes.

Question 13

And didn’t President Barack Obama and the Russian Federation re-affirm on 12/4/2009 the 1994 obligations???

Answer 13

Yes.

Question 14

So wasn’t it NOT ONLY shameful on general principles BUT ALSO CATASTROPHIC FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION that President Obama DID NOT LIFT A FINGER in 2014 when Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula and effectively annexed the eastern half of Ukraine???

Answer 14

Yes, it is shameful on general principles when a U.S. President such as Barack Obama, violates his commitments.

And yes, it was CATASTROPHIC FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION that President Obama DID NOT LIFT A FINGER in 2014 when Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula and effectively annexed the eastern half of Ukraine!!!

Question 15

Re Q-11 and Libya, haven’t we studied how in 2003 Iraq’s President Saddam Hussein claimed to have nuclear weapons -- and not only the U.S. intelligence services but the intelligence services of many of our European allies (especially the U.K.) believed him???

Answer 15

Yes, especially the British intelligence services.

Question 16

And haven’t we studied how, IN REACTION TO THE U.S.-LED invasion of Saddam’s Iraq in early 2003, LIBYA’S COLONEL QADDAFI, in a panic, admitted that he had a nuclear weapons program and immediately offered to renounce it?

Answer 16

Yes, as unbelievable as Colonel Qaddafi’s reaction was!!!

Question 17

And haven’t we studied how Colonel Qaddafi’s panicked reaction caught the U.S. (and the world’s) intelligence services by surprise because they had no idea that, as mentioned in Q-10, “the father of the Pakistani nuclear bomb” had secretly provided Libya (as well as North Korea and Iran) with the “know how” for producing nuclear weapons?

Answer 17

Yes, because our intelligence services were so ignorant!!!

Question 18

So wasn’t it NOT ONLY shameful on general principles BUT ALSO CATASTROPHIC FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton organized the U.S./British/French attack on Libya which would have been a “non-starter” without U.S. intelligence and air cover?

Answer 18

Yes, it was shameful on general principles for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to organize the U.S./British/French attack on Libya which would have been a “non-starter” without U.S. intelligence and air cover!!!

And yes, it was CATASTROPHIC FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demonstrated to all of the world’s wannabe nuclear powers that they would have to be insane to surrender their nuclear programs!!!

Question 19

BTW did both the Arab League and the United Nations believe they had been swindled by Hillary’s U.N. Resolution that only approved a “no fly” prohibition for Qaddafi’s air force (which NEVER flew during the conflict), because Hillary proceeded to use American airpower to support the entire military campaign of the revolutionaries to topple Qaddafi?

Answer 19

On 3/20/2011, the Washington Post ran a story whose headline was “Arab League Condemns Broad Western Bombing Campaign In Libya” and which began --

“CAIRO — The Arab League secretary general, Amr Moussa, deplored the broad scope of the U.S.-European bombing campaign in Libya and said Sunday that he would call a league meeting to reconsider Arab approval of the Western military intervention. Moussa said the Arab League’s approval of a no-fly zone on March 12 was based on a desire to prevent Moammar Gaddafi’s air force from attacking civilians and was not designed to endorse the intense bombing and missile attacks — including on Tripoli, the capital, and on Libyan ground forces — whose images have filled Arab television screens for two days. ‘What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone,’ he said in a statement carried by the Middle East News Agency. ‘And what we want is the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians.’ Moussa’s declaration suggested that some of the 22 Arab League members were taken aback by what they have seen and wanted to modify their approval lest they be perceived as accepting outright Western military intervention in Libya. Although the eccentric Gaddafi is widely looked down upon in the Arab world, the leaders and people of the Middle East traditionally have risen up in emotional protest at the first sign of Western intervention. A shift away from the Arab League endorsement, even partial, would constitute a major setback to the U.S.-European campaign. Western leaders brandished the Arab League decision as a justification for their decision to move militarily and as a weapon in the debate to obtain a U.N. Security Council resolution two days before the bombing began. As U.S. and European military operations entered their second day…..”

