Korea Threatens Attack

[patriot66]

when he did go after OBL the right screamed WAG THE DOG

Which was correct.

 

[patriot66]

And Bush was warned how many months in advance of a possible attack?

But not specifically planes used as missiles, and airport security was warned, and stepped up.

 

[patriot66]

a wacko right wing blog

... were you TRYING to prove my point, or was it accidental?

Does not change the facts of the matter.

 

[patriot66]

actually. Clinton had no basis to take custody of OBL - a foreign national on foreign soil - when the Sudan supposedly offered him up.

http://www.infowars.com/saved pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

1) to say there has been no provocation is something you cannot do with a straight face
2) there was officially a ceasefire
3) If the ceasefire was in place, then yes, it would be pre-emptive. But Kim Jong Un removed the ceasefire, putting the two Koreas back into a state of war.
4) If you asking if it is a pre-emptive strike... then yes. But Jarod was referring to a pre-emptive WAR. Are you deliberately moving the goal posts or was it just an accident?

You're being a willful idiot now. First, while there has been provocation, we've seen this kind of saber-rattling from NK for years - to me (and I would wager most), it does not rise to the level of real provocation, in terms of justifying a military response.

And sorry - for both you & your hairsplitting. Any military action - whether it's a selective stirke or part of a larger effort/WAR - would be seen as pre-emptive at this point. The justification that we are technically still "at war" is a joke.

You should be embarassed.

 

[patriot66]

Clinton did a lot of things that I didn't like, but spreading misinformation is wrong.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.asp

Whenever he went after the terrorists, he was accused of wagging the dog, he was damned if he did, damned if he didn't which is what Republicans like to do. Good when a Republucan does it, bad when a Democrate does it. I did not agree with some of his actions, but I woud think a Republucan would love them, but they didn't.

The Bush administration basically ignored Osama until he struck, so please just shut up about Clinton's failures or perceived failures.

http://www.meforum.org/435/usama-bin-ladin-american-soldiers-are-paper-tigers 1998 when this interview took place

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You're being a willful idiot now. First, while there has been provocation, we've seen this kind of saber-rattling from NK for years - to me (and I would wager most), it does not rise to the level of real provocation, in terms of justifying a military response.

No... you understand that your idiocy is on par with Jarods and that bothers you, so you are lashing out. The difference between NK rattling its saber now vs years ago is they are nuclear capable at this point. They can deliver that to the South. You admit it is your opinion that it isn't 'real' provocation. First... when you use a subjective term, then it is... subjective. I would wager you are incorrect in your assessment of the publics views on this.

And sorry - for both you & your hairsplitting. Any military action - whether it's a selective stirke or part of a larger effort/WAR - would be seen as pre-emptive at this point. The justification that we are technically still "at war" is a joke.

You should be embarassed.

1) No, it is not a joke. It is reality. You just wish to pretend it isn't because you were made to look stupid.

2) There is a difference between a pre-emptive strike during a war and a pre-emptive war. If you can't comprehend this simple little fact, then perhaps you should remain on the sideline during the discussion.

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

No... you understand that your idiocy is on par with Jarods and that bothers you, so you are lashing out. The difference between NK rattling its saber now vs years ago is they are nuclear capable at this point. They can deliver that to the South. You admit it is your opinion that it isn't 'real' provocation. First... when you use a subjective term, then it is... subjective. I would wager you are incorrect in your assessment of the publics views on this.

1) No, it is not a joke. It is reality. You just wish to pretend it isn't because you were made to look stupid.

2) There is a difference between a pre-emptive strike during a war and a pre-emptive war. If you can't comprehend this simple little fact, then perhaps you should remain on the sideline during the discussion.

It's so cute when you dig your heels in.

We can disagree on what constitutes provocation that justifies military force all day - but that would be a whole different goalpost (ironic, isn't it?)

Your argument is that - since there is not "officially" a cease fire and we're still "at war" - we can fire at will at North Korea, any ol' time, and it wouldn't be pre-emptive.

Now, I have to go laugh for awhile. Really hard.

 

[Phantasmal]

No... you understand that your idiocy is on par with Jarods and that bothers you, so you are lashing out. The difference between NK rattling its saber now vs years ago is they are nuclear capable at this point. They can deliver that to the South. You admit it is your opinion that it isn't 'real' provocation. First... when you use a subjective term, then it is... subjective. I would wager you are incorrect in your assessment of the publics views on this.



1) No, it is not a joke. It is reality. You just wish to pretend it isn't because you were made to look stupid.

2) There is a difference between a pre-emptive strike during a war and a pre-emptive war. If you can't comprehend this simple little fact, then perhaps you should remain on the sideline during the discussion.

I have to interject one thing, their delivery system is questionable.

 

[Howey]

http://www.infowars.com/saved pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

http://www.meforum.org/435/usama-bin-ladin-american-soldiers-are-paper-tigers 1998 when this interview took place

Gotta give him credit....


