# Dangerous Game of Cat and Mouse...



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

it would appear as though Obama is the mouse!  the N. Koreans are looking for a response or some sort of recognition on the international stage from the US. obviously, we are only interested in 6 party talks and any UN resolution is a worthless as toilet paper. so......what happens next?
the N. Koreans will "ratchet up" their actions until they make Obama blink!
and trust me, the dear leader will blink first! he is clueless...... 



> North Korea tests more missiles, lashes out at US
> 
> Talmadge, Associated Press Writer - Tue May 26, 3:56 pm ET
> SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea lashed out Tuesday at the United States and reportedly launched two more short-range missiles even as U.N. Security Council members debated possible new sanctions against the communist nation for its latest nuclear test.
> ...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It's not just North Korea, all of our enemies know we have no guts leading this nation. Were nearly a mirror image of what we were in the 1980's.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

They were pulling this crap 5 years ago too... were we a mirror image then?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

omegax said:


> They were pulling this crap 5 years ago too... were we a mirror image then?


Not to this extent. This mornings news says that North Korea has put more pressure on the United States in the last month than they did the previous eight years of Bush. 
North Korea would never have tried this with Reagan. They pushed Bush a little bit, but they know there is no danger pushing Obama.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

They tested a nuke under Bush. They tested missiles under Bush. Just not in the same week. Besides, testing short range missiles is about the least annoying thing they do. We already knew they have been selling countries SCUDs for years. It's about the only way they make money.

Criticizing Obama for taking the exact same approach as Bush is hypocritical.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I am critical of the past two presidencies and our leaders in washington. This nation in general is getting soft and too worried about being PC and changing the US image over seas. The "american Arrogance" is what they think they are helping to dissolve. They are not. They are showing weakness. Also there are more crazies out there with more technology and won't hesitate to use it.

The US Leadership in all for the past 10 years or so needs to step it up. When Bush went into Iraq was showing some balls. But what did this country do.......start investigations on him, wanted to impeach him, says he had no cause, etc. _ Yes for what he stated the reason why going in WMD's has not been proven._ But it showed these nations we won't sit idle as another counrty won't let UN officials in to do inspections.

But then the follow up of what this nation did put us right back in the image as "soft". The investigations, the media degrading our leader, now with the closing of gitmo, the toreture alligations and investigations, calling our Ineligence agency liars by our elected leaders, etc. Just look at the crap washington (majority of elected officials) has done to undermine this country. They are not backing decisions made by leaders. I could go on and on.

Until this country gets united again these other country's will keep toeing the line and pushing the envelope to see how far they can go. I don't see any stoppage of them for a few years.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Your right Chuck, and Omegax the latest missile North Korea tested was much longer range. They say they are pushing to extend their range to the United States. It's not short range failures anymore. The new tests are much more serious. They also restarted their nuclear program that they had suspended. Nothing hypocritical at all about calling Obama a wimp in comparison to Reagan and Bush.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

They tested long range Taepodong-2 missiles (among others) July 5th, 2006, and they tested a nuclear device October 9th, 2006. So, yes, it is hypocritical to call out Obama for the same reaction Bush had.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

omegax said:


> They tested long range Taepodong-2 missiles (among others) July 5th, 2006, and they tested a nuclear device October 9th, 2006. So, yes, it is hypocritical to call out Obama for the same reaction Bush had.


Well, we will find out shortly if my statement was hypocritical or not. I think they are going to push a lot harder. Also, didn't they stop nuclear material production under Bush? They say they have started up again this week. They are doing a lot more grandstanding I think. Also, their past tests failed with missiles going into the ocean. These didn't fail.

I think the big difference now is their attitude. They appear to be a lot more belligerent. Iran is talking a lot tougher also. Now they are sending war ships into international water today. They say if the U. S. tries to stop their nuclear program they will put an embargo on ships leaving the gulf.


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

N Korea is testing Obama, I guarante they are still afraid of obama but his is a new and relativly unkown and unproven power in the U.S. they want to push his limits and see what they can get away with. Only time will tell how obama handles this we will see I still think is a little bit to early to judge him on this.

President Barack Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak "agreed that the test was a reckless violation of international law that compels action in response," the White House said after the leaders spoke by telephone. They also vowed to "seek and support a strong United Nations Security Council resolution with concrete measures to curtail North Korea's nuclear and missile activities."

