And now for the ineffectual protestations from the world
Hey, Joe Biden said “gird your loins” for the testing of Barack Obama, didn’t he? Voila:
North Korea defiantly carried out a provocative rocket launch Sunday that the U.S., Japan and other nations suspect was a cover for a test of its long-range missile technology.
Liftoff took place at 11:30 a.m. (0230GMT) Sunday from the coastal Musudan-ri launch pad in northeastern North Korea, the South Korean and U.S. governments said. The multistage rocket hurtled toward the Pacific, reaching Japanese airspace within seven minutes, but no debris appeared to hit its territory, officials in Tokyo said.The U.N. Security Council approved an emergency session for Sunday afternoon in New York, following
a request from Japan that came minutes after the launch.
Readying ineffectual protestations from the world:
The South Koreans called it “reckless,” the Americans “provocative,” and Japan said it strongly protested the launch.
Obama’s statement here.
North Korea’s response:
“Nyah, nyah, nyah, we can’t hear you.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- North Korea launches rocket! | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- ScoopThis.Org » North Korea has launched a rocket!
- Norks launch missile, Obama issues statement | BitsBlog
- Bloodthirsty Liberal » Power Launch
- Ted Turner On N. Korea: “They Were Thin & Riding Bikes” | Democrat = Socialist
- Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate’s Cove
- Russ. Just Russ.
- North Korea Fail | Vancouver Secrets
- The TIW Blog » Blog Archive » Obama endorses N. Korean missile program
- Bored with Obama! « Riggword Weblog
- UN Security Council Ignores Obama | Hennessy's View
- Tel-Chai Nation
- Vice Pres. Joe ‘Gaffe Machine’ Biden: Steven Crowder’s Comedic ‘Rain Man’ « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Sarah Palin Wins POTUS Game Show; Obama’s Lack of Foresight about US Missile Defense Cuts Seems Naive & Dangerous « Frugal Café Blog Zone
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: War
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Mudville Gazette
» Leakiest administration ever?Sister Toldjah
» Obama plans to announce troop decision on Afghanistan next weekPundit & Pundette
» Various and sundryStop The ACLU
» Obama To Hold Another Prime Timer To Explain Our Afghanistan Strategy To Islamic ExtremistsRedstate
» Put Me in the No Camp on the Purity TestAmSpecBlog
» Lieberman Says He's "Stubborn" on Gov't Plan
Sorry Z, jsut got on. The thread was entitled Comrade. Your first entry was at 3:51 pm.
The title is the ineffectual world’s response that is coming first thing in the morning, yes?
This is a perfect example of Obama’s “hope and change” strategy. North Korea threatens not to interfere as it laughs at the UN and the world. Obama responds by “hoping” that Kim Jong Il will “change” his mind and not launch the missile.
Results: missile launched.
Now Obama will go to the UN and “hope” that the UN will be cross with North Korea and make them “change” their ways.
Truly, one the most ignorant examples of strategy and international relations I have ever seen.
Wonder how long it will be before we hear that Obama/Clinton strategy WOULD have worked if not for Bush destroying N. Korea’s view of the U.S.? So its not Obama/Clinton’s fault you see….
Since you asked. North Korea’s regime is not so much communist as a criminal enterprise. They are the Mafia in charge of a country with no industry and no goods worth trading for.
Their income comes from drugs, arm sales and counterfeiting. Want to know why all your paper mony changed; North Korea.
We cut off their ability to sell arms and use the banking industry to degrade their ability to counterfeit. Believe it or not we in effect agreed to turn a blind eye to this, which was nonsense.
If they threaten I would destroy their nuclear reactors, and their missle launch sites. I would cut off all aid to them. If North Koreans starve; that’s life as they as the enemy.
Could this lead to war? Yep, but who cares. We have dealt with these people for the last 56 years after failing to take them out in 1953; thanks to yet another Democrat; Harry Truman. Time to put an end to them and tell the Iranians what’s in sote for them if they don’t back off.
For those who fail to learn the lessons of history…
Why am I suddenly reminded of Neville Chamberlain waving his piece of paper and declaring “Peace in our time”?
One can easily superimpose the face of Obama or his Secretary of State on that image.
This administration is demonstrating how ineffectual it can be. With Madame Clinton begging for anyone in a N. Korean kareoke bar to please call her, with Barry off on his megalomaniac need for acceptance and worship, and the rest of the Capital crew fiddling…blame Bush and the nasty uncaring Conservatives for all the troubles in the world while the US burns. Lord help us all
This brings to mind Neville Chamberlain vs. Winston Churchill.
Chamberlain pursued a strategy of appeasement. Is that what you liberals want? Look how that worked out.
