Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on May 25, 2009, 07:47:59 AM
-
Will he bribe them off with a million barrels of oil, like Bush did?
or will he smack the piss out of them for blowing up shit on our Memorial Day?
-
or will he sit back and do nothing like he did when they first started moving towards this?
-
or will he sit back and do nothing like he did when they first started moving towards this?
His first words were a call to action by the international community.
So maybe he'll do nothing. but he's talking tough so far. This would be his first real test. I think the way he's kept the punks at gitmo, kept the military big, ramped up numbers in afghanistan, and put bullets in pirates, he just might have the cajones to fcuk up Nk's day in some meaningful manner.
-
His first words were a call to action by the international community.
So maybe he'll do nothing. but he's talking tough so far. This would be his first real test. I think the way he's kept the punks at gitmo, kept the military big, ramped up numbers in afghanistan, and put bullets in pirates, he just might have the cajones to fcuk up Nk's day in some meaningful manner.
I honestly think NK is just puffing up their chest and seeing how far they can get on their leash...Obama let them launch their "satelite" which wasnt a satelite, this isnt his first test for them this is a result of doing nothing on his first test with them...
-
I honestly think NK is just puffing up their chest and seeing how far they can get on their leash...Obama let them launch their "satelite" which wasnt a satelite, this isnt his first test for them this is a result of doing nothing on his first test with them...
So NK - which has vowed to blow up California I believe - is just puffing their chest.
But Iran, a few years behind NK in technology and with a lot ot lose, is a big threat and worth blowing our $ attacking.
And Iraq - with no nukes and no missiles - was enough of a threat to blow our economy attacking.
Great logic here. :(
-
His first words were a call to action by the international community.
So maybe he'll do nothing. but he's talking tough so far. This would be his first real test. I think the way he's kept the punks at gitmo, kept the military big, ramped up numbers in afghanistan, and put bullets in pirates, he just might have the cajones to fcuk up Nk's day in some meaningful manner.
\\\
The international community...ur joking right. Kept the punks at gitmo? He's cloing it and bring them here, if he has his way. I guess u missed the part where he didn't have plan. Barry did't put bullets into anybody. Barry didn't saya word incase the Navy fucked it up, and he could distance himslef from it. I guess u missed that to, since he's only on TV for every other thing. He didn't do a thing the last time nKorea launched. He could'nt even get a resolution past in the UN. Nice spin...keep trying.
-
So NK - which has vowed to blow up California I believe - is just puffing their chest.
But Iran, a few years behind NK in technology and with a lot ot lose, is a big threat and worth blowing our $ attacking.
And Iraq - with no nukes and no missiles - was enough of a threat to blow our economy attacking.
Great logic here. :(
IRAN has contributed to the deaths of our soldiers dipshit...Iraq was believed to have wmd dip shit...If NK is such a big threat why did obama let them launch on their first test?
-
IRAN has contributed to the deaths of our soldiers dipshit...Iraq was believed to have wmd dip shit...If NK is such a big threat why did obama let them launch on their first test?
-
IRAN has contributed to the deaths of our soldiers dipshit...Iraq was believed to have wmd dip shit...If NK is such a big threat why did obama let them launch on their first test?
actually, after the UN inspections, nobody still thought they had WMD. Of course, Bush had the war infrastructure in place already, and you know what that meant...
No, I think NK is puffing their chest and a country that can be dealt with using embargos and group sanctions - just as iran and iraq (was).
War should be a last resort. it wasn't in iraq, and it's not in iran, for all those chickenhawks who aren't serving but have a hard-on for invading.
-
actually, after the UN inspections, nobody still thought they had WMD. Of course, Bush had the war infrastructure in place already, and you know what that meant...
No, I think NK is puffing their chest and a country that can be dealt with using embargos and group sanctions - just as iran and iraq (was).
War should be a last resort. it wasn't in iraq, and it's not in iran, for all those chickenhawks who aren't serving but have a hard-on for invading.
The White House has got hire you Rob...
-
Yeah..thats all we need, another appeaser in the Whitehouse. Sanctions 240...what exactly is left. Iran has a golden opportunity with Obama in the Whitehouse to do what it wants quietly. Instead they just sent ships to the Gulf of Aden and their military is prodding Israel.
If someone says they are going to wipe your country off the map, take them seriously.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
-
actually, after the UN inspections, nobody still thought they had WMD. Of course, Bush had the war infrastructure in place already, and you know what that meant...
No, I think NK is puffing their chest and a country that can be dealt with using embargos and group sanctions - just as iran and iraq (was).
War should be a last resort. it wasn't in iraq, and it's not in iran, for all those chickenhawks who aren't serving but have a hard-on for invading.
hindsights 20/20 only a liberal such as yourself doesnt see that jack ass...you act as if i think iraq was a great idea... ::) ive said many times on here it was a mistake...I never said we should invade NK or Iran you dumb moron all i proposed was whether obama was going to sit back and talk but do nothing about NK's newest actions just like he did the last time which you dismissed, I guess it was just like i called it to be wasnt it?
-
Nobody here thinks we need to "invade" Iran. Nor do we need to "invade" nKorea. But u can allow the Israeli's to do it, u can shoot down a rocket, u can pressure Russia and China to stop backing either country. U can try and accomplish something with all this supposed good will. Or is it that they know that Barry is a weak kneed appeaser and they don't have to do a damm thing?
-
never said we should invade NK or Iran you dumb moron all i proposed was whether obama was going to sit back and talk but do nothing about NK's newest actions just like he did the last time which you dismissed, I guess it was just like i called it to be wasnt it?
What are you referring to? The last time NKorea conducted a nuclear test, Bush was in office. They shut down the reactor in exchange for financial aid from us. They started it up again when we cut aid.
The only thing I can figure you're talking about is the missile launch last month, but that's not even comparable to an underground nuclear test with a seismic reading equal to that of a powerful earthquake.
-
IRAN has contributed to the deaths of our soldiers dipshit...Iraq was believed to have wmd dip shit...If NK is such a big threat why did obama let them launch on their first test?
PROVE IT!!!!!
-
What are you referring to? The last time NKorea conducted a nuclear test, Bush was in office. They shut down the reactor in exchange for financial aid from us. They started it up again when we cut aid.
The only thing I can figure you're talking about is the missile launch last month, but that's not even comparable to an underground nuclear test with a seismic reading equal to that of a powerful earthquake.
