Posted on 10/09/2006 6:39:50 AM PDT by kellynla
So does Jimmuh.
I'll be leaving shortly, but I've got a few errands to run on my way home tonight. Hope to see you around later!
Making the populace of NK to seem as victims sends some very wrong signals. Bush is consistent in making this same mistake over and over. In doing so our foreign policy suffers from it.
Covert taking out of thugs via an operation overseen by the Pentagon under order of congress {on need to know basis} and POTUS would save many of our service members lives. Ford and Carter's EO prohibiting assignations gave a green light to some of the worst dictators from 1976-present. Look at these time-lines and you'll see the connection. Ford's EO was written I think in 1975. Significant Terrorist Incidents, 1961-2003: A Brief Chronology
The heads of state supporting terrorist cells lost all fear of retribution from our government to make THEM personally pay for their actions. The prohibition was a huge mistake and sent the wrong message of do as you please we won't kill you for it.
Can't argue with that.
Nice selective editing of my post to come to your brilliant conclusion.
When you have contributed 1/10th of what I have as a conservative in the community and on FR, let me know.
Meanwhile, here is a site for you.
Well you sure wouldn't have known from watching the Today Show if you missed the first 30 seconds. It was about 15 minutes of Foley after that.
Personally, I think it is a presidential inside joke...they ALL seemed to do it, even the scumbag traitor Carter, who should know better.
As a former Nuclear Medicine Tech, I grit my teeth every time I hear it. Or at least I did. Now I just pretend it is a big joke, and I feel a lot better...:)
"A nuke tossed at Korea would kill fewer people than a conventional war, and would give just cause for a nuke response that might end things immediately."
Do you really think that the Chicoms will stand by, and allow anyone to nuke North Korea, right on their doorstep??!! Please explain to me in detail how you would keep China from tossing everything they have at us in retaliation for a pre-emptive nuclear strike on North Korea.
Let me tell you a little something about the Sudan (you probably already know, but I'll post it anyway.)
The Sudan was divided into oil development districts, years ago. The French (Total Fina Elf) hold one of the southern districts, I believe it is the Germans and the Chinese who now hold the other districts. The Muslims who control the gov't would like to get these oil fields working, but the tribal people of the area are in the way. So, the rest of the world wants the US to come in and help them remove these people, so that the Muzzies won't have to kill them and the French can have their oil.
No I did not know that about the Sudan, thanks for the info. The rest of the world wants us to remove the tribal people so the French can have their oil? And where would we take these tribal people to? New US citizens? Another African country? If I were king of foreign policy, I'd do my best to eliminate all Muzzie governments, one bullet at a time. Do it for the children. F the oil, we have at least 16 years supply off our own coasts that we can't drill, and the French are already French toast due to their importing of hostile Muzzies. They aren't going to need the oil. They are going to need prayer mats.
I read one of the blogs that was criticizing Bush for not stepping into the Sudan mess that claimed that Bush should do it because Marathon Oil had bought a small share in the French interest in southern Sudan. The writer tried to claim that since Marathon is a Texas company, Bush had a responsibility to end the genocide. Never mind that the French probably already have troops in the area, defending their interests.
MacArthur was fired for insubordination as he should have been.
There is one positive thing about such matters as this: we get to be entertained by the brilliance of the Armchair Generals. Of course, it is always the same advice "BOMB!!!BOMB!!!and BOMB some more."
What I was trying to say was that a couple of nukes launched from nK would kill fewer South Koreans than a conventional war would. There are 15 million South Koreans within easy artillery range of nK - a war would kill numbers that would dwarf Nagasaki.
However, China would not start a nuclear war over nKorea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.