BlameAmericaLast,
Thank you for understanding, but my question/comment works beyond the simple appeasement question (of which it ranks right up there. Agreed, we are in a situation in which Hope and Change is becoming synonomous with appeasement.
In diplomacy, talk is talk. We are entering (again) a need for action not discussion. “Well Done is always better that Well Said”.
When an earlier era’s Great American Peacemaker merely sent notes of protest over Germany’s sinkings of passenger liners in 1915, someone wrote,”It reminds me of a man whose wife’s face is slapped by another man, who thinks it over and writes a note telling the other man he must not do it, and when the other man repeats the insult and slaps his wife’s face again, writes him another note of protest, and then another and another. . .”
Select which is the Democrat and which the Republican. Then select which one you would wish to protect YOU.
With the jawbone of an ass, Samson slayed thousands.
TOTUS does the same thing with every Presidential news conference.
Sandydog – kindred spirits.
But in this age of Republicans becoming Democrats in all but name only… Political affiliations become irrelevant.
Please bear in mind this is not a party position (Proudly a Reagan Conservative if you ask), but a position we ALL must face. No more appeasement. No more waiting for the UN to agree to discuss. What would Reagan do?
Not the time to talk about getting rid of nukes, Obama. Careless. Foolish.
Japan. In seven minutes. Capable of reaching the U.S.
Kim Jong-il just replied, “You first.”
Hoping for change. Bordering on capitulation.
“Not the time to talk about getting rid of nukes…”
I’m sorry but why? We are not ever going to launch a nuclear missle/bomb on anyone. Do you know what my kids do if I keep threatening them with something that will never materialize? They forever call my bluff.
Yes we need to do something material/concrete with N. Korea. That reality and nuclear weapons/bombs be two different things.
Yes, obama promised that. The idiot obviously never heard of strategic deterance.
There is a REASON they have not be used since 1945. Because we knew that to use them was global suicide. But in a disarmed world, one or two can be used safely. Clearly obama is too stupid to see that.
I think this article says exactly what needs to be said, the way it needs to be said. http://feeds.foxnews.com/~r/blogs/foxforum/~3/4H9OpAvQ8eY/
God help us and the rest of our allies. Or former allies as the case may be.
“Yes, obama promised that. The idiot obviously never heard of strategic deterance.
There is a REASON they have not be used since 1945. Because we knew that to use them was global suicide. But in a disarmed world, one or two can be used safely. Clearly obama is too stupid to see that.”
I’m sorry but the idea that we will never use nuclear weapons so we can reduce them started way before Obama and is not a Democratic Party idea.
It is suicide to use ANY nuclear weapons sir. We kill ourselves with our own bombs if we use them.
We have many many options other than nuclear. Its time to use them. Its way past time to use them. But that truth and the use of nuclear weapons are again, apples and oranges.
Threatening someone with something that will never be used makes us powerless.
During these “talks” is anybody going to check under the table to see if Kim Jong Il has his fingers crossed??
Or is listening to the iPod Obama gave him?
Definitely not in advocacy of escalation to a nuclear strike. But your allegory to children/parents is well taken. I will respond to a second allegorical arguement in dealing with a thug or bully.
One of the first lessons that I have learned is that a physical response to a bully’s threat usually ends with the bully backing down with a loss of face because they are not expecting that.
Agreed, no rational person will “launch a nuclear bomb/missile”, and the key operative term I use is rational, and not arguing semantics the US did drop the atomic weapons twice..but under different circumstances in that we were allready at war against a zealot regime.
The United Nations is merely an extension of Wilson’s League of Nations that has outlived its usefullness. It is just as imposing just as altruistic. But when totalitarian regimes have a say over United States internal matters, we are looking toward petty despots and tin horn thugs with the backing of a “super wonder weapons” poised at our “collective throats.
How effective was the “containment” of Iraq? How effective are the collective UN Peacekeepers? Definitely not paragons of success. To name a single instance, the corruption behind the “Oil for Food” has indicated that this is not the exception to the rule, but rather the rule itself. With China and Russia both indicating a “Veto reservation” in the matter, all the world may further expect is the “forever calling your bluff” you mention.
I am wishing to discuss this matter further, but definitely no trolls allowed!
Personally, I’m glad NK shot off a missle.
It shows this nation, America, that its new dictator, talks a big game but doesn’t have the balls to do anything about it.
No balls at all. None. Not even one.
Glad to discuss it but your posts is lumping a bazillion things into one post.
It is clear and I think most of us agree that “something” material/concrete needs to be done with N. Korea, Iran, etc. We are past words.
But nuclear is not that “something”. Nuclear is never going to be that “somethign” that the US does. It is madness to do so.
