Barack Obama

[transjen]

I think he should stay out of it, After all it's IRAN'S election not ours so step aside and let IRAN sort out there own problem after the dust clears see who's in charge and take it from there Jennifer

[TracyCoxx]

Thanks Jen, although by now that one is a safe bet since Obama has done little so far. Now for the tougher one since we're still waiting to see what happens. North Korea. What should be done about their ship full of nuclear materials they're carting around in the Pacific? And what should Obama's response be if North Korea fires more missiles despite Obama's warnings?

And what should his response be if one of those missiles N. Korea launches is aimed towards Hawaii or Alaska?

[transjen]

The nuclear genie was let out of the bottle a long time ago and once freed it can never be rebottled, N KOREA is beating it's chest talking tough when they should remain silient, He's talking big so you have to keep your cool and hang tough and call his bluff he'll fold as he knows full well we can blow him off the face of the earth which will happen if a nuke hit's the US and any attemp will end in his country being invaded. He can't win so call his bluff Jennifer

[JohnTB]

Originally Posted by transjen

I think he should stay out of it, After all it's IRAN'S election not ours so step aside and let IRAN sort out there own problem after the dust clears see who's in charge and take it from there Jennifer

Well said!

And, waht of the the Iranian President's [attempted] flattery toward OB [or, was it intended as an insult] when he said OB was acting like his presecessor {George W. Bush}

[tslust]

Originally Posted by transjen

I think he should stay out of it, After all it's IRAN'S election not ours so step aside and let IRAN sort out there own problem after the dust clears see who's in charge and take it from there Jennifer

That's a great idea.

Originally Posted by transjen

The nuclear genie was let out of the bottle a long time ago and once freed it can never be rebottled, N KOREA is beating it's chest talking tough when they should remain silient, He's talking big so you have to keep your cool and hang tough and call his bluff he'll fold as he knows full well we can blow him off the face of the earth which will happen if a nuke hit's the US and any attemp will end in his country being invaded. He can't win so call his bluff Jennifer

One dangerous thing about N. Korea is that they have the world's best artillery. Also they have the third largest army in the world. They have enough artillery and rockets to completely wipe Seoul off the map in (at best) a several hours. Or if you believe the N. Korean propaganda, in a matter of minutes. Their guns and rockets are dug into those hills and mountains. For the last 56 years, they've been fortifying their entire country. If it comes to war against N. Korea, it would probably have to be a ground war. Most of their positions can't be taken out from the air.
Military casualties could possibly range from 661092 - 1,152,772 U.S. and Allies 4,407,275 - 5,812,075 N. Korea and possibly China. Those are the, "top end" estimates.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by tslust

That's a great idea.


One dangerous thing about N. Korea is that they have the world's best artillery. Also they have the third largest army in the world. They have enough artillery and rockets to completely wipe Seoul off the map in (at best) a several hours. Or if you believe the N. Korean propaganda, in a matter of minutes. Their guns and rockets are dug into those hills and mountains. For the last 56 years, they've been fortifying their entire country. If it comes to war against N. Korea, it would probably have to be a ground war. Most of their positions can't be taken out from the air.
Military casualties could possibly range from 661092 - 1,152,772 U.S. and Allies 4,407,275 - 5,812,075 N. Korea and possibly China. Those are the, "top end" estimates.

Here's what I think will happen. North Korea will keep launching doodads and will keep doing it to annoy people. However, in the event that they launch towards the US, they will have signed their death warrant. If they launch towards SK or Japan, Obama will:
A) Try to rally up the UN and convince them to help out with the attack against NK because he is one of those team player types and will want to make it look like a joint effort, rather than a US spearheaded effort like in Iraq.

Or

B) If a US base in SK or Japan is hit, Zero will have no choice but to invade lest he lose face with alot of Americans. NK will be invaded by a force of US troops, ROK soldiers and Japanese SDF. NK will be able to fuck up Seoul pretty good with their artillery but military bases will be mostly untouched due to the C-RAM systems. Once that first shot is fired though, NK arty will be lit up by SK and American artillery de to the fact that the C-RAMs track rounds once they are in the air and will have a precise fix on their location.

NKA mechanized forces will probably come down the Kaesong-Munsan approach and will be met with Javelins, AT-4s, attack choppers and Spectre gunships not to mention whatever mechanized we have. The initial push into South Korea will be massive but short lived.

Meanwhile, the coast will be blocked by naval ships and any artillery needed will be provided by 6 inch guns. The noisy NK diesel subs will be dispatched by our nuclear powered ones. Any air to air combat will be an epic fail for KJI's pilots.

The subterrainian tunnels that are there and the people inhabitating them will learn firsthand what the words"Daisy Cutter", "BLU-82" and "Thermobaric" have in common.

Of the people left standing, we will try to win hearts and minds with MREs. Since KJI felt it was necessary to starve his people so that he can have his ass handed to him, his subjects will be a bit more open to having us there. There might be a resettlement akin to when the Berlin wall came down.

