Friends, that's right: I said "Gas Attack!" No, your Uncle Earl didn't just eat a whole can of baked beans. I'm talking about chemical weapons -- or rather, Brian and I discuss the rights and wrongs of chemical warfare in this week's Newsmaker Show. But that's not all! Historically speaking, Brian and I also cover Nixon's opening to China circa 1972, the legitimacy (or lack thereof) of the McCarthy hearings and the Red Scare in the 1950s, Hitler's gradual realization that the war was lost in April 1945, and more.
In terms of current events, Brian and I talk about changing attitudes towards China, in light of China's key role in facilitating the global spread of the coronavirus. We also contemplate the morality and legality of the extreme measures now being undertaken to combat the pandemic, and the potential for any future vaccine to become mandatory. President Trump's bold decision to suspend all immigration also comes under our penetrating gaze.
All in all, it's a great show, engorged with eloquence and reverberating with relevancy! Don't miss it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz7uCbUuTh4&feature=youtu.be
And here's a very compelling analysis of our COVID-19 predicament:
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/494034-the-data-are-in-stop-the-panic-and-end-the-total-isolation
Anyone interested in reading a view defending McCarthy might be interested in reading "Blacklisted by History...." (longer title) by M. Stanton Evans. It's a long book of 627 pages. And yes, I have a copy, and have read in it. I have always believed McCarthy was right, no pun intended. He correctly identified those who were selling our country out (literally), and continue to do so. He is an arch enemy of the leftist trash because he was a real threat to them. Too bad we don't have a lot of people like him around any more. As it is, McCarthy identified those areas of American life most heavily infested by the leftist disease: The media, Academia, and The Film Industry. These three area are living proof today of how right McCarthy really was!
ReplyDeleteWell said, Ray! Another thing to keep in mind is that it really doesn't matter whether a leftist is a card-carrying member of the Communist Party or not. Nor does it matter whether they are agents of an enemy state. What matters NOW is whether their mentality and moral sense are INFECTED with the virus of Marxism. The sad truth is that virtually all of us are, in the modern world, but some of us have survived minor exposure to develop immunity, whereas others have succumbed to the disease lock, stock, and barrel. The worst Marxists, and the most dangerous, are the ones who have barely heard of Marx, and would never describe themselves candidly as followers of his movement! Anyway, that's my two cents.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy
ReplyDeleteYour "two cents" is worth $500 now, due to inflation. All silly jokes aside, thanks for your comment supporting my comment. I'm sure glad there is a book available defending McCarthy. I remember a college graduation just a few years ago in my area where the wife of a professor at that college was one of the commencement speakers. Her entire address was dedicated to blasting McCarthy. Rather interesting I would say.
Dr.Waddy and Ray: A very interesting dialogue. McCarthy's crudeness was his undoing, I think. Even one as down to earth as Ike was put off by it. But McCarthy was undoubtably right in his overall perception that Marxism had seriously infected the American polity. I mean, I don't know why FDR dumped Wallace but its a good thing he did.Wallace was at best a Commie apologist.Then there was Hiss.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: Your observation on WWI gas warfare is one I have never heard before and it explains very much. That tactic almost ended my life before it began as my Grandfather was gassed at the Battle of Le Hamel on July 4, 1918.
I have always wondered why the Nazis, especially the SS, did not use gas in combat. They seemed capable of all else. But your observation that it had no decisive effect in battle in WWI helps in understanding it. Even Hitler did not mandate its use, not withstanding his temporary blindness in 1918 (from gas?). His terrible vindictiveness would seem to have ruled out any moral misgiving.No, it had to be mostly objective considerations that restrained the Nazi monsters, even though some of their commanders retained some relative Prussian humanity.
From everything I have read you are spot on in reference to WWI artillery.The Battle of Antietam in 1862 was later described as "artillery hell" but it was popgun stuff compared to the Western front just 50 years later (why, there actually were men in the American army who had served in the Civil War!). It may be that mobile artillery, in tanks and of course in planes, made all the difference 21 years later.
Dr. Waddy and Ray: I think Nixon was a gifted student of international politics and I'm confident he was fully aware of the consummate evil of empowered Marxism. The picture of him shaking hands with the monstrous Mao is surreal but in its realistic intent, it was to Nixon's credit. I think.
ReplyDeleteIn 1972, shortly before Nixon's China visit, I traveled to the border between British Hong Kong and the PRC. From a promentory I was able to look perhaps 10 miles into what was absolutely forbidden ground to any American. I still have pictures of that view and where I took it, featuring an entirely rural aspect, now stands the multitudinous and utterly modern city of Shen Zhen. No one, including Nixon, could have foreseen China's miraculous rise in the decades thereafter.
There is obvious increasingly well supported perception that China is in many ways responsible for this epidemic. What the consequences for China, the U.S. and the rest of world will be? Search me! China is very good at circling the wagons. But we have and I trust will continue to have, a gutsy player of a President and will be well served thereby in this situation.
Dr. Waddy et al: The inattention paid to Communist atrocities and the very creditable attention paid to Nazi outrages is readily evident. Have we seen anything similar to the inspired pursuit of Nazi criminals in a similar crusade against Communist monsters? No! Why? Because in the gifted U.S. at least, the far left is exalted in a way unimaginable in consideration of the EQUALLY evil Nazis. Show me a movie other than "One day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch" which portrayed the Gulag honestly.
ReplyDeleteWhy, what does this say about our entertainment elite? This: they are profoundly separated (thoroughly drug addled as they are) from the real America. Their product is condemned!
Jack, I haven't read anything specifically about Nazi policy re: chemical weapons, but their restraint is very interesting. WWII was no-holds-barred, for the most part, as we all know, and so I think Hitler's personal experience with gassing must have played a role. He knew what would be unleashed on German soldiers if gas became "fair game". On the other hand, he unleashed epic suffering on his own people, partly through his own bloody-mindedness, on numerous occasions. I agree with you that his "scruples" are puzzling.
ReplyDeleteQuite right, Jack -- foreseeing China's rise, 1972-2020, would have taken remarkable vision and insight! From Nixon's perspective, China was just a backwater that allowed us to weaken the Communist Bloc as a whole by our dalliance with Mao. We can't really fault him for not having a crystal ball.
And I agree totally about the Left's failure to condemn or even seriously examine the history of communism. Lefties specialize in "blind spots" -- so much so that many of them ought to be have an ophthalmologist on speed dial.
Dr. Waddy: I just read in Ambrose's Citizen Soldiers another plausibly important factor in German restraint in using gas in combat: the prevailing winds in Northern Europe go West to East. (One might have thought that a factor in 1917?) Yet, even in the beyond insane extremis of April 1945 Hitler did not order the use of the many gas shells he had available ( and the inveterate SS and Hitler youth willing to launch them; in the event they DID do so very much destruction in those closing weeks).
ReplyDeleteJack, wouldn't west to east winds be an argument for using gas against the dreaded Russkies? Plus, the idea of pulling any punches on the Eastern Front in the final stages of the conflict seems absurd...
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: Very good point; since the Rus presented an existential threat why not not gas them? I have no answer to that. Maybe, just maybe, Hitler's commanders refrained (?). Can't think of any other reason.
ReplyDeleteNeither can I. The Germans had some nasty gasses too. They had developed nerve gas, I believe. Granted, it's a radical step, but falling victim to the Bolshevik hordes is a radical fate!
ReplyDelete