[itai195]

I don't know, show me proof that Kim, Iraqi insurgents, and those shadowy Democrats who knew about Foley all along are trying to manipulate the election.

Certainly we'll find out about the stock market rally's longevity after November. Do you think it's impossible to cause short-term manipulations in the stock and commodity markets?

[Spliffdaddy]

US military is "overextended"?

How many people does it take to launch a few tactical nukes? I think it takes 3. One to give the order and two to initiate the launch.

There will be no air assault because it would take too long to eliminate 10,000 artillery positions - all pointed at Seoul, South Korea - a city with a population of 10 million. There will be no ground assault for the same reason, plus a multitude of other reasons.

And you can stop blaming the USA for North Korea's actions. It isn't a problem that directly affects the US. It may indirectly affect the USA. All we need to do is make sure the nukes never leave North Korea.

Why is it always the USA that must solve the world's problems? What's in it for us? Criticism when things don't go right? Criticism when things *do* go right?

It's up to the "world community" to decide what, if anything, they intend to do about the problem of North Korea having nuclear weapons. I've never seen the "world community" actually accomplish anything significant - but they seem to be well-versed on what we do wrong.

The trouble with the USA is that we're a chickenshit nation that fears world opinion. There's nothing we can do. Being a superpower that perpetually declines to show military strength makes you a superpower in name only.

Not sure when we started caring about what the world thought of our actions, but I'd bet it's about the same time we started losing wars.

If the USA cannot ignore world opinion on matters that relate directly to our national security, then we're finished as a nation. As it stands, we cannot take pre-emptive action against a known enemy - we cannot take direct action against a known enemy - and we can't even mention our enemies by name without having to bow to both world opinion and liberal opinion within our borders.

[itai195]

So now that Iraq has gone awry, you advocate appeasement?

[Spliffdaddy]

wtf are you talking about?

edit: filing you under "nutcase" along with a few others. I will not respond to any comments from members in my "nutcase" file.

[itai195]

Your post sounds very similar to what a lot of people said about Iraq prior to the Iraq war, and you and others called them appeasers.

edit: filing you under "nutcase" along with a few others. I will not respond to any comments from members in my "nutcase" file.

It's not the first time I've caught you wearing no clothes

[kmkkid]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

So... do you all think it really happened?

I believe it happened. I friend who teaches in S. Korea said she felt the earth tremors.



Also. I'd like to take this time to complain about the news stations "Nuclear Powers" list which now includes N. Korea. WHERE THE HELL IS CANADA? Ugh. Unless I'm missing something, we've had nuclear power for decades..... And I know damn well we have nukes of our own. Hell we made a lot of the U.S.' nukes.

*edit* Ok, so they say we've gotten rid of them. I don't believe it

[marden]

Originally Posted by itai195

I don't know, show me proof that Kim, Iraqi insurgents, and those shadowy Democrats who knew about Foley all along are trying to manipulate the election.

Certainly we'll find out about the stock market rally's longevity after November. Do you think it's impossible to cause short-term manipulations in the stock and commodity markets?

*This is what is frustrating about debating some people. You can't assume they understand the basics of human nature and how the world works. Or if you do make that assumption they say things that tell you that you gave them too much credit.*

You may be right.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by marden

*This is what is frustrating about debating some people. You can't assume they understand the basics of human nature and how the world works. Or if you do make that assumption they say things that tell you that you gave them too much credit.*

If you can make unsubstantiated accusations then so can I. Just like your accusations, there is some inconclusive evidence around to keep people busy spinning conspiracy theories about the administration.

You may be right.

Well it's good to finally know what you mean by this.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by kmkkid

Also. I'd like to take this time to complain about the news stations "Nuclear Powers" list which now includes N. Korea. WHERE THE HELL IS CANADA? Ugh. Unless I'm missing something, we've had nuclear power for decades..... And I know damn well we have nukes of our own. Hell we made a lot of the U.S.' nukes.

They started to include it, but they couldn't type "Canada" without following it by "(LOL)", so finally they gave up.

[kmkkid]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

They started to include it, but they couldn't type "Canada" without following it by "(LOL)", so finally they gave up.