I don't see how this is a weak reaction by obama, he is speaking to our proper ally who is in most danger of N Korea and seeking and discussing the best solution to the problem. Now time will tell if obama follows through.

Plainsman wrote:
Your right Chuck, and Omegax the latest missile North Korea tested was much longer range. They say they are pushing to extend their range to the United States. It's not short range failures anymore. The new tests are much more serious. They also restarted their nuclear program that they had suspended. Nothing hypocritical at all about calling Obama a wimp in comparison to Reagan and Bush.

So it is ok to not take this as serious as long as the tests are failures and most likely will only affect our allies in "short range" of N. Korea. It is just as serious either way.

Just a question what more should we be doing that obama is not?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

utahhunter1..... Good post.

I agree it is too early to judge Obama on this issue. But if you look how he let the speaker of the house trash or smear the image of the nations inteligence agency, shut down gitmo, did not defend the interagation tactics that the former president deemed ok, etc. You can see peoples concern.

But yes for what he did by talking to S koren is a good start. But he has to remain strong. But again his track record shows that when it comes to Defense and millitary he is on the soft side. (stated above.)


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> Your right Chuck, and Omegax the latest missile North Korea tested was much longer range. They say they are pushing to extend their range to the United States. It's not short range failures anymore. The new tests are much more serious. They also restarted their nuclear program that they had suspended. Nothing hypocritical at all about calling Obama a wimp in comparison to Reagan and Bush.


and the dear leader has cut the missile defense budget.....when you are blown away and on fire, remember, you can praise the messiah for he led you to the gates of Hell.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

if you are waiting for "concrete results" from the UN, you are either low on expectations or just plain foolish. there hasn't been a resolution passed, all the way back to Saddam Hussein, that any foreign country paid a nickel's worth of attention to......the organization is a joke and all the rogue nations, including China and Russia, don't give a damn about them.

they have never forced anyone to observe any resolution, why would that change now? Obama is a weakling and they know it....keep watching.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

The biggest problem here is that n korea has nothing to lose. If we bomb them they (kim) doesn't care, if we sanction them he doesn't care either. I fail to see what reagan would have different. Khadafi could have been a threat to oil supplies, he was a problem and reagan fixed it. We are stretched too thin to deal with everything right now.

Iran needs to be turned into a parking lot once and for all. Thirty years of their garbage is 29 too many. Either eliminate them or help overthrow them. The best option might just be to let the isrealis loose on them. Iran is just trying to jerk the price of oil up overnight and run our economy down even farther. Just like bin laden, they are trying to destroy us from within


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

H94: I need to give you a reality check about the missile defense "shield". That thing has never worked. NEVER. The only time we've hit an ICBM with another missile, the ICBM was packing a homing beacon to tell the other missile where it was. Maybe down the road we'll get it right, but it's not even remotely close. Even if the missile shield was working perfectly, there are about a billion other ways to deliver a nuke. Its cancellation isn't worth getting bent out of shape over.

Also, the "Dear Leader" thing sounds really goofy in a thread about North Korea...


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

hunter9494 said:


> if you are waiting for "concrete results" from the UN, you are either low on expectations or just plain foolish. there hasn't been a resolution passed, all the way back to Saddam Hussein, that any foreign country paid a nickel's worth of attention to......the organization is a joke and all the rogue nations, including China and Russia, don't give a damn about them.
> 
> they have never forced anyone to observe any resolution, why would that change now? Obama is a weakling and they know it....keep watching.


hunter9494 you are vary quick with your obama is a weakling, u.n. is a joke were going to be blow away now and lead to the gates of hell because of obama and the u.n. statements like that are premature and in my opinion out of line so early on when there is no easy solution . we could bomb the crap out of them but would end up killing huge amounts of inocent represed people because their leader is nothing but the reversed end of a donkey or we could send in ground troops and that would cut down on inocent casualties but then we will be in another iraq . can we afford that right now? . there is no easy answer. So what is your 100% sure fire save all no more problem solution to this?? You should probably have a pretty good plan to solve this to back statements like that.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Obama is weak, although in his defense he is doing what he is told.