LOL it is when you put it in perspective doggity, that was step one we let them get away with that, not only did we let them conduct it which was against already agreed upon terms we took no action afterwards and let them decide the course of action even when they made intimidating statement after intimidating statement we did nothing...you dont think that lead to this?
-
PROVE IT!!!!!
LOL dude look it up and please dont ask me for proof when you have more conspiracy theories then 240...
-
LOL it is when you put it in perspective doggity, that was step one we let them get away with that, not only did we let them conduct it which was against already agreed upon terms we took no action afterwards and let them decide the course of action even when they made intimidating statement after intimidating statement we did nothing...you dont think that lead to this?
Except you are not looking at it in perspective. You are looking at it myopically so it aligns with your anti-Obama stance. These latest actions didn't occur in a vacuum.
A)... and this can't be underscored enough... the test was a failure. The rocket landed in the ocean and it wasn't even loaded with a warhead. No warhead, no violation of international laws.
B)If anything, the missile test would be considered step two, and even that number is a little low. Step one occurred under the Bush administration. This test is a result of years of negotiations breaking down. Nothing NKorea has done in the last few months is new, yet somehow it's all Obama's fault? LOL
-
I think that main problem here is that no country can do shit to North Korea without severe bloodshed.
-
there is still a lot of debate as to whether or not iran helped send weapons to the USA.
They said there was proof, but NBC examined all 2000 pieces of evidence, and not a single one was certified and none stood up to inspection. The "smoking gun" was promised and never materialized.
Granted, I'm sure they're proxied out the ass to some degree, and a long drawn out war benefits them, as we can handle 2 but not 2 wars...
But "proof" is something we haven't seen yet. not saying they're innocent, nor do I care if isr cooks them, that's their business.
-
PROVE IT!!!!!
LOL dude look it up and please dont ask me for proof when you have more conspiracy theories then 240...
Absolutely horrible evidence, Tony.
Please share with us this undisputed evidence. "look it up"... really makes YOU sound like the jackass here.
-
there is still a lot of debate as to whether or not iran helped send weapons to the USA.
They said there was proof, but NBC examined all 2000 pieces of evidence, and not a single one was certified and none stood up to inspection. The "smoking gun" was promised and never materialized.
Granted, I'm sure they're proxied out the ass to some degree, and a long drawn out war benefits them, as we can handle 2 but not 2 wars...
But "proof" is something we haven't seen yet. not saying they're innocent, nor do I care if isr cooks them, that's their business.
240...I seen evidence.....ok does that help. Now its ur word against mine.....mine comes with a TS SSI clearance.
NBC....NBC did an investigation. NBC doesn't know its ass from a hole in the wall. Iran is running Quds forces into the South. We've captured them. We've captured EFP"s, we've got intel that they're resupplying AQ and the Mahdi army. A fucking media outlet isn't cleared to know what the hell is going on . U have'n't seen the proof 240..u haven't. I suggest u enlist, qualify for a clearance and find out, short of that, pull ur head out of Obama's ass and recognize that Iran isn't sitting on its hands as a major Western power conducts combat operations on its border, without doing anything.
-
Absolutely horrible evidence, Tony.
Please share with us this undisputed evidence. "look it up"... really makes YOU sound like the jackass here.
This is as good a proof as anybody here is cleared to know about.
Three factories in Iran are mass-producing the sophisticated roadside bombs used to kill British soldiers over the border in Iraq, it has been claimed.
Related Articles
Our escape from blast, by TA men
Chinese businessman accused of using New York banks to buy Iran materials to make nuclear weapons
Royal Marine foils roadside bomb plot
US investigator exposes Iran's nuclear weapons 'shopping list'
Barack Obama is giving Iran the time it needs to build a nuclear bomb
Lieutenant-General Sir David WillisonThe lethal bombs are being made by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps at ordnance factory sites in Teheran, according to opponents of the country's theocratic regime.
Designed to penetrate heavy armour, the devices being manufactured in Iran involve the use of "explosively formed projectiles" or EFPs, also known as shaped charges, often triggered by infra-red beams.
The weapons can pierce the armour of British and American tanks and armoured personnel carriers and completely destroy armoured Land Rovers, which are used by the majority of British troops on operations in Iraq.
The Sunday Telegraph revealed in April that Iranian-made devices employing several EFPs, directed at different angles, were being used in Iraq.
And in June, this newspaper obtained the first picture of one of the Iraqi insurgent weapons - designed to fire an armour-piercing EFP - believed to have been responsible for the deaths of 17 British soldiers.
British Government scientists have already established that the mines are precision-made weapons thought to have been turned on a lathe by craftsmen trained in the manufacture of munitions.
Members of the Washington-based Iran Policy Committee have released the details about the three bomb factories gathered by the exile group, the National Council for Resistance in Iran (NCRI).
Iranians working for the NCRI pinpointed the facilities at three industrial sections called Sattari, Sayad Shirazi and Shiroodi. The factories are in the Lavizan neighbourhood in northern Teheran which is controlled by the country's defence ministry. The Sattari Industry specialises in anti-tank mines and operates under the aegis of the IRGC's al-Quds or Jerusalem Force.
Alireza Jafarzadeh, a former spokesman for the NCRI who in 2002 revealed the existence of two Iranian nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak, said the devices were smuggled to Iraq via Iran's Shalamcheh border region.
"These sites are close to a military site, known as Lavizan 2, that is now being used for Iran's nuclear programme. It shows there is a high level of co-ordination by the Iranian regime, which wants to destabilise Iraq to make way for an Islamic Republic.
"This is not a ragtag workshop in some remote area. These sites are within an area that is one of the most sanitised parts of Teheran which is controlled by the Iranian Defence Ministry."
He added that NCRI sources reported the movement of EFP devices from Teheran into Iraq as recently as June and that supplies of the devices, which began last year, had been stepped up in recent months.
The infra-red triggering mechanism for roadside bombs was perfected by Hezbollah, under Iranian tutelage, against Israeli forces in the 1990s. Mr Jafarzadeh said that in recent weeks Iran had facilitated the movement of cash from Shia groups in Iraq to Hezbollah.