Equally it is madness to not do something that we can do and should do.
jsmiddleton4: seriously. read a F’ing history book. The only reason hundreds of millions didn’t die in a world wide war between russia and america was NUCLEAR WEAPONS. We give up our nukes, a nuke WILL be used. Count on it.
Obama is a complete idiot to think otherwise and so is anyone else.
I apologize if my posting’s train of thought become tangential. Attempting to express so much in so little a format may become daunting.
Agreed we are way past the point of talking. Obviously, waiting for the UN to agree on possible “sanctions” all the while China and Russia pose the veto option is simply imbicilic.
sono…
“jsmiddleton4: seriously. read a F’ing history book.”
Now that’s an effective and mature reply there sono.
If you have a problem with the truth I guess that means I’m ignorant and need to read a book?
SonofDY, From perusing your previous posts I have come to respect your opinions and thank you for your service. I served twenty one years in Uncle Sam’s Canoe Club.
Deterence created by Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) was a huge influence preventing all out confrontation between the US and USSR. But then when we actually had a leader willing to back up words with actions. And again, we may observe what happened to the USSR. By the way, no thanks to Teddy Kennedy.
Disarming to the point of being Nuke free, while tyrants posess them and are willing to usher in the “new Mahdi” or otherwise is simply ludicrous IMHO.
What truth? You have repeated political talking points of the far left that if you picked up a simple history book would be proven false. If you can’t be bothered to learn what the hell you are talking about, then thier is no further point in discussing it. Shove your eliteist “discussion” since clearly you are only here to push your far leftist crap which has no basis in reality.
It is clear to most rational thinking people that if the USA removes all its nuclear weapons then it loses that deterance. What would stop a nuclear attack on the USA then?? Nothing. Imagine a world where North Korea and Iran are more powerfull than the USA. THAT is the world you are suggesting. It is complete maddness to reduce your arms when your sworn enemies are INCREASING thiers. Do you honestly think anyone here buys the “immature” tactic??
Come on.
Kim Jong Il is *so* uninvited to the Wednesday Night Cocktail Parties.
No Wagyu beef for you, Jongie!
Take that, you Bully, you!
kingfish, the ignorant leftist annoy me. We who served, know.
time to go work on the house again.
He doesn’t know what to do, period. He can only be a community organizer, showing the world he doesn’t know a thing, reading a teleprompter. If N. Korea doesn’t want to be “organized”, he’s at a loss for options. This rookie president, with a “corrupt bargain” rookie SofS, will cause us more problems than we can cope. Hostile countries know this. They’re not stupid! They’ll string both of them along, for whatever they can get. Obama wants to “walk softly, but carry a wiffleball bat.”
“(The President) promised on the campaign trail “to the leave the cold war behind” and “rethink the requirements for nuclear deterrence.” Last November, he unveiled an arms reduction proposal that purports to do just that. It would have the United States reduce its strategic nuclear arsenal over the next ten years from its current level of 7,200 warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 warheads. Equally important, the United States would achieve that goal not by negotiating a new Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START) agreement, but through unilateral action.”
Which President?
I hospital corpsman with Marines from 1972-1976.
Does that mean I then also “know”?
Clearly not. Or you forgot.
There are idiots in the service as well.
“You have repeated political talking points of the far left that if you picked up a simple history book would be proven false.”
Your answer to my question will demonstrate you are both wrong and offensive when attempting to label anyone you disagree with as parroting far left positions sir.
So sono, not everyone who is a veteran knows. Only people who agree with you “know”?
Who is parroting far left points of view?
I posted the wrong link about Dukakis, the one I was thinking of was his executive order 242 that basically made Massachusetts the best first strike target for a Soviet nuke by neutering any Massachusetts effort to prepare for a nuclear attack thus insuring that a strike on us here would result in the greatest number of casualties! (It was written by John F’n Kerry BTW)
I always wondered what plans he had back then to evacuate himself while watching 10’s of thousands more die because of that order?
This is really bringing up some bad memories for me…
Oh Boy! New Trolls.
Uplander – I know you are not talking about me!
Point of task is ineffectual protestations of the world.
Nothing to see here, move along
That wasn’t your point which I referred to as a strawman. That’s a new point you’re raising. Again, grow up.
That’s the strawman. You see son, nobody made this point that you blood-thirsty rightwingers are the problem and NOT the rest of the evil in the world. You made up this issue to get your nonsensical rant off of your chest. You may as well be arguing to a person made of straw or Harvey the Rabbit. You made up the argument to engage in the blog version of “hearing yourself talk”. It’s typing masterbation.
