The Lunatic Will Soon Be Running the Asylum

The Lunatic Will Soon Be Running the Asylum

This article is written by George E. Wolke who Frank DeMartini went to High School with.  As we like to give people from the other side a place to voice their opinions as well, here is another example.  This time regarding the nuclear arms race that Donald Trump seems to be promoting.  Let us know your thoughts.

I’ve been trying to give President Elect Trump a break because, well its Christmas time.  But, unfortunately I can’t and won’t anymore.

Before reading this post, please take a second to go to and listen to his Morning Joe interview. There the lunatic, who will be our President on 1/20/17, advocated for a nuclear arms race. I guess he thinks we need one to be safe and great again.

Let’s put this in perspective. The US nuclear arsenal is currently at about 1,500 weapons.  Each of which has a blast yield of 1,200,000 tons of TNT.  In comparison, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a blast yield of 15,000 tons of TNT. So, each of our current weapons is roughly 100 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb, enough to destroy an area 100 times the size of Hiroshima.  And we have 1,500 of them, which is enough to destroy 150,000 Hiroshima’s.

The Hiroshima blast killed 150,000 people. Our current arsenal is capable of killing 150,000 times that, or 22.5 billion people. This represents 3 times the world’s population.   Think about it, our current arsenal can kill the world three times over.

I guess that’s not safe enough.

I’d like to ask each and every Trump voter out there if this what you expected?

Is challenging the world to build more nuclear weapons really what we need in order to “Make America Great Again”? Is the risk of global nuclear war the way to “Make America Great Again”?  And are we willing to spend the trillion or more dollars Trump’s buildup will cost?

Or, is this finally enough for you to question this man’s motives and ability to lead?

Dangerous rhetoric like this has no place on the global stage and is not what America stands for. We stand for peace through strength. And, we certainly have more strength than is required in our current arsenal to convince anyone not to screw with us. Furthermore, a nuclear arms race will do nothing to stop organizations like ISIS. In fact, it will just empower them to work harder to gain access to these weapons themselves. Trump’s arms race won’t make us safer at all. It will do just the opposite.

I am hoping with all my might that the adults in the room will sit this lunatic down and tell him that his words will have global consequences. But I am less than confident that they will, or that he will listen.

For the record, I’ve always considered Trump a loose cannon who’s mouth would get us in some serious trouble.  But this unreasonable, ill-thought-out, proposal shocked me to my core.

Merry Christmas to everyone!

Share This Post

4 Responses to "The Lunatic Will Soon Be Running the Asylum"

  1. Wow. At least there is a wall, the confines of the Asylum, around this narrative speculation. And the Lunatic, then, Nicholson, had redeeming social significance.

    One would cheer the subliminal message of “One Flew over the Cocos Nest”. Not so here.

    I can think of nothing more morally thought provoking than the soliloquy from “A few Good Men”

    “Col. Jessep: [from the witness stand] Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.”

    Who would you want at the Battle of the Bulge, General Gorge S Patton or Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi? Was Patton a lunatic or patriot?

  2. It’s uncanny…whenever I ask anyone who supports trump to justify his lunacy, I get deflections. If your point was that it’s a big, bad, scary world then okay. Isn’t the ability to blow it up three times enough?

    And that’s just the triad. We also happen to have the best equipped and trained conventional forces in the world.

    But all you gave is a movie quote. Good movie though.

    1. Your argument

      “It’s uncanny…whenever I ask anyone who supports trump to justify his lunacy, I get deflections.”

      is a “non sequitur.” You do not know me and your premise is erroneous. …..For clarity, I do not think Trump is a Lunatic… why would I have to defend your beliefs??????

      If lunacy is winning and staying alive, a mandate of national security, then you have me.

      Don’t underestimate movies as a vehicle for communicating. A picture is worth a thousand words. The quote was an excellent vehicle for dialogue, in which it failed. You shot the messenger.

      I was not trying to change your mind, just open a window into mine. You offered me nothing to change my mind, thus the effort was worth the possibility.

      There is a deep well of thought in the last sentence of my original observation.

      One might take a moment to analyze “December 7, 1941” an excellent and thoughtful research effort by Ira Schwartz. Roosevelt waited for an excuse to enter the war, possibly knowing the price, just so his reputation could be protected. Had he preempted the issue, would he have been a lunatic? Read the comments to Iras’ essay.

      Is “December 7, 1941” not the conundrum between “preemption” and “revenge and reparation? The former takes a leader with vision, the latter takes only moral salve for the conscience.

      Yes, I know, one will argue “cause”. Some blame America for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These two events probably saved “millions” of American lives. I am sure you find those actions easier to embrace and would not vilify Truman as a lunatic…..?

      The issue is that preemption has no argument based on facts to justify “cause”. You cannot prove a negative. Thus that Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche morality abstractly contrived is impossible without reality, of which that uncomfortableness for “tough love”, approx. 200k Japanese lives for a projected million American lives, the price of an invasion, regardless of the price, is beyond many.

      I wish individuals like you could lead during peace times. But in a hostile word, get behind me, don’t get in the way, and wait for your chance in history.


    Why anyone except Hillary. Why America not only needs to fight, it needs to win.

    December 24, 2016 marks the 25th anniversary of the formal end of the Soviet Union

    Suffer a little detour in the anguish of a lost election. Hillary would have been an Obama third term. Most would argue and agree. Disagree? Obama is a closeted collectivists and an Israel antagonist. Research his expansion of entitlements and yesterday’s UN vote. Collectivists are inherently socialist leaning if not outright socialists. Hillary would further this agenda.

    The path that America is on is from Judeo-Christianity, to the false narrative of an amalgamation of religions, to secularism, to radical progressivism, exiting Erdogan’s train at socialism.

    Near the end of his famous 1922 treatise Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis,

    “Mises warned:

    Socialism is not in the least what is pretends to be. It is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build, it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means production has created … Each step leading towards Socialism must exhaust itself in the destruction of what already exists.

    When voices are once again heard calling for socialism – even by a recent candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for U.S. President or on university campuses around the country – it is important, no, it is crucial, that the history and reality of socialism-in-practice in those parts of the world where it was most thoroughly imposed and implemented, as in the Soviet Union, be remembered and fully understood.

    If we do not, well, history has its own ways of repeating itself.”

    W\e ran away from the tyranny of King George. Socialism in reality is tyranny.

    So, why Trump? The linear decision tree for the electorate started with “not” Hillary!


Post Comment