Brig James Dutton, then the commander of British forces in southern Iraq, revealed last November that EFPs had led to a marked increase in the lethality of attacks. He said the "technology certainly, and probably the equipment is coming through Iran". He added: "They come in various grades, these EFP improvised explosive devices, from those that could be made in a relatively simple workshop to those that would require a reasonably sophisticated factory."
Last week, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a former IRGC commander and the man believed by Western intelligence agencies to be in charge of Iranian operations in Iraq, was asked in an interview with CBS television why Iran would furnish roadside bombs to Iraqi insurgents.
He ignored the question, instead responding: "We are saddened that the people of Iraq are being killed. I believe that the rulers of the US have to change their mentality. I ask you, sir, what is the American army doing inside Iraq? Why are the Americans killing Iraqis on a daily basis?"
The factory disclosures come amid growing unease among soldiers in Iraq over what they believe is inadequate protection against terrorist booby traps.
There are fears that soldiers' lives are being put at risk by senior officers insisting that troops must conduct patrols in armoured Land Rovers even though they provide little or no protection from such insurgent devices.
Pressure continues to mount on the Ministry of Defence to introduce a new range of military vehicles that will protect troops from the terrorist bombs in Iraq.
The last two soldiers to be killed by the device were Lieut Tom Mildinhall, 27, and L/Cpl Paul Farrelly, 28, both members of the 1st Queen's Dragoon Guards, who were killed on May 28 in a district north-west of Basra.
-
My head isn't in obama's ass - I made it very clear that I'm sure iran is proxy'd in Iraq, but that the world sure hasn't seen evidence of it.
I've also said i'm fine with ISR cooking them - but not with sending US troops and $ into the mess.
-
Except you are not looking at it in perspective. You are looking at it myopically so it aligns with your anti-Obama stance. These latest actions didn't occur in a vacuum.
A)... and this can't be underscored enough... the test was a failure. The rocket landed in the ocean and it wasn't even loaded with a warhead. No warhead, no violation of international laws.
B)If anything, the missile test would be considered step two, and even that number is a little low. Step one occurred under the Bush administration. This test is a result of years of negotiations breaking down. Nothing NKorea has done in the last few months is new, yet somehow it's all Obama's fault? LOL
First off im not a party hard liner, i didnt like alot of what bush did and i certainly dont like alot of what obamas doing but i give him his credit when its do.
LOL dude they were under sanctions or something or other im not quite sure what that prohibited them from launching anything...that broke that agreement by launching the satelite whether it was a sucessful test or not is irrelevant whether it carried a warhead or not is irrelevant what is certain is that by not addressing that issue it led to this issue
LOL what the fuck ever bro that arguement is retarded...this first launch you may have a tad bit of ground to stand on but even that is a horrible arguement and this last action of NK and the for sure future actions of NK are on obamas plate bro. If you want to say that obama is following right in line with bush's actions on this then fine either way i disagree with the actions, its not about bush or obama bro, you should stop watching msnbc.
-
and so the debate turns Iran and the Barry haters.
-
My head isn't in obama's ass - I made it very clear that I'm sure iran is proxy'd in Iraq, but that the world sure hasn't seen evidence of it.
I've also said i'm fine with ISR cooking them - but not with sending US troops and $ into the mess.
The world.....I'm sure the CIA/Mossad/Brit Intel...and everybody else is convinced enough.
-
First off im not a party hard liner, i didnt like alot of what bush did and i certainly dont like alot of what obamas doing but i give him his credit when its do.
LOL dude they were under sanctions or something or other im not quite sure what that prohibited them from launching anything...that broke that agreement by launching the satelite whether it was a sucessful test or not is irrelevant whether it carried a warhead or not is irrelevant what is certain is that by not addressing that issue it led to this issue
LOL what the fuck ever bro that arguement is retarded...this first launch you may have a tad bit of ground to stand on but even that is a horrible arguement and this last action of NK and the for sure future actions of NK are on obamas plate bro. If you want to say that obama is following right in line with bush's actions on this then fine either way i disagree with the actions, its not about bush or obama bro, you should stop watching msnbc.
Yes, they were under sanctions... UN SANCTIONS. Which they agreed to in exchange for financial aid. It was not Barry's obligation to go to war or whatever you expected him to do because Nk violated a UN agreement. The administration worked with the UN Security Council to tighten sanctions and that's is really the only reasonable thing that could have and should have been done.
And, yes, whether or not the test was successful is relevant in regards to your first post in this thread which you criticized the president for "doing nothing" in response to a missile test. A missile test and a nuclear test are two drastically different things. What exactly do you think the administration should have done? Gone to war ? I guess you don't see how well poorly planned posturing has worked out over the last eight years. Like it or not, rushing into wars at the slightest provocation does no one any good. Going to war with a country over non-working missile technology is as stupid as going to war over WMDs that don't exist.
-
Yes, they were under sanctions... UN SANCTIONS. Which they agreed to in exchange for financial aid. It was not Barry's obligation to go to war or whatever you expected him to do because Nk violated a UN agreement. The administration worked with the UN Security Council to tighten sanctions and that's is really the only reasonable thing that could have and should have been done.
And that got us to this point, bravo...
And, yes, whether or not the test was successful is relevant in regards to your first post in this thread which you criticized the president for "doing nothing" in response to a missile test. A missile test and a nuclear test are two drastically different things. What exactly do you think the administration should have done? Gone to war ? I guess you don't see how well poorly planned posturing has worked out over the last eight years. Like it or not, rushing into wars at the slightest provocation does no one any good. Going to war with a country over non-working missile technology is as stupid as going to war over WMDs that don't exist.
AGAIN YOU TARDS NOBODY IS SAYING GO TO FUKING WAR ::) :o how you dont see that from reading this thread is beyond me dude.
-
AGAIN YOU TARDS NOBODY IS SAYING GO TO FUKING WAR ::) :o how you dont see that from reading this thread is beyond me dude.
what do you think Obama should do in response, tony?
(you dont have an answer, do you?)
-
And that got us to this point, bravo...
AGAIN YOU TARDS NOBODY IS SAYING GO TO FUKING WAR ::) :o how you dont see that from reading this thread is beyond me dude.
Fine. The president is wrong for "doing nothing", you think sanctions from the security council are stupid, and war is for tards. Then what exactly are you suggesting should have happened?
-
what do you think Obama should do in response, tony?