Watch China and Russia, what they do will tell you where and how this is being played in regards to N.K.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

TK33 said:


> The biggest problem here is that n korea has nothing to lose. If we bomb them they (kim) doesn't care, if we sanction them he doesn't care either. I fail to see what reagan would have different. Khadafi could have been a threat to oil supplies, he was a problem and reagan fixed it. We are stretched too thin to deal with everything right now.
> 
> Iran needs to be turned into a parking lot once and for all. Thirty years of their garbage is 29 too many. Either eliminate them or help overthrow them. The best option might just be to let the isrealis loose on them. Iran is just trying to jerk the price of oil up overnight and run our economy down even farther. Just like bin laden, they are trying to destroy us from within


The Electromagnetic Pulse might do the trick!!!!

http://www.heritage.org/research/nation ... bg1784.cfm

:sniper: :beer:


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

something obviously has changed in NK. Bush got them to stop producing plutonium and take down a reactor tower, although now they have started it all back up. hmmmmmm.....

you have to ask yourself, did they sense a weakness in Obama as he was predicted to win the election in the US? i would certainly think that would be part of their strategy, when the leader of the US talks about disarmament, it sure sends a clear message to those countries that want to arm up. even the Chinese show no interest in stopping them and have called for preparations for a response to a nuclear event in their neighborhood...that's pretty damn ominous, don't you think? the Chinese don't care if we are concerned or if Japan is concerned either. time spent at the UN is as i said, a waste of time.

as far as the missile defense shield, it isn't developed and won't be if you give up and cut the budget to spend that money on Acorn homes. all those homes for the poor won't mean $hit when Iran or Korea launch one that we can't stop.

sure, there are lots of ways to deliver nukes, but the big boom stuff is sent through the air...i just think Obama has no original thoughts here and he was elected Prez, so as a former community organizer, so far, he has asked "for a strong response" from other nations. well, as he said himself, it's "just words".

seems we need a Prez like Kennedy who confronted the Russians when they brought missiles into Cuba...he called their bluff and they got the hell out....i don't recall that he sat down with them for discussions either.

we need a strong leader and Obama is the weakest we could possibly have right now...he has the balls to tell Israel to settle down, but can't or won't confront Korea or Japan, so there you have it.."the dear leader".


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

http://www.butiamaliberal.com/2009/05/d ... korea.html

good read on the subject...history will repeat itself. Iran and NK will stall and use gamesmanship while acquiring the weapons and the needed delivery systems...it is inevitable and so it will be when we MUST do something about it.....they too will have the ability to destroy us as well.

interesting strategy, waiting for your opponent to gain equal strength... :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> The Electromagnetic Pulse might do the trick!!!!


Technology is great, but when it can be destroyed so easily it's foolish of us not to employ redundant mechanical controls in our weapons. Maybe they have, lets hope so. They could certainly destroy our economy with an electromagnetic impulse. 
North Dakota is a good place to be. I kind of like having a botany degree and ammo too. One of my hobbies is medicinal and edible wild plants. The ammo gets meat. If I had no television to watch I would get fat out on the prairie without ever stepping in a grocery store. It could come to that in my lifetime.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> > The Electromagnetic Pulse might do the trick!!!!
> 
> 
> Technology is great, but when it can be destroyed so easily it's foolish of us not to employ redundant mechanical controls in our weapons. Maybe they have, lets hope so. They could certainly destroy our economy with an electromagnetic impulse.
> North Dakota is a good place to be. I kind of like having a botany degree and ammo too. One of my hobbies is medicinal and edible wild plants. The ammo gets meat. If I had no television to watch I would get fat out on the prairie without ever stepping in a grocery store. It could come to that in my lifetime.


I was thinking more like it would be our answer to NK.

I hope our power grid,natural gas and oil pipe lines infrastructure has effective controls in the event of a EMP. It wouldn't surprise me if they aren't .I hope it never happens! I will be banking on venison and fish(10,000 lakes) and a semi-remote area that I have a cabin already. Most essentials and personal protection are in place for an emergency. The devaluation of the dollar is almost as scary! I have to get some wild plant reference books too.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I was thinking more like it would be our answer to NK.


I was wondering which way you were going with that. It would get their nuke work, and wouldn't hurt their people much. After all what would it bother with many living on two acre farms they work with their hands. Eat, sleep, dump in the rice field, have another kid, harvest rice, eat, sleep, dump in the rice field, replay, replay, replay.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

these are going to be defining moments for Obama. Remember during the campaign he said something along the lines of "we are the party of Roosevelt, do not tell me we cannot defend this country". I believe it was his nomination speech. I voted for the man partially because of his comments at protecting the country, not ruling out striking Iran, etc. If he fails at these challenges he will lose a hell of a lot of independent votes.