Rightwingers are blood-thirsty war hawks, but that doesn’t discount the rest of the evil in the world. I explicitly said that we should engage North Korea militarily if it attacked an American interest. I would not attack them because they are trying to get the same military capabilities as India and Pakistan. They aren’t irrational jihidists, and would never launch one at us insuring mutual annihilation. Iran is clearly a different story. You are dreaming of some movie-like scenario where NK sells a nuclear warhead to Iran without any intelligence discovering it, and without Iran having the capability to launch it. Iran is a seperate issue, and again not the point of your original response to me
In response to others, I don’t give a dang what oppressive regime the North Korean people are living under. If they want their freedom they need to overthrow their government. I sure as hell don’t want American blood spent to “liberate” them. Unless Kim attacks an ally or other U.S. interest, I could give a crap what he does.
The problem with the libs is an inability to confront evil. If the theory above doesn’t work, what’s their plan B?
Meanwhile, in the real world, those of us who realize that evil will not be destroyed by eliminating the tools it uses, are in favor of “peace through strength.”
Bozo the VP said the “One” would be tested. So far the “One” is failing World Politics 101. Too bad you don’t get a chance to re-take the course if you fail!
We can dream but let’s be realistic. You’ll always have someone stashing away nuclear weapons, in hiding, regardless of how many U.N. resolutions and treaties are signed. History shows us that that will be be true. People around the world haven’t changed, regardless of the “peace” and “love”, dreamers want. Bioweapons too.
I
I should add AND Israel.
As far as I recall, North Korea purchased the materials and technologies from other countries. It would be nice to know which ones.
Sorry to say they got the technology from China who got it from us when Bubba moved tech transfer oversight from ‘State’ to ‘Commerce’.
Not one other thing that has been tried for the last 60 years has worked. You suggestion?
Mine? cut them off completely and let them die through civil war or by attacking south korea.
undersiege…
I now know why you have that sign on name. The voices in your head pick on you regularly or what?
Sad little man you are. Sad…..
That’s boring. Your inability to admit to your initial strawman and general “spin” is fascinating on a psychological level. If you’d rather lobby petty insults than admit your errors in substance, I’ll move on, and be entertained by your post battles with others. For the last time, grow up. Bye.
I’d rather they not have a nuke simply because I’d like to see less countries with nuclear capabilities. Accidents happen, and who knows what suicidal crazies may get button access way in the future. If they had a nuke under Kim, I certainly don’t think they’d use it, but rather would enjoy being a “bigshot” like us, India, Israel, Pakistan, China and others.
I’d use economic sanctions and diplomacy, but I wouldn’t cut them off to the extent that they’d invade SK. If they eventually got a nuke, oh well, I certainly think Pakistan and Israel would use their nukes before NK ever would. However, I don’t think anyone would ever launch a nuke, except for jihadist minded regimes like Iran or the like. For the last time; I’d only attack NK if it attacked an ally, property, or interest of ours. Period.
Would it be preferable to remain defenseless when North Korea and Iran ignore any worldwide treaty to rid ourselves of nuclear weapons? But perhaps one would rather believe Kim Jong-il than the U.S., South Korea, and Japan when he says this was a perfectly innocent satellite launch.
Seven. Minutes.
***
Interesting. I entered the following phrase into Google’s search engine:
and I received just two results—
a link to this page, and a link to a page from the Korean Development Institute.
Reduction and elimination are two different things. Bush intended to reduce. Obama intends to eliminate. Jong-il scoffs at Obama’s intentions.
***
Since we’re playing “Name That World Leader,” here’s my submission:
Later in the article:
Our country is trying to wipe the slate clean while other countries are filling in the slate’s empty spaces. We whip out the eraser, they whip out the chalk. I’d rather we keep our writing up there as long as others have their own words to inscribe.
BTW, NK already has nuke capability. For the purpopses of this thread, we’re talking about expanded capabilities, and the ability to reach as many nations as possible via launch.
Well the answer to my question that you don’t seem to want to answer is George w. Bush. Just wondering if he is also a far left wing nut sono?
“That’s boring.”
I’m 100% sure that I can not compete with the many other more exciting voices in your head under….
The UN officaly stated it will do..
NOTHING!!!
Thats right, the UN re-affirms its uselessness.
And proves again why we have to keep nukes no matter what the far left wackos say.
Again, you have no substance, and a complete inability to admit when you’re wrong. You’re fascinating, but your insults are boring. I know insults work best when the facts betray you. But freshen up your material, will ya?
LMAO
Which has failed completely since 1955.