(you dont have an answer, do you?)
he should have been proactive about the situation and responded before hand, tried to find paths outside the UN to deal with the situation, done more then send a fuking letter, responded when NK threatned to fight if more sanctions where passed...you think just sitting on our hands was the right move?
-
I think many of you ppl dont realize that they broke an agreement with no reprecussions, does that sound right to you ppl?
-
I think many of you ppl dont realize that they broke an agreement with no reprecussions, does that sound right to you ppl?
NK is a tiny shithole in the middle of nowhere. Waste of time to care about it.
-
he should have been proactive about the situation and responded before hand, tried to find paths outside the UN to deal with the situation, done more then send a fuking letter, responded when NK threatned to fight if more sanctions where passed...you think just sitting on our hands was the right move?
"Be proactive"?
"Find paths"?
What are you, a college kid bluffing his way through a job interview?
be more specific.
-
"Be proactive"?
"Find paths"?
What are you, a college kid bluffing his way through a job interview?
be more specific.
NK sat there for what a month at the least saying how they were going to launch, what did obama do? make a speech, tell them they will face new sanctions etc...
LOL how about anything other then sit on his hands and do nothing? how about new sanctions or at the very least penalties for breaking the old ones?
You think it was ok for NK to break sanctions and recieve no reprecussions?
-
he should have been proactive about the situation and responded before hand, tried to find paths outside the UN to deal with the situation, done more then send a fuking letter, responded when NK threatned to fight if more sanctions where passed...you think just sitting on our hands was the right move?
...
I think many of you ppl dont realize that they broke an agreement with no reprecussions, does that sound right to you ppl?
The only agreement they broke was the agreement they made with the UN. Why would Obama find paths outside of the UN to deal with a violation of a UN agreement? Aside from a violation of that agreement, NK didn't actually do anything illegal. They have the right to test missile technology. All nations do. The concern is that the missile technology could be used to deliver nuclear warheads.
NK did suffer repercussions. As I've posted over and over, the UN agreement was basically for financial aid.They shut down the reactor the first time in exchange for financial aid. They started it up again rejecting that financial aid, most likely because they feel they can get more by advancing their nuclear tech.
-
"Be proactive"?
"Find paths"?
What are you, a college kid bluffing his way through a job interview?
be more specific.
Seriously. He forgot to include the phrases "paradigm" and "think outside of the box."
-
Seriously. He forgot to include the phrases "paradigm" and "think outside of the box."
LMAO... he offers no solution. His answer is to bitch about obama. He offers no ideas on how Obama should have done it. He's an empty complainer, no better than the libs he hates.
NK sat there for what a month at the least saying how they were going to launch, what did obama do? make a speech, tell them they will face new sanctions etc...
LOL how about anything other then sit on his hands and do nothing? how about new sanctions or at the very least penalties for breaking the old ones?
You think it was ok for NK to break sanctions and recieve no reprecussions?
Stop bitching about Obama - and tell the class what you would have done instead.
If you don't have any ideas, just admit that to us. Specifics please.
-
The only agreement they broke was the agreement they made with the UN. Why would Obama find paths outside of the UN to deal with a violation of a UN agreement? Aside from a violation of that agreement, NK didn't actually do anything illegal. They have the right to test missile technology. All nations do. The concern is that the missile technology could be used to deliver nuclear warheads.
NK did suffer repercussions. As I've posted over and over, the UN agreement was basically for financial aid.They shut down the reactor the first time in exchange for financial aid. They started it up again rejecting that financial aid, most likely because they feel they can get more by advancing their nuclear tech.
Actually when you agree not to you, give up that right...I didnt say that the US should be the only one that acts upon this but to sit here and do nothing isnt really acceptable in my mind
obviously that financial aid wasnt enough of a deterent to keep them from doing this so dont you think something else should have been done?
-
LMAO... he offers no solution. His answer is to bitch about obama. He offers no ideas on how Obama should have done it. He's an empty complainer, no better than the libs he hates.
Stop bitching about Obama - and tell the class what you would have done instead.
If you don't have any ideas, just admit that to us. Specifics please.
how about tougher sanctions? lets just start there
-
Actually when you agree not to you, give up that right...I didnt say that the US should be the only one that acts upon this but to sit here and do nothing isnt really acceptable in my mind
obviously that financial aid wasnt enough of a deterent to keep them from doing this so dont you think something else should have been done?
"Something"
Like what, Tony?
You're answering it with a Q, Tony.
You criticized Obama's actions, but didn't tell us what you would have done differently.
perhaps you should be more "proactive" and actually give us a straight answer.
Would you have invaded? Set up a blockade? What would you have done?
-
how about tougher sanctions? lets just start there
So, even though you apparently didn't even have a general idea of what the sanctions were, you fault Barry relying on them. Even though your only suggestion seems to be instituting tougher sanctions... which is what the Security Council did.
Even if the launchers had been successful, operating at 100% capacity, the military determined that they still didn't have the capabilities to be a threat to America.
-
"Something"
Like what, Tony?
You're answering it with a Q, Tony.
You criticized Obama's actions, but didn't tell us what you would have done differently.
perhaps you should be more "proactive" and actually give us a straight answer.
Would you have invaded? Set up a blockade? What would you have done?
OMG your running around in circles...Im not answering it with a question dumb ass
sanctions...i dont need to give specific examples thats for the experts to decide ven answers dip shit,which ones would be the most effective and best to employ.
I suppose tough words are good enough for you?
-
So, even though you apparently didn't even have a general idea of what the sanctions were, you fault Barry relying on them. Even though your only suggestion seems to be instituting tougher sanctions... which is what the Security Council did.
Even if the launchers had been successful, operating at 100% capacity, the military determined that they still didn't have the capabilities to be a threat to America.
i had a general idea what the sanctions where thats why i knew they broke them with the launch...what sactions did the security council put in place, to my knowledge they sent a letter...
That is not the point here doggity NK broke an agreement apparently the money they were recieving wasnt enough to deter them from doing this or restarting their nuke program...you think we should just let them procede?
-
i had a general idea what the sanctions where thats why i knew they broke them with the launch...what sactions did the .
That is not the point here doggity NK broke an agreement apparently the money they were recieving wasnt enough to deter them from doing this or restarting their nuke program...you think we should just let them procede?
You are confusing "sanctions" with "conditions".
And , once again, what would you have done if you were Obama? You've already stated that "doing nothing", going to war, and sanctions are all bad ideas.