The thing that is driving me nuts about Obama and the dems is that they keep making the same mistakes over and over again and keep trying things that have failed before. Considering that most dems, especially liberals consider themselves to be so enlightened it is awfully bizarre that they have such a hard time with history and learning from past errors. Clinton failed with Saddam and bin laden, hopefully Obama doesn't fail with Kim and Ahmadenijad. Or whatever the hell his name is.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

This is extremely frightening as with their Dear Leader opposing our's & his obvious lack of experience & strength, it can go bad fast.

And few leaders in the world have the insanity, will, military strentgh, and strategic positioning to make things go as bad as Kim Jong Ill does.

If Kim is inclined, he can decimate SK's capitol withouyt setting one boot over the DMZ (it's well within range of thousands of pre-positioned artillery pieces). If he decides to invade, the best our 30,000 troops and the ROKS can do is slow the tide somewhat, they can't stop the NKs. If he decides to pop a nuke, all bets are off. The one place in the world I would not want to be right now is in SK...

The only country that can reign them in in China, and they clearly are sitting on the sidelines watching our Dear Leader & the UN twist in the wind...

Obama isn't near big enough man for the job, particularly at this point in history, and I fear not just US but the world will pay for it...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Omegax have you changed your opinion yet? I see North Korea now considers the armistice null and void, and are at a state of war with South Korea. As I understand they have made the statement that they will attack South Korea now because they agreed that ships leaving North Korea should be inspected for shipments of nuclear weapons to rogue nations. 
Today U. S. troops are on high alert in South Korea, and the news videos showed them hastily erecting sandbag barricades in preparation. We could loose 30,000 soldiers there. So far Obama is still appealing to the United Nations. He has made no statements to North Korea that they will face any retribution if they get out of line. 
The latest missile tests were capable of carrying war heads which makes them much different, and they were carried out within 60 miles of the Russian border which has finally given concern to the Russians. 
I don't think any other president in history would still be sitting on their hands as Obama is. Playing with the United Nations as our troops face this danger is child like. I am disappointed (not surprised) that Obama puts such important matters into the hands of the United Nations which in recent years has show it's no friend of the United States, and an organization with yearly lessening power and respect from many nations. Perhaps the lessening power and respect is a good thing, but only if we have a capable president, which we don't.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

Nope. Not even close.

Your beef with the UN is absolutely irrational. It's the same thing Bush would have done. It's the same thing Saint Ronnie would have done. They're not going to say "no" (especially since they've now freaked out the Russians). What is to be gained is potentially getting China to put the brakes on them, without going to war. It's the smart thing to do. It's probably what will happen.

The options are go to the UN, maybe then fight, or just fight. I fail to see how going right to step 2 is any better.


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

omegax said:


> Nope. Not even close.
> 
> Your beef with the UN is absolutely irrational. It's the same thing Bush would have done. It's the same thing Saint Ronnie would have done. They're not going to say "no" (especially since they've now freaked out the Russians). What is to be gained is potentially getting China to put the brakes on them, without going to war. It's the smart thing to do. It's probably what will happen.
> 
> The options are go to the UN, maybe then fight, or just fight. I fail to see how going right to step 2 is any better.


It is not anybetter. ok say obama does challange Kim and Kim IS stupid or clever enough to call obama's bluff what do we do then obama will then have to eat his words and not back his threats toward NK or we go to war either way it is vary bad for us. We still have time on this. This is kind of what happened with iraq. Sadam challenged us and we made threats and were defied and bush had to back his threats. Look where it got us. I served with and lost several goods friends due to it and we all did it proudly. But I would do and give anything to get them back if it means spending a little extra time on peace talks so be it. If trying to work out a peacefull solution does not work out then we go to war i'll probably be one of the first to get go and show Kim what happens when you mess with america. Working this out peacefully is the only way to truely win though. We may go to war and dominate Korea but with all the lost life will it truely be a win.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> The options are go to the UN, maybe then fight, or just fight. I fail to see how going right to step 2 is any better.


