Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Is it me, or is the world getting more scary since Barry took office? Barry is a "Photo-Op" Prez, no one is afraid of him..... Except the banks and car companys

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98D25Q80&show-article=1

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,521617,00.html

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Is it me, or

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Wait - it's MORE scary now that N. Korea claims to have exploded a nuclear weapon, which they also claimed to have done under the previous administration? How is the knowledge that they now still have what we knew they had years ago making things MORE scary?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
One day we're railing AGAINST the UN, calling for it to be abolished - or at the very least, for the U.S. to get out of it - and the next we're saying that every other nation (the operative word being "other") should do as the UN says.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
In other words, you won't answer the question.

It should come to no surprise that no one will care about the UN Resolutions, since obviously no one cared about them in 2003. It took two nations acting pretty much independently to do enforce resolutions that the UN should have been enforcing, because no one else cared. North Korea knows this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
One day we're railing AGAINST the UN, calling for it to be abolished - or at the very least, for the U.S. to get out of it - and the next we're saying that every other nation (the operative word being "other") should do as the UN says.

---

As Tonto once said, "What you mean WE, white man?"



"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
In other words, you won't answer the question either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, and I thought we were all about that whole "coalition of the willing" bullshit. Are you now saying that that was a sham? You state that two nations "independently" did it, because no one else cared. Have you forgotten Poland? You forgot Poland!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
We threatened them, blatantly and with malice aforethought, and very publicly.

They pull out a really huge gun and show us it's loaded.

And then we have the NERVE to whine ?

Please.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
We threatened them, blatantly and with malice aforethought, and very publicly.

They pull out a really huge gun and show us it's loaded.

And then we have the NERVE to whine ?

Please.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

North Korea is the crazy neighbor who gets drunk, goes out in the back yard, and starts firing his really huge gun wildly. Kim Jung Il and his pappy have run their economy so far into the ground that their people are starving in droves, even with massive U.S. and South Korean aid, and the government there has nothing to lose by using a nuke for no reason at all.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

And of course they've never made an aggressive move, aside from invading South Korea, kidnapping its citizens, sending sabotage teams across and around the border on a regular basis, preventing families from knowing if their relatives are dead or alive, etc.


"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Until that day, you are also a rouge nation, and should be treated as such.

---

Quote:

---

But less inventive - us americans, we can BUILD some shit, when we try, and we're the best farmers on the planet - maybe if we spent those talents on life instead of death, building solutions instead of weapons, we'd undercut many of the true causes underneath all this violence.

But of course, that requires a social, mental and emotional maturity we neither have, nor are likely to develop with a society wholly built around it's prevention.

At it's end, this is STILL "have bigger club, take your stuff!" - just on a national, rather than personal scale, and we can do better, we OUGHT to do better.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Quote:

---

Until that day, you are also a rouge nation, and should be treated as such.

---

Well, other than maybe San Francisco, I doubt we'd qualify as a rouge nation, or maybe you were thinking France ?

Rogue nation though, that one I'll give ya.

And if you wanna go stupid analogies, in this case America is the nutty militia guy with the HUGE arsenal in his basement whining about some guy way down the block daring to own a .38SPL revolver.

As far as M-A-D and other idiocy goes, the only country with enough maturity and balls to cast aside it's nuclear arsenal and be done with the whole bone brained idiocy... is Canada.

Of course, being a Michigander, I am very well acquainted with the fact that as a people and country, they're both more mature and well behaved than we are.

But less inventive - us americans, we can BUILD some shit, when we try, and we're the best farmers on the planet - maybe if we spent those talents on life instead of death, building solutions instead of weapons, we'd undercut many of the true causes underneath all this violence.

But of course, that requires a social, mental and emotional maturity we neither have, nor are likely to develop with a society wholly built around it's prevention.

At it's end, this is STILL "have bigger club, take your stuff!" - just on a national, rather than personal scale, and we can do better, we OUGHT to do better.