Or

C) Zero convinces Russia and China to get involved as the Chinese will want to look like the sane older brother compared to North Koreas batshit insane policy. They will also want to keep it hushhush that they were the ones who supplied NK with nuclear materials and the ability to weapoonize them. NK will be split up between China, Russia an South Korea. And in the end, Kim Jong Il won't be so ronery.

Sorry if this sounds like gibberish; I'm typing via Ipod touch and Im really sleepy. That and my arguements are mostly based on hearsay, conjecture and groping at straws.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

I think [Obama] should stay out of it, After all it's IRAN'S election not ours so step aside and let IRAN sort out there own problem after the dust clears see who's in charge and take it from there Jennifer

Is this just your opinion or has the democratic party abolished the Truman Doctrin?

Originally Posted by Truman

it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.

Originally Posted by JohnTB

And, waht of the the Iranian President's [attempted] flattery toward OB [or, was it intended as an insult] when he said OB was acting like his presecessor {George W. Bush}

I couldn't really give a crap about what Ahmadinejad says. Anyone can realize he's full of shit.

The obvious first line of defense in Hawaii and/or Alaska are our anti-missile defense systems. BO wants to slash $1.2B from missile defense programs for FY 2010! Who's side is he on?

Originally Posted by tslust

One dangerous thing about N. Korea is that they have the world's best artillery. Also they have the third largest army in the world.

It may be large, but I would imagine it's poorly maintained. How could it not be if it's so large? They do not have a large economy to support it. Iraq had the 4th largest army. As of 2006 it was the 9th largest. What happened?

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

Obama will:
A) Try to rally up the UN and convince them to help out with the attack against NK because he is one of those team player types and will want to make it look like a joint effort, rather than a US spearheaded effort like in Iraq.

What are you talking about? In 2002, Bush went to the UN to ask for help with Iraq. He got a unanimous vote from them. As many as 40 countries were in the fight against Iraq.

[transjen]

Yes that was and still is my opion, Also my opion the middle east has been at war with one enother for thousands of years i say fine you fight it out amongst yourselves and when it's over who ever is left standing give us a call Jennifer

[TracyCoxx]

Ok. Fair enough. So if that was democratic foreign policy, who's running the country then? Since that's not the policy now.

[tslust]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

It may be large, but I would imagine it's poorly maintained. How could it not be if it's so large? They do not have a large economy to support it. Iraq had the 4th largest army. As of 2006 it was the 9th largest. What happened?

Firstly, when it comes to war, you must never underestimate the enemy. True, the Iraqi Army was very formidable (mainly in '91) force on paper. However almost all of their tanks and planes were obsolete Soviet epuiptment. The bulk of their ground forces were made up from conscripts, who had little or no training and experience. Our forces were just as green, but were better equipted, led, and trained.
Secondly, the enemy rarely ever follows your plan for him. The Iraqis were almost obsessed with fixed defences. Patton said, "Fixed fortifications are monuments to man's stupidity." The problem for the Iraqis was they seem to have forgotten that they were fighting in the desert. Desert Warfare is always a war of mobility. However, N. Korea is much different. War in N. Korea would be a war of attrition. The N. Korean Army may not have the "nice toys" that we have. They are fairly well equipted, the Chinese have seen to that, because in N. Korea, the Army comes first; all other matters (including starving children) are secondary.
Remember you must never underestimate your enemy. Understimation leads to overconfidence, which leads to complacency, which turns into unnecessary casualties.

[TracyCoxx]

What do you think a Town Hall meeting with the president is? Most people would say that's when anyone can come to an open forum and ask questions, any questions, of the president. Not in BO's world where he wants strict control over what is said and what the state run media reports. Chip Reid and none other than ultra-liberal Helen Thomas (she's 89 years old and has been has covering the White House during every presidency since JFK) called White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs out and put him on the hot seat.

Gibbs: "... But, again, let's--How about we do this? I promise we will interrupt the AP's tradition of asking the first question. I will let you [Chip Reid] ask me a question tomorrow as to whether you thought the questions at the town hall meeting that the President conducted in Annandale-"

Chip Reid: "I'm perfectly happy to-"

Helen Thomas: "That's not his point. The point is the control--"

Reid: "Exactly."

Thomas: "We have never had that in the White House. And we have had some, but not-- This White House."

Gibbs: "Yes, I was going to say, I'll let you amend her question."

Thomas: "I'm amazed. I'm amazed at you people who call for openness and transparency and-"

Gibbs: "Helen, you haven't even heard the questions."

Reid: "It doesn't matter. It's the process."

Thomas: "You have left open-"

Reid: "Even if there's a tough question, it's a question coming from somebody who was invited or was screened, or the question was screened."

Thomas: "It's shocking. It's really shocking."

Gibbs: "Chip, let's have this discussion at the conclusion of the town hall meeting. How about that?"

Reid: "Okay."

Gibbs: "I think-"

Thomas: "No, no, no, we're having it now--"

Gibbs: "Well, I'd be happy to have it now."

Thomas: "It's a pattern."