You have a point, but there are steps between the UN and starting a war. I think the UN is absolutely worthless. Their actions in Africa is despicable, and they have even been caught using 12 year old girls for prostitution. They should just go away.
Threats would be all it would take, but the liberals have destroyed the value of a threat. If America would have been united in the Iraq war a threat now would absolutely put N Korea in line. However, since the liberals have tried for years to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq a threat means nothing. We are the number one power on earth, and if we had a president with guts a threat would strike fear into a-holes around the world. As it is we are currently simply a big dumb joke.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

utahhunter1 said:


> omegax said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. Not even close.
> ...


Good post Utahhunter. I share your thoughts on this.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Seabass, and utahunter I agree that was a good post. I can understand that you would do a lot to get your friends back. That's good, and I commend you for having a heart. I'm just not sure these people are sane enough to have a peaceful solution. I do agree that we should try that first, but we have been trying since what 1951? 
The biggest problem N Korea is to us is them selling a nuke to a radical Middle-East terrorists. Those guys don't care about tomorrow, they want to kill us at any cost if it means their entire family dies also. They would celebrate loosing two friends in war. 
Seabass and utahunter I share your hope, but to be safe we need to show our teeth. Mad men do understand power. We don't need to use it unless we have to, but they need to know we are willing. Because of our Democrats in congress we lost terribly in the Iraq war. We lost our credability, our respect, and our power to negotiate. Not because Bush started the war, but because our Democrats denigrated our nation simply to demean Bush. If this was 1776 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid would be hanged for treason, and it would be well deserved. They are more dangerous than Sadam was, or Bi Laden ever will be. Throw in Obama and we could see the end of this nation as us older guys have seen it.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

utahhunter, you must keep in mind after reading plainsmans posts all that is bad in the world can be blamed on the democrats. If plainsman walks out to his car in the morning and he has a flat, it's the democrats fault. If he opens his refrigerator and the light bulb doesn't work, it's the democrats fault. If he buys a new radial arm saw and their are instructions written in 15 languages, it's the democrats fault!

So it's only natural that our failure in Iraq has nothing to do with the republicans in power or their lack of an exit strategy. We "showed our teeth" in Iraq and where did that get us? I again aplaud your vision that at the very least we should attempt diplomacy first. By working with the U.N., terrorists cannot point a finger only at the U.S. They must point their fingers at the nations that make up the U.N.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> utahhunter, you must keep in mind after reading plainsmans posts all that is bad in the world can be blamed on the democrats.


No, no no, liberals. It's all the liberals fault. Now that we all understand that, carry on.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Sea Bass....

If you look at what the Dems in power during Bush's Admin all they did was not back the commander and chief. They would bash him and what he was doing in Iraq. They are the ones that stated his exit strategy was wrong or he had none. If Bush was still in power we would still have more soldiers in Iraq helping the people. Not pulling out soldiers. His Exit Strategy was not to go over conquer and then leave. You need to stay in the country and help with the rebuilding and so forth. How many years have we had troops in Korea, Japan, Turkey, Germany (before the wall fell), etc. We have troops stationed around the world. Many are from wars, conflicts, uprisings, and defense strategy's.

But the dems ever since the war started were against Bush and his admin. They wanted to impeach him, slander him and his admin, do investigations, etc. Now that is not backing your commander of the nation. Now they are wanting or did want investigation on interigation tactics, CIA and how they lied, etc. Again is this backing the past commander and chief.


----------



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

Plainsman said:


> > utahhunter, you must keep in mind after reading plainsmans posts all that is bad in the world can be blamed on the democrats.
> 
> 
> No, no no, liberals. It's all the liberals fault. Now that we all understand that, carry on.


 8)

Chuck, we have gone over this topic ad nauseum on this board... I disagree with your sentiments, but I guess the main thing now is to figure out how to move ahead in the middle east and elsewhere.


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

seabass wrote:
utahhunter, you must keep in mind after reading plainsmans posts all that is bad in the world can be blamed on the democrats. If plainsman walks out to his car in the morning and he has a flat, it's the democrats fault. If he opens his refrigerator and the light bulb doesn't work, it's the democrats fault. If he buys a new radial arm saw and their are instructions written in 15 languages, it's the
democrats fault!

Plainsman I do not alway agree with you but I hold all of your posts and comments in high regards as give them alot of thought and consideration as well as many of the other members on this site as I am only 22 years old and am not yet as knowlegable and wise as most of you older guys and am not nieve enough to think I am even close so don't take this as offensive but that paragraph is just plain funny. It got me laughing pretty hard because it seems so true. For some reason even though I don't know you at all other that just from reading your post I can just picture you doing those things. :beer:
Sorry for getting off the topic.

