Hopper
Banned
No prob, homey. I wuz kinda debatin whether I should fess up, but I knowwed ya would probably figure it out for your own damn self.
North Korea rejects torpedo findings, threatens war
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
No prob, homey. I wuz kinda debatin whether I should fess up, but I knowwed ya would probably figure it out for your own damn self.
Just as soon as I've left enough rep for other people that's another +1 for you.
Hopper
Banned
I done tole ya, Game....Mullet can't win this thang, him and his homeboys should give up the ghost.
Slappfisk
Member
There is a precedent for it though isn't there?
USS Stark was attacked by the Iraqi's in 1987 and USS Liberty was attacked by the Israeli's in 1967.
Both a Democratic and Republican president allowed such an act to slide with only a token response.
Mind you, as you mentioned in the current political environment Obama could not afford to act as all the nutters would be frothing at the mouth for revenge regardless of the consequences.
+1 to you for being well informed.
As for the USS Stark: well clearly Ronald Reagan hated America.
Seriously though, it sounds like that may have been an accident and it's unclear whether it was an authorized attack. Obviously it was a tragedy given that people died, but if there was no intent to attack then I can understand the desire to not escalate the conflict. Starting a war probably wouldn't have been productive.
Similarlyth e USS Liberty inquiry concluded it was a case of mistaken identity. Not productive to respond with military action.
Essentially, I'm saying that if it was clear that North Korea attacked us and they meant to attack us that the President would respond with military force of some kind. Suggestions that he'd wring his hands and try to start a U.N. Resolution are not only absurdly unfounded but are emblematic as to why this country is presently unable to govern itself in a civilized manner.
I never said he would be completely OK with it. I just question what he would actually do about it.
Personally, my initial reaction would be to blow something up in NK but realistically I think it would start a chain reaction of horrendous consequences. I'm not sure it would be the best or preferrable option.
I suspect that within the next 50 years, if not sooner, the two Koreas will re-unify and become one again. That is if the nutcase running the looney bin to the north doesn't do something stupid first.
Last edited:
Slappfisk
Member
Yep, it was not in the national interest to create a conflict where none existed. Additionally both countries were members of the good lads club. Israel for being Israel and Iraq for fighting Iran.
I find it laughable that conspiracy loonies out there think the the torpedoing was a false flag attack on the part of the US and South Korea.
Neither country has any interest in fighting North Korea. The US army is exhausted from nearly ten years of constant operations in the middle east. The US economically has no wish to commit itself to a third front. Even less wish to enter into a protracted conventional war in Asia.
The South Koreans are fearful of what happens to Seoul. Have a lot more to lose than the North Koreans and are not excited by the prospect of winning a war that leaves them integrating an economic disaster that will take decades to correct.
What makes this intriguing is that if a small US warship like the USS Stark was attacked or sunk by the North Koreana, Obama would be in a lot of trouble.
The rational thing would be to find a way to let it slide rather risk causing a war with nothing to be won and only things to lose. Yet, domestically he will have to appear tough and resolute or the right wing will be besides themselves with rage, despite the fact that even the smallest provocation could push the North Koreans over the edge and into war. A war with dire consequences for the US and South Korea.
Further illustration of how nutty the political landscape in the US has become. For many people, backing your guy or attacking the other guy takes precedence over what is best for the nation.
Scorpjazz
Well-Known Member
This. He wouldnt be ok with it. Or, at least, he would act like he is outraged. All while introducing some 'serious' resolutions, and asking whose *** he needs to kick.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
So you'd be upset if Obama didn't immediately bomb North Korea if that happened? To hell with Seoul and all?
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Why is Obama being looked at as some anti-war weak president?
last I checked Afghanistan and Iraq are still rocking and rolling. Has peace broken out there? Or is there still violence and bloodshed?
Military defense spending has increased. We have more troops in Afghanistan than ever. We're still building aircraft carriers, jets, and bombs.
Ummmmmm so what exactly has Obama done to make it sound like he's some weak flower power child? Is it the START treaty that even Colin Powell supports?
Please, enlighten me. And please, don't bring that whole bowing down to the Saudi prince crap up again. Bush made out with him so don't even start that.
last I checked Afghanistan and Iraq are still rocking and rolling. Has peace broken out there? Or is there still violence and bloodshed?
Military defense spending has increased. We have more troops in Afghanistan than ever. We're still building aircraft carriers, jets, and bombs.
Ummmmmm so what exactly has Obama done to make it sound like he's some weak flower power child? Is it the START treaty that even Colin Powell supports?
Please, enlighten me. And please, don't bring that whole bowing down to the Saudi prince crap up again. Bush made out with him so don't even start that.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
As is Japan, from what I've heard. My friend once told me that every few months NK fools around like they're going to attack Japan. Most people know that there's nothing to it. However, it is a pretty scary reminder of what could happen...