Can someone explain this to me?

It was only believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It was only believed that these invisible WMD's were a threat to the world. So we decimated the country and made sure Saddam Hussein got very dead. No weapons, no threat, but Hussein is still very dead.

Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

reply to post by jiggerj


Short answer - Obama is in office rather than Bush.

Obama promised to engage rogue states. He still thinks his gift of gab works everywhere its tried. N Korea also has a long history of brinksmanship but no history of actually doing anything.

Originally posted by jiggerj
It was only believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It was only believed that these invisible WMD's were a threat to the world. So we decimated the country and made sure Saddam Hussein got very dead. No weapons, no threat, but Hussein is still very dead.

Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

Well, some would say it is because NK has never gassed the Kurds. Or invaded Kuwait.

But anyone with half a wit would say that it is because NK has no petroleum. There is no financial impetus to do anything other than laugh at him.

And Saddam wasn't seen as a "buffer" against the west. It was only about 100 years ago that we invaded China.

Wild guess is that North Korea is a prototype of NWO and therefor not been interfered much. Labratory of living humans and what all TPTB can make them go through without major riots. Labratory of brainwashing tactics and one religion ( God is head of state ). Extremely poor people and lavishly living rulers.

Prior to reading any other replies, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say.......
No OIL?

reply to post by jiggerj


Bush... Obama... SAME THING. SAME foreign policy, because their foreign policy is dictated to them by the global central banks and mega corporations. NK has nothing to do with the preservation of the Petro-Dollar. NK is not an OPEC nation, therefore we don't care what NK says or does. Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc... are all oil producers and their international conduct directly effects the value and demand of the Petro-Dollar.

The USA has not attacked North Korea yet, because their nuclear weapons, as well as their ally China both act as deterrents. This means that they won't attack the USA and its allies (because the USA has strong allies, and nuclear weapons), and we won't attack them.

If China had no treaty with North Korea, and they supported the USA, and North Korea had no nuclear weapons, you could be guaranteed that the place would have already been taken out. Why? Because there wouldn't have been anything deterring the USA from eliminating the 'threat'.

location, location, location, NK is not in a viable Strategic Location. Once we mess them up we can't set up bases of operations to reach or defend (from other threats). Iraq, Afghanistan good set ups for runs into other threats etc..

Originally posted by jiggerj
Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

The answer to this, is NO you are WRONG. You're always wrong ...

Kim Jung was answering to a threat.

Let me put it this way ... if China, started a major live fire war exercies off the shore of New York, and were flying around the shores of the US with live nuclear weapons.

You'd be pissing in your pants ...

That's what Kim Jung did, and he made a big rattle saying "If you attack us, we have weapons to strike back" ...

but, somehow the rest of us here in the world don't feel even slightly threatened. And the rest of the world, will be doing fine, and we'll get along just fine without a poor-sighted, trigger happy cowboys running around, with their "wanted dead or alive" posters.

I say Americans should go out and buy glasses instead and improve their eyesight.

reply to post by jiggerj

[color=707070]Just to add another possibility that differs from previous responses:


Too scared to attack someone whom we actually KNOW for a fact that not only do they have Weapons of Mass Destruction, but also that they are smart enough to know how to use them.

Originally posted by jiggerj
Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

Maybe you need to ask why you believe 'the little fat boy' needs a hole in the head.
Maybe you need to ask yourself why you have such an opinion of someone you have never met.
Maybe you need to ask why is someone trying to control your thoughts about another human being and why you are being so willing to allow your thoughts to be controlled.
Maybe you need to ask why America and SK decided to conduct provocative military exercises off the coast of another sovereign nation.
Maybe you need to ask why America is so little respect for other nations.

Originally posted by jiggerj
It was only believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It was only believed that these invisible WMD's were a threat to the world. So we decimated the country and made sure Saddam Hussein got very dead. No weapons, no threat, but Hussein is still very dead.

Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

The reason Bush had to, no, wanted to destroy Iraq (thought it wasn't known so well at the time) is because Saddam tried to kill Daddy Bush. Bush didn't care about anyone but himself and his family, so he sent the boys off to die as payback to Saddam, that's all. And we know that Bush doesn't give a hoot about America or the people or much of anything because he sat by with his thumb (well, you know) while the present regime destroyed the nation. He wouldn't give any support to the Republican presidential nominee. Heck y'all, he didn't even attend the convention. Nope, Naw, no,no. So you see, there were no WMD's. The whole thing, like today's wars with Libya, are all for personal reasons. Corruption at the very highest levels of government. The only difference from Bush to the O is skin color alone, that, and that the O is a closet muslim.

So there you have it in a nutshell.

PS to this. Another thing gets me as long as I'm venting, and that's all the "love the troops" hullabaloo. No one cares about the troops. Not the government or anyone. It's all to satisfy a self imposed guilt trip of those that send them for no good reasons and those that voted the people in who do it. We get to see all their arms and legs blown off as if that was supposed to mean it was a good thing what we did, but it's not, and yes, I'm pretty much fed up with it, and so now I've said so. But it makes John McCain feel better to see it so he can ready them for Syria or Iran. And the democrats are in on this too so I can't excuse them either.

The ONLY just war is a war where there is an immediate and clear and present danger to America, or where America is attacked. All the rest are crimes against humanity.

Attacking and destroying the Taliban in Afghanistan was just. But we stayed too long, and that was unjust. Iraq was a war crime in total as Saddam posed no threat and did not openly attack America. Libya was a war crime in the same exact way Iraq was.

And to think, if Saddam didn't try to kill Daddy Bush, Kuwait would be Iraq's 19th province today. They always say don't screw round with the Texans cause payback is (well, you know.)

Originally posted by jiggerj
Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

Because he has about a million pieces of artillery pointed at Seoul and working nukes. There is a difference between engaging an enemy that is attempting to develop WMDs but is pretty much harmless at the moment, and engaging an enemy that is capable of mass destruction at this very moment and waiting for an excuse. North Korea is at war with South Korea, and any military action on their soil would be the excuse they need to go hot again. The purpose of American foreign policy being to secure her interests abroad, it would not be prudent to give them that excuse.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction, and he definitely threatened the world with them. And yet the little fat boy has yet to receive that much needed hole in his head. Why?

You almost said yourself - one major difference is that 'Kim Jung Un definitely has weapons of mass destruction'.

The very fact that Iraq was straight forward invaded was a tell tell sign that they KNEW he didn't have WMDs

And, really, that's the whole point of such weapons..

It must have been policy to arm NK with nuclear capabilities;

A chess piece playing a cameo role?

NPT

The NPT Review Process: The NPT Review Process: The Treaty allows for the Parties to gather every five years to review the operation of the Treaty.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by jiggerj

 

Short answer - Obama is in office rather than Bush.

Obama promised to engage rogue states. He still thinks his gift of gab works everywhere its tried. N Korea also has a long history of brinksmanship but no history of actually doing anything.

actually it's the even shorter answer, sea

NK has Nukes.

saddam didn't have the WMD's sooo....

bullies are notorious for not starting tish with those capable of defending themselves.

Two probable reasons

There is no money to be made.

and it would risk a confrontation with 1.3 billion Chinese

reply to post by jiggerj

Shortly before his untimely death, former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook told the House of Commons that “Al Qaeda” is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan. Courtesy of World Affairs, a journal based in New Delhi, WMR can bring you an important excerpt from an Apr.-Jun. 2004 article by Pierre-Henry Bunel, a former agent for French military intelligence.
www.globalresearch.ca...

Robin Cook's resignation speech over Iraq war

and now Saddam, Bin Laden and Robin cook, all of them have been killed !
and North Korea is a card of China not USA ! so USA can not kill that !!

did we forget here that all wars are bankers wars?

from what i hear, many countries are fed up with the antics of the rothschild bankers and have banded together to fight them.

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
did we forget here that all wars are bankers wars?

from what i hear, many countries are fed up with the antics of the rothschild bankers and have banded together to fight them.

Forget that I brought up Iraq for comparison. When it comes to Kim Jung Un we have to go to Jiggerj's rule book:

Rule No. 35

If you wave nuclear weapons in everyone's face and don't pull the trigger this time, you DON'T get a second chance! T'sall I'm sayin'.