RE: http://www.military.com/opinio...15202,191737,00.html

Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.

All that, in spite of Israeli 'proof' the Koreans were building 'a nuclear weapons plant' in Syria?

Maybe that's why John Bolton's megalomaniac scheme to 'embargo everything, everywhere'- passed under the aegis of the former hyper-security regime,is connected to Kim Jong Il's bad attitude.

And to which Syrian port was he shipping all those 'nuculer deevices' the Israelis wiped off the face of the earth? There are only two and Israel should have a watching brief on both.

And your solution to the problem is???

"First, on the political front, North Korea's Kim Jong Il has challenged President Obama more in four months than he did President George W. Bush in eight years."
That is because he knows Obama is a big wus, no back bone and no clue on any policy. Maybe he can spend his way out of trouble.

How bizarre...

Mr. Brooks says nothing about President Bush taking no action whatsoever on the 2006 NK tests of both ICBMs and the nuke - but now the problem is so much more serious.

I gotta wonder if the neconservatives are starting to regret encouraging the hapless GWB to cease living up the treaty negotiated by the Clinton administration? After all, all it did was encourage the NK's to restart their nuclear program, accelerate the ICBM program, and resume testing of both. Then the 6-party talks concluded with a deal that was fundamentally the same as the Clinton Administrations deal, except now the NK's had fully developed nukes and more developed ICBM capabilities.

Yet another foreign policy mess left behind by the neoconservative cabal that simply couldn't leave well enough alone. Yet now their advice should be heeded? After what foreign or military policy successes the so-called Heritage Foundation has advised on exactly? Is there even one?

After 8 years of obvious foreign, military, and economic policy recommendation failure, it is indeed a stretch for the Heritage Foundation to be advising on the clipping of one's dog's toenails let alone matters of national security.

Ground based BMD still has far more failures than successes, and all of the tests so far have been largely rigged with transponders to help the system find its warheads. The Navy's system, using SM3's/Aegis is far more effective and has been proven to be workable.

The hyper-expensive ground based system also does nothing to intercept cruise missiles or nukes stuffed into a tramp steamer (both much cheaper delivery systems and far harder to detect), and is far cheaper to evade/spoof than can be reasonably be countered on our side. In essence, a great program if you love corporate welfare.

Stationing Aegis ships around the Koreas, and encouraging Japan to start making noise about assuming a offensive vs. defensive stance will get the Chinese moving (because they remain terrified of the Japanese resulting from their experience during WW2) and turning the thumbscrews on the NK's, which is easily the best alternative (while maintaining a high level of alert in the meantime).

Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

Very Well Said ET2BM3!!! Those two are obviously monitors of websites that have a majority of Conservative viewer's who don't drink the Obama Juice!!!

Great Post.

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

Excellent post. The left could send former Secretary of State, Albright and let her give Kim Jong II another signed autograph basketball from Michael Jordan to convince Kim Jong II to stop his Nuclear Program. LOL......

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration...

That would be very incorrect, in fact you are off by about 2 administrations, at least... for the record, that is.

Also, if you have been studying/reading PolicyWonk's posts for so long, how come that was your 1st post?

The FACT is that Pakistan, N. Korea and Iran were ALL just as much a pain-in-the-a$$ to previous administrations, going all the way back to 1950, as they have been to President Obama. But they most certainly were a thorn in GW's side, and his father's, and Clintons, and don't forget Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy.... yada, yada, yada.

If you do not believe me, try a decent (and perhaps recent) History text book, for children.
K?

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

This is Obama's... second major issue. First the economy, then this. This is really going to test him. If N. Korea fires a missle with a nuclear warhead to America, does he attack N. Korea, or keep trying to solve the problem diplomatically. Thank God that we have organizations in the military that even Obama does not know of. Maybe they can do some damage in the night. When nobody is looking.

I can not beleive there is a problem with North Korea. I mean the Clinton Administration sent Madeline Albright and the dictator loving Jimmy Carter over for tea with Kim Jong in the 1990's and received assurances that the North Koreans were just using their reactor for energy to help take care of their starving people....I wonder what happened...Obama's initial response is as weak as the content of his character. This guy has absolutely no clue on how to deal with a rogue nation. Maybe he and his good buddy Hugo Chaves can discuss what to do with the rogue dictator in North Korea. Considering that Obama has pretty much made himself a dictator of this country with his government power grabs of the banking, mortgage and auto industry I just do not see how he has time to deal with Kim Jong Il. Anybody know where the billions of dollars went with his moronic "stimulus package"? Anyone? He is worse than Maddow. Obama and the Democrats should be brought up on charges for defrauding the taxpayers and generations to come of trillions of dollars. Hope and change...isn't it wonderful!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

Hatred for the past administration? I'm simply not as willing as you are to make excuses for blatant incompetence. Perhaps you can elaborate on how successful they were? The Administration of G W Bush was deemed 36th out of 42 in the recently released C-SPAN Presidential Rankings: All-time worst w/