Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/06/18/north.korea.ship/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/...dex.html</a> They think it might contain weapons and technology. This could be nothing, this could be the start of a whole lot of crap.
Originally Posted By alexbook So, we're going to ask for permission to search the ship. And if they refuse, here's our response: <a href="http://www.borowitzreport.com/article.aspx?ID=7029" target="_blank">http://www.borowitzreport.com/...?ID=7029</a>
Originally Posted By gadzuux Another worrisome report ... <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/06/16/international/i210537D58.DTL&tsp=1" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...TL&tsp=1</a> >> The United States has deployed anti-missile defenses around Hawaii amid reports that North Korea may fire its most advanced ballistic missile toward the U.S. islands early next month, adding to already high tensions in the region. A report in a Japanese newspaper said Pyongyang might test-fire its Taepodong-2 toward Hawaii around the U.S. holiday of Independence Day. North Korea test-fired a similar long-range missile on July 4 three years ago, but it failed seconds after liftoff. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the additional defenses around Hawaii consist of a ground-based mobile missile system and a radar system nearby. Together they could shoot an incoming missile in mid air. "Without telegraphing what we will do, I would just say ... we are in a good position, should it become necessary, to protect Americans and American territory," Gates told reporters in Washington on Thursday. A new missile launch — though not expected to reach U.S. territory — would be a brazen slap in the face of the international community, which punished North Korea with new U.N. sanctions for conducting a second nuclear test on May 25 in defiance of a U.N. ban. North Korea spurned the U.N. Security Council resolution with threats of war and pledges to expand its nuclear bomb-making program. << So where's the sense in any of this? What does north korea get out of these overtly provocative maneuvers? They have no allies to speak of, and if they get too rambunctious, I would hope that china and russia would step up to the plate and be the heavy hand. This really shouldn't be a matter for major US involvement. North Korea is NOT a direct threat to the US. It IS a direct threat to the peace and stability of the region. Therefore, the military powers IN THE REGION should be on the front lines of any confrontation. If North Korea attempts to invade South Korea, THEN we could be the primary opposing force. But why would they do that? This whole thing is senseless. Kim and North Korea cannot 'win' anything - all they can do is throw the entire region into chaos and possible nuclear conflict.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***What does north korea get out of these overtly provocative maneuvers?*** Food.
Originally Posted By ecdc They must be pretty hungry then. If North Korea shoots a missile at the United States, we'll have no choice but to go to war with them. And even with ground forces spread between Afghanistan and Iraq, I have to think we could bomb them night and day without too many casualties on our part. All in the name of defending ourselves against a madman.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Wow, and Joe Biden was mocked and criticized when he said Obama would be tested within six months... From abcnews.com, Oct. 20, 2008 >>ABC News' Matthew Jaffe Reports: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., on Sunday guaranteed that if elected, Sen. Barack Obama., D-Ill., will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions. "Mark my words," the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy." <<
Originally Posted By Mr X ***If North Korea shoots a missile at the United States, we'll have no choice but to go to war with them.*** Well, I dunno. They've launched missiles directly over staunch U.S. ally Japan a few times now, and noone seems to care (except the increasingly freaked out residents of Japan, myself included). In any case "at" the United States wouldn't do it. They have no technology that could actually *hit* any of the 50 states as far as I know (even the planned launch towards Hawaii, at maximum success, would fall 500 miles short). Perhaps they could hit Guam? I don't know if that would cause such an international stir honestly (we tend to regard our territories as much less important than our states for some reason). Methinks the DPRK can do whatever they want, without much threat from abroad (the Japanese are chomping at the bit, believe me, but they are stifled by their non-militaristic constitution which they refuse to change for whatever reasons).