I just watched Chris Wallace interview David Axelrod. He asked Axelrod what should be done about the launching of that missle by North Korea. Axelrod’s (non)answer was, “The better question would be, why do they want to alienate themselves from the rest of the world?” Once in a while, I do indulge in screaming at the TV. This was one of those times. David Axelrod is just about the slimiest crapweasel alive today. He fidgeted, he swallowed constantly, he averted his eyes, and he said more “uh’s” than Obama at a town hall meeting without his beloved TP. Believe it or not, that was the first time I had heard an interview with Axelrod and I pray I don’t have to go through that again. I just felt I needed to at least see what he is about. I can tell you, he is as dishonest and disgusting a human being as I have seen. One minute they are talking about the nuclear threat from NK and Iran, and in the next breath he is pushing Obama’s agenda to get rid of our nuclear arsenal. Sorry I am so worked up, but I have just looked evil smack dab in the face and I am scared.
AS CO2 Producer accurately stated, the other countries in the world are INCREASING thier nuculear capability while obam the clueless wants to disarm us. A suicidal plan.
what nk, iran, pakistan, china, prove is that the u.n. is a totally feckless bunch of gasbags spending opm and dining at elaine’s. they can’t enforce law and order on baby doc in jamaica, or mugabe in africa, or khomeni and achmadinajad in iran or kim jong in nk. they are a monumental waste of time and money, our money primarily, and have only one enforcement mechanism, get america to go fight the bad guys wherever they are. let’s blow this ballast, before more american’s die in some flea ridden hellhole to seperate two tribal chieftains.
My sentiments EXACTLY! It is not that we WON’T use them, it is that we COULD use them and therefore they are a deterent. And yes, if we give up our nukes, we are sitting ducks.
With all due respect, you are terribly naive!! So many people in the world HATE the U.S., in spite of all the good we have done in our history. If we leave ourselves defenseless, we WILL be destroyed.
undresiege: The usa has been trying to deal with North Korea peacefully since 1955. Nobody seems to know what to do with these wackos. While we do nothing but talk in circles with irrational leaders, the North Koreas sink deeper and deeper into hell. Talking is great, if the other side actualy believes in the talks. Hell North Korea is the reason why I knew Talks with the nutcase saddam would fail. The UN isn’t going to back up its talking. So as long as the leaders of said countries don’t give a damn about thier people, they can ignore the UN forever. That was true in Iraq and insanely so in North Korea. They have literal watched thier own population starve to death rather than comply.
How do you deal with that level of insanity? In the end it comes down to arms. Now is better than when they have nukes.
Believe me, I am not happy about that because I would be sent to this war. I am not excited by that prospect AT ALL.
I prefer than the North Koreans take care of this themselves.
For those “wishing” for the elimination of nuclear weapons, here a a hytorical fact. If you look at the history of war on this planet over time the number of deaths by war from the beginning of recorded time rises steadily.
The pattern is unbroken, deaths rise steadily, each period of time worse than the next. WWI was thought to be the war that ended all war, bcause of the amount of carnage. WWII was t
three times bloodier.
After 1945 deaths from war have on a relative scale plummeted due to the threat of nukes. Nukes deter desposts and people like Obama are too STUPID to underastand that. Notice there is no push for nuclear weapons in the Western Hemisphere because of the Kennedy Doctrine (look it up).
When it comes to nukes we should be the world’s policeman. We are a superpower and a force for moral good in his world. Who better to have the power to deter nations like North Korea?
When the Obama fraud called the launch “provocative” I’m sure the North Koreans were so afraid they immediately canceled both their missile AND their nuclear programs!
How pathetic. Obama has notified the entire world that the USSA will do nothing to stop our enemies.
Thank you for articulating the policy that has been tried for the last 30 years and failed miserably. Option 2 is what?
If the North Korean government is involved in printing fake U.S. money that is reason enough to wipe them out.