Question 29

So is it any surprise that the Qaddaf tribe in whose area virtually all Libyan oil exists as a result of which Colonel Muammar el Qaddafi (or, in other words, “Muammar of the Qaddafs”) was the leader of all Libya -- have reacted to Hillary’s policy of trying to destroy them by pledging allegiance to ISIS?

Answer 20

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 21

But vis-à-vis the lessons taught Iran and North Korea by Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton with their policies toward Ukraine and Libya that Iran and North Korea would have to be insane to give up their nuclear programs, is there any use in “crying over spilt milk”???

Answer 21

Not according to what I was taught by my mother!!!

Question 22

Wouldn’t it be more constructive to attempt to evaluate whether Iran’s Supreme Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un are rational so that “Mutual Assured Destruction” could be employed in their cases?

Answer 22

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 23

With respect to this question vis-à-vis Ali Khamenei, did we consider the Russian cable traffic during the Cuban missile crisis that became public following Glasnost?

Answer 23

Yes.

Question 24

Did those cables show that immediately after American spy satellites discovered the Russian missiles in Cuba, Fidel Castro cabled Nikita Khrushchev to say, in effect: “In the course of human events, it is sometimes necessary for a people to be willing to sacrifice themselves for the ‘greater good,’ as a result of which I am willing to sacrifice myself and the Cuban people by firing all of the nuclear missiles in Cuba at the U.S., following which it should be an easy matter for the Soviet Union to ‘mop up’”???

Answer 24

Yes.

Question 25

And did that immediately provoke Khrushchev to cable his underlings, both in Cuba and Russia, to say, in effect: “Who is this madman??? And who gave him control (de facto if not de jure) over MY MISSILES??? And get MY MISSILES the hell out of Cuba ASAP!!!”???

Answer 25

Yes.

Question 26

BTW, did supreme-negotiator Khrushchev get President Kennedy to remove American missiles from Turkey in exchange for the removal of Russian missiles from Cuba -- which missiles the post-Glasnost-available Russian cable traffic showed that Khrushchev would have removed anyway? And was there any shame in this for President Kennedy because, after all, he thought he was dealing with a real crisis?

Answer 26

Yes, Khrushchev did get Kennedy to withdraw American nukes from Turkey!!!

And yes, there was no shame in this for President Kennedy because, after all, he thought he was dealing with a real crisis!!!

The only real shame should be felt by the Mainstream Media which perpetuates to this day THE MYTH that President Kennedy was facing a real crisis!!!

And THE MYTH that the Cuban missile crisis was the closest the world has ever come to a nuclear holocaust.

Rather than 1973 when Israel, following long-standing policy that it would fire its 7 nuclear missiles if it reached the point of “only 24 hours to go to complete annihilation,” were within minutes of launching their nuclear missiles which were aimed at 7 Russian cities -- as described in Q&A-33 and Q&A-34!!!

Question 27

But back to the main question -- how do we know that Supreme Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is any more rational than Fidel Castro??? Particularly in light of all the other aggression being perpetrated by him, and in light of all the U.N. resolutions at which he is “thumbing his nose”???

Answer 27

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 28

If the answer to the main question is that Supreme Ayatollah Khamenei is sane (and who knows whether that is true), isn’t the best Mutual-Assured-Destruction policy the de facto alliance that has formed between ISRAEL and Egypt and the “Gulf State Six” (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Oman) -- for which the nuclear deterrent would be ISRAELI NUCLEAR WEAPONS???

Answer 28

So one would think!!!

After all, we have studied on numerous occasions how French President Charles de Gaulle pulled France out of NATO because, having been the Commanding General of the LARGEST Army at the end of WW-II (the 7-million-man French army raised from the French colonies, as a result of which Supreme Allied Commander Dwight Eisenhower ordered that General de Gaulle and his French army be the first Allied troops to enter Paris!!!), de Gaulle believed that the Soviets in the 1960’s WOULD NOT BE DETERRED FROM USING THEIR VASTLY-SUPERIOR CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS BY “MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION” because, de Gaulle believed, the Soviets would not believe that America would risk a nuclear holocaust in order to save its NATO allies, in general, and France, in particular.

