Well, it was fun while it lasted...

a reply to: Bobaganoosh

We rise when agree. Can't we all just agree that war is stupid?

But we don't pull the puppets strings do we. Who pulls Halliburton, Raytheon, CACI, Bechtel, Aegis, General Dyn, Custer Battles strings.....yes it's the neocons. And they simply don't give a **** if you think war is stupid.

Anyone that thinks they don't control the Pentagon is a fool. And they mock Trump like the clown he is....

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

OK.

Let's say we do nothing and they fire off a nuke that smokes Honolulu? Or maybe they smoke Seoul? How about Tokyo?

What do we do then? Or would we only have some moral authority to act if they smoke Honolulu?

Let's say they hit Tokyo and vaporize a bunch of people and burn tens of thousands more. Do we have some moral imperative then to come try to help clean up the resulting disaster? Tend to the wounded and those dying of radiation poisoning, or should that be all on Japan's shoulders to do?

How about if they do that to Seoul, and then follow-up with an invasion? All South Korea's cross to bear then? Do we strand our guys on the border, or just pull them out and leave South Korea with no immediate means of defense against a North Korean army that is the only serious product of that nation?

Apply that Neocon logic here at home:

People might murder people so we better start rounding people up.

But what are we to do with them?

And you're still skipping past the hypocrisy of US the global hegemonic evil empire having the nerve to tell anyone else what is right or wrong when it comes to militarism / foreign policy / etc.

And what's with the what if's??

Ever hear of Mutually Assured Destruction? Look that up, spend an entire night on that one.

How doesn't it apply here??

The actual logic, the Neocon's logic, whether you can yet perceive it or not, is what they're talking about is preventing him from being able to counter-attack US soil (i.e. we attack him and then he retaliates).

This pre-emptive foreign policy, when dealing with nuclear armed states, is the surest march to global nuclear Armageddon.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

SJW is made up construct to enrage people into watch entertainment news so the outlets can make money. It's not real. There are no SJWs. Name one bill that has been signed by a president in the last 50 years that has made anyone one's life any better? There are none.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

If we were really looking to pre-empt him, we wouldn't have waited for him to develop his own nuclear devices and start firing off ballistic missiles that may or may not work at each test and may or may not be tipped with one of his warheads.

We would have taken him out well before this point for true pre-emption.

But sure, I suppose we could let him nuke someone just to be sure that's what he really intends.



I hear that if you get flashburns from the blast, they are third degree, so you won't actually feel them.

One would think this would have been enough to convince most people it should not be allowed to happen again, not even to let us all realize that someone is serious about their intentions to do it.

What we hope is that he backs down. Yes, all the options are being discussed because no one knows what he will do.

a reply to: dfnj2015
I don't think you read the same post I did, because he wasnt championing Trump, he was pointing out how he's the same as the rest.

The flaw in your logic is believing morality has a place in this world.

We do it because we can, and we must, for that is the nature of man. If we don't, someone else will, and we will suffer for it.

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: dfnj2015
I don't think you read the same post I did, because he wasnt championing Trump, he was pointing out how he's the same as the rest.

RE: " You had Obama & Hillary in total disgrace ala their Neolib foreign policy disaster."

Foreign policy was not defined by the Obama administration. All the Clintons, Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea are high ranking members of the CFR. It is simply not true that it is their policy which is a "total desgrace" if that is your opinion. The objectives set out by the CFR were clearly met so the policy is a smashing success!

RE: "Finally, for this juncture, we have "Neoliberalism", which again is about foreign policy, but instead of just launch immediate airstrikes, instead they like to leave it up to the likes of the CIA / DIA, sneaky stuff, overthrow their government stuff "

Meaningless rhetoric assuming political parties actually matter. They do not. Lobbyists define domestic policy. CFR defines foreign policy. Both parties have EXACTLY THE SAME POLICIES.

The OP was full of assumptions that political parties are actually functional. Politicians are figureheads. They are talking heads who are told exactly what to say by their handlers. There used to be joke when I was growing up that went like this, "you know how to tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving." The joke doesn't even work anymore because "lying" is not a strong enough word.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
SJW is made up construct to enrage people into watch entertainment news so the outlets can make money. It's not real. There are no SJWs.

The problem is that even if they were just created by the entertainment-news conglomerates they've taken on a life of their own and now thrive en masse across the social media platforms. No media coverage is needed, they're going full throttle right now on Twitter, YouTube comments, Facebook, the chans, Reddit, here on ATS even.

I don't care for it but SJW is a perfectly viable phrase. Social Justice Warrior.

The SJW is one who is defending or even attacking something or someone because they feel some type of social injustice has occurred. They are protecting their concept of society by demanding that everyone else conform to it.

They do this because they're incapable of understanding and accepting that other people don't have to think, act, talk or function like they do. Some are willing to resort to violence over anything that contradicts their concept of how the world should be.

