Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Can someone explain this to me?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Because China does not want us to invade North Korea. Aside from this, we know that Kim Jong Un is simply making empty threats to appear fearless and powerful in the face of his people. There really isn't much more to it.

Of course, if you poke the bear enough times it will eventually lash out, but granted we leave NK alone, we won't have much to fear from them.




posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 
Ask China.
I have a feeling they would react VERY strongly to an invasion of a former allie right next door to them.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

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?


It's very very simple.

Iraq cannot use pretend weapons.

North Korea can use real weapons.

Bullies only bully smaller and weaker, then they have to try to justify it so people won't call them a bully.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   
There's several reasons..

Selling oil for gold is not tolerated.




posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Politics, no other reason except politics.

Un is the lapdog of China, China is a super power, the U.S. is led by a boat-load of cowards who want to keep China happy.

If anyone is ever going to deal with Un, it will end up being China and not the U.S., in my opinion.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by grubblesnert
reply to post by jiggerj
 
Ask China.
I have a feeling they would react VERY strongly to an invasion of a former allie right next door to them.



In these times of spies and sharp-shooters, I'm just talking about taking out the lunatic leader. Do you honestly think the NK people would complain? They're scared to death of him.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 08:32 PM
link   
This is definitely a hypocritical move on the part of the US president G.W. Bush. Here is what this is proof of, in my opinion...That while the US claims to be the "good guy" in all fights, the truth is much more sinister. The truth of why we invaded Iraq had nothing to do with WMD's. In fact, it has been PROVEN now that Bush and his cronies in the White House KNEW that there was ZERO intelligence suggesting WMD's in Iraq. And therefore this PROVES that the government will use a false flag event, or attempt to sell something to the US public based on lies. Why wasn't Bush prosecuted for this lying to the people?

Does anyone remember the crap the Republicans threw out because Clinton lied to the people about what he did? Since they could not argue with the fact that what he does in his personal life is really none of their business, they tried to say it was because he lied about it. Yet Bush tells a much larger lie, and lie that cost the US trillions of dollars, and more importantly, many soldiers' lives, yet where are these supposedly "moral" republicans? They are not saying a word about this.

Yet they are quiick to criticise everything Obama does, even when it is not his fault. So can someone tell me how some people, namely the whole republican party, can be so ignorant and biased? If they would at least stop claiming the moral high ground, when the truth is that they do nothing because it is moral. So why did Bush go into Iraq? Well do you know how much money he made for both his family and his friends? All of those government contracts, things like oil, and supplying things Iraq as well? BILLIONS of dollars. And all of that money went into the Bush family coffers, and into the hands of giant corporations who were awarded GOVERNMENT money, YOUR money, in contracts. Bush used his presidency to make so many people rich, everyone except the people, and republicans now want to complain because Obama is trying to help people? They cannot have that. They say everyone feels entitled, when the truth is that it is themselves who think they are entitled to everything. The proof is in the story I just related of Bush.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 09:55 PM
link   
\

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by grubblesnert
reply to post by jiggerj
 
Ask China.
I have a feeling they would react VERY strongly to an invasion of a former allie right next door to them.



In these times of spies and sharp-shooters, I'm just talking about taking out the lunatic leader. Do you honestly think the NK people would complain? They're scared to death of him.
Executive Order 12333 forbids assasination of Foreign Leaders.
So........it aint gonna happen under US sanction. well at least not officially
edit on 6-7-2013 by grubblesnert because: clarification



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
This is definitely a hypocritical move on the part of the US president G.W. Bush. Here is what this is proof of, in my opinion...That while the US claims to be the "good guy" in all fights, the truth is much more sinister. The truth of why we invaded Iraq had nothing to do with WMD's. In fact, it has been PROVEN now that Bush and his cronies in the White House KNEW that there was ZERO intelligence suggesting WMD's in Iraq. And therefore this PROVES that the government will use a false flag event, or attempt to sell something to the US public based on lies. Why wasn't Bush prosecuted for this lying to the people?


You are absolutely correct. However, bear in mind that what you just described is done daily in the US by police. "Probable cause" is when you have a reason to believe. Bush declared something akin to probable cause, knowing that the info was false, but knowing that he could just say it was bad info. Cops do this every day. It is wrong in both instances, and in neither does it result in justice.