Scenario…2011. The U.S. has disarmed all their nuclear weapons and the rest of the world has “followed suit”. Iran and North Korea has “promised” they will no longer seek weapons of mass destruction. All is calm. All is bright. We have U.N. inspectors who are dedicated to going in to Iran, NK and other countries and inspect any facilities that could possibly be used to make weapons of mass destruction. They continually receive clean bills of health. Unfortunately, there are numerous corrupt members of those inspection groups who are more than happy to take money under the table in return for closing their eyes to certain suspicious activity. Move ahead to the year 2015. President Palin is trying desperately to find out who the corruptocrats are at the U.N. because our intelligence shows Iran is acting incredibly suspicious and has been meeting with NK on a regular basis. According to the U.N., nothing to see there…move along. February 2016. 6 million southern Californians are wiped out by a “mysterious” bacterial agent which was most likely snuck into our country over the Mexican border, which was completely opened to all illegal immigration, by order of President Barack Hussein Obama in 2011 and unanimously approved by Congress (in the dead of night), with all republicans opposing. The mysterious bacteria slowly moves across the country, killing everyone except those who, for some strange reason, had an immunity. Strangely, those who were immune were all liberals. Every single one of them. Move ahead to the year 2050. A space ship lands on the White House lawn and more humanoids debark and enter the White House, greeted by President Barack Hussein Obama III. These humanoids are from the Mother planet where the other liberals had originated and landed in Roswell, New Mexico back in the 1940’s. These humanoids have evolved on their own planet over centuries, to be immune to all bacterial disease. However, they never evolved any common sense and are incredibly stupid. Unfortunately, there is no one else residing in the country, and therefore stupidity reigns in the U.S., as there is no one left with any intelligence to fight them. Move forward to the year 2079. The entire plantet is covered with a giant icecap, the result of the policies set forth by Al Gore III which did not allow any warming anywhere. The. END.
Option 2 is they get more nukes, and will be treated like a pariah while under the Kim regime. We ain’t spillin American blood because Kim has nukes.
Again:
Undresiege has repeatedly stated
Yer funny, you happy, aggravated lil’ scrapper you.
You are right back to square one, but now they have nukes. Now they can make the same threats under Option One but now they have nukes. Not good. Better find Option 3.
But that ass didn’t talk.
I have no doubt the Russians and Chinese are all for the Western world disarming (because they never will–even if they said they did). Ever since this joke of a president took office Putin and his hand puppet must be laughing themselves silly.
Again:
They aren’t a suicidal people over in North Korea Fly. They won’t use them. They just want to compare (blank) sizes with China as some point, and generally flex ego in the nuke club.
Countries that would use nukes(In Order):
Iran(if they had them)
Pakistan(if a jihadist took over)
Israel(because they can be over the top brutal, and they know Big Brother America will defend them no matter what they do, and rightly or wrongly they’re paranoid over there.
Didn’t have a teleprompter either…
So you said that about Israel right after you said that Iran would use nukes if they had them, which they will soon. Did you forget that they hate Israel and want them all destroyed? What is paranoid about Israel wanting to defend their nation against Iran and their nukes? I really want a rational answer this time, if possible.
Underseige,
You are assuming two things; they will not use them using an unconventional delivery means and they won’t sell one or more for cash to keep their regime afloat. They will sell anything. The have a history of it.
And they are brutal, as well as hating us. You might want to read the history of the Korean War. The North Korean Communists are a unique group. Other than the Iranians who are religious nut case zealots there is no nation on the planet I can think of that is more of a nuclear threat than North Korea.
Lumping them in with the rest of your list is not recommended.
P.S. I always find it interesting to see people be so sanctimoneous about Israel. They live in an area as small as New Jersey with they backs to the sea, no friendly border of any kind, surrounded by ten of millions of people who want them dead and two generations ago 6 million of them (90% of all European Jews) were systematically rounded up and butchered, men, women, kids; it did not matter. And who tried to stop them being led to the incinerators. NOBODY!
You call it paranoid. Easy for you to utterly ignore all of the above. They have every reason to be beligerant as hell and armed to the teeth. I sure would be. As I have posted before they have every reason to turn Gaza into a lifeless smoking hole. Our giving the Palestinians $900 million to rebild is beyond stupid. They celebrated in the streets on 9/11 as 3,000 Americans burned alive or crashed into buildings.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
and the belegerent friend of my enemy still needs to be watched carefully, action as required…
I did call Israel paranoid. Before that I said, rightly or wrongly. I understand the logistics and the fact that they are surrounded by people that hate them. All that you type about, flows into my point that I believe that they are the second-most likely country to use nukes.(Though we’d likely successfully beg them from launching) Plus, they know that we’ll defend them as the big brother. I’m not slamming them, and the fact of the matter is, they are paranoid. This paranoia makes them a candidate to use nukes in my mind. Paranoid isn’t an insult in this context.
Regarding NK, we’ll agree to disagree. Thanks for a civil discussion. I’m signing off. Have a good week.
Undersiege,
I see you havesigned off, but I leave you with this. Following is the formal definition of paranoia:
1. a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others, sometimes progressing to disturbances of consciousness and aggressive acts believed to be performed in self-defense or as a mission.
2. baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.
In what respect does anyone find the threats to Israel baseless or delusional?
How anyone can believe they are is beyond me. I guess if you are a Holucost denier…..
Okay guys those who point out that the nuke is a useless weapon, to your mindset, yes, to others no.