The best part is that they're easily manipulated and typically not very bright. They're also shut down pretty quickly when confronted with facts and will typically resort to name-calling, ad-homs, or even violence instead of accepting that they are wrong or willing to back down.

I do respect their tenacity. I'll give them that much.

a reply to: ketsuko

Of course it is hypothetical as of now.

When it isn't, that will be the real test. Will we still fight amongst ourselves or will we focus the intentional threat of violence at the true source of these problems? I know who will be in my scope, and it won't be a useful idiot.

If even a few million folks stood up to save about a billion, wouldn't that be God's work?

originally posted by: Noncents

originally posted by: dfnj2015
SJW is made up construct to enrage people into watch entertainment news so the outlets can make money. It's not real. There are no SJWs.

The problem is that even if they were just created by the entertainment-news conglomerates they've taken on a life of their own and now thrive en masse across the social media platforms. No media coverage is needed, they're going full throttle right now on Twitter, YouTube comments, Facebook, the chans, Reddit, here on ATS even.

I don't care for it but SJW is a perfectly viable phrase. Social Justice Warrior.

The SJW is one who is defending or even attacking something or someone because they feel some type of social injustice has occurred. They are protecting their concept of society by demanding that everyone else conform to it.

I not going to defend the SJW label. It seems to me what you are saying is nobody has a right to complain about anything in society. And appealing to government to help make people's lives better is just not an option. I just do not agree with this line of thinking. People have grievances with their local, state, and federal governments. Not everyone has the best education or language skills in expressing those grievances. You seem to think everything is just perfect the way it is. Or, you seem to think only grievances you agree with are the only valid ones. Or, maybe you think people just do not have the right to even have grievances.

The moment you use the SJW label you shutdown the other person's opinion as irrelevant. Which is fine but I still think other people should be able to have an opinion respected even if you don't like it. What I mean by respect is people do not get what they want. But you don't have to be degrading by attaching derogatory labels on people in my humble opinion. I just think we can be civil with each other even if we do not agree.

Whatever your position is on people having grievances, I do not have a problem with people trying to change their government to be more to their liking. Even it if it means addressing the grievances is at the expense of other people. At some point it will become "more perfect" but I doubt it will ever be perfect.

a reply to: dfnj2015
It's one thing to complain and be unhappy with government. From my understanding that's not what the whole SJW thing is about. Most people only complain about government to people that can't do anything about it anyways instead of being active in their local government (and trying to climb the ranks if they wanted to go that far with it). Being bothered about a government problem is normal. I've never seen someone that actually gets involved with governmental issues called an SJW, those are typically referred to as activists.

That's not the same thing. I think you understand this.

It's a different thing entirely to attack people, regular individuals, because they don't have the same social views. It's fine for other people to have a different view. It should be that way. We're not a hive-mind.

That's kind of what the whole SJW label is about. The SJW types are people that refuse to accept this and act out either vocally or physically, typically violently. It's not OK to attack people, vocally or physically because they hold a different social view than you. People can handle disagreements without melting into screaming, flailing, masses of stupidity.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

That was a great heart felt post;

Hear me, fellow outsiders / purveyors of sanity, the battle to take down the Two Party System must begin now. We have a few years until the next election. If you think waiting until the last year, and then complaining about how the "third" parties have no chance, then they wont. And this isn't about what we're told is "conservatism", or "liberalism", it's about cutting out all the insanity. We all know what it all looks like, from both sides now. We seen it all after 8 years of Bush, and 8 years of Obama.

While I agree with much of what you have said I would like to add.... It does not matter who is elected POTUS... The deep state or the professional bureaucrats are able to sway opinions and policies of anyone.

Trump, during his campaign, said all the right words for many of us to help him get elected.. Then once in office with all the supposedly high tech briefings and advisors his policies are a mirror of those who went before him with few exceptions.. I think many are disappointed in how things are turning out.. I know I am..

Is he trying to do some good...yes.. The biggest thing IMO are his supreme court nominees for that is the gift that will keep on giving for many years, long after Trump is but a page in some history book.

Anyway star and flag for your thoughts.. The whole Korean thing is more straight forward IMO than Syria or anything in the Mid-East.. That is a Sunni (Saudia Arabia et al) verses Iran and their brand of Islam not to mention Israel who is there in the mix and has becomes buds with Saudi et al.. None of this stuff is going away anytime soon so let us all hope mankind does not blow itself up before some of these matters get sorted out.

North Korea has been a festering sore for a long time. It is time to put pressure on China et al to get the North Koreans to fall more inline with some kind of dreamed world order.. Myself I just hope South Korea does not get wiped off the map during the process .

I think most of us are weary of the left petulant behavior

Seriously, after 8 years of retarded, insane, hyperventilating, assinine attacks against Obama, a few months of isolated demonstrations against the most upresidential president in history is petulance?!

Trump is a disaster and a fraud.

I do agree that we need more than two parties. That's about the only thing I can agree with in the OP's incoherent rant. Maybe you should take a position next time instead of every position at the same time?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Seriously?