So President/General Charles de Gaulle pulled France out of NATO and developed his own nuclear weapons (derisively called the “Force de Frappe” by the Americans) in order to sober up the Soviets that if they ordered their tanks “to roll to the Atlantic” which they could so easily have done, there would be a nuclear response from the French, even if America “chickened out”!!!

In today’s Middle East, it appears obvious that Egypt and the Gulf State Six believe that the “Israeli nuclear umbrella” is much more credible vis-à-vis Iran than the “U.S. nuclear umbrella”!!!

Question 29

And since the answer to the main question vis-à-vis Kim Jong-un is that he and his regime are NOT SANE so that MAD would have a chance of succeeding, haven’t all of the foreign-policy experts agreed that the key is China which keeps the Kim regime propped up economically???

Answer 29

Yes.

Question 30

HOWEVER, why should we be trying to bribe the Koreans to behave, which has been such a policy failure repeatedly over the last 25 years???

Answer 30

Why indeed!!! Unless we are still addicted to self-delusion!!!

Question 31

AND WHY should we now be trying to bribe the Chinese with all kinds of economic “carrots” to bring North Korea “to heel” which must be a huge relief to the Chinese who thought President Trump was really going to do something about all the American jobs that have been exported to China???

Answer 31

Why indeed!!! Unless we are still addicted to self-delusion!!!

Question 32

WHY NOT simply do what the Israeli’s did???

Answer 32

Please read on Q&A-33 through Q&A-36.

Question 33

After all, haven’t we studied on numerous occasions how Seymour Hersh’s “The Samson Option” records that Israel’s nuclear weapons saved it from annihilation (literally) in 1973???

Answer 33

Yes.

Question 34

And didn’t Seymour Hersh record that when Golda Meir’s cabinet agreed that they were “within 24 hours of annihilation” at which point they had always agreed to fire their 7 nuclear missiles, the only reason Henry Kissinger was willing to save Israel WAS THAT THEIR 7 NUCLEAR MISSILES WERE AIMED AT RUSSIAN CITIES in recognition that the Soviet Union was the cause of all the Arab-Israeli strife for a quarter century (and counting)???

Answer 34

The short answer = yes.

The “back story”???

Henry Kissinger was so incensed over the behavior of Moshe Dayan (former Commanding General of the Israeli Defense Forces who was elevated at the beginning of the 1967 “Six Days War” to Israel Defense Minister as which he continued to serve for 7 years before becoming Foreign Minister for another 2.5 years and who was also famous for the huge black patch over his left eye) in invariably treating Arab diplomats disrespectfully and derisively following the 1967 War, that Kissinger refused to supply Israel with any ammunition for its military weapons (all of which were American).

Most of us remember the Egyptian troops crossing the Suez Canal in 1973 and then hunkering down under their SAM’s (surface-to-air missiles).

Most of us were oblivious to how the Syrian tanks were rolling across Israel since the Israel Defense Forces had virtually no ammunition to stop them. [And most of us had forgotten how Egypt and Syria had combined into a single country 1958-1961 called the United Arab Republic.]

Seymour Hersh does not record which Minister, during Golda Meir’s cabinet meeting convened to re-affirm that Israel would fire its 7 missiles at Russian cities if it reached the point of “24 hours to go to complete annihilation” and to agree that Israel had reached that point, suggested that they still had a few minutes to cable Kissinger to provide a Heads Up on What Was Going Down within a matter of minutes!!!

Luckily, Kissinger was available to receive the cable and Seymour Hersh recorded that Kissinger immediately cabled back: “Commence firing ‘as if there is no tomorrow’ – the resupply planes will take off at dawn”!!!

The Israelis did commence “firing as if there is no tomorrow”!!! The resupply planes did take off at dawn!!! And “Israel” did not become the answer to a trivia-quiz question – “What Middle East country WAS destroyed by Kissinger”!!!

However, one shudders to think what would have happened if Israel’s 7 missiles had been aimed at Arab capitals rather than Russian cities!!!