-
You are confusing "sanctions" with "conditions".
And , once again, what would you have done if you were Obama? You've already stated that "doing nothing", going to war, and sanctions are all bad ideas.
LOL i never said sactions were a bad idea, i think more sanctions should have been put on NK its obvious again that the financial aid given wasnt a deterence.
you said that the security council instituted tougher sanctions, what sanctions did they institute?
-
sanctions...i dont need to give specific examples thats for the experts to decide ven answers dip shit,which ones would be the most effective and best to employ.
I suppose tough words are good enough for you?
You've said that the ones in place now aren't good enough, so simply saying "different sanctions" is a weak-assed argument. You came into the thread bashing Barry's actions but haven't given one solid example of how they could be improved upon.
-
You've said that the ones in place now aren't good enough, so simply saying "different sanctions" is a weak-assed argument. You came into the thread bashing Barry's actions but haven't given one solid example of how they could be improved upon.
Not at all, those sanctions didnt work thats not to say that all sanctions wouldnt work, what kind of logic is that?
Actually I came in this thread b/c I called this when NK launched their "satelite"
Ive already said that i believe this to be NK puffing out there chest to get more in negotiations...I just see 240 getting ready to praise obama but overlooking the fact he did nothing with the act that lead to this one...that I called.
-
Not at all, those sanctions didnt work thats not to say that all sanctions wouldnt work, what kind of logic is that?
Actually I came in this thread b/c I called this when NK launched their "satelite"
Ive already said that i believe this to be NK puffing out there chest to get more in negotiations...I just see 240 getting ready to praise obama but overlooking the fact he did nothing with the act that lead to this one...that I called.
You worry too much about NK. You are safe from them in Texas.
-
You worry too much about NK. You are safe from them in Texas.
No doubt, but that could be applied to alot of things that could have far reaching consequences that arent physical...
-
Not at all, those sanctions didnt work thats not to say that all sanctions wouldnt work, what kind of logic is that?
Actually I came in this thread b/c I called this when NK launched their "satelite"
Ive already said that i believe this to be NK puffing out there chest to get more in negotiations...I just see 240 getting ready to praise obama but overlooking the fact he did nothing with the act that lead to this one...that I called.
Once again, that isn't even a criticism that makes sense. A successful nuclear test and an unsuccessful missile launch SHOULD merit two different responses.
-
No doubt, but that could be applied to alot of things that could have far reaching consequences that arent physical...
Sure, but seriously you shouldn't get worked up too much about NK. Isn't GW in Texas now?
-
Once again, that isn't even a criticism that makes sense. A successful nuclear test and an unsuccessful missile launch SHOULD merit two different responses.
first off the missle launches success isnt important what is important is that they were testing...
I agree with you if you look at each action independently but the problem is that the actions are linked together and all to obtain the same end. Ill explain it like this a basketball game is won by a last sec 3 pointer what shot won the game? the 2 free throws made in the 1st quarter had just as much to do with the win as the last sec 3 pointer. If one step leads to the same end as the next step and you cant accomplish the goal without each step then each step is equally important
-
Not at all, those sanctions didnt work thats not to say that all sanctions wouldnt work, what kind of logic is that?
Actually I came in this thread b/c I called this when NK launched their "satelite"
Ive already said that i believe this to be NK puffing out there chest to get more in negotiations...I just see 240 getting ready to praise obama but overlooking the fact he did nothing with the act that lead to this one...that I called.
i've said all along - cook em :)
-
Sure, but seriously you shouldn't get worked up too much about NK. Isn't GW in Texas now?
Dallas I believe, and ::)
-
We had Aegis cruisers in the Sea of Japan that could have taken down the satelite, that would have sent a message. The nKoreans could have done very little in response. U people act as if this all happens in a vacuum. That each event isn't tied to another. We had reators, we had satelite and rocket launches, now we have a test. The regime in nKorea is old and unstable. There are questions as to how much control Kim has of his military and what they will do if and when he dies. They aren't as crazy about him as they were his old man, and the old generals remember how close they came in 51'.
-
Dallas I believe, and ::)
Do you think he should be allowed to walk free?
-
Do you think he should be allowed to walk free?
ya i do, why wouldnt I...take into account i dont buy into the whole he made up the wmd bs shit and planned 9/11 ::) i guess he mobilized the worlds biggest army orchestrated a terrorist plot and just plane didnt plant wmd in iraq...
-
Bush?
-
Do you think he should be allowed to walk free?
Um..u guys really need to get past Bush. If we're attacked on barry's watch...not only will a Dem never get voted in again...we might start executing some, starting with Reid and Pelosi.
-
ya i do, why wouldnt I...take into account i dont buy into the whole he made up the wmd bs shit and planned 9/11 ::) i guess he mobilized the worlds biggest army orchestrated a terrorist plot and just plane didnt plant wmd in iraq...
I am not a 9/11 conspiracy guy but I DO believe he lied about wmd. There is ample evidence for this, never mind tons of violations of the Constitution.
-
I am not a 9/11 conspiracy guy but I DO believe he lied about wmd. There is ample evidence for this, never mind tons of violations of the Constitution.
so he lied about it but just forgot to plant evidence? LOL again im not disputing evidence against it just like you cant dispute that there was evidence for it and this is only what we the public have been deemed ok to see...was it a mistake ya that doesnt mean he intentionally lied...Violations of the consitution, i assume you mean the patriot act?
-
Please post what violations.....as Obama is doing so with the bailouts/medical insurance etc etc etc......
-
Um..u guys really need to get past Bush. If we're attacked on barry's watch...not only will a Dem never get voted in again...we might start executing some, starting with Reid and Pelosi.
Sure, have them all executed. After a while these scumbag politicians would finally start listening what people want because they would be scared shitless otherwise.
-
Please post what violations.....as Obama is doing so with the bailouts/medical insurance etc etc etc......
Obama should be executed too. I have never claimed otherwise. Both hideously bad and (possibly) evil presidents. Clinton should as well, etc.
-
so he lied about it but just forgot to plant evidence? LOL again im not disputing evidence against it just like you cant dispute that there was evidence for it and this is only what we the public have been deemed ok to see...was it a mistake ya that doesnt mean he intentionally lied...Violations of the consitution, i assume you mean the patriot act?
Patriot Act, among other things.
