Notoriously corrupt Susan Rice pens an op-ed piece in NYT blasting Trump's rhetoric; ignores history

You probably don't need yet another example of the idiocy and sabotage of the U.S. by members of the Obama regime and their media supporters, but you need to see this from his National Security Advisor, the woman who went on 5 Sunday news programs to repeatedly, falsely claim to Americans that Benghazi was caused by an internet video: Susan Rice.

[To see how Trump could put the Democrats on defense about this whole situation, click here.]

Just hours ago the NY Times published an opinion piece by Rice, in which she exposes her ignorance of...well, damn near every principle of military and national strategy.  I've put a link at the bottom so you can read her words for yourself, but I'll save you a lot of time by filtering out the useless platitudes and quoting her substantive points.

She begins by admitting the obvious:

North Korea’s substantial nuclear arsenal and improving intercontinental ballistic missile capacity pose a growing threat to America’s security. 

What she won't tell you is how the Norks managed to achieve both these "capacities" during the past 8 years--when the American government was ruled by B.H. Obama, loyally served by Susan Rice.

Rice notes that "tough new sanctions" on the Norks were adopted by the United Nations last week.  Rice had previously said she believed sanctions were a reasonable alternative to combat to get the Norks to stop developing nuclear weapons and ICBMs, but now she claims

This juxtaposition of tough sanctions and military exercises has predictably heightened North Korea’s threats.

So suddenly economic sanctions aren't helpful?  Wait, haven't you always told us that sanctions were the preferred alternative to war?  Why the reversal?  Oh yeah, I got it now: You never thought the Trump administration would be able to get China and Russia to go along with new sanctions.  Sure, makes perfect sense now.

Next:  Rice dismisses the threatening rhetoric of crazy Nork dictator Kim Jong-un as merely "colorful rhetoric."  By contrast, Rice believes the real threat is from Trump's response:

What is unprecedented and especially dangerous this time is the reaction of President Trump. [who] said on Tuesday that if North Korea makes new threats to the United States, “they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.” These words risk tipping the Korean Peninsula into war, if the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, believes them and acts precipitously.

Got that, citizen?  When the dictator of North Korea threatens to strike the U.S. with nuclear weapons it's merely "colorful rhetoric," while Trump's words "risk tipping the Korean Peninsula into war if...Kim Jong-un believes them."

Rice goes on to make back-to-back contradictory statements

History shows that we can, if we must, tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea — the same way we tolerated the far greater threat of thousands of Soviet nuclear weapons during the Cold War.

First, though, we can never legitimize North Korea as a nuclear power...

So which is it, you lying bag of crap:  Do you believe we can "tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea," or do you claim "we can never legitimize North Korea as a nuclear power"? 

Seems to me that every rational person would interpret these two statements as clearly being mutually exclusive--it's either one or the other.  Yet Rice doesn't seem to see the contradiction.  

Rice further airily dismisses any concerns about North Korea's nuclear capability by comparing such concerns to "the Trump surrogates whipping up Cuban missile crisis fears."  This is amusing, because Rice wasn't born until after the Cuban missile crisis.  Thus she apparently believes everyone else's knowledge of that showdown is as hazy and muddled as hers.  But some of us actually lived through it, and it's a famous case study in defense theory and strategy.

If you aren't familiar with it, in the summer of 1962 the Soviet Union and Cuba agreed to place Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba.  U.S. reconnaissance planes confirmed the construction of several facilities that had the unique layout of Soviet missile-launch complexes.

Because Cuba is just 90 miles from the continental U.S., the public was worried about this move, and president Kennedy felt significant political pressure to prevent the actual missiles from being installed.  When the U.S. detected a Soviet convoy carrying missiles on their decks, Kennedy ordered the Navy to prevent the ships from reaching Cuba.

After a tense few hours, with the Navy closing on the Soviet ships, Soviet premier Khruschev ordered the ships to turn around, and the crisis ended.  Many analysts have claime it was the closest the U.S. and the Soviet Union have ever come to nuclear war.

Wikipedia has an interesting--though not totally accurate--take on the crisis.  One of the many things the Leftists who control Wiki have omitted was that the president during that time was a Democrat.

So it's fine for a Democrat to take the world to the brink of nuclear war with the world's only other superpower...but heaven forbid that a Republican should use similar tactics against a ghastly dictatorship that insists on being accepted as a nuclear power.

Rice goes on to recommend "we must enhance our antimissile systems."  In doing so she counts on the fact that virtually no American remembers that when Reagan proposed a missile-defense system, congressional Democrats and their media allies ridiculed it, and refused to appropriate more than a token amount to research and develop it.  They derided it as "Star Wars."  And once research showed it was feasible, congressional Dems refused for two more years to fund it, before finally caving in to public pressure and funding deployment of just one site.

So Rice is recommending a proposal that her own party blocked and ridiculed for years.  Of course she would never admit that, preferring instead to ridicule any current concerns--despite a president of her own party taking the world to the brink of nuclear war to ban a nuclear threat near U.S. shores.

To see Rice's entire NY Times opinion piece, click here.