Originally Posted By Mr X re post 6...iirc the President mocked him for it as well. perhaps a low-key "yeah, you were right Joe" would be appropriate now.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Well, I dunno. They've launched missiles directly over staunch U.S. ally Japan a few times now, and noone seems to care (except the increasingly freaked out residents of Japan, myself included).<< Right. I guess it depends on a combination of intent and success. Obviously if they got lucky and actually hit Hawaii and killed Americans, game over. But what if it falls 100 miles short of Hawaii, but we have intelligence that says they were really trying to hit it? What if it falls 500 miles short, we have intelligence that says they were trying to hit it, but they publicly just call it a "test?" Not an easy question, I agree. The Japan question is an interesting one, as well. What would the Japanese do if North Korea bombed the deliberately? What about unintentionally, in a test gone awry? Believe me, I'm not excited at the prospect of yet *another* war. But I'm also not fond of madmen - and Kim Jong Il seems to make Ahmadinejad look perfectly sane. Unlike other liberals, I support the war in Afghanistan 100%. If North Korea bombs us, or comes close and their intentions are clear, I think I'd support bombing them into submission, destroying all their nuclear plants and development, and anything that even looks like its used as a launch pad.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 You're not the only liberal who feels that way, ecdc. In this case, it's somebody actually threatening, so there would be just cause if North Korea actually did something.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***What would the Japanese do if North Korea bombed the deliberately? What about unintentionally, in a test gone awry?*** A very good question. Personally, I think it would be time to unveil the secret nuclear arsenal that every Japanese person I've ever talked to insists can not possibly exist.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Unlike other liberals, I support the war in Afghanistan 100%.*** Yeah, I really don't get the liberals who insist Afghanistan is no different from Iraq.
Originally Posted By Mr X Good news folks. Nothing to worry about here! JOHN MCCAIN has decided to personally deal with those crazy Koreans and perhaps singlehandedly intercept that ship. <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/19/military-set-intercept-north-korean-ship-suspected-proliferatin-missiles-nukes/" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/politic...s-nukes/</a>
Originally Posted By gadzuux Most every 'liberal' I know - and that's quite a few - generally supports the afghanistan war. I even take it a step further and think we should be taking a larger role in Pakistan. For years we were concerned about making our puppet Mushareff look weak. Well that's no longer a problem. We need to go where the enemy is. And if they're on that side of the border instead of this side, well that's just tough.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Yeah, I also don't know any "liberals" personally who are against being in Afghanistan. Everyone I know thinks that's where we should have been in the first place. I'm by no means "anti-war". I'm just against unnecessary ones.
Originally Posted By ecdc A CNN poll in May showed 48% of Americans opposed to the war in Afghanistan, IIRC, a sizable majority of those were people who identified themselves as Democrats.
Originally Posted By alexbook >>JOHN MCCAIN has decided to personally deal with those crazy Koreans and perhaps singlehandedly intercept that ship.<< LOL
Originally Posted By alexbook >>Yeah, I also don't know any "liberals" personally who are against being in Afghanistan. Everyone I know thinks that's where we should have been in the first place. I'm by no means "anti-war". I'm just against unnecessary ones.<< It's probably no surprise to anybody here that I opposed the war in Afghanistan. I even went to anti-war demonstrations during the run-up. Not that I didn't think we should do something about the Taliban, but I felt that the way the war was launched was unnecessarily precipitous and unilateral. We've also inflicted far too many civilian casualties with poorly targeting air bombardments, resulting in even more anti-American feeling among Afghans. I don't have the formula for solving the North Korean problem, but I just hope this administration is serious about building international consensus for whatever action they eventually decide to take. I also hope we can be honest with ourselves about the effects of a war, if that's what ends up happening.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Perhaps they could hit Guam?>> Or Palau. I might be more center right than some here and I don't want to make sound like I'm "for war" but if you're going to do, then do it right. Which is something that didn't happen in the first few years of Iraq.
Originally Posted By Mr X Well, the reason I mentioned Guam is because it's a U.S. territory (thus I'd imagine it could trigger some sort of U.S. response). Palau is not associated with America, I think (correct me if I'm wrong on that).
