Obama Admin. Getting Tough w/N. Korea

[dellinger63]

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday the evidence is “overwhelming” that a North Korean submarine sank a South Korean warship and the communist country must face international consequences for its actions.

“The evidence is overwhelming and condemning. The torpedo that sunk the Cheonan and took the lives of 46 South Korean sailors was fired by a North Korean submarine,” she told reporters.

and our plan for consequences

Underscoring the concern, U.S. officials have refused to call the North’s attack on the ship an act of war or state-sponsored terror, warning that an overreaction could cause the Korean peninsula to “explode.” They said they would explore diplomatic steps through the U.N. or increase Washington’s unilateral sanctions against North Korea’s Soviet-style state.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/2...052110.article

OMG not UN sanctions! Kim Jong must be shaking, actually laughing in his boots. Let's really make him suffer and delay the sanctions indefinately!!

[joeydb]

If I had a nickel for every time Democrats said "getting tough" and "sanctions" in the same sentence...

By the way, isn't the use of sanctions (and nothing else) how North Korea got to be a nuclear power in the first place?

Can't wait to see how the Iran sanctions play out. Anybody want to give me odds for a bet on a nuclear Iran?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by joeydb

If I had a nickel for every time Democrats said "getting tough" and "sanctions" in the same sentence...

By the way, isn't the use of sanctions (and nothing else) how North Korea got to be a nuclear power in the first place?

Can't wait to see how the Iran sanctions play out. Anybody want to give me odds for a bet on a nuclear Iran?

I agree with Israel and believe 'that cow has already left the barn'

[hi_im_god]

your criticism is misdirected. s. korea is (appropriately) taking the lead in the response to the sinking of their ship.

do you suggest we bomb n. korea because they sank a s. korean ship? how does that play out for s. korea?

if we aren't going to follow the s. korean lead, what should we do?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

your criticism is misdirected. s. korea is (appropriately) taking the lead in the response to the sinking of their ship.

do you suggest we bomb n. korea because they sank a s. korean ship? how does that play out for s. korea?

if we aren't going to follow the s. korean lead, what should we do?

Have BP start drilling for oil off their shores

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

do you suggest we bomb n. korea because they sank a s. korean ship? how does that play out for s. korea?

if we aren't going to follow the s. korean lead, what should we do?

I don't think we should bomb anyone regarding this. We should have said to the world we have S. Korea's back when they undoubtedly retaliate. Period! F' the U.N.! What are they going to do restrict food imports? The people of N. Korea are brainwashed victims of Jong who could care less about them. Jong individually and/or his military needs to be attacked not the people.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I don't think we should bomb anyone regarding this.

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Jong individually and/or his military needs to be attacked not the people.

Um....

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I don't think we should bomb anyone regarding this. We should have said to the world we have S. Korea's back when they undoubtedly retaliate. Period! F' the U.N.! What are they going to do restrict food imports? The people of N. Korea are brainwashed victims of Jong who could care less about them. Jong individually and/or his military needs to be attacked not the people.

s. korea isn't going to attack the north. the end game for any war on that peninsula is the destruction of seoul followed by the collapse of n. korea.

s. korea couldn't deal with the flood of refugees that come after the n. korean regime is gone even if they weren't dealing with several hundred thousand dead and a ruined economy.

you should be thankful that we have grown ups making the decisions. it's a better world than the one that would exist if people actually did what you suggest.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I don't think we should bomb anyone regarding this. We should have said to the world we have S. Korea's back when they undoubtedly retaliate. Period! F' the U.N.! What are they going to do restrict food imports? The people of N. Korea are brainwashed victims of Jong who could care less about them. Jong individually and/or his military needs to be attacked not the people.

Yes thats exactly what we need is another war front... Then you'll ****ing complain that we are getting deeper in debt.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday the evidence is “overwhelming” that a North Korean submarine sank a South Korean warship and the communist country must face international consequences for its actions.

“The evidence is overwhelming and condemning. The torpedo that sunk the Cheonan and took the lives of 46 South Korean sailors was fired by a North Korean submarine,” she told reporters.

and our plan for consequences

Underscoring the concern, U.S. officials have refused to call the North’s attack on the ship an act of war or state-sponsored terror, warning that an overreaction could cause the Korean peninsula to “explode.” They said they would explore diplomatic steps through the U.N. or increase Washington’s unilateral sanctions against North Korea’s Soviet-style state.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/2...052110.article

OMG not UN sanctions! Kim Jong must be shaking, actually laughing in his boots. Let's really make him suffer and delay the sanctions indefinately!!

Threats Threats Threats. O'Dumbass doesn't have the balls to do anything about North Korea. Just like he doesn't the balls to do anything about the illegals. Im sure if the Governor of Arizona was President there would be some action taken against North Korea. All O'Dumbass wants to do is kiss Calderon's ass while he is degrading this great country of ours.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I agree with Israel and believe 'that cow has already left the barn'

I side with Israel too, and that's one of the many reasons that I vote Republican.

What's interesting is that everyone who proposes sanctions, and only sanctions (this includes some Republicans), knows that they WON'T WORK. Therefore those same individuals are OK with doing nothing, since doing nothing is the functional equivalent of sanctions.

Does anyone think our security is well served by people with this attitude?

[Cannon Shell]

Seriously what can be done about N Korea? The reality is nothing because this has been allowed to fester for so long. Iran is a much bigger problem.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

s. korea isn't going to attack the north. the end game for any war on that peninsula is the destruction of seoul followed by the collapse of n. korea.

s. korea couldn't deal with the flood of refugees that come after the n. korean regime is gone even if they weren't dealing with several hundred thousand dead and a ruined economy.

you should be thankful that we have grown ups making the decisions. it's a better world than the one that would exist if people actually did what you suggest.

sometimes divorce ends that way but needs to be done to end the suffering

get a set!

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Um....

what I expected from you but thank you for at least being consistent.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

what I expected from you but thank you for at least being consistent.

I don't follow. You expect me to point out glaring inconsistencies that you create within single posts?

I guess that's flattering. I have always been a pretty good reader. Thanks!

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I don't follow. You expect me to point out glaring inconsistencies that you create within single posts?

I guess that's flattering. I have always been a pretty good reader. Thanks!

why cause I expect S.Korea to 'man up' and fight knowing we will back them but not directly involve ourselves?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

why cause I expect S.Korea to 'man up' and fight knowing we will back them but not directly involve ourselves?

Well how are we going to back them if not militarily?

With words of support and cheers? Isn't that what you're upset about in the first place in this thread -- just talking and not doing anything?

Or else, we have to back them up militarily, which necessarily involves "bombing" people, which you've started your post by saying we shouldn't do.

So which part of your post do you mean? You quite clearly can't mean both, which is where "Um...." came from in the first place.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

With words of support and cheers? Isn't that what you're upset about in the first place in this thread -- just talking and not doing anything?

.

I'm upset because all our supposed bros., sisters etc. are pussys and need big bro. to save everything! USA as a big bro needs to say go get em! IMO

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I'm upset because all our supposed bros., sisters etc. are pussys and need big bro. to save everything! USA as a big bro needs to say go get em! IMO

Ok, I didn't get anything even remotely close to that sentiment from your original post -- but if that's what you were trying to say, ok then, I have nothing to discuss on that.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Ok, I didn't get anything even remotely close to that sentiment from your original post -- but if that's what you were trying to say, ok then, I have nothing to discuss on that.

BTW IMO same goes for Israel. Nip it in the bud!