Plainsman are we not starting to do the same kind of crap to obama that was done to bush by the democrats. And I just don't see Kim backing down to an Obama threat he wants to test obama he won't back down easily while testing the waters and if obama starts throwing out treats he will have to back them up and right now he can't afford to back them up regarless of who are president is we can't afford to back another war period. So all we can really do is bluff but Kim is arrogant enough to call us on it. Obama needs to do the resposible thing even if he takes crap for it and he is as far as I can see on this issue.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Bass...

I would be this critical of the Rep party if they did the same.

utah....

You are correct. I hope the Rep party won't start to trash everything this leader does military and defense of this nation. The US needs to show a united front like it did on 9/11. It was united in all of its actions.

Now in regaurds to not backing Obama and some of his policies is a different story. Because if you study history he is leading us down the same path other leaders have tried and failed at. And utah.....a 22 year old can read and know this as well. 8)


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

bottom line, so far Obama and Clinton are headed down the same diplomatic path of failure. the results will be the same, no tough actions, embargoes or searching of ships, same result...the Koreans don't want to talk, hell, they don't even want to listen to the "dear leader"! SNAFU! 

everyday that goes by and we fail to act, only emboldens the Koreans and Iranians...one thing for sure, if you don't do anything, you won't be blamed for doing the wrong thing!


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

hunter9494 said:


> bottom line, so far Obama and Clinton are headed down the same diplomatic path of failure. the results will be the same, no tough actions, embargoes or searching of ships, same result...the Koreans don't want to talk, hell, they don't even want to listen to the "dear leader"! SNAFU!
> 
> everyday that goes by and we fail to act, only emboldens the Koreans and Iranians...one thing for sure, if you don't do anything, you won't be blamed for doing the wrong thing!


You still have not answered my question on what you would do about this you can criticize and down talk others all you want but if you don't have a far superior solution it does not do any good so what is your solution on this that obama is not doing I have yet to hear anyting from you but criticizm. I really would like to hear your solution on north korea we sure need a good solution. growing up my father use to always tell me never ever go to someone to complain about a problem but go to them with several solutions to the problem.

Another point needing to be taken into consideration is how many wars can we take. Simply it is tough on you I can't speak for the guys in iraq as I served in Afghanistan. Can we handle another war?? Can we take it?? I will tell you we will take it right down the N Koreans throats if need be, but I read somewhere can't remember where that my generation is spending twice the amount of time deployed in combat zones as compared to world war 2 vets and look at the pyscological problems they still have to this day. It is my generation that is taking the brunt of this war can we psycologically handle another one. How much more combat time can we handle. None of us will generally admit it affects us but it does and I have seen it.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

seabass said:


> utahhunter, you must keep in mind after reading plainsmans posts all that is bad in the world can be blamed on the democrats. If plainsman walks out to his car in the morning and he has a flat, it's the democrats fault. If he opens his refrigerator and the light bulb doesn't work, it's the democrats fault. If he buys a new radial arm saw and their are instructions written in 15 languages, it's the democrats fault!
> 
> So it's only natural that our failure in Iraq has nothing to do with the republicans in power or their lack of an exit strategy. We "showed our teeth" in Iraq and where did that get us? I again aplaud your vision that at the very least we should attempt diplomacy first. By working with the U.N., terrorists cannot point a finger only at the U.S. They must point their fingers at the nations that make up the U.N.


Not necessarily true. The europeans have been hit and have had several thwarted attacks by al-qaida for their support of the US.

The only way I can see to bring an end to this is to rid our presence there. They have been fighting for milleniums and nothing is going to stop them. The common folk there only know fighting and the wealthy folk over there make a pile of money off the fighting. They don't want us there, period. We should be keeping all energy resources from North America in North Amercia. We should keep all goods and materials here, therefore all the money would stay here. Americans should not be in the middle east or parts of asia. Rumsfeld started a strategy that it appears Gates wants to follow. A smaller, more specialized, and more defensive military. If someone or some country is a problem, we eliminate them, no occupation just flat out unadulterated destruction. We are the best at it and it is the only thing our adversaries understand.

