38 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
Doing what Saddam did
Shouting threats in the darkness doesn't require one to have a big sword.
Not interested in the size of his tackle Steve. But why do we always refer to the Iraqi dictator as Saddam? I mean Hitler is Hitler right? So why do we refer to him as if he's the bloke next door?
I was comparing the two as no more than "sabre rattlers".
My response was to be taken figuratively but we will be required to take the N.K. guy seriously even if just a bluff and a waste of time. But to answer your question as to why we referred to the now gone Iraqi dictator by that name, I'd say it's because of how we got to know him in our news reports. If is name was reported as Jeffrey, we'd refer to him as Jeffrey. There are people of both fame and infamy whose names take on their own persona and are forever attached to that individual. When we hear the name, we hear their history and reputation along with it. For that person, it could be an honor or a curse as could it also be for anyone else of the same name.
Perhaps something amiss in my wording.
I was not, at the time, aware that you claim to be Welsh. This could present a small language issue when not using the more formal. I could have said that the Korean leader's "bark was probably worse than his bite". In other words, he's not the threat that he presents himself as. I used the metaphor of making noise in the darkness as it was long ago used to intimidate an enemy in the hopes they'd run away rather than enter the battlefield. The Scots were said to be masterful at this.
I think the biggest fear right now
is because so many of the countries involved have new and untried leaders in positions of power.......NK, SK, the US has three (Hagel, Brenner, and Kerry) along with a Prez that firmly believes he can smile and charm his way out of anything...........any one of them could easily make a mistake and 'bring it on'.....
It doesn't help that BO had done away with the protections Bush had put into place (the deterrents in Poland and another country (in an attempt to 're-set' relations with Russia that turned into a joke) and the ones in Alaska ... and the ones in Alaska are being put back because of the NK threats but it might take two years for that now. Bad decisions made early on are coming back to bite him now so the real hope is that China, having the only real influence over NK, will get them to back down.
I'd considered that it was just a test of Obama's resolve
but, in that it's his second term, I hesitated to suggest that. Clearly this president originally ran as one who'd rely on the negotiating table other world pressure rather than prep the military for possible armed conflict. His policy may or may not be effective depending on who he's dealing with. But, you're right. Obama has never really been tested on his own and it's surely not because he's sent signals that he's not to be messed with.
Naturally, this is all Obama's fault, LOL
I don't know what's making North Korea do what it's doing. The military exercises we've been conducting right off their borders aren't helping matters any though. They're using those as a justification to ratchet up the rhetoric even more. We don't need to fly stealth bombers around for them to know what we can do to them.
And don't kid yourself, Toni. The Pentagon has had plans in place for dealing with North Korea for ages.
And how many
of those plans or policies has BO dismantled? Are you sure he hasn't?
"BO" dismantled Pentagon plans?
Or are you just taking the "I'll assume he did unless you can prove he didn't" position on that particular bit of speculation.
Anonymous got him today
He dismantled the missle
protection from the Poles and Cheks and in Alaska..........how do you know that the Pentagon's plans to deal with NK haven't been altered as well? This is a Prez who doesn't believe in preventative measures regarding our national security but is all in for preventative crap like changing school menus........
Plans are altered all the time
You wouldn't want them dusting off plans from 1954, would you?
You're getting yourself into a lather over something you're only guessing has even been done, and that only based on your own blind hatred.
You are the one
who offered up the supposed Pentagon plans, Josh.......without any proof that any plans that might have been in place are still there. And, yes......I don't trust this Prez any more than I did before he took office the first time around. After all, by his own words, he has more 'flexibility' in his second term.
I'm not going to argue with you.....
.....over something that exists only in your imagination. If you want to tell yourself that the president instructed the Pentagon to scrap its North Korea file, based on nothing more than your hatred for the man, knock yourself out.
that the Pentagon has plans in place to deal with NK and has had them for years...without proof that it's true. I speculate that if any were in existence, BO may decide to not enforce them just as he decides which laws he will ignore and not enforce. You say potahto, I say potato...........however, it is only MY speculation that ever gets scrutinized in SE ONLY because I detest our leader.......yep......that's the BO way of fair and balanced.