-
NK is already isolated. I don't think they care about embargoes. They are functional with out world trade.
Obama will do nothing.
-
first off the missle launches success isnt important what is important is that they were testing...
I agree with you if you look at each action independently but the problem is that the actions are linked together and all to obtain the same end. Ill explain it like this a basketball game is won by a last sec 3 pointer what shot won the game? the 2 free throws made in the 1st quarter had just as much to do with the win as the last sec 3 pointer. If one step leads to the same end as the next step and you cant accomplish the goal without each step then each step is equally important
Okay... let's say you're playing. You have a sizable lead.When the opposing team makes a few free throws in the first quarter, do you start worrying? Maybe a little, but you realize that the game is not over, right? If you just walked off the court because you predicted disaster, that would be an irrational reaction, right? Now, if those free throws, crash and land in the middle of the ocean, you worry a little less, right?
But as the game progresses, and your opponent starts sinking half court bombs, one after another, you get a little more worried, right? Their freethrow game is still a mess, even though it's improving, but their three point steez is off the chains. They are still behind, but in the last ten minutes, they've closed the gap 120-116. Which are you more concerned with- their sloppy free throws or their tight three-pointer?
-
We had Aegis cruisers in the Sea of Japan that could have taken down the satelite, that would have sent a message.
Gee, I wonder why we didn't use them? Oh, that's right. The "satellite launch" was a failure.
-
Patriot Act, among other things.
Patriot act as ive already stated is i believe to be unconstitutional but its necessity could be argued especially in this day of age.
what are the other things?
-
Gee, I wonder why we didn't use them? Oh, that's right. The "satellite launch" was a failure.
Gee we didn't use them because Obama didn't allow it..because he's weak or believe's the UN will work..or is an idiot. They had no idea that the rocket would fail to deploy the satelite upon launch.
-
Okay... let's say you're playing. You have a sizable lead.When the opposing team makes a few free throws in the first quarter, do you start worrying? Maybe a little, but you realize that the game is not over, right? If you just walked off the court because you predicted disaster, that would be an irrational reaction, right? Now, if those free throws, crash and land in the middle of the ocean, you worry a little less, right?
But as the game progresses, and your opponent starts sinking half court bombs, one after another, you get a little more worried, right? Their freethrow game is still a mess, even though it's improving, but their three point steez is off the chains. They are still behind, but in the last ten minutes, they've closed the gap 120-116. Which are you more concerned with- their sloppy free throws or their tight three-pointer?
your arguement is basically saying that we shouldnt worry about it until they can hit us and thats ignorant...If they start actions to prepare to hit us you need to nip that in the bud...You dont wait untill they have all but the last piece of the puzzle in place before you take action.
-
Thats a game analogy and these are nuclear weapons....are u a child?
-
If the next nuclear explosion doesn't derail the six-party talks, Kim will rightly conclude that he faces no real danger of ever having to dismantle his weapons program. North Korea is a mysterious place, but there is no mystery about its foreign-policy tactics: They work. The real mystery is why our administrations -- Republican and Democratic -- haven't learned that their quasi-religious faith in the six-party talks is misplaced.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently rejected "linkage" in Russia policy as "old thinking." Disagreement in one area, she argued, shouldn't prevent working on "something else that is of overwhelming importance." Whatever the merits of linkage vis-à-vis Russia, de-linking a second North Korean nuclear test from the six-party talks simply hands Pyongyang permission to proceed.
Even worse, Iran and other aspiring nuclear proliferators will draw precisely the same conclusion: Negotiations like the six-party talks are a charade and reflect a continuing collapse of American resolve. U.S. acquiescence in a second North Korean nuclear test will likely mean that Tehran will adopt Pyongyang's successful strategy.
John Bolton.....
I guess ol John wasn't an idiot was he. This was five days before the nuke test.
-
Patriot act as ive already stated is i believe to be unconstitutional but its necessity could be argued especially in this day of age.
what are the other things?
Illegal invasion of Iraq which has been a disaster in every way possible with ZERO benefits, torture, overspending, etc.
-
Illegal invasion of Iraq which has been a disaster in every way possible with ZERO benefits, torture, overspending, etc.
how was the invasion of iraq illegal?
I wasnt aware that those were prosecutable offenses
-
Ok again we're going to be clear and factual here....what violations? As u have laid out....torture isn't in the Constitution, overspending isn't in the Constitution...Iraq was voted on by the Congress and passed, which is in the Constitution. The major Dem players saw the same intel as the Bush admin and still voted to ok it. I think u need to look whats actually in the Constitution. Obama is over spending, government sponsored insurance isn't, neither is the cradle to grave BS being pushed by the Dems. U can easily argue that elements of the Patriot act aren't and I don't have a problme with it.
-
your arguement is basically saying that we shouldnt worry about it until they can hit us and thats ignorant...If they start actions to prepare to hit us you need to nip that in the bud...You dont wait untill they have all but the last piece of the puzzle in place before you take action.
That's not my argument at all.
You are the one who has, repeatedly, floated some bull comparing the admin.'s reaction to the missile test to their yet-to-be-determined reaction to the latest nuclear test. My point is not that there is no need to worry: it's that we know the cowboy tact to international security doesn't work. Our reactions must be smart and measured. Korea already has missiles at its disposal. The missile it tested could never have reached America, even if it worked (which- and this is important- it didn't). Almost everyone knowledgeable about the situation feels this is a ploy for some type of financial leverage.
Once again, you are advocating "nipping something in the bud". How do you plan on doing that?
-
Thats a game analogy and these are nuclear weapons....are u a child?
Hey, I'll be the first to admit it wasn't a good analogy, but I didn't introduce it.
-
Smart and measured....got us here, all the way back to Bill Clinton. Diplomacy doesn't work with this guy. 6 party talks don't work either.This failure of diplomacy clearly shows the need for more diplomacy. The Six Party Talks have done nothing to stop N. Korea's nuclear program. Obviously this demonstrates the importance of redoubling efforts to conduct more Six Party Talks. Just remember...missile defense remains unproven. However, when it comes to diplomacy, especially 'smart' and 'tough' diplomacy, everyday is a new day. ::)
-
That's not my argument at all.