I agree with you on the Bushies missing an exit strategy. Where on Earth was retired Gen Schwartzkopf? He was on MSNBC and/or FOX after the war began, and he said we should repatriate and pay their military and let them police themselves. He went on to say that it would be easier, cheaper, and less damaging (casualties)to have them handle their own country's internal security. We should have remained only to protect them from other invaders. where would we be now? There is no one better than the bear at dealing with the middle east. Odierno appears to be doing one hell of job now though but he still is no Schwartzkopf.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Well there is an old cliche that might fit what we should do "speak softly and carry a big stick". Unfortunately when we called Hussein's bluff and took him out the democrats were more interested in destroying Bush. If they had not done that the world would see us with a big stick right now and we could speak softly. The democrats destroyed that for political gain. The only thing that works with mad men is a big stick. Also, diplomacy with these people only works if they think your willing to use the big stick. We have nothing, no big stick, and no ability for diplomacy. Do any of you really think they are going to be nice because we are good guys? We need to rebuild an image that says we can be kind or we can remove you from the planet the choice is yours. We don't want to take advantage, we do not want to be unfair, we do not want to be bullies, we do not want to be empire builders, but don't threaten us or we will bury your behind. 
I wish the world was as simply as some of you think. If you grew up with life a little tougher you would know that sometimes you can talk and talk and the guy is still going to smack you in the face if you let him. These people are not like you and I.
I'm afraid at this point we are a pansy nation that can be taken advantage of. I think we will talk and talk until they try take us out and then everyone will ask, how did this happen.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

i agree, Pearl Harbor, 911, all over again. gee.....we didn't think they would ever do that? duh.....we are telegraphing our weakness in several different languages. we are being stupid about this, we will soon be a victim of an incident, i can almost guarantee it.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

We still have the big stick and everyone knows that. They just think Obama won't use it, and he won't unless he is absolutely cornered. Pearl Harbor happened because we were not pro-active and some think there was a political motivation behind that also.

This is why we should be defensive. If we were not stretched out like we are now the rest of world would still call us the sleeping giant. The dems wanted to destroy republicans, not just bush. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove were also on the target list. The Bush admin had no plan, they flat out ignored Schwartzkopf (heard that on fox) when him and powell gave their version of what should be done and now we are reaping what they sowed. The fact that a lot of these crooks had something to gain from a drug out war and an expensive rebuilding process.

In reality I would say that Powell, Rumsfeld, and obviously Schwartzkopf were on the right track. I am sure McClelland was with them given his hasty dismissal or resignation or who knows. Doesn't matter now, the only thing that matters is if Obama will learn from history, including very recent history.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Pearl Harbor happened because we were not pro-active and some think there was a political motivation behind that also.


You mean for example that we didn't warn them? Or that we didn't take strong enough action? The political motivation that some suspected was a welcome to war because of a poor economy (  ) high unemployment (  ) and public unrest. Oh, oh.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

as for Korea, they will do something, probably on the seas. they are making every excuse in the world to start a fight. i don't think for a minute this is just sabre rattling. they feel emboldened and for the US to dismiss the challenge as baseless and unfounded will only lead to the old "gee, we didn't think they would do that" excuse for not knowing what was coming down.

the greatest intelligence is no excuse for denial. we will still be surprised when they take action, because we are convinced that they won't.....gawd our leaders are so dumb.


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

I have yet to hear anybody say they are convinced that NK won't take action we all know it is a vary good possibility and have not denied it so I dont see your point, but we need try other solutions before we act militarily we have got to al least try and get China to pressure N Korea as they are about the only country NKorea will disscuss this with and obout the only country that has any non military power over them. China has already condemed the attacks we need to attempt to get china to further pressure them. Kim is not stupid he does not want to lose power. And Plainsman we do have a big stick Obama has one of the greatest military forces in the history of the world to back agains N Korea not to mention our soldiers and officers have more actual combat experience than any other major power in the world. And our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan and all over the world are sure proving to everyone we are just a pansy nation. I think Not.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Yes pressure does need to be put on china. But one thing is china holds some major power over the US since it is holding a majority of our current debt.

One thing fears me........

Too many fights being fought at the same time.....Iraq, Afgah, Watching Iran, and NK.

This was one of the major down falls of germany in WWII......Fighting on to many fronts. History people....if you don't study it you are doomed to repeat it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> And our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan and all over the world are sure proving to everyone we are just a pansy nation. I think Not.