You know what it's like when you pull a fresh Coke out of the refrigerator ... pop the top and take a deep swallow ... only to find it's flat, and not even cold?

I'm giving these back ... this time ...
... don't lose them again.

Excellent thread!

S&F

a reply to: ketsuko

If we were ever gonna "deal" with him, we would have stopped him before he got the bomb.

Now he has it. He says if he's attacked he'll use it. Is that irrational?

Since WW2 they've only ever been used for deterrence.

Now he's got one cementing his rule, but now the bright idea is 'hey he his whole nation MIGHT commit permanent national SUICIDE by attacking people just for the fun of it, so lets go attack him to ensure he only blows up South Korea'.

Having some clue what nukes do to nouns ought to be your rally cry to prevent a conflict.

REALITY CHECK: If we attack / invade, there's a high probability he'll launch on South Korea before its over. You'd seriously work to ensure he nukes South Korea now just so he cant MAYBE nuke Hawaii later? That's what your position adds up to. PERIOD.

He's been able to attack SK, I mean REALLY attack, but hasn't. He's been able to NUKE them, but hasn't. But WOAHHHHHHHH, if he gets the means to hit Hawaii he'll just automatically LAUNCH!!!!!! And then all of NK would inherently be immediately nuked to kingdom come, despite not having certainty that their bomb will actually hit AND detonate.

Seriously, I just cant even comprehend how this simple logic isn't painfully obvious to you; how you cant see that by pursuing military WAR you're ensuring the sort of outcome you're supposedly trying to prevent.

The Neocon FEARMONGERING sure has gotten to you.

REALITY CHECK: NOBODY is EVER going to nuke US unless 'we' go around triggering nuclear wars. NOBODY could ever hope to survive hitting US with nukes, and therefore it will never happen unless we deserve it and they're desperate.

So far we've got the "deserve it" part covered as long as we push on with this ind of Neocon / Neolib foreign policies. And to push at desperate little nations like this, that's how we bring about this two part formula.

Or, you know what, if you can't be dissuaded by logic and humanitarianism, then go ENLIST to be in the war you want so bad.

Fat Man the Little Boy Kim is LAUGHING at all of US thanks to this wild FEAR obsession you guys have over him, his little army, and his tiny bomb. And its embarrassing, just like the SJW's and their insanity.

a reply to: Snarl

Feel free to join the actual debate.

Plenty of juicy points for you to launch from.

Just telling someone they're being stoooopid doesn't mean that it isn't actually you that is.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I usually agree with you, but I have to say that underestimating your enemy is a recipe for disaster.

I don't think all this downplaying of North Korea is very smart. Lil Kim is not his father and he grew up a spoiled brat under a regime that were essentially God's. I doubt he is mentally stable and is probably over estimating himself to a large degree. I doubt he's afraid to die, and I bet he's prepared to if it meant manifesting their countries "destiny".

It's been pretty clear he isn't scared of anyone and isnt falling for any bluffs. It seems to me he wants a war.

I don't know though, just my thoughts..

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Snarl

Feel free to join the actual debate.

I don't see it as a debate. Kim Jong Un sunk the Cheonan and shelled YeonPyeong Do (there was a time when he was a four-star general and in command of the area where these two incidents took place). He's bringing a nuclear weapons program to maturity. He's working out the kinks in his ballistic missile programs. He's openly threatened the United States and her allies with Armageddon.

There's no doubt we should destroy his ability to make war ... or take hostile action against Seoul in petulant retaliation. The best way to do that is a strategic nuclear strike. Completely obliterate all North Korean military forces within 50 miles of the DMZ, destroy his ballistic missile labs, smash his nuclear testing facility.

I know I cross a line with some with these next thoughts. I'd go so far as to wipe PyongYang from the map. I'd attack and destroy China's strategic weapons programs in the same three-minute stroke. They've propped-up the Kim dynasty for 60+ years ... they should surely be made to pay for that as well.

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Snarl

Feel free to join the actual debate.

I don't see it as a debate. Kim Jong Un sunk the Cheonan and shelled YeonPyeong Do (there was a time when he was a four-star general and in command of the area where these two incidents took place). He's bringing a nuclear weapons program to maturity. He's working out the kinks in his ballistic missile programs. He's openly threatened the United States and her allies with Armageddon.

There's no doubt we should destroy his ability to make war ... or take hostile action against Seoul in petulant retaliation. The best way to do that is a strategic nuclear strike. Completely obliterate all North Korean military forces within 50 miles of the DMZ, destroy his ballistic missile labs, smash his nuclear testing facility.

I know I cross a line with some with these next thoughts. I'd go so far as to wipe PyongYang from the map. I'd attack and destroy China's strategic weapons programs in the same three-minute stroke. They've propped-up the Kim dynasty for 60+ years ... they should surely be made to pay for that as well.

No more people should suffer.

A single shot is all we need.

Drop a single missile right on his head.

If the next guy wants to kill us all.

Hellfire his a$$. Time to rethink all this stuff...