You are the one who has, repeatedly, floated some bull comparing the admin.'s reaction to the missile test to their yet-to-be-determined reaction to the latest nuclear test. My point is not that there is no need to worry: it's that we know the cowboy tact to international security doesn't work. Our reactions must be smart and measured. Korea already has missiles at its disposal. The missile it tested could never have reached America, even if it worked (which- and this is important- it didn't). Almost everyone knowledgeable about the situation feels this is a ploy for some type of financial leverage.
Once again, you are advocating "nipping something in the bud". How do you plan on doing that?
LOL OMG SANCTIONS!!!!!!!!!! to start with... ::)
LOL you think that if the first missle launch test would have been meet with more opposition they would have continued down the same road?
Man you really need to read the thread before you start posting in it...I already stated that its more then likely posturing to get more in negotiations... ::)
smart and measured like another letter perhaps?
-
again doggity what sanctions where put on NK after the missle launch?
-
Hey Al u want an answer right...having been in SKorea 3 times this past year and 4 or 5 more in my 16 year career, I'll give u one. First off they should have waxed the sat. That would have sent a message world wide that Obama means business. Now we know that he's the usual UN sanctions, strongly worried letter type of Dem. Second u need to officially isolate them, blockade em....and work out a real deal with China. We already have a framework in place with them, if and when the North fails. They don't want them to go bacause of the humanitarian crisis. So I guess u agree to foot that bill...they just seal their border. We estimate that the Chinese will invade nKorea once it falls, to set up a buffer zone between the refugee's and its border. Thats a start....
-
Smart and measured....got us here, all the way back to Bill Clinton. Diplomacy doesn't work with this guy. 6 party talks don't work either.This failure of diplomacy clearly shows the need for more diplomacy. The Six Party Talks have done nothing to stop N. Korea's nuclear program. Obviously this demonstrates the importance of redoubling efforts to conduct more Six Party Talks. Just remember...missile defense remains unproven. However, when it comes to diplomacy, especially 'smart' and 'tough' diplomacy, everyday is a new day. ::)
How can you talk out of both sides of your mouth like this? As if your posts in other threads disappear when you click on a different thread. You know damned well that NKorea is never going to disarm and their nuclear program is almost entirely about getting concessions from the west. You literally posted that today. They have no capabilities to actually attack America with nuclear weapons, and they would certainly lose a war with us. Ufortunately, it comes down to a game of time and diplomacy.
-
how was the invasion of iraq illegal?
I wasnt aware that those were prosecutable offenses
No Declaration of War, which makes ALL of our bungled, costly and bloody interventions since after WWII ILLEGAL. Besides, GW sent men to their death on a pack of lies which I think should be prosecuted.
-
Speaking on ABC's "Good Morning America," Mullen said: "We believe that North Korea continues to pursue a nuclear weapons program. A North Korea with nuclear weapons poses a great danger to its neighbors. They've also recently launched longer-range missiles pursuing literally ICBM kinds of missiles."
"In the long run," Mullen said, "a state like North Korea with nuclear weapons and the ability to fire those kind of missiles long range pose a threat to the United States."
North Korea earlier this year rejected a plan for additional U.S. food assistance and kicked out five groups distributing American aid in the country.
State Department spokesman Robert Wood said at the time, in mid-March, that the North gave no reason for refusing to accept U.S. food aid. But the rejection was worrisome to aid workers and U.S. officials.
North Korea faces chronic food shortages and has relied on outside aid to help feed its 23 million people since famine reportedly killed as many as 2 million in the 1990s, a result of natural disasters and mismanagement.
-
No Declaration of War, which makes ALL of our bungled, costly and bloody interventions since after WWII ILLEGAL. Besides, GW sent men to their death on a pack of lies which I think should be prosecuted.
I was one of those men, I'd doing just fine with it. Ur a head in the sand appeasment kind of guy. What were u doing on 911?
-
again doggity what sanctions where put on NK after the missle launch?
The resolutions never passed. NK has allies in the security council which caused it to stall.
-
The resolutions never passed. NK has allies in the security council which caused it to stall.
thats exactly right, so none
-
"We know that North Korea was in the process of building the nuclear weapons’ facility in Syria that Israel bombed and destroyed — it therefore has an active foreign policy on behalf of what used to be called the axis of evil. North Korea is intimately connected with the Iranian nuclear weapon now thought to be in the final stages of production. This April, North Korea launched a long-range missile that flew over the Pacific. And maybe things are coming together. Holding out that famous open hand of his, President Obama expects to negotiate Iran into desisting with its nuclear development. The only realistic alternative is a military strike by the United States or Israel, or both. But in that event, North Korea might freeze the situation by brandishing its nuclear weapon on behalf of Iran. "
Time is running out. The more sincere Obama is, the more naïve he seems.
They couldn't even get a "strongly worried letter" agreed upon. So much for hope and change. We have the JV team running our foreign policy. They think we're weak now, atleast under Bush, they were scared.
-
I was one of those men, I'd doing just fine with it. Ur a head in the sand appeasment kind of guy. What were u doing on 911?
Using 9/11 as an argument is getting old, especially since it wasn't a nation state that attacked us; here we could have used Letters of Marque and Reprisal which have been used in the early history of the country without invading the whole place with an army.
Would not having gotten involved in Vietnam been appeasement? 60,000 dead Americans, a economic disaster and consequences that continue today? Totally unnecessary. I believe in a strong military BUT I don't believe in unnecessary wars.
-
how was the invasion of iraq illegal?
I wasnt aware that those were prosecutable offenses
Actually, it's ironic. You've been making the argument that NKorea should be punished by America for violating a condition of a UN treaty, but the Iraq war was a violation of the UN charter. We went to war claiming Iraq was an imminent threat to us, even though the UN has to make that determination (and they didn't). There were never any WMDs found, before or after the start of the war, so it was technically a UN violation.
-
thats exactly right, so none
So, what is your point? You claimed that Obama should have done more. Other than introducing the resolutions through the UN, what more should he have done? You still haven't said how or why you would have taken action outside of the UN were you in his shoes.
How should he have "nipped it in the bud" without war or sanctions or diplomacy?
-
Actually, it's ironic. You've been making the argument that NKorea should be punished by America for violating a condition of a UN treaty, but the Iraq war was a violation of the UN charter. We went to war claiming Iraq was an imminent threat to us, even though the UN has to make that determination (and they didn't). There were never any WMDs found, before or after the start of the war, so it was technically a UN violation.