Just keep thinking we're innocent.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

They started to include it, but they couldn't type "Canada" without following it by "(LOL)", so finally they gave up.

That's REALLY funny!

[kmkkid]

Originally Posted by marden

That's REALLY funny!

Oh come now, Frances inclusion on the list is funnier.

[marden]

Originally Posted by kmkkid

Oh come now, Frances inclusion on the list is funnier.

Hmmm, I was too young to know to laugh about that when I first learned that France had nukes. I think I just assumed they were entitled because they helped win WWII. US, Britain, Russia and France. Same as the division of Berlin. Everyone had a piece.

[kmkkid]

Originally Posted by marden

Hmmm, I was too young to know to laugh about that when I first learned that France had nukes. I think I just assumed they were entitled because they helped win WWII. US, Britain, Russia and France. Same as the division of Berlin. Everyone had a piece.

Ah, Canada never helped with WWII eh?

You must have been sleeping through history class.

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by Dakar

He was joking, you know.

No I wasn't.

Originally Posted by marden

The idiocy and ignorance of some folks is truly just amazing.

It's funny because it's true.

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

The sad fact is that it is going to take a dirty bomb in our country to get the liberals to understand why the United States has to be offensive.

If 9/11 didn't convince them then maybe a nuke or two will.

Sometimes it takes a terrible disaster to bring people together. Maybe you could mail anthrax to some prominent liberals? That might wake them up a bit!

[marden]

Originally Posted by kmkkid

Ah, Canada never helped with WWII eh?

You must have been sleeping through history class.

Weren't they part of the Queen's forces? And they weren't awarded a separate sector of Berlin, were they?

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by marden

Hmmm, I was too young to know to laugh about that when I first learned that France had nukes. I think I just assumed they were entitled because they helped win WWII. US, Britain, Russia and France. Same as the division of Berlin. Everyone had a piece.

France didn't build a nuclear force until well after World War Two (in the 1960s). And they built it because they wanted to exercise nuclear deterrence independent of NATO.

And certainly no one thought the Soviets were "entitled" to have nuclear weapons when they did get them in 1949.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

The sad fact is that it is going to take a dirty bomb in our country to get the liberals to understand why the United States has to be offensive.

If 9/11 didn't convince them then maybe a nuke or two will.

Actually, I think the sad fact is that it is going to take a dirty bomb labeled "Made in Korea" to get conservatives to understand that terrorists posing as Muslims aren't the only, or biggest, threat.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Actually, I think the sad fact is that it is going to take a dirty bomb labeled "Made in Korea" to get conservative to understand that terrorists posing as Muslims aren't the only, or biggest, threat.

Oh please, more revisionist history again.

It was the conservatives that was saying in the 90s when something COULD have been done, that there wasn't enough being done about it. That throwing money at them wouldn't stop anything.

Guess who was right.

It's not the conservatives that are/were disillusioned.

[PER3]

Originally Posted by marden

If you don't know the difference I suggest you look elsewhere.

Thanks. Had a look and found it.

Kim Jong Il prefers government-trained prostitutes, and that Republican fellow prefers government-trained pageboys.

Back on topic now.

[red rocket]

Dirty bombs, rubbish.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

The term dirty bomb is most often used to refer to a Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD), a radiological weapon which combines radioactive material with conventional explosives. Though an RDD is designed to disperse radioactive material over a large area, the conventional explosive would likely have more immediate lethal effect than the radioactive material. At levels created from most probable sources, not enough radiation would be present to cause severe illness or death. A test explosion and subsequent calculations done by the United States Department of Energy found that assuming nothing is done to clean up the affected area and everyone stays in the affected area for 1 year, the radiation exposure would be "fairly high". However, recent analysis of the Chernobyl fallout seems to show that many people are hardly affected over 5 years and more.

Because a terrorist dirty bomb is unlikely to cause many deaths as a result of the conventional explosives, many do not consider this to be a weapon of mass destruction. Its purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical, harm through ignorance, mass panic, and terror. Additionally, decontamination of the affected area might require considerable time and expense, rendering affected areas partly unusable and causing economic damage.