Gibbs: "Which question did you object to at the town hall meeting, Helen?"

Thomas: "It's a pattern. It isn't the question-"

Gibbs: "What's a pattern?"

Thomas: "It's a pattern of controlling the press."

Gibbs: "How so? Is there any evidence currently going on that I'm controlling the press--poorly, I might add."

Thomas: "Your formal engagements are pre-packaged."

Gibbs: "How so?"

Reid: "Well, and controlling the public-"

Thomas: "How so? By calling reporters the night before to tell them they're going to be called on. That is shocking."

Gibbs: "We had this discussion ad nauseam and-"

Thomas: "Of course you would, because you don't have any answers."

Gibbs: "Well, because I didn't know you were going to ask a question, Helen.
Go ahead."

Thomas: "Well, you should have."

Gibbs: "That's good. Have you e-mailed your question today?"

Thomas: "I don't have to e-mail it. I can tell you right now what I want to ask."

Gibbs: "I don't doubt that at all, Helen. I don't doubt that at all."

To watch the whole exchange, and it's quite entertaining, go to
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q37kt0ga0OA

Afterwards, Helen Thomas said to CBS that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.

"Nixon didn't try to do that," Thomas said. "They couldn't control (the media). They didn't try. What the hell do they think we are, puppets?" Thomas said. "They're supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them."

LOL you go girl!!!

[CreativeMind]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

What do you think a Town Hall meeting with the president is? Most people would say that's when anyone can come to an open forum and ask questions, any questions, of the president. Not in BO's world where he wants strict control over what is said and what the state run media reports. Chip Reid and none other than ultra-liberal Helen Thomas (she's 89 years old and has been has covering the White House during every presidency since JFK) called White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs out and put him on the hot seat.

Afterwards, Helen Thomas said to CBS that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.

"Nixon didn't try to do that," Thomas said. "They couldn't control (the media). They didn't try. What the hell do they think we are, puppets?" Thomas said. "They're supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them."

LOL you go girl!!!

Well, it would seem that the public is likewise starting to finally wake up to all the media manipulation and controlled imagery and information flow, which was inevitable because no matter how much spinning the talking heads do on TV...trying to convince you that things are great...people ultimately look at their own lives and their friends and say "What the hell are you talking about? Life SUCKS right now!"

Here's a bottom line truth about politics: a shitty economy and sky high unemployment and people scrambling to simply make their bills is always going to create A LOT of really pissed off people, no matter who you are. Which is a lesson that the anointed one is about to learn.

From today's Real Clear Politics...

Ohio: Obama Under 50% Approval

President Obama's job approval in Ohio has dropped significantly in the last two months, dipping under the 50% mark for the first time, according to a new poll by Quinnipiac University.

In the last Quinnipiac poll in Ohio taken in early May, Obama enjoyed a healthy 62% job approval rating, with only 31% disapproving.

Today, Obama's job approval stands at 49%, with 44% disapproving - a twenty-five point drop in just eight weeks.

Not surprsingly, Obama has seen a corresponding drop among voters' approval of his handling of the economy: two months ago he had a net +21 approval (57/36), today it is -2 (46/48).

[transjen]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

What do you think a Town Hall meeting with the president is? Most people would say that's when anyone can come to an open forum and ask questions, any questions, of the president. Not in BO's world where he wants strict control over what is said and what the state run media reports. Chip Reid and none other than ultra-liberal Helen Thomas (she's 89 years old and has been has covering the White House during every presidency since JFK) called White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs out and put him on the hot seat.



To watch the whole exchange, and it's quite entertaining, go to
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q37kt0ga0OA

Afterwards, Helen Thomas said to CBS that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try. What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”

LOL you go girl!!!

After all W was always upfront and never had hand picked questions, Jennifer

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

What are you talking about? In 2002, Bush went to the UN to ask for help with Iraq. He got a unanimous vote from them. As many as 40 countries were in the fight against Iraq.

I know that. What I was trying to say was that ever since we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, military action will be looked at with alot of scrutiny. Hypotheticaly, if we were to invade, the general view of the public would be that there is some secret motive to invade and a missile from KJI would be reason enough to do so. A force of mostly US troops would be seen as a cover for clandestine operations, just like people believe that the invasion of Iraq was only for oil. If it was a multinational force mostly comprised of UN peacekeepers with the US in the rear rather than spearheading the operations, military action would be a bit more palateable, people would be alot less suspicious of why we went there and it would make Zero look like Jesus Christ:Teamplayer.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

A force of mostly US troops would be seen as a cover for clandestine operations, just like people believe that the invasion of Iraq was only for oil. If it was a multinational force mostly comprised of UN peacekeepers with the US in the rear rather than spearheading the operations, military action would be a bit more palateable, people would be alot less suspicious of why we went there and it would make Zero look like Jesus Christ:Teamplayer.

The UN couldn't scratch its ass without the US showing the way. When have they taken the lead against any country? The US has always had to do what is necessary with or without the international community because we're usually the ones who can get the job done. The UK has the right stuff too.