But try telling the cave trolls this...

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

But less inventive - us americans, we can BUILD some shit, when we try, and we're the best farmers on the planet - maybe if we spent those talents on life instead of death, building solutions instead of weapons, we'd undercut many of the true causes underneath all this violence.

But of course, that requires a social, mental and emotional maturity we neither have, nor are likely to develop with a society wholly built around it's prevention.

At it's end, this is STILL "have bigger club, take your stuff!" - just on a national, rather than personal scale, and we can do better, we OUGHT to do better.

---

And the sad fact is, no matter what we invent, no matter how far our technology takes us, there's always that wanker at the Pentagon whose very first question will be, "How can we weaponize this?"

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Sounds like American foreign policy...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
And if you wanna go stupid analogies, in this case America is the nutty militia guy with the HUGE arsenal in his basement whining about some guy way down the block daring to own a .38SPL revolver.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Although the Russians and Chinese are still calling for talks with North Korea, they may be getting a little nervious about such a wild-card state.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
As far as M-A-D and other idiocy goes, the only country with enough maturity and balls to cast aside it's nuclear arsenal and be done with the whole bone brained idiocy... is Canada.

Of course, being a Michigander, I am very well acquainted with the fact that as a people and country, they're both more mature and well behaved than we are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Sounds like American foreign policy...

---

Could be. Does that make a nuclear-armed North Korea any less dangerous? They have less ability to project diplomatic or economic pressure, so they're more likely than the U.S. to go directly to intimidation and blunt force. They've used both before(Before you bust a gut, yes, so has the U.S., but that's really not the issue here). They don't care if large portions of their population die, since they've been starving them to death for years.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
As far as M-A-D and other idiocy goes, the only country with enough maturity and balls to cast aside it's nuclear arsenal and be done with the whole bone brained idiocy... is Canada.

Of course, being a Michigander, I am very well acquainted with the fact that as a people and country, they're both more mature and well behaved than we are.

---

I think this is solely due to the fact that they are parasites by nature. I don't spite Canadians for this at all. They're the little brother of the big bully. They may not have the huge military, the huge federal defect, the huge platform of hypocrisy (telling the whole world how to act while not following those rules themselves), but they do have the benefit of living right next door to Big Scary Brother.

I really think Canada would be a much different nation if we were not here, or even THAT much different if we were a hostile force against them (think Isreal/Pakistan).

Bottom line... you're lucky to be a Canadian today, eh?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

---

Quote:

---

What would you do about them, Frem?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

The point I was making is either international law, and UN mandates are fair, applied equally and are not ignored by anyone, or they simply cannot be applied at all. In other threads particularly those dealing with the Iraq war, much has been said about having to enforce international law, and the weakness of the UN not being able to do it.

As for Korea, President Roh Moo-hyun's sunshine policy of engagement was likely to bear some fruit down the line, and the deal Clinton had made was working to some degree.

Direct confrontation with North Korea has always only resulted in them getting their backs up, the more bluster and attack in the media ( axis of evil, etc ) the less they will listen to anyone.

Without an external threat, I think North Korea would eventually have the change everyone seems to desire, they cannot afford to maintain their forces and or their economic output the way they have, war at this point ( even with nukes ) is unwinable.

Kim will eventually die, the way to end this is to try to generate to conditions where a more moderate government could succeed him. Rattling sabres and making threats will not do that.

Containment, then engagement. And the South Koreans and the Chinese have to lead the way there, the US doesn't have enough credibility to achieve anything in the way directly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

North Korea is the crazy neighbor who gets drunk, goes out in the back yard, and starts firing his really huge gun wildly. Kim Jung Il and his pappy have run their economy so far into the ground...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
And if you wanna go stupid analogies, in this case America is the nutty militia guy with the HUGE arsenal in his basement whining about some guy way down the block daring to own a .38SPL revolver.

