October Surprise

DaBish said:
I don't quite understand where you get that Liberals are clueless. I think that we're a bit more broad-minded and have come to the realization that all big things are made up of lots and lots of little things.
Click to expand...

Nice timing. I occured to me just today, in my wanderings around the countryside that the difference between we closed minded jackbooted neocon neanderthals and the open minded clear thinking clearly communsitic metrosexuals & their sexual partners is, after starting in the same spot, we were, after examining evidence & historical trends, not afraid to make up our minds.
 
A.B.Normal said:
Kim Jong-il is a nut bar do you think he really cares .
Click to expand...

Since it will be his ass on the line, quite literally, yes. If it were only the innumerable piss ant citizens, no.
 
MrBishop said:
Air-warfare would be an issue...no free reign for stealth bombers in the skies over NK.
Communication centers are more extensive and harder to knock out.
NK actually has the ability to strike back instead of holding on for dear life.
Click to expand...

Hmm don't spend much time watching Modern Marvels, Wings or the History channel huh?
Actually we could spank them to pieces without raising a sweat. The real problem would be twofold, first there would be an overriding urgency attached due to the Nuke factor and the PC desire to minimize civilian casualties.

Let's keep this goin'

What about the measly 37,000 ground troops the U.S. is supposed to have on the ground. How about all the assets that would be rushed into the theatre prior to the beginning of hostilities. The South Koreans have some stuff lying about don't they? Stuff we sold them? But then they'd probably want to sit this one out, I heard they don't wanna fight.

Would China sit idly by or would they want to get into the act in a military sorta way, most likely not. We'd tell them to stay out of it and they'd sure listen to U.S.
 
Winky said:
Would China sit idly by or would they want to get into the act in a military sorta way, most likely not. We'd tell them to stay out of it and they'd sure listen to U.S.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. What's more important to China: coming to the aid of a tiny nation with very little to offer in return, or keeping Chinese goods on the shelves at Wal-Mart?
 
What's that thing about no two countries that have a MacDonald’s ever attacked each other?
Whoa the hue and cry when Mickey Dee's announced the future closing of a lot of overseas stores.

Yup Build a Disneyland in China and all will be well with the world. Mebbe we can close the one in France!
 
Invade NK, WTF are you guys talking about?

NK has two things we don't want them to have; WMD's and the “big Dong”.

China would stand down if we were to remove the nuke threat from next door.

B-2’s based in the US, AWACS based in Japan, and 7-Carrier Grx (that’s “groups” winky).

HARM, Tacit Rainbow, JASSM, Tomahawk, Harpoon, ACLM, Sparrow, Sea-Sparrow, Phoenix, Los Angeles Class.

No invasion, the shock and awe revisited.

What are they going to do? Fire a nuke at several naval attack formation spread out in over 100,000 sq miles of open sea? They have to know where you are to hit you. (We no longer keep tight flotillas during engagement it’s a peal harbor/ cold war thing)


  • The left has already made the case for taking action against NK.

  • We have little to lose politically in the world right now.

  • The US gains new international bargaining power by the tonnage.

  • NK is left with China to the north and US to the south.

  • GWB wins big points for success with minimal collateral damage with a justifiable strike.

  • And the words “American” and “cowboy” are spoken in the same sentence in more languages then ever before.

If we don’t strike now and John F’n sKerry gets elected NK can become a real threat to the world in another 4 years.

GWB four more years
 
ok, NK knows that there's enough firepower in the US Army to totally whipe out the world, so their country wouldn't be any problem, right?
and they also know that if they launch any nuclear weapons, they can expect to get nuclear weapons in return onto their country, right?

what does NK gain by doing so? their leader might be a nutcase, but i'm pretty sure he'll also know that if he has no country left to rule, he's fucked anyway.

now, again, why would NK start any war? and in which ways are they a threat to the world?
sounds a lot like extreme paranoid people talking here.

btw, what did shock-and-awe bring in iraq? iraq didn't capitulate after those strikes, even with the amount of force used upon them. a ground war was needed to get hold of iraq. what makes you think that it DOES work with NK?
 
oh and besides that, what the hell is that with invading and bombing every country you don't agree with?

i've had this discussion with gonz before as well...

i hope your government thinks more than you guys; do you guys like to start wars? if so, what the hell are you doing here, posting about it? as good americans, and world savours, shouldn't you be participating instead?

well, RM? winky? Gonz?
 
Just be damn glad Gonz, Wink and myself didn't get any backing for the government we formed earlier this year. There'd be hell to pay.

We would have outsourced a tomahawk factory to kiwi-ville just to save $$$ on shipping 'em out to the fleet.


<<< why would NK start a war >>>

Because they're nuts. Kim Jong-il is not sane and has no business with nukes let alone long-range nukes.


It wouldn't be a war, just a momentary hostilie action.

(wink ygpm)
 
Dang Hell Yeah I remember our befief
duty at the Helm of Power
We were well on our way to making the world
a better place for us Good people to live in...

but
The world drags me down


Oh the heads that turn

Make my back burn

Oh the heads that turn

Make my back burn

The sparkle in your eyes

Keeps me alive

The sparkle in your eyes

Keeps me alive

And the world and the world

The world turns around

And the world and the world

The world drags me down

Oh the heads that turn

Make my back burn

The fire in your eyes keeps me alive

The fire in your eyes keeps me alive

I’m sure in her you’ll find

The sanctuary

I’m sure in her you’ll find

The sanctuary

And the world and the world

The world turns around

And the world and the world

The world drags me down
 
ResearchMonkey said:
Just be damn glad Gonz, Wink and myself didn't get any backing for the government we formed earlier this year. There'd be hell to pay.

We would have outsourced a tomahawk factory to kiwi-ville just to save $$$ on shipping 'em out to the fleet.


<<< why would NK start a war >>>

Because they're nuts. Kim Jong-il is not sane and has no business with nukes let alone long-range nukes.


It wouldn't be a war, just a momentary hostilie action.

(wink ygpm)
Click to expand...

heh, talk like doesn't make you any more sane than Kim Jong-il. i'm just very glad people with those kind of thoughts aren't in control of nukes, or in any position to call for military action.

you think quite easily, regarding other people's lives. death is the highest price that can be payed, and that's something that shouldn't be taken lightly.

but i'm afraid we'll never agree on this subject. you'll be dissapointed at the lack of military action, and i'll stay happy, knowing that people with a little wider view on things are in charge.
 
Shadowfax said:
regarding other people's lives. death is the highest price that can be payed,
Click to expand...

Hardly. It is the final price but far from the highest price. Ask any survivor of a Japanese prison camp or an Iraqi rape room. Those with a wider view allow the evil of the world to exist & persist. Just ask the UN what they're doing to help the Rwandans at this very moment.

Wider view is political double speak for not getting involved.

Oh, for the record, I'm against war until we're attacked or someone needs our help.
 
Gonz said:
Oh, for the record, I'm against war until we're attacked or someone needs our help.
Click to expand...

interesting, since you've said before that you support the preliminary attacks on countries that might become a threat to the US in the future.

and i never said that violence never solved anything; war has caused a lot of good as well, in many cases (it saved europe in WW2) but i do say that war shouldn't be something that is used lightly as a tool, to possibly prevent any threats in the future.
 
but you wouldn't support attacks on NK and Iran at the moment?

actually, I already know the answer...would be easier to ask which countries you wouldn't attack, at this time ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top