American exceptionalism, basically the USA can do no wrong, regardless of what it does and if you criticise its actions, you are Unamerican, a hater, a lib or a host of other bad things.
As long as we do it, it's ok but if others do it, it's bad.
-
Actually, it's ironic. You've been making the argument that NKorea should be punished by America for violating a condition of a UN treaty, but the Iraq war was a violation of the UN charter. We went to war claiming Iraq was an imminent threat to us, even though the UN has to make that determination (and they didn't). There were never any WMDs found, before or after the start of the war, so it was technically a UN violation.
LOL goodness gracious you retards need to read, ive stated many times i think iraq was a big mistake, you want to punish the US for that go ahead...second iraq actually had broken UN agreements prior to the US invasion im not justifying the invasion just putting things into perspective for you.
So, what is your point? You claimed that Obama should have done more. Other than introducing the resolutions through the UN, what more should he have done? You still haven't said how or why you would have taken action outside of the UN were you in his shoes.
How should he have "nipped it in the bud" without war or sanctions or diplomacy?
I would have been ok with sanctions, even if they were only sanctions enforced by the US and not the UN. My point is that we shouldnt have sat there and done nothing which is what you are arguing. We very well could have shot the missle down if we had wanted to, what would have been a more diplomatic way would have been to layout certain actions that would be taken if NK launched and when they did follow through with those actions, sactions, blockade, military if thats what needed to be done.
-
American exceptionalism, basically the USA can do no wrong, regardless of what it does and if you criticise its actions, you are Unamerican, a hater, a lib or a host of other bad things.
As long as we do it, it's ok but if others do it, it's bad.
goodness gracious deicide your beginning to sound like an idiot again...Again im not a party hard liner like others on here i happen to be more conservative then liberal so of course alot of obamas actions i dont agree with bush wasnt very conservative so i was against many of his actions as well. If the UN wants to punish the US then fine, i think what we have learned from this and Iraq breaking UN agreements US going into Iraq without UN permission is that the UN is basically useless and if you want something done you need to find alternative ways.
-
goodness gracious deicide your beginning to sound like an idiot again...Again im not a party hard liner like others on here i happen to be more conservative then liberal so of course alot of obamas actions i dont agree with bush wasnt very conservative so i was against many of his actions as well. If the UN wants to punish the US then fine, i think what we have learned from this and Iraq breaking UN agreements US going into Iraq without UN permission is that the UN is basically useless and if you want something done you need to find alternative ways.
I think you missed my point. We do things to people in countries such as Guatemala, Chile and Indonesia, horrible things like assassination, overthrowing governments, participating in genocide and we do it because we feel like it, without batting an eyelash. If you believe in individual liberty as I do then you must also believe that non-threatening countries have a right to be left alone. I am not talking about Iraq now. People have a right to be left alone and so do nations.
Why did Indonesians deserve this for example?
-
I think you missed my point. We do things to people in countries such as Guatemala, Chile and Indonesia, horrible things like assassination, overthrowing governments, participating in genocide and we do it because we feel like it, without batting an eyelash. If you believe in individual liberty as I do then you must also believe that non-threatening countries have a right to be left alone. I am not talking about Iraq now. People have a right to be left alone and so do nations.
Why did Indonesians deserve this for example?
I got your point, i dont see how it really applies to me as i already stated iraq was a mistake?
LOL dude you think we are the only country that does this? PPL cant be left alone deicide i know thats a novel concept bro but its just plain silly, this isnt a hippies utopia the idea of ill leave you alone if you leave me alone doesnt work in todays society. The world is far to intertwined, maybe its b/c I dont buy into the whole moral high ground thing which i still dont understand why you do as an atheist but anywho. Other countries affairs effect us if not directly then indirectly, im not justifying shit deicide just giving you something to think about.
-
I got your point, i dont see how it really applies to me as i already stated iraq was a mistake?
LOL dude you think we are the only country that does this? PPL cant be left alone deicide i know thats a novel concept bro but its just plain silly, this isnt a hippies utopia the idea of ill leave you alone if you leave me alone doesnt work in todays society. The world is far to intertwined, maybe its b/c I dont buy into the whole moral high ground thing which i still dont understand why you do as an atheist but anywho. Other countries affairs effect us if not directly then indirectly, im not justifying shit deicide just giving you something to think about.
I am not an idiot, of course I don't think in such utopian terms. It's not novel to me and we can work within the framework of 'military threat'. None of the countries I mentioned ever posed a direct military threat, moreover the argument 'if we don't do it, others will', is bunk. Why don't we try to improve ourselves and let others do what they do AS LONG THERE IS NOT DIRECT MILITARY THREAT. In the case of Guatemala and Chile the only interests involved were corporate interests, not national ones.
-
LOL goodness gracious you retards need to read, ive stated many times i think iraq was a big mistake, you want to punish the US for that go ahead...second iraq actually had broken UN agreements prior to the US invasion im not justifying the invasion just putting things into perspective for you.
I'm a retard that needs to learn how to read?!! You asked how the Iraq war could be considered illegal and that post told you. Whether you believe Iraq was a mistake or not is irrelevant. Iraq's broken UN agreements don't cancel out the fact that America ignored the UN charter, either. Haven't you ever heard that two wrongs don't make a right?!!
I would have been ok with sanctions, even if they were only sanctions enforced by the US and not the UN. My point is that we shouldnt have sat there and done nothing which is what you are arguing. We very well could have shot the missle down if we had wanted to, what would have been a more diplomatic way would have been to layout certain actions that would be taken if NK launched and when they did follow through with those actions, sactions, blockade, military if thats what needed to be done.
Okay, so finally you admit that what you REALLY expected Obama to do was go to war over a missile test. I already posted why that was terrible, juvenile idea pages ago, so I'll just address the rest of your post now.
1. America still enforced sanctions against NK even though the UN resolution didn't go through. China and Russia are NK's biggest trading partners and they blocked the stricter sanctions. Outside of the financial aid NK received for temp disarmament, there isn't much American money flowing into the country.
2.As I just posted, unless a country is considered an imminent threat to another country, military action against said country is considered a violation of UN charter . As I've posted multiple times, our military had already concluded that the rocket was not a threat to America.Nk had already revealed that they were launching the rocket and that it contained a non-destructive load. It didn't fly over American airspace. On what grounds should America have shot it down?