BTW, following Kissinger’s performance, the Israelis have tried insofar as possible NOT to rely on American weapons.

Question 35

So why doesn’t America simply “take a page” from the “Israeli play book” and announce to the Chinese that since they are responsible for North Korea, America and its allies will respond to any nuclear aggression from North Korea by nuking (pick a number) times as many Chinese as the North Koreans nuke???

Answer 35

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!

Question 36

And for anyone who would like to argue that such a policy would be insane, shouldn’t s/he have to address whether Mutual Assured Destruction in the Cold War was not EQUALLY INSANE, which is why everyone loved referring to it by its MAD acronym???

Answer 36

Yes, holding China responsible for North Korea could be considered insane.

But no more insane than the successful Cold War policy of Mutual Assured Destruction!!!

BTW, in line with French President/General Charles de Gaulle’s policy of pulling France out of NATO and developing French nukes to provide what the Soviets would consider a credible threat (rather than relying on the so-called “American nuclear umbrella”) --

wouldn’t the South Koreans and the Japanese each be wise to develop their own “Force de Frappe” to provide a MAD response that the Chinese would consider credible???

Question 37

And building on the theme of the First Short Quiz that America’s foreign policy is based on the free use of the American military to protect the foreign investments of The Establishment resulting from The Establishment’s exportation of American jobs for the last 25 years --

(A). Doesn’t the primary focus of the Defense Department’s new (for the first time in more than a decade) National Defense Strategy on Russia and China demonstrate a preoccupation with protecting foreign investments resulting from The Establishment’s exportation of American jobs for the last 25 years???

(B). Doesn’t the apparent willingness to “give away the store” to China in terms of fighting for American jobs in order to get China to have its North Korean puppet utter, once again, some comforting words -- demonstrate the power of The Establishment to protect its Chinese investments that have resulted from exporting American jobs to China???

Answer 37

What do you think??? Let’s discuss!!!


**********

NB: ISIS and Al Qaeda

The new National Defense Strategy also relegates ISIS and terrorism to a back seat.

In this regard, our 12/13/2017 meeting reviewed once more --

(1) Osama bin Laden’s fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans;

(2) Fatwas can not be revoked following the death of the person who issued it;

(3) Accordingly, nuking 10 million Americans is the solemn religious duty of every member of Al Qaeda, ISIS (formerly Al Qaeda in Iraq), and all of the other terrorist groups that have pledged allegiance to ISIS;

(4) The US Government has ignored the solution proposed by the Founding Dean of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and vigorously supported by Sam Nunn (D-GA and former Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee), Richard Lugar (R-IN and former Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), and the Chair and Co-Chair of The 9/11 Commission, as well as Tim Russert and Tom Brokaw -- to control all of the world’s fissile material the way we used to control gold at Fort Knox;

(5) Instead, the US Government instituted the FISA program to spy on terrorists; and

(6) The FISA program, which was due to expire on 12/31/2017, was/is threatening to destroy America à la George Orwell’s “1984.”

----------
It is respectfully submitted that Americans are more likely to be nuked as a result of Osama’s fatwa to nuke 10 million Americans -- than by Russia or China, or even by Iran or North Korea.

Particularly after the disgraceful way the FBI mishandled two tips regarding the 2/14/2018 Parkland FL school shooting!!!

After all, how can the FBI be trusted to handle any intelligence gathered by FISA-program spying against terrorists???

And as sad as are 17 dead Americans in Parkland FL due to FBI incompetence, it is not (yet) 10 MILLION dead Americans due to FBI incompetence!!!

Though we may never know how incompetent the FBI really is if the FISA-program does result in the establishment of Orwell’s “1984” in America!!!

HOWEVER, since we have gone over all of these issues so recently, it is respectfully suggested that we conserve time on 3/14/2018 by confining ourselves to the material covered in the First Short Quiz and Questions 1-37 of the Second Short Quiz.

Post Reply

Return to “Participant Comments - “American Tianxia: Chinese Money, American Power and the End of History” by Prof. Salvatore Babones - March 14”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests