N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth !
- Thread starter lovejoy
- Start date
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
Don't worry about it amigo. Oh by the way, we still have 50 states in the union, not counting Puerto Rico. :nanner:
Cheers. :glugglug:
Don't worry about it amigo. Oh by the way, we still have 50 states in the union, not counting Puerto Rico. :nanner:
Cheers. :glugglug:
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
:1orglaugh
Just wondering if Hawaii is still around!? :dunno:
:1orglaugh
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
Hawaii is still around but N. Korea fired 7 short-range SCUD into Sea of Japan on July 4th and threatened to fire more if their ship is searched by the US Navy.
It is just a war game but eventually N. Korea will hit Japan. (northern Japan)
I doubt within 12 months, N. Korea can develop much longer range SCUD to fire.
The Russia has mobile long-range SCUD, it is self-substaining with 10-12 crews included kitchen, living quarters and is mobile. I am not sure the Russia will provide such technology to N. Korea.
If N. Korea did receive the technology, it will just be used as a bargaining chips against NATO for their missile shield in Europe.
Just wondering if Hawaii is still around!? :dunno:
Hawaii is still around but N. Korea fired 7 short-range SCUD into Sea of Japan on July 4th and threatened to fire more if their ship is searched by the US Navy.
It is just a war game but eventually N. Korea will hit Japan. (northern Japan)
I doubt within 12 months, N. Korea can develop much longer range SCUD to fire.
The Russia has mobile long-range SCUD, it is self-substaining with 10-12 crews included kitchen, living quarters and is mobile. I am not sure the Russia will provide such technology to N. Korea.
If N. Korea did receive the technology, it will just be used as a bargaining chips against NATO for their missile shield in Europe.
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
Please refer to my analysis on the death of Michael Jackson, abuse of IV Propofol, oxycodone, Demerol and sleeping pills.
Concerned about the death of Steve McNair, I think Steve and his girlfriend had big fights and she decided to end it all after the Nashville Police stopped Kazemi and took her to the Police Station and let Steve McNair go.
It is the "same" police officer who stopped Steve Mcnair couple years back for DUI and the case was dropped.
The Nashville Police have completed the interviews of most of the waiters and waitress in two restaurants in which Steve McNair and his girlfriend went the night before the shooting.
Will update any current event in N. Korea !
Please refer to my analysis on the death of Michael Jackson, abuse of IV Propofol, oxycodone, Demerol and sleeping pills.
Concerned about the death of Steve McNair, I think Steve and his girlfriend had big fights and she decided to end it all after the Nashville Police stopped Kazemi and took her to the Police Station and let Steve McNair go.
It is the "same" police officer who stopped Steve Mcnair couple years back for DUI and the case was dropped.
The Nashville Police have completed the interviews of most of the waiters and waitress in two restaurants in which Steve McNair and his girlfriend went the night before the shooting.
Will update any current event in N. Korea !
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
I agree totally !!!!! :nanner: :eek: :nanner:
I agree totally !!!!! :nanner: :eek: :nanner:
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
Yes! The Russians are equipping bears and we are currently training dolphins! It's going to be a real petting zoo of a war in a few weeks! Oh, and the Japanese are training a legion of schoolgirls with samurai swords to invade South Korea over the J-Pop and K-Pop battle of the decade!
Whoo, Red Alert 3 really brings out the imagination!
Yes! The Russians are equipping bears and we are currently training dolphins! It's going to be a real petting zoo of a war in a few weeks! Oh, and the Japanese are training a legion of schoolgirls with samurai swords to invade South Korea over the J-Pop and K-Pop battle of the decade!
Whoo, Red Alert 3 really brings out the imagination!
Facetious
Moderated
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
Interesting posts ^
As much as a Dodo bird as "w" Bush was, I often find myself in agreement with his admins warning about "The Axis of Evil" -> Iran - North Korea - Venezuela.
If N Korea and Iran aren't neutralized by the time they come full circle with their nuke & missile technology the western world will be in a world of hurt !
It has been suggested that now is the time to neutralize the illegal nuclear program in Iran given the recent political turmoil over the elections.
The Obama administration has, thus far, failed to "capitalize on an opportunity" to do some things that wouldn't normally otherwise be done" . A preemptive attack against Iran's weapons mfgers is totally acceptable given that A) it's manufacture of nuke weapons is illegal (according to the U.N.) B) Something about wiping a nation off of the face of the earth, ad nauseam. (We should encourage a nation such as Israel to defend itself before they threats against them come to fruition)
Interesting posts ^
As much as a Dodo bird as "w" Bush was, I often find myself in agreement with his admins warning about "The Axis of Evil" -> Iran - North Korea - Venezuela.
If N Korea and Iran aren't neutralized by the time they come full circle with their nuke & missile technology the western world will be in a world of hurt !
It has been suggested that now is the time to neutralize the illegal nuclear program in Iran given the recent political turmoil over the elections.
The Obama administration has, thus far, failed to "capitalize on an opportunity" to do some things that wouldn't normally otherwise be done" . A preemptive attack against Iran's weapons mfgers is totally acceptable given that A) it's manufacture of nuke weapons is illegal (according to the U.N.) B) Something about wiping a nation off of the face of the earth, ad nauseam. (We should encourage a nation such as Israel to defend itself before they threats against them come to fruition)
Sigh ...
When Iraq failed to fully disclose (and they never did), the UN Resolution only stated "consequences" one more time. The "consequences" were tougher than the almost 2 dozen before, and more aligned with the original, 1990 resolution, although the 1990 resolution talked about how Iraq must remove itself from Kuwait. Like in 1991, the US decided to interpret what those "consequences" were, claiming the prior resolutions, including violations of the cease fire of 1991, which meant it was no longer in effect. Again, even the original, 1990 resolution also did similar, generic "consequences" as well, and were not very explicit, other than how Iraq must choose to remove itself from Kuwait, with the typical, "or else." People debated what that meant back then as well.
If you don't remember that, then I don't know what to tell you. A lot of people seem to have a "short memory" on this board. The US media, other than CNN at the time (which wasn't popular yet), was very slanted towards favoring the US. In fact, the US media regularly pushed the concept that the UN was useless, and the US should act without it. Again, I know we have a lot of 20-somethings on this board, and all would have been pre-teen those 18-19 years ago.
No matter how people try to spin it on both sides, there was nothing that was explicitly legal or illegal. But then again, that was the case in 1990 as well. In 1990, we had the blessing of all Arabic nations. That was the main difference. The only UN Resolutions that were definite were the terms of the cease fire after the 1991 surrender, which Iraq was repeatedly notified by the UN it was in violation of. In the final 2002 Resolution, only Kuwait supported the US on action.
Hans Blix said it best, Iraq never, ever disclosed anything, and its was impossible to verify anything as a result. That was fact, and Blix repeated it over and over. People like to focus on Blix's comments post-US military deployment in Kuwait, not before he realized the US was not bluffing this time, and then came out against war. Understand the US bluffed and bluffed and bluffed for years on Iraq. Even in 1995, the US gave into French and Russian vetos on the UN Security Council, until three (3) defectors escaped Iraq in 1996 and disclosed installations that turned out to be true. And that's when the inspections started all over again, with the "cat'n mouse" came continuing.
In the case of Libya, South Africa, etc..., they disclosed. The only way inspections work is if a nation discloses. I think people forget the US under-estimated Iraqi capabilities until 1991, and then was shocked. Then you had all of the games Iaq played from 1991-1996, with Iraq denying and then being caught red handed again and again. By 1998, they just expelled the inspectors, and the Clinton administration fired of cruise missiles without any UN resolution, and drew up invasion plans. Clinton backed down from the invasion, but the same plan was revisited, and used, by W. The US intelligence from post-inspection of 1998-2002 had no reason to believe that "cat'n mouse" game had ended. Sadly enough, a lot of things were dumped and other things, we don't know where they went other than the trace results of some WMD usage in Japan and elsewhere.
Even in Oliver Stone's W., the well regarded notion that Saddam decided to move from active WMD development/hiding to farce was to keep his people in-line and not revolting, especially since he assumed the US was fluffing like the 18 or so resolutions prior.
In all honesty, the stupidest thing W. ever did was make it about WMDs. He should have never done that. Beyond the fact that he should have never gone in (which people in Congress seem to "conveniently forget," including those with the exact same intel as W., let alone Clinton before), all he had to do was point back to the terms of the cease fire. Iraq never, ever abided by those terms and were, without any doubt, in total violation of them. That was repeatedly agreed upon by everyone in the Security Council.