During the 1960s it is thought that the UK Ministry of Defence evaluated RDDs, deciding that a far better effect was achievable by simply using more high explosive in place of the radioactives. Any form of weapon designed to provoke any kind of biological damage--short of killing a person outright--is banned under the Geneva Protocols, making the development, deployment and use by any signatory state an illegal activity.

Dirty bomb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by PER3

Kim Jong Il prefers government-trained prostitutes, and that Republican fellow prefers government-trained pageboys.

Don't forget congressman Gerry Studds (D). Although there is one difference, Studds actually had sex with the 17 year old page and when censured by Congress claimed it was consensual sex between adults. NAMBLA anyone? Dems, so effective at using their moral compasses continued to re-elect him 5 times.

Honestly though, the gay-bashing coming from the left is astonishing.

[besson3c]

I wonder if this is all Clinton's fault?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I wonder if this is all Clinton's fault?

Good question and I think the simple answer is; no.

Iran is Ahmadinejad's fault.
Iraq was Saddam's fault.
N. Korea is Il's fault.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Oh please, more revisionist history again.

It was the conservatives that was saying in the 90s when something COULD have been done, that there wasn't enough being done about it. That throwing money at them wouldn't stop anything.

Guess who was right.

It's not the conservatives that are/were disillusioned.

I'm talking about the present, not the past. It seems all you are able to focus on here is the past; "what did Clinton do?" "What did conservatives 10 years ago do?"

In the present it's Muslims, Muslims, Muslims. We even have people like Abe claiming a nuclear North Korea doesn't pose a threat when compared with "Global Jihadism".

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Good question and I think the simple answer is; no.

N. Korea is Il's fault.

Kim is the family name, not Il.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

I'm talking about the present, not the past. It seems all you are able to focus on here is the past; "what did Clinton do?" "What did conservatives 10 years ago do?"

In the present it's Muslims, Muslims, Muslims. We even have people like Abe claiming a nuclear North Korea doesn't pose a threat when compared with "Global Jihadism".

I think the answer is that they're both threats, threats that we've addressed differently, because they are different in nature.

The truth is that they are not necessarily distinct threats: Korean missiles are in Iran's hands, and Iran has no trouble supplying them to HizbAllah.

Iran had representatives at the July 4th North Korean missile test demonstrations.

So I think suggesting that "North Korea doesn't pose a threat when compared with 'Global Jihadism'" is in error.

[Kerrigan]

http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...src=rss&rpc=22

North Korea may have conducted another nuclear test.

(whatever happened to the auto-naming URL thingy?)

[Moderator]

when you name three countries as evil...and invade the one least capable of defending itself...do not be surprised when the other two seek the ultimate object of security.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by vmarks

Kim is the family name, not Il.

Yep. Kim is his family name, and Jong-il is his first name. It's not, like, Kimberly J. Il.

[Kerrigan]

Heh, "Kim". What a gayish name.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Moderator

when you name three countries as evil...and invade the one least capable of defending itself...do not be surprised when the other two seek the ultimate object of security.

Either Clinton named North Korea as part of the axis of evil - or you have the timeline of events wrong.

See, NK processed fuel rods that were given to them by the Clinton administration - in order to build their alleged bomb.

Yeah, Clinton gave them nuclear technology...on the promise that NK would use it for 'peaceful purposes'.

In effect, NK was working on a bomb for well over a decade.

Heck, even McCain blames Clinton.* And we all know how liberals trust McCain's opinion.

But anyways, neither Bush nor Clinton is really at fault for what any nation decided to do.

This is as much our problem to solve as it is Iceland's or Belgium's.



* "I would remind Senator (Hillary) Clinton and other Democrats critical of the Bush administration's policies that the framework agreement her husband's administration negotiated was a failure,"

"The Koreans received millions and millions in energy assistance. They've diverted millions of dollars of food assistance to their military," he said.

[Moderator]

Keep saying Clinton...I hear if you say it three times in quick succesion Bush ( by that I mean Cheney) will be forgivin for 6 years of neglect.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Precisely. Let's be a little more eager to blame Clinton for every damn thing that happens.

Did you even read my post?

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not blaming Clinton directly, but he was told just throwing money at Korea would make a even bigger problem. He was warned. He didn't listen.