---

Sorry. Crying "But America does it.", no matter how true or false, doesn't give North Korea a free pass.

What would you do about them, Frem?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Secondly, I would quit denying reality and encourage responsible development in that area, now that folks know they have the capability, fine, dandy, let em know the point is made and THEN point out how much more benefit that material would be as a power plant instead of national dick-waving...

---

Quote:

---

Offer support and trade with other nations in proportional exchange for cutting some civil rights slack to his people...

---

Quote:

---

Do a little history research into how our original trade "negotiations" have gone off with them, and how we acted about it, and you'll find they got a fairly legit beef about our own behavior as regards the matter, and feeding their paranoia about our intentions is a damn stupid thing to do when you take that into account.

---

Quote:

---

Posted by Geezer:


I have done such research and find that every agreement North Korea has made they've broken, every treaty they've signed they repudiated, and none of the promises they've made have ever been kept.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
If you stop POKING the puffer-fish, eventually it deflates, yanno.
Cause that's seriously what this guy and his policies put me to mind of, trying to appear bigger and scarier so him and his country don't get swallowed up by a bigger fish, is all.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
I actually have a friend who's Muslim, and she's normal. Her family fled Iraq when Saddam Hussein came into power.

You can't just send back all middle-easterners or Muslims, because they're different tribes and religious sects (Muslims) or religions (Jewish and Islam) that want to kill each other.

That would work about as well as the way we (America, France, England, and Russia) divided up the Middle East after the World Wars. Which is to say, we didn't respect tribal boundaries (which we promised we would), which caused a whole hell of a lot of friction, and THEN we went and tried to impose our sovereignty over them to keep the peace. So sending back all our refugees would just end up with a lot more conflict and a lot of dead refugees.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
I actually have a friend who's Muslim, and she's normal. Her family fled Iraq when Saddam Hussein came into power.

You can't just send back all middle-easterners or Muslims, because they're different tribes and religious sects (Muslims) or religions (Jewish and Islam) that want to kill each other.

That would work about as well as the way we (America, France, England, and Russia) divided up the Middle East after the World Wars. Which is to say, we didn't respect tribal boundaries (which we promised we would), which caused a whole hell of a lot of friction, and THEN we went and tried to impose our sovereignty over them to keep the peace. So sending back all our refugees would just end up with a lot more conflict and a lot of dead refugees.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Hmm, apparently you missed the incidents I was referring to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Sherman_incident
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_expedition_to_Korea_(1871)

A very inauspicious beginning to our relationship with them, and a history built on that and other such jackassery leads them not to trust us very much.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Let me get this straight. You're advocating extraditing people, many of them innocents, in what will basically amount to a death sentence... because things would be more convenient for you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Oh, and Jack ?
You'll find me firmly against you on that one, and you might wanna mentally chew over what that is - just sayin.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Let me get this straight. You're advocating extraditing people, many of them innocents, in what will basically amount to a death sentence... because things would be more convenient for you.

---

Quote:

---

Their very presence here gives the Government the convenient excuse to put cameras up everywhere, illegally wiretap us, illegally detain us indefinitely, and instills a fear in a majority of easily manipulated sheeple in America to allow this all to happen for their "safety".

---

Quote:

---

People will understand this way of thinking more if these people ever really do start bombing schools and malls. One of two things is going to happen then.... The first is the Government will lock down everything from the internet to the time your allowed to walk the streets at night. The second being that there will be a whole lot of dead innocent people right here on our soil when people start really losing faith in our Government to do anything about the problem and start taking measures in their own hands.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So your "solution" it to just blindly knuckle under to the government and go with whatever they say is easiest, right? Let me guess, they actually sold you on it with that "it's for your own good" line of bullshit.

---

I have no idea what your talking about here man. There's no way our government today would ever propose any solutions I've suggested. Look around you.... Is even FOX news and that dipshit O'Rielly or even the pill popping Rush so bold as to say these things?