Does anyone remember the crap the Republicans threw out because Clinton lied to the people about what he did? Since they could not argue with the fact that what he does in his personal life is really none of their business, they tried to say it was because he lied about it. Yet Bush tells a much larger lie, and lie that cost the US trillions of dollars, and more importantly, many soldiers' lives, yet where are these supposedly "moral" republicans? They are not saying a word about this.


The Clinton debacle is "where it all went wrong". That was what created the rift in todays politics. Where the well was poisoned. It was so absolutely ridiculous that I don't even think the Inquisitors took it seriously. Clinton is hardly worthy of my pity, but I did pity him in the stupid position he found himself in. I am somewhat shocked a GOPer had a chance to win when Bush did, honestly.

Oh wait....and that is how the well was poisoned.



Yet they are quiick to criticise everything Obama does, even when it is not his fault.
Poppycock. It was all his fault the moment he took the oath of office. And until it gets changed, it will remain his fault. And when a new President is elected, it will be his fault, too. Until he fixes it (which won't happen).


So can someone tell me how some people, namely the whole republican party, can be so ignorant and biased? If they would at least stop claiming the moral high ground, when the truth is that they do nothing because it is moral. So why did Bush go into Iraq? Well do you know how much money he made for both his family and his friends? All of those government contracts, things like oil, and supplying things Iraq as well? BILLIONS of dollars. And all of that money went into the Bush family coffers, and into the hands of giant corporations who were awarded GOVERNMENT money, YOUR money, in contracts. Bush used his presidency to make so many people rich, everyone except the people, and republicans now want to complain because Obama is trying to help people? They cannot have that. They say everyone feels entitled, when the truth is that it is themselves who think they are entitled to everything. The proof is in the story I just related of Bush.


When Obama leaves office he will be filthy stinking rich, too. It makes it hard to have a serious conversation with a partisan.
edit on 6-7-2013 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by grubblesnert
reply to post by jiggerj
 
Ask China.
I have a feeling they would react VERY strongly to an invasion of a former allie right next door to them.



In these times of spies and sharp-shooters, I'm just talking about taking out the lunatic leader. Do you honestly think the NK people would complain? They're scared to death of him.


Yes they would complain. He is a big part of their reality.

Cognitive dissonance can create a violent backlash. Never underestimate the power of the unwashed masses to actually be brainwashed masses.



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   

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?


1 feels if the situation in the region of ASIA in association with the NORTH KOREA peninsula was out of control, potential issues or global threats would be discussed behind closed doors with EURASIA interest and beyond. And so one must ask who do YOU feel should be sent to murder this man? YOU or some Soldierz who would risk their lives? And so then what? complain about how they are then sent away for nothing politics? as the world turns its EYE on YOU or them representing you.


NAMASTE*******



posted on Jul, 6 2013 @ 10:42 PM
link   
I would Ask Bush Jr's Daddy...

Bet he knows the answer, that or Oil. You choose.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by grubblesnert
Executive Order 12333 forbids assasination of Foreign Leaders.
So........it aint gonna happen under US sanction. well at least not officially


From Wiki: Order 12333

Part 2.11 of this executive order reiterates a proscription on US intelligence agencies sponsoring or carrying out an assassination. It reads:[5] No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination. Previously, EO 11905 (Gerald Ford) had banned political assassinations and EO 12036 (Jimmy Carter) had further banned indirect U.S. involvement in assassinations.[6] As early as 1998, this proscription against assassination was reinterpreted, and relaxed, for targets who are classified by the United States as connected to terrorism.[


LOL If the order can be reinterpreted and relaxed then it's not much of an order. Plus, if what the NK leader did wasn't terrorism, I don't know what is. I sure felt terrorized that the world was going into a nuclear war.
edit on 7/7/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by grubblesnert
Executive Order 12333 forbids assasination of Foreign Leaders.
So........it aint gonna happen under US sanction. well at least not officially