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Good question and I think the simple answer is; no.

Iran is Ahmadinejad's fault.
Iraq was Saddam's fault.
N. Korea is Il's fault.

Exactly.

I just find it Ironic when the right was telling Clinton that throwing money wouldn't work, and they turned out to be right, the left find a way to blame Bush.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

I'm talking about the present, not the past. It seems all you are able to focus on here is the past; "what did Clinton do?" "What did conservatives 10 years ago do?"

The past has to do with the present. I am not JUST thinking about the past. I am not excluding it because it doesn't fit my political slant like some.

In the present it's Muslims, Muslims, Muslims. We even have people like Abe claiming a nuclear North Korea doesn't pose a threat when compared with "Global Jihadism".

What does that have to do with by the time Bush took office, it was too late?

Originally Posted by Moderator

when you name three countries as evil...and invade the one least capable of defending itself...do not be surprised when the other two seek the ultimate object of security.

Well it's a good thing NK was doing this well before Bush was in office. So your little blame shift simply doesn't fit.

For example, Spliff pointed out important FACTS, and TRUTHS to you. What do you do? Make some silly statement like

Originally Posted by Moderator

Keep saying Clinton...I hear if you say it three times in quick succesion Bush ( by that I mean Cheney) will be forgivin for 6 years of neglect.

Again, once NK has nuke ability, it is simply too late. This was said in the 90s. That something needed to be done BEFORE they had such ability. It was said throwing money at them wont stop them.

Now it's too late, the left are pointing their fingers at the right in a desperate blame shift.

[marden]

11/10/2006 - 7:22:12 AM

N Korea: 'Sanctions would be act of war'

South Korea’s military was reportedly preparing for nuclear conflict today as rival North Korea warned that an international push for tighter sanctions on Pyongyang over its atomic weapons test would be an act of war.

A North Korean official based in Beijing said: “Sanctions are nonsense. If full-scale sanctions take place, we will regard it as a declaration of war.

“Why is the UN, which didn’t raise any problem when India received nuclear technology from the US, trying to sanction us? “The more pressure we get, the stronger our response will be.”

The words came after North Korea shocked the world on Monday by claiming to have conducted its first nuclear bomb test, triggering a US-backed campaign for the UN Security Council to sanction the country.

South Korea’s military was checking its readiness for nuclear war, Yonhap news agency reported today.

Irish Examiner> Breaking News> Sport

Iran had better start praying.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Either Clinton named North Korea as part of the axis of evil - or you have the timeline of events wrong.

See, NK processed fuel rods that were given to them by the Clinton administration - in order to build their alleged bomb.

Yeah, Clinton gave them nuclear technology...on the promise that NK would use it for 'peaceful purposes'.

In effect, NK was working on a bomb for well over a decade.

Heck, even McCain blames Clinton.* And we all know how liberals trust McCain's opinion.

But anyways, neither Bush nor Clinton is really at fault for what any nation decided to do.

This is as much our problem to solve as it is Iceland's or Belgium's.



* "I would remind Senator (Hillary) Clinton and other Democrats critical of the Bush administration's policies that the framework agreement her husband's administration negotiated was a failure,"

"The Koreans received millions and millions in energy assistance. They've diverted millions of dollars of food assistance to their military," he said.

Hmmmm, no I think this situation is mostly a US problem, just like Iraq.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Nicko

Hmmmm, no I think this situation is mostly a US problem,

NK being mostly a US problem? Are you kidding me?

just like Iraq.

Tell that to Israel and Kuwait, and Iraqi's own people, etc.

[Powerbook]

True, true...
PB.

[Dakar]

Uh, weird.

[Nicko]

I love the guardian

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

As it stands, we cannot take pre-emptive action against a known enemy - we cannot take direct action against a known enemy - and we can't even mention our enemies by name without having to bow to both world opinion and liberal opinion within our borders.

Unfortunately this is true. But let some freak of nature like little kim or little Ahamawannajihad ever hit one of our U.S. cities with a nuke, they better make sure it is their best shot. Because when we get up, we will incinerate every living thing in their countries that breathes, talks, walks, crawls, slithers, swims, and wiggles.