In the Russian Military the use of tactical nuclear weapons up to 15kt range are part of standard Tradoc for a number of scenerio’s. And launch athourity is given to local commanders in said events. Now this isn’t a “massive wall of bombers” spoted, but more of a tanks are crossing a river, or we happen to have noticed a large concentration of the enemy. China’s tradoc permantly assigns 1/4th of its rockets to hit the US should we do anything to piss them off or intervean in Taiwan.
And with various ATBM System in Western and Eastern armed forces the pitiful numbers of nukes now in service, as well as age of sercive would mean less than half of our nukes would even hit the target sector.
Furter more using nukes WILL NOT I REPEAR WILL NOT KILL THE WORLD. No thats 1960’s Hippies crap. Most nukes have less of a radioactive shelf life and spread than that of a reactor, for instance common view holds it that if a city is nuke it can’t be lived in till 100’s of years later, wrong Okinawa and Japan were reoccupied with in 7 years and keep in mind these were “dirty” bombs for that time, a modern day H-bomb if ever used could hinder an area for as little as a few weeks to two years.
Meanwhile the Neutron bomb in China’s Invatory can leave an area lifeless for 50 years. And thats the deadliest of nukes. The arn’t a “OMG WE ALL GONNA DIE!” Weapons, there arn’t that many and as I states alot of technology is making those deployment systems obsolete, so in the event of a major war you can’t count on them.
It depends on the usage, also given the imporvements on warhead blast focusing, and quidance many nukes of modern types actully have less of a spread and are more accurate. The Nuke can not be placed back in the bottle, the ability to build one is now 60 years old, its out. I have no love for the ICBM City busting 20 Megaton weapons, but I have no problem with the low yield tactical weapons.
Heck you have convential weapons stronger than those, and if we are getting rid of our nukes we better damn well build up our convential forces. People are stuck into this “peace” once the fear of the nuke, or it its self is gone the door to convential conflict will be open once more, and the western countries with its socialized peoples will be at the Mercy of the Eastern Powers. Make no mistake the US is not the strongest military nation on this planet, and if it is thats not saying much, only about 1000 missiles keep us safe. The two million men in our armed forces simply CAN NOT protect the United States and its allies and all of its terrotory should the nukes go and opean warfare is allowed once more.
And the Obama response is….blah, blah, blah…. blah, blah….yada, yada, yada.
The N Koreans don’t give a rat’s arse about your or anyone else’s “opinion”. They know you’re all show, no go.
Okinawa and Hiroshima *blah so many typos. Point is the nuke is not a useless weapon as it has been used and the MOAB and an MLRS battery can unleash the same level of death and destruction, and in my opinion nukes are the least of our worries, billion must be placed into building them, the delivery systems and the Silo’s and Subs to launch them and to maintane them. Chemical and Biological weapons are far cheap and primitive versions of them can be built with household cleaning supplies. And there after effects last vary longer than even the deadlist of nukes.
As President Bush inherited Kim Jong-il from the Clinton administration – many of whom now overly populates the Obama administration (Hello, Susan Rice!) and were undeniably failures in defusing Jong-il – so it’s only fair that N. Korea be passed back onto the Democrats.
It’ll be interesting and very telling, to see how team Obama handles Jong-il this go round, and it may well determine if whether or not the Democrat Party will forever be known as weak on defense.
Why didn’t we just shoot the thing down when it cleared North Korean airspace?
The first thing Reagan would have done is park the carrier task force of the USS Kick Your Ass off the coast of South Korea.
is call them evil, tripled our defense budget to show how “bada$$” we are, and nothing beyond that. This is the same Ronald Reagan who refused to avenge the deaths of 241 marines. Let’s not reinvent history in regards to Ronald Reagan.
Don’t forget cut taxes and double the revenue to the governement. Ah, but then the Democrat will spend three times the amount of money…
I’m talking about Reagan and National Security. What in the heck makes you think Reagan would make a military move against the North Koreans when outright refused to go to avenge our 241. Yeah, later in life he said; “That was my biggest mistake”, but talk is cheap years after the fact. REGARDING THIS ISSUE, A President Reagan would call Kim evil, make a mean face, spend more on our military, and then do nothing to stop Kim from getting more nukes. Of course once Kim got more nukes, Reagan’s strategy would be to engage in a (blank) size contest for years in the hopes of bankrupting North Korea. There’s no way in hell Reagan would move militarily against NK. His records speaks for itself. 241 brave and strong would likely agree.
I’m trying to figure out where undresiege makes the connection between the number 241, Reagan, and North Korea.
