And which particular "Coast to Coast show" "prophecy" are you specifically referencing here, dgtempe?

[edit on 15-10-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Chris McGee

SeekerOf
Contrary to your liking, the Bush administration is indeed offering to talk just not in the fashion you desire. There will be no further one-on-one talks, as stated by the administration. What is being offered is 6-way party talks, thus your proclamation and assertion that the administration "aren't willing to offer talks" is a blatant inaccuracy.

Yes, the Bush administration is offering to return to six party talks which they know will be rejected. Do you ever ask yourself why they are offering something they know will be rejected?

Ironically, the same can be said of North Korea constantly offering two-party talks...every wonder why they're offering 'em when they know they'll be rejected?

There's a lot that could have been done, but apparently NK was too busy amassing to take the decades of previous talks seriously. It's pretty obvious that NK just wants more money. They're basically threatening anyone who sanctions them (the UN), and making less-than-subtle threats towards the US and South Korea.

This guy's made his own bed. I generally don't like most of the things Bush does, but unlike previous, less-accurate engagements, we're not relying on intel or heresay. Kim has detonated a nuclear device and says he plans on using it.

Let's not get crazy and say everything we're hearing has been whitewashed by the USA and/or MEMRI; there are evil nutty people in the world besides Bush, and when they start making threats against the country they need to be dealt with.

this is all not good, but north korea is stupid to do such a thing cause our satillites will shoot em down way before they even reach the u.s.a. and if they did that we would have to retaliate and then china is forced to be involved. very ugly. and this oil thing too, our troops are going to be spread apart. what are these nations trying to do, divide and conquor the u.s.a what is really going on here? are these peoples trying to divide and conquor the u.s.a. see im right and it just proves it more about what ive been saying on here. these countries have formed a league of nations against u.s.a. i dont trust any of these nations gov'ts, iraq,iran,venezuella,cuba,north korea,china,parts of africa,russia,afghanistan,somallia, japan. its alll going to be like domminos. first prediction cut off oil by cutting ties with oil companies supplied to the u.s.a. second prediction, north korea to threaten nukes as a diversion, usa enters gulf,japan enters gulf, usa enters iran, iran goes to war with usa, usa enters north korea, japan nukes usa from gulf taking out usa missle targets ,china invades overseas battlegroups of usa, usa uses satilillights nukes them all.

[edit on 16-10-2006 by littlebird]

[edit on 16-10-2006 by littlebird]

Originally posted by littlebird
first prediction cut off oil by cutting ties with oil companies supplied to the u.s.a. second prediction, north korea to threaten nukes as a diversion, usa enters gulf,japan enters gulf, usa enters iran, iran goes to war with usa, usa enters north korea, japan nukes usa from gulf taking out usa missle targets ,china invades overseas battlegroups of usa, usa uses satilillights nukes them all.

Well I don't think it will happen quite like that, but you have the right idea. Everyone could be drawn in to a major war that will make Iraq look like a walk in the park, all because of NK.

And BTW, Japan hates NK and is our ally, and they do not have nukes.

I am more than willing to bet that if little kimmy forces his hand and goes to war with SK and hence the US, It will only be a matter of time until Iran and its buddy pre-emptively strike the U.S. in the middle east. I don't believe that there is cohesive plan to divide and conquer, but I do think all of these countries are looking for a opportunity to kick the U.S. while its hands are tied. Hezbollah and Hamas could keep Israel too tied up to be of great aid to the US. Chavez would not hesitate to cut off oil either in such an event. And all China and Russia would do is wave their hands in the air and say its not their fight. The worst thing the U.S. can do at this point is show weakness in the situation with little Kimmy; everyone is watching, waiting to see the U.S. show that it can be pushed around. The sanctions this passed this weekend appear to be a great step in the right direction. Every moment that passes with little kimmy not retaliating shows what a sack of hot air he is. China and Russia should be commended for actually stepping up to the plate and doing the right thing for once; though not to the degree I would like to see, it was a great step forward for the useless nations' security council to actually to accomplish something constructive.

The sanctions in theory could be used as a method of fighting the war without war. Now that there is a ban on the sale of heavy weapons to NK they can only choose to keep their currnent stock in pristine condition by not using them and as a result have badly trained soldiers when the time comes for them to see real action OR train the soldiers up with the heavy weapons which will over time slowly erode them due to wear and tear.

Just how long will it take for Kimmy till he snaps at the fact that he can no longer purchase a Lazy-boy chair to sit in when he wants to watch all of his hollywood movies?
Im guessing he will try and smuggle one in via China/SK and if that fails then he would do something stupid(er).

Perhapse this is why it has been said that "sanctions=war?"

[edit on 16-10-2006 by freeradical]

Ahh, the developments... *mind wanders*

Anyway, China is a little shady where these matters are concerned, and Russia is entirely too quiet on the whole thing. Reading between the lines is always just reading between the lines, but in this case, between the lines lies the possibility that NK is only a proxy. One thing that always seems to hold true in these matters is that, in the end, everything is a lot more devious than initially thought. There's always "more to it".

Anyone else?

Originally posted by Seekerof
And which particular "Coast to Coast show" "prophecy" are you specifically referencing here, dgtempe?

[edit on 15-10-2006 by Seekerof]

Ed Dames most likely.