Criticize his sources and what does he come up with?


EVEN CRAZIER SOURCES!!!!!!

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It's so cute when you dig your heels in.

You mean with silly little things called FACTS? You are basing your entire position on subjective terminology and opinion. Mine are on facts.

We can disagree on what constitutes provocation that justifies military force all day - but that would be a whole different goalpost (ironic, isn't it?)

No, it wouldn't be moving the goal posts. It would be a part of the discussion as to whether or not a preemptive strike was warranted.

Your argument is that - since there is not "officially" a cease fire and we're still "at war" - we can fire at will at North Korea, any ol' time, and it wouldn't be pre-emptive.

It would not be a preemptive war you dolt. It could be a preemptive strike. But you deliberately ignore the difference because it doesn't suit the story you wish to tell. That said, legally yes... if North Korea declares an end to the cease fire agreement, then we are at war. We do not have to wait until they strike. Though in this case it would be prudent.

Now, I have to go laugh for awhile. Really hard.

You should, fools typically laugh at their own stupidity.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/04/04/north-korea-warns-military-cleared-to-wage-nuclear-attack/

But Lorax sees no 'real' provocation.

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

LOL

Freak, it absolutely would be moving the goalposts from your little sideshow - remember...where you bolded Jarod's post, and said he was an idiot for not understanding what you were trying to argue? And what was that again? Oh, yeah - it was that any action now would not be pre-emptive, because we're still technically "at war."

You dug a big ol' hole for yourself, and now you're stomping your feet trying to pretend you didn't. But it's all here in black & white.

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

Jarod proclaimed that if he acted we could finally end the Korean War... which is correct, the war never ended. A ceasefire was agreed upon. A ceasefire that Kim Jong Un has declared null and void (granted this is the second time he has done so)

There cannot be a pre-emptive war. For as Jarod stated, the Korean War never ended and the cease fire is currently considered null and void as declared by the leader of North Korea. As of now, they are technically at war already.

In case you forgot this post (the gist of what you were arguing all along, btw).

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

LOL

Freak, it absolutely would be moving the goalposts from your little sideshow - remember...where you bolded Jarod's post, and said he was an idiot for not understanding what you were trying to argue? And what was that again? Oh, yeah - it was that any action now would not be pre-emptive, because we're still technically "at war."

You dug a big ol' hole for yourself, and now you're stomping your feet trying to pretend you didn't. But it's all here in black & white.

No Lorax. That was not what I said. That is YOUR STRAW MAN.

Go back and look at what was bolded you twit.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

In case you forgot this post (the gist of what you were arguing all along, btw).

Ironic given that you cannot seem to recall that yourself and continue instead to beat the hell out of your straw man.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Boy Onceler really skewered SF on this thread. I can't even watch this anymore...

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Where is DH? I guess the brutal skewering SF took reminded me of him.

 

[Cancel 2020.1]

Ironic given that you cannot seem to recall that yourself and continue instead to beat the hell out of your straw man.

You seem confused on the concept of a "straw man." The argument you were making is what I repeated - and I bumped the post that made that as clear as day.

Your only real thought when you hopped on this thread was to try to make a fool out of Jarod with some absurd parsing. It didn't work. I'm so sorry about that.

So sorry.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Ignore the tiny weakling, strengthen our defenses and move forward. Dont give this pittafull government the attention they are desperatly seeking.

If they take any agressive action toward us (not just words), take it as an excuse to finally end the Korean War.

Certantly do not promote or start a pre-emptive war again.

I hope the Bush doctrine on Pre-Emptive war is DEAD!

hmmm.....

I think you missed the obvious error in your post. That is what I think. Read the bolded portions again... tell us what is wrong with those two statements being together.

I must have missed it, too. If they attack us, it wouldn't be pre-emptive to respond to that with military force.

Is that what you were trying to imply?

I'm not going to play "riddle me that" with you. Stop being coy & just explain it. You can call me stupid afterwards for not getting it, because right now, I don't.

Jarod proclaimed that if he acted we could finally end the Korean War... which is correct, the war never ended. A ceasefire was agreed upon. A ceasefire that Kim Jong Un has declared null and void (granted this is the second time he has done so)

There cannot be a pre-emptive war. For as Jarod stated, the Korean War never ended and the cease fire is currently considered null and void as declared by the leader of North Korea. As of now, they are technically at war already.

LOL

Freak, it absolutely would be moving the goalposts from your little sideshow - remember...where you bolded Jarod's post, and said he was an idiot for not understanding what you were trying to argue? And what was that again? Oh, yeah - it was that any action now would not be pre-emptive, because we're still technically "at war."

You dug a big ol' hole for yourself, and now you're stomping your feet trying to pretend you didn't. But it's all here in black & white.

yes, it is all there in black and white. Showing you creating your straw man, showing you valiantly wailing away at your straw man. I never said 'any action' would not be pre-emptive. You simply said I did. I said it could not be a preemptive WAR if the WAR never ended. Which is correct.