I know that there were 241 Marines killed in Beruit by islamic terrorists in 1983 – but there was utterly no connection between that and North Korea. As far as a lack of response, it was the democrat-controlled congress that demanded that Reagan didn’t respond. Reagan actually did respond, but the response was toned down because he still needed the democrat congress to at least not torpedo his efforts at defeating the Soviet Union.
There’s every reason to believe that Reagan would move against North Korea – just ask Muammar Gaddafi!
Past behavior gives clues of future or hypothetical behavior. You and Kaos are trying to opine that the man who refused to use force to go after the terrorists that killed 241 of our marines would use a show of force against NK for launching a test missle. No way Jose.
Gaddafi was an apple to the NK orange because he was one man who orchestrated terrorist acts that killed Americans and took credit for it. So we bombed his house.
It’s really weak to blame Congress when Reagan was the Commander in Chief. Do you in turn want to credit Congress with the raids on Gaddafi? I doubt you would. President Reagan as the leader of the free world, should have authorized force, and wage war if necessary after those Islamic terrorists. If the weaklings in Congress wouldn’t back him up, eff em.
If he was man enough later in life to admit to his errors and failings, his supporters should be man/woman enough to do the same.
Again:
Sorry undresiege, but Reagan never refused to use force to go after the terrorists who blew up the Marine barracks in Beruit. The democrat congress refused – Reagan didn’t. Don’t project things from the democrat congress onto President Reagan.
I served under Reagan so I have a much better understanding of what Reagan would and wouldn’t do. You can’t even get right what Reagan did in response to the terrorist attack in Germany from Libya.
If you want something really weak, then you should continue your postings about how incompetent and ineffective President Reagan was.
Regarding this issue: Reagan would have directly challenged North Korea and shot down their missile. North Korea is NOT the Soviet Union and Reagan would not have treated them as such. His record did speak for itself – it’s too bad that you try to spin his real record into a bunch of liberal revisionist nonsense.
So, and apparently not.
He didn’t NEED congress. I can’t believe you fail to understand that.
Based on the garbage you’re spewing he wouldn’t unless the Democratically controlled Congress authorized it. Guess what dude, they wouldn’t. As much as you want it, you can’t have it both ways.
With your twisted logic, you’re trying to opine that Reagan would risk war with NK by shooting down their “test missile” though nothing was hit and nobody died, with or without congressional approval. However, he wouldn’t avenge the deaths of 241 Americans because congress wouldn’t grant approvel. Get real. You’re in LaLa land. You can’t have it both ways, though you’d like to in “protecting” your hero.
He was on this issue. WHY IS IT REAGAN CAN ADMIT HE MADE A MISTAKE, BUT YOU CAN’T SEEM TO ADMIT HE MADE A MISTAKE? DO YOU KNOW REAGAN BETTER THAN HE KNEW HIMSELF? DO YOU HAVE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HIMSELF THAT RONALD FREAKEN REAGAN WASN’T PRIVY TOO?
We can agree on that.
undresiege:
Apparently yes. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Yes, and Apollo 18, 19, and 20 were launched on schedule and landed on the moon also. Just because you don’t have any idea of how things worked – and even less of an idea on how Reagan was fighting a much larger war doesn’t mean that I share your lack of understanding.
No garbage from me, and I’m not the one now trying to have it both ways. Your complete lack of understanding of the larger context at the time in apparent.
That’s not what I said. Why don’t you make an effort to actually read what I posted and then respond to that?
Judging by your posts you seem to believe that history is a series of small unconnected incidents that have no place within a larger context. Thus because President Reagan didn’t personally grab a gun and go off avenging the deaths himself he was a coward rather than someone who was fighting a much larger war. Talk about someone who needs to get real and not reside in lala land!
Why is it that you can’t see the larger context of the Cold War? I’m reminded of Winston Churchill, who knew that German bombers were going to attack a certain English city on a certain date, at a certain time – and he allowed the attack to take place without doing anything to stop it because he knew if he alerted the population of anything else then the Germans would know the British had broken their military codes (Ultra).
Heck, if it hadn’t been for Jimmy Carter, there would have been no terrorist organization to bomb the barracks in the first place!!
We just disagree on what that record was.
In less than 24 hours your desire to defend Ronald “Messiah” Reagan has caused you to look rather desperate. First, you were saying Congress prevented Reagan from going after the terrorists responsible for the attack in Beirut.
Now re-read post 185 where you actually give reasons for Reagan’s lack of response and give an example of Churchill during WW2. BTW, the example has nothing to do with a failure to seek out those responsible for the Beirut bombings and bring them to justice. You’re comparing apples and lettuce. You can’t figure out what excuse you want to make, so you make and all excuses.
It was a mistake not to boldly respond and seek justice through military force.
The lack of response emboldened islamic jihadists, period, end of discussion.