Our military men and women are certainly not pansies. Our people in general want wars over in a week, and have no will to stay the course. They kept asking Bush what his exit strategy was. I think you would have to be the worlds biggest fool to announce your exit strategy. Did any country during WWII announce their exit strategy? You would have to be God awful dumb to tell an enemy when you were going to stop, and how. :eyeroll: It sounds like something from a Bugs Bunny/Elmer Fud cartoon. I think the exit strategy thing is just liberals trying to sound intelligent. I can't take it serious. I know it was a liberal talking point over and over like parrots.


----------



## utahhunter1 (May 3, 2009)

So I take it you meant liberals are pansies not our nation because who truly represents our nation and its people on the world stage. Is it our politicians our president or our soldiers. I love the spirit of our nation It is obsolutly amazing the spirt our nation has and has for our troops. I don't think we don't have the will to stay the course if it is what we as americans want. I think the Iraq war was was just more than the people wanted and thought necessary. I think the majority of people when it first started thought we were going to bomb the crap out of Iraq like during the clintion admin. for a couple of months then pull out I don't think they realized how far we were going to go and that their husbands sons daughter and mother would be gone for years at a time for many years to come and when they realized what we got into they wanted an end. I just can not see our nation as cowards and pansies. I dont know how things in the dakotas work but if I made a statement like that about our nation here in my home town of utah and walked down the street I would probably have a rifle pointed at me from a window in every house and we as a nation are not cowards and I refuse to believe it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I think the majority of people when it first started thought we were going to bomb the crap out of Iraq like during the clintion admin.


I guess I don't remember us bombing the crap out of Iraq during the Clilnton administration.



> I love the spirit of our nation It is obsolutly amazing the spirt our nation has and has for our troops.


Why do you think Napolitano wanted to list returning vets as people to watch like terrorists? Why do you think liberals always cut the military? I remember the Viet Nam war, who was it spit on vets and called them baby killers? Answer: Liberals, liberals, and liberals. When I was in college who hated the cops? Liberal kids, that's who. Some are genuinely appreciative of our troops, liberals only say they are. Harry Reid could care less if you fly home first class or in a box. Same for Pelosi.

Harry Reid stood before congress and declared "this war is lost". He wanted to shaft Bush so bad that he was willing to make the death of all those soldiers to have been in vein. I have watched that liberal disdain for the military and law enforcement for 40 years. As a federal employee when I hired I often hired vets, because my liberal co workers thought vets were worthless. They would say so, even though there was a veterans pref. They would get ticked if I didn't hire in January even though I needed no one until late April. They wanted me to get the vets out of their way so they could hire the bunny hugging, vegetarian, granolas.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

Clinton didn't bomb the crap out them, he did some airstrikes but nothing major, Clinton just followed the UN mandates with the parallels Saddam had to stay out of. He also failed to launch one important missile, the one the dreaded and godawful CIA had pointed at a fellow named bin laden.



> Yes pressure does need to be put on china. But one thing is china holds some major power over the US since it is holding a majority of our current debt.


China is eventually going to need their money. They need us to succeed politically and economically. They too are just posing and trying to advance themselves on the world stage.



> This was one of the major down falls of germany in WWII......Fighting on to many fronts. History people....if you don't study it you are doomed to repeat it.


Hilter was a lunatic and lost control of his own people. I agree with your statement to a point but these are two different conflicts, at least for now. The major difference is there are no superpowers as of yet against us.

Utahhunter is right, the Iraq war is more than anyone bargained for because the idiots in the bush admin just flat out lied to the american people. Remember the part about securing our energy resources and keeping them affordable? The fact that Cheney's old Halliburton buddies are making a killing doesn't help either, even though realistically they are the only company that could pull something like this off. It is however disgusting the way the gov't has allowed them to do such crappy work and gouge the hell out of the gov't.

Military action should be the last resort but given the fact that NK is so secretive and confrontational, or antagonizing means that we have to be prepared for the worst and hope for the best. End it before it gets farther out of hand.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> prepared for the worst and hope for the best. End it before it gets farther out of hand.


There it is all in a nutshell. Very good TK. Life should always be hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. That's what health, life, and nursing home insurance are for. Car insurance too. Any insurance for that matter. Why would you prepare for a skinned knee, but not nuclear war.

Your also absolutely right about end it before it gets worse. If you have cancer do you cut the tumor out when it's an ounce in weight or do you wait until it's ten pounds? Just in case it goes away on it's own you know.


----------