From Wiki: Order 12333

Part 2.11 of this executive order reiterates a proscription on US intelligence agencies sponsoring or carrying out an assassination. It reads:[5] No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination. Previously, EO 11905 (Gerald Ford) had banned political assassinations and EO 12036 (Jimmy Carter) had further banned indirect U.S. involvement in assassinations.[6] As early as 1998, this proscription against assassination was reinterpreted, and relaxed, for targets who are classified by the United States as connected to terrorism.[


LOL If the order can be reinterpreted and relaxed then it's not much of an order. Plus, if what the NK leader did wasn't terrorism, I don't know what is. I sure felt terrorized that the world was going into a nuclear war.
edit on 7/7/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)
Welll then...make yourself a copy of this section of 12333, and this thread including your statement:

".......if what the NK leader did wasn't terrorism, I don't know what is. I sure felt terrorized that the world was going into a nuclear war"

fold them up and put it in your back pocket. ( your get out of jail free card)

Get yourself on over to to North Korean and get to work!



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by grubblesnert
 





Welll then...make yourself a copy of this section of 12333, and this thread including your statement: fold them up and put it in your back pocket. ( your get out of jail free card) Get yourself on over to to North Korean and get to work!


This said nothing. What is your point, if you have one?



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:29 AM
link   
The main problems with North Korea is that they have enough weapons grade plutonium to make around six bombs, and they were considered 'loonies' by Mike McConnel (Director of National Intelligence), which implies they regard them as unpredictable and capable of anything. Spying is also more difficult given its closed society and the absence of a USA embassy in the country, and going through the country on foot wouldn't be recommended either due to the amount of hidden minefields in the de-militarized zone.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by grubblesnert
 





Welll then...make yourself a copy of this section of 12333, and this thread including your statement: fold them up and put it in your back pocket. ( your get out of jail free card) Get yourself on over to to North Korean and get to work!


This said nothing. What is your point, if you have one?
Your OPs premise is based on bias and lack of knowledge.
The sole porpose of which, I surmise, is to either garner like minded bias and inflamatory responses to stroke your own ego
or, In my case, respond with shallow minded ire.

My point being, if your so convinced your logic and passion is justified go over there and do it! (it was humor)

It appears you want no one to "explain this to me" as you request in your threads title. Only to wallow in your own vitriol and close mindedness.

What say ye ole' sad one?
edit on 7-7-2013 by grubblesnert because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-7-2013 by grubblesnert because: spellin'



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by grubblesnert

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by grubblesnert
 





Welll then...make yourself a copy of this section of 12333, and this thread including your statement: fold them up and put it in your back pocket. ( your get out of jail free card) Get yourself on over to to North Korean and get to work!


This said nothing. What is your point, if you have one?
Your OPs premise is based on bias and lack of knowledge.
The sole porpose of which, I surmise, is to either garner like minded bias and inflamatory responses to stroke your own ego
or, In my case, respond with shallow minded ire.

My point being, if your so convinced your logic and passion is justified go over there and do it! (it was humor)

It appears you want no one to "explain this to me" as you request in your threads title. Only to wallow in your own vitriol and close mindedness.

What say ye ole' sad one?


I say, you take a conversation and reduce it to personal attacks via your immaturity. Come back when you're ready to have adult conversations and when you're ready to attack the topic and not the members.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 
"I say, you take a conversation and reduce it to personal attacks via your immaturity. Come back when you're ready to have adult conversations and when you're ready to attack the topic and not the members."

Addressing allegations of immaturity and personal attacks....
I would say calling for assaination of a country's leader and/or going to war with the entire nation over YOUR personal feeling of being "terrorized" is pretty immanture.
Would'nt you?
Moreover, I don't feel my responses to you opinions were personal. Rather, My responses were based on your premise and your sarcastic terse responses to me.

Could say we're a little like one and other in some respects. I can see similairities.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by grubblesnert
 





Welll then...make yourself a copy of this section of 12333, and this thread including your statement: fold them up and put it in your back pocket. ( your get out of jail free card) Get yourself on over to to North Korean and get to work!


This said nothing. What is your point, if you have one?


I think he was totally hinting at you being ninja enough to do it.

I don't know. Your picture looks kind of old, like Walter Matthau.





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join