The US just decided to invade. As much as Congress tries to pin it on W., and he's a great scapegoat, a lot of people in Congress (many Democrats) were getting tired of nations like Iraq not giving a flying fuck about reesolutions and not bothering to disclose jack. I honestly invite people to read Hans Blix prior to the start of US troop deployments in Kuwait in late 2002. He did not start to reverse his views until it was clear the US was making good on its threats.
Even the original 1990 resolutions were not explicit on force. Ironically, the US actually built quite an alliance in 2003, just without the blessing of Arab nations other than Kuwait. That is the real difference. Understand Iraq was no longer a "sovereign nation" after it invaded Kuwait and lost a war, giving up its "sovereign nation" status and agreed to cease fire terms. The US and 40 some odd other nations just decided the "consequences" as outlined in the almost 2 dozen resolutions out to mean something.
And we've been paying the price ever since.
North Korea has been a problem since the start of the Clinton administration, and until Carter intervened, the Clinton administration was already planning for armed conflict. By 1999, the Clinton administration realized North Korea wasn't living up to the 1994 deal. The rest is history. A lot of people want to blame W. for a lot of things, and I fully admit W. is the man who made many poor decision, but they were hardly done in a vacuum, and he was hardly alone.
Blaming him is just looking past the problem, and it's why we keep repeating history. That includes the current implosion of the US' consumer-focused economy with absolutely no tit-for-tat tariffs and other, chronic mistakes. A lot of this didn't start with W., or even Clinton, and goes back to the '80s and even some of the '70s. The .COM bust and destruction of the economy, including W.'s first recession, were not his doing. Same thing for Enron and others. The real estate bust started in the '90s, not Clinton, but the Republican Congress as well. Hell, Republicans are being soley blamed for NAFTA, even though Gore was a massive proponent.
Apparently you missed the UN Resolution that called for the ceasefire agreement in the case of Iraq back in 1991. No UN Resolution was required, although W. sought and received one regarding the inspections. There were nearly 2 dozen over the previous dozen years as well. Otherwise every cruise missile attack made by Clinton was illegal as well, because none of them justified any force against Iraq other than no fly zones that were limited in scope.
When Iraq failed to fully disclose (and they never did), the UN Resolution only stated "consequences" one more time. The "consequences" were tougher than the almost 2 dozen before, and more aligned with the original, 1990 resolution, although the 1990 resolution talked about how Iraq must remove itself from Kuwait. Like in 1991, the US decided to interpret what those "consequences" were, claiming the prior resolutions, including violations of the cease fire of 1991, which meant it was no longer in effect. Again, even the original, 1990 resolution also did similar, generic "consequences" as well, and were not very explicit, other than how Iraq must choose to remove itself from Kuwait, with the typical, "or else." People debated what that meant back then as well.
If you don't remember that, then I don't know what to tell you. A lot of people seem to have a "short memory" on this board. The US media, other than CNN at the time (which wasn't popular yet), was very slanted towards favoring the US. In fact, the US media regularly pushed the concept that the UN was useless, and the US should act without it. Again, I know we have a lot of 20-somethings on this board, and all would have been pre-teen those 18-19 years ago.
No matter how people try to spin it on both sides, there was nothing that was explicitly legal or illegal. But then again, that was the case in 1990 as well. In 1990, we had the blessing of all Arabic nations. That was the main difference. The only UN Resolutions that were definite were the terms of the cease fire after the 1991 surrender, which Iraq was repeatedly notified by the UN it was in violation of. In the final 2002 Resolution, only Kuwait supported the US on action.
Hans Blix said it best, Iraq never, ever disclosed anything, and its was impossible to verify anything as a result. That was fact, and Blix repeated it over and over. People like to focus on Blix's comments post-US military deployment in Kuwait, not before he realized the US was not bluffing this time, and then came out against war. Understand the US bluffed and bluffed and bluffed for years on Iraq. Even in 1995, the US gave into French and Russian vetos on the UN Security Council, until three (3) defectors escaped Iraq in 1996 and disclosed installations that turned out to be true. And that's when the inspections started all over again, with the "cat'n mouse" came continuing.
In the case of Libya, South Africa, etc..., they disclosed. The only way inspections work is if a nation discloses. I think people forget the US under-estimated Iraqi capabilities until 1991, and then was shocked. Then you had all of the games Iaq played from 1991-1996, with Iraq denying and then being caught red handed again and again. By 1998, they just expelled the inspectors, and the Clinton administration fired of cruise missiles without any UN resolution, and drew up invasion plans. Clinton backed down from the invasion, but the same plan was revisited, and used, by W. The US intelligence from post-inspection of 1998-2002 had no reason to believe that "cat'n mouse" game had ended. Sadly enough, a lot of things were dumped and other things, we don't know where they went other than the trace results of some WMD usage in Japan and elsewhere.
Even in Oliver Stone's W., the well regarded notion that Saddam decided to move from active WMD development/hiding to farce was to keep his people in-line and not revolting, especially since he assumed the US was fluffing like the 18 or so resolutions prior.
In all honesty, the stupidest thing W. ever did was make it about WMDs. He should have never done that. Beyond the fact that he should have never gone in (which people in Congress seem to "conveniently forget," including those with the exact same intel as W., let alone Clinton before), all he had to do was point back to the terms of the cease fire. Iraq never, ever abided by those terms and were, without any doubt, in total violation of them. That was repeatedly agreed upon by everyone in the Security Council.
The US just decided to invade. As much as Congress tries to pin it on W., and he's a great scapegoat, a lot of people in Congress (many Democrats) were getting tired of nations like Iraq not giving a flying fuck about reesolutions and not bothering to disclose jack. I honestly invite people to read Hans Blix prior to the start of US troop deployments in Kuwait in late 2002. He did not start to reverse his views until it was clear the US was making good on its threats.
Even the original 1990 resolutions were not explicit on force. Ironically, the US actually built quite an alliance in 2003, just without the blessing of Arab nations other than Kuwait. That is the real difference. Understand Iraq was no longer a "sovereign nation" after it invaded Kuwait and lost a war, giving up its "sovereign nation" status and agreed to cease fire terms. The US and 40 some odd other nations just decided the "consequences" as outlined in the almost 2 dozen resolutions out to mean something.
And we've been paying the price ever since.
North Korea has been a problem since the start of the Clinton administration, and until Carter intervened, the Clinton administration was already planning for armed conflict. By 1999, the Clinton administration realized North Korea wasn't living up to the 1994 deal. The rest is history. A lot of people want to blame W. for a lot of things, and I fully admit W. is the man who made many poor decision, but they were hardly done in a vacuum, and he was hardly alone.
Blaming him is just looking past the problem, and it's why we keep repeating history. That includes the current implosion of the US' consumer-focused economy with absolutely no tit-for-tat tariffs and other, chronic mistakes. A lot of this didn't start with W., or even Clinton, and goes back to the '80s and even some of the '70s. The .COM bust and destruction of the economy, including W.'s first recession, were not his doing. Same thing for Enron and others. The real estate bust started in the '90s, not Clinton, but the Republican Congress as well. Hell, Republicans are being soley blamed for NAFTA, even though Gore was a massive proponent.
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
The GOP has gone up in flames...Palin turned out to be a loon and a fraud. GOP Govs can't keep their dicks in their pants.
All of this fear and froth for North Korea is nothing more than a "wag the dog" distraction for whatever remains of the GOP base, so that they can forget or not deal with the tattered shreds of irrelevancy and incompetence that currently shroud the entire party...:dunno
North Korea poses no threat to the U.S. We have no money to pursue anything more than diplomacy. But, I'd be interested to read if the fiscal conservative members of this forum would support a tax increase to fund military hostilities against North Korea. Is it the intentions of the GOP that the US spend tax payer funds to rebuild several different countries around the world?
Why can't the GOP and Conservative people keep their attention focused ON AMERICA? Do they hate America so much that they want to conquer and rebuild foreign countries into some mythical ideal conservative state?
The GOP has gone up in flames...Palin turned out to be a loon and a fraud. GOP Govs can't keep their dicks in their pants.
All of this fear and froth for North Korea is nothing more than a "wag the dog" distraction for whatever remains of the GOP base, so that they can forget or not deal with the tattered shreds of irrelevancy and incompetence that currently shroud the entire party...:dunno
North Korea poses no threat to the U.S. We have no money to pursue anything more than diplomacy. But, I'd be interested to read if the fiscal conservative members of this forum would support a tax increase to fund military hostilities against North Korea. Is it the intentions of the GOP that the US spend tax payer funds to rebuild several different countries around the world?
Why can't the GOP and Conservative people keep their attention focused ON AMERICA? Do they hate America so much that they want to conquer and rebuild foreign countries into some mythical ideal conservative state?
Re: N. Korea will launch long ranch missle directly hitting Hawaii on July the Fourth
Damn, cocaine is one hell of a drug!
