N Korea spits at the united nations

Both. Actually I like to test-market column ideas on you WERA folks. Smartest crowd in America.

Hey thanks, dudes. But DaveK, I ain't no master...just a reasonably good bull$hitter. How esle do you think I get to hang out with Nancy?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: N Korea spits at the united nations

OK, the treaty was signed in 1972. That means it was with the Soviet Union, not Russia, so it is a dead treaty. Russia is not equal to the Soviet Union. Russia is but one small part of the Soviet Union. So negotiations with Russia bear no relation to negotiations with the Soviet Union. And since Russia doesn't control all the military assets of the former Soviet Union, they are in no position to be negotiating on behalf of the former Soviet Union. So exactly what country is this treaty with? Oh, that's right, one that doesn't exist any longer.

And even better, our withdrawal from the treaty, valid or not, is according to the terms of the treaty. So we didn't weasel out of anything; we simply left according to the terms of the treaty.

As for the strategic value of South Korea to the US, exactly what is it? They have no resources we need, therefore we have no strategic interest there. We can get cheap products manufactured there after the North takes over or we can move production somewhere else. South Korea offers us nothing that we can't get elsewhere. All they DO offer us is the opportunity to get involved in someone else's fight. Let the Korean boys fight that fight, I say.

 

The value of Korea

Like it or don't, American's have billions invested in Korea. You don't just pick up and leave billions of dollars worth of investment unless its a worst case scenario. Not to mention, Strategically, its on the front lines against the new 800lb Gorilla coming onto the world scene, China.

Also, Korea is not some 3rd World country. They have a good educational system and a solid base of engineers, scientists, etc...that are necessary to produce 21st century goods.

If the US Government just abandoned all those people and investments, where would we invest again? Build it in another country only to have some other regional bully take it over? That's the precedent you set by just saying here, take it all.

 

why the hell do you guys waste any time on due north and his communistic banter? he's a troll.

 

Ranting out of my ass? So you believe that journalists really are out for the good of the people, and not more exposure so they can get a better paying job? And yeah, I'm talking about the ones from FOX news, too. Hey believe what ya want...but the Daily Show on Comedy Central is as credible a source for real news as CNN is. I mean, some stuff they report *is* accurate. It's hard to make up stuff like the day the space shuttle is supposed to launch. I'm talking about issues that can't be verified - war correspondance for example. I can give a perfect, exact example if you really must hear it.

And I had no idea about the liberal media having a mind poisoning conspiracy, why don't you enlighten us? (I thought they were just honest communists, trying to make a living.)

Thanks for the warning though, I'll get my foil hat.

 

we don't need to know about Iraq??

I mostly just lurk here, but I couldn't resist commenting on this statement:

"Iraq has more to do with a lot of things than most people care to know about, or more importantly, need to know about."

I think that right now most people care very much to know about Iraq and what they have to do with. The part that really concerns me though is the "or more importantly, need to know about". This is OUR government, right, or are we subjects of some sort of monarchy? We very much "need to know" about why we're doing this.

EB3

 

WTF?

Like 130Gunner I too can give you very specific instasnces when the media was completely yanking your chain, less specific if you don't have a clearance

I swear I didn't come out of lurking just to jump square in the middle, but it seems that way....there was the collar bone post

 

Yep... ranting out your ass unless you really have basis for the accusations you make towards the news industry. So many people are always ripping them and haven't a clue about the industry.

No they're not out there for the good of the people, it's a job DUH but some happen to like it and are commited to ethical guidelines. Before you blast the talking heads, they're governed by editorial policy or they get canned... and that policy is determined by the owners & stockholders of some of the largest corporations in the US.

Maybe you're confusing a news reporter womeone who is editorializing?

 

eric must really like the clinton news network.

 

Re: WTF?

and the military's always totally honest? like they were in the Bay of Pigs and My Lai and thousands of other incidents?

 

Since when do stockholders get to set editorial policy?

 

and who do you listen to so you can formulate your accute, intellectual informed opinions.. Rush Lardball?

 

EB3 - that probably sounded a lot different that what it meant. I'm not saying the public should be kept in the dark by any means. Most of the time. Maybe we just disagree here, but there *are* things, contrary to the media's belief, that everybody doesn't need to know right now. Wanna document it for later reference? Or so mistakes aren't repeated? Perfectly fine. Let the story break at time when the information isn't sensitive, or won't directly impact diplomacy or combat contingency? Works for me.

But does anyone really believe it's a good idea for CNN to blurt out what units are deploying where? Or reporting a story in which there are NO facts available to the public - just for the sake of reporting a story?

Or my favorite - would anyone have blamed the Marines who landed on a beach in the middle of the night on a live operation - to have a news crew waiting there for them; if they had popped a couple of them before they realized they weren't hostiles? Okay, so that's a little extreme as far as an example - but you can probably see why the media perceives the military as not liking them, and being overly secretive.

 

only becuase huggers like eric can't stomach what it takes to have this great country. people die for the cause. can't just have it for free.

 

yeah, why not put a muzzle on them, fuck the first ammendment

 

fuck your first amendment when it comes to keeping a few things quiet. some liberal asshole right to know falls just short of keeping other's asses from getting shot off. they give phd's to people like you?

 

Ahhhhhhhh, good ole CNN. Without getting myself in too much trouble here, you may remember a little incident in China just a short while ago involving a Naval aircraft and a Chines BOZO. I happen to be VERY familiar with that type of aircraft, and some of the things you saw on that wonderful network were absolutely laughable, and bordered on blatent uninformed, unverified or just plain made up crap. I felt so strongly at the time that I contacted them both electronically and through good ole snail mail, with no response. My contention with them was essentially this: If they were so wrong about that and I could personally verify what they were telling me was so inaccurate, what was I to think about the rest of the content on the network with which I was less familiar?

Don't even get me started on Bernie Shaw and Peter Arnaut(SP?)

To borrow a term from mr Wilson, complete and utter ASSCLOWNS!!!

 

fu&*stick is mine. assclown belongs to dave K.

 

I do. And the industry is probably more of the problem - but then again I never said Ted Turner and the like were worth pissing on if their guts were on fire, either.

Yes, there are. There are always exceptions to the rule.

Not surprising, coming from someone who has nothing to lose from jackass reporters quite possibly causing me to get my ass blown out of the sky. Nothing to do with the first fucking amendment. If so, I must have missed the part where knowingly endagering others' lives is protected speech.

 

funny how liberals consider themselves intelligent and enlightened. and they consider people as myself stupid and ignorant. i call it an obvious incredible amount of common sense. so what's better? someone who is enlightened? or, someone who can cross the goddamn street on their own? liberals want what they deem they deserve, and people like myself get what they negotiate. liberals want to hug each other and forgive. and, ignore that the other person wants to hack their guts out. i would love eric and co's warped sense to be reality. but it isn't. so i for one vote to incenerate any bastard that intends to fuck with my suv's, guitar collection, and cash flow.