......it is perfectly reasonable to believe that the Pentagon and the CIA have been monitoring North Korea for ages and have plans in place in the event of a military escalation on their part. I would expect nothing less. You, on the other hand, are blowing gas based on your own hatred and nothing else. Have at it. I'm done here.
RE: it is only MY speculation
it is only MY speculation that ever gets scrutinized in SE ONLY because I detest our leader
Is that so?
It's not because you detest Obama, it's because you're the ONLY one that speculates...all the others use facts.
What about the scrutinizing YOU do?
Josh hasn't been able to prove
his statement that "the Pentagon has had plans in place for years to deal with NK".....he only speculates and assumes so...........so I'm scrutinizing and asking for facts.
RE:so I'm scrutinizing and asking for facts.
good for you....keep up the good work.
Which title do you prefer?
The Speculation Scrutinizer?
wasting your time Josh
These people are borderline trolls, like all the regurgitating folk who post the same thing over and over again: OB has horns and a tail. He's the anti-Christ. Wasn't born here (PROVEN he was). He's muslim (I'll take him at his word, and anyway...). He's SOCIALIST, Waaaah (he's not, it's just that both parties are so skewed to the right, sans Palosi and a few others, that Birchers don't remember what the center used to be).
To wit: Toni seems to think the prez has, would or could persuade the Pentagon to sh*tcan national defense plans, vital components of our security, on a whim or something. Notice his assinine use of the word enforce, honesty about his real bias and obvious affinity for the brain snatchers called Foxbot. I can only laugh. Well, I'm late to the party so this is just for anyone curious in the future.
Ah, the true sign of a "troll"
They suddenly appear in a forum, they take hits at a few people, then immediately start pointing their "troll" finger around. You're sort of new at this trolling bait aren't you? Kids can be so cute at times, even troll kids, LOL.
Let's look at history
You've been a CNET member since March 2010....I've been here since somewhere around 1997 and was a Moderator in numerous forums at CNET and ZDNET (before CNET took it over) including this one for a number of years.
You've made a total of SEVEN posts in two years, including this one bashing me as a troll, compared to my nearly 13 THOUSAND.
Who's the troll? Come back when you grow up.
I've been here since 1997 or 98 myself
I've known Toni for fifteen years. I don't consider her a troll at all; in fact when we're not discussing politics we get along quite well. Even she acknowledges that she's consumed by hatred for this president. I think it clouds her thinking. She makes crazy accusations like this one and then asks me to prove her wrong. I'm not sure what you'd call it but I wouldn't call it trolling. Just my two cents on that subject.
maybe he'll see a disembodied hand writing some unknown text on a wall in the white house one day. BOAKYBGB
So, Kim Jong_Un has nuclear arms.
Won't that spread to the rest of his body?
I think it's a typo
The type of arms he has are unclear and not nuclear
Be careful people don't put words in your mouth
You do realize who he was talking to I hope. You don't honestly think he's going to take the same tact as when he was talking to Sarkosy about the Israelis, also presumed in private?
for all you BO has horns and a tail crowd
So the prez, who's increased drone strikes, saving our armed forces, and who snuffed out the dems = weak on defense fantasy* in the recent election "doesn't believe in preventative measures". Huh. Guess he's just a weak capitulator compared to his predecessor, that Einstein from Texas. Is his changing menus anything like classifying ketsup a vegetable?
BO's right you dork.
* Now. Today. Not 35 years ago you moronic, trigger-happy war clowns.
So, you have no problem
with his lies to you about what he'd do militarily when he was running for president? I personally, rarely criticize his approach to the military since he's done much the same as Bush during his term. I usually stay out of those threads, for the most part. My biggest problem with him is he's a consumate Liar, arrogant, economically obtuse, stubborn to point of stupidity at times on domestic issues, and did I mention Liar?
So you think it's in our
best interests to just drone and kill everybody rather than capture and interrogate in order to glean intel that will continue to keep us informed and help the military strategies? Wonderful......
As far as 35 years ago........that would it put it right into Jimmy Carter's 'tenure'........that worked out real well with all those hostages in Iran, didn't it? Does it surprise you at all that they were released the DAY of REAGAN'S INAUGURATION? Now why do you think it happened that way? Was it possibly because they knew they could walk all over Carter and Reagan had already made it known he wasn't going to take Iran's crap? They didn't even TRY to push that envelope.
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 2)