Damn, cocaine is one hell of a drug!
Argue with me, not the GOP ...
Too many Democrats define themselves in the terms of the worst Republicans they can find. Too many Republicans define themselves in the terms of the worst Democrats they can find.
In the end, neither matter a fuck. How people can argue how the ACLU is better than the NRA, or how the NRA is better than ACLU, is beyond me. It's more half-sighted, near-sighted bullshit rhetoric.
How free speech matters, but gun ownership doesn't? Or how all gun ownership must be protected, but some speech needs to be controlled?
And going the opposite, people are now saying he's expanding the war in Afghanistan, and he said he wouldn't. He completely said he would. He also warned about North Korea. People are now redefining him.
Do people honestly listen to candidates? Or just believe what they want?
But agreed, far more Republicans are hypocrites on that matter than Democrats. At the same time, a lot of Democrats can spend even more than Republicans.
Please, please stop the political rhetoric and bullshit on this.
Bill Clinton refocused missile defense and put money into it because of North Korea. Are you ignoring this reality as well? It's about blackmail, pure and simple. North Korea does it to South Korea and, even more so, Japan.
If that is the case, then I, myself, a Libertarian, agree with you 100%! I've constantly said the US should pull back to the Americas pre-Suez Incident of 1956, and let everyone else in the world fuck themselves over. We have everything we need in the Americas.
So, instead of arguing with the GOP, argue with me. Not the GOP, me. My policies. My alleged "sitting the fence" (God that's such bullshit, my views are extremely solid, and cross party lines left and right). My views. My "policy."
The US should have never crossed the British and French in 1956, and so many other things both before and after. Once we left the Americas, we took on way too much. And now people both look to us, and then curse us.
North Korea isn't about the US at all. Never has been. Never will be. Anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know dick about that strategic realities of the entire region.
I am not a registered Republican! I never have been, never will be. I am not for the same reason I'll never be a registered Democrat either.
Too many Democrats define themselves in the terms of the worst Republicans they can find. Too many Republicans define themselves in the terms of the worst Democrats they can find.
In the end, neither matter a fuck. How people can argue how the ACLU is better than the NRA, or how the NRA is better than ACLU, is beyond me. It's more half-sighted, near-sighted bullshit rhetoric.
How free speech matters, but gun ownership doesn't? Or how all gun ownership must be protected, but some speech needs to be controlled?
Some of the "fraud" claims based on Palin's statements can actually be applied to Obama's promises as well. He spewed a lot of bullshit he knew he could never live up to, and people ate it up.
And going the opposite, people are now saying he's expanding the war in Afghanistan, and he said he wouldn't. He completely said he would. He also warned about North Korea. People are now redefining him.
Do people honestly listen to candidates? Or just believe what they want?
Nor can Democrats. But not all Republicans are hypocrites either. Some are Libertarian on freedoms.
But agreed, far more Republicans are hypocrites on that matter than Democrats. At the same time, a lot of Democrats can spend even more than Republicans.
Dude, I have been over the strategic situation. South Korea, Japan and even Taiwain have been over it. In fact, everyone agrees that the second Jimmy Carter made it about North Korea v. the US, it became royally fucked.
Please, please stop the political rhetoric and bullshit on this.
Is it the intention of every Democrat to appease the North Koreans to the point of requiring one? How about at the expense of South Korean tax payers? Japanese?
Bill Clinton refocused missile defense and put money into it because of North Korea. Are you ignoring this reality as well? It's about blackmail, pure and simple. North Korea does it to South Korea and, even more so, Japan.
Then we should pull out of everywhere but the Americas, tell Japan to fend for itself, the EU to get their petroleum from Russia and be done with it.
If that is the case, then I, myself, a Libertarian, agree with you 100%! I've constantly said the US should pull back to the Americas pre-Suez Incident of 1956, and let everyone else in the world fuck themselves over. We have everything we need in the Americas.
So, instead of arguing with the GOP, argue with me. Not the GOP, me. My policies. My alleged "sitting the fence" (God that's such bullshit, my views are extremely solid, and cross party lines left and right). My views. My "policy."
The US should have never crossed the British and French in 1956, and so many other things both before and after. Once we left the Americas, we took on way too much. And now people both look to us, and then curse us.
North Korea isn't about the US at all. Never has been. Never will be. Anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know dick about that strategic realities of the entire region.