If Imus can't get away with a "nappy-headed-ho" comment, surely suggesting what I am would be a career ending move, politically or otherwise.

So.... you gotta be kidding me.

Quote:

---

And who are these "sheeple" you speak of who are cowering under their beds right now? I mean, besides AuRaptor, I really haven't ever seen anyone who's as terrified of muslims as you seem to think they are.

---

I mentioned "sheeple" and people who cower under their own beds separately. There are many sheep who leave the bedroom and pretend that it isn't happening and there are sheeple who are oblivious to it happening too. Though the Rethugs have the lock primarily on the hiding-under-the-bed type, the Demons have plenty of sheepish tenancies as well.... but that's another post all to itself.

Quote:

---

Also, how do you weed them out? Do you just walk up and ask them if they're muslim? Do you round up anyone who isn't white? Do you patrol the mosques? Do you serve pork and detain anyone who refuses it?

---

There is no weeding out. Did I even mention Muslims or the Muslim faith one single time? I said ALL of them... Christians too.

But I'm not going to say anymore about that. I do offer my condolences to them when the innocents have to suffer for the actions of the extremists.

Don't worry... because this is a suggestion that would never come to life in the real world. The government would have far too much to lose by imposing it. The people would have to do it themselves, but to think it or dare suggest it results in a lot of hatered and misunderstanding coming from the other side (and I know that I've crossed the line into extreme "insanity" as based in the real world when Frem is in 100% disagreement with something I say).

I just don't want to see that bloodshed that will inevitably happen when another few smaller "somethings" happen. We'll probably never see something the scale of 9/11 again, at least not in the second wave, but the message delivered will be of tenfold strength next time. These people are not stupid and, having a diploma in social engineering myself, I know a little bit about getting close enough to somebody to get them to think that they're doing what they want to do when they're really doing what you want them to do.

My suggestions are to avoid senseless bloodshed on our own soil, on both sides.

The only way to avoid this happening when those tragic events occur is to impose complete Government control as far as their abilities currently allow them to impose it. (And however they can legislate more Constitutional infringements on liberty in the future, particularly when there exists a filibuster-proof Congress).

I don't want to see either of these things happen to us or them. I truly hope that people who read what I say understand that this is all with the bigger picture in mind and what seems like racist behavioral thought patterns are merely a side effect of what I see the solution as.

I don't want to be hated for my view here.

What if I were to suggest we give them a nice chunk of good land (for real this time, and not the way we screwed the indians) until this shit blows over. I don't think I've ever come off as a racist before. I just don't want to see the end result be a lot of mindless bloodshed or worse yet, a Government which rips up the constitution and imposes invasive behavior on a tyrannical scale by micromanaging of our very lives to prevent the bloodshed from occuring.

You got a better suggestion for all of us cupcake?

Quote:

---

I find it ironic that someone who claims to lean libertarian now wants the government to actively take control of who is racially pure enough to live in "your" country. That IS what this amounts to, y'know.

---

All misunderstandings and misconceptions. (See Above)

Quote:

---

Also, your argument that this is necessary because internment camps were evil is specious at best. You recognize that the internment camps were evil, but propose that the LESS evil thing to do would be to go them one better, and just jump right on over to deportation. I'm sure you support back-to-Africa movements for blacks, too, right?

---

You're guilty of making that choice at the very least every 4 years yourself...

How many times has it been suggested to me before and after the fact that Obama was the lesser of two evils, friend?

Are blacks Americans? I told you this isn't about racism. You obviously don't know my past or who I am, so it is wildly unfair for you to even ask me about the back-to-Africa movement in that sarcastic tone.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I know they're a bunch of repressive dickheads, Geeze, my POINT is that we really should quit providing them with an *excuse* for it.

And we should start that by developing a negotiation scheme other than pointing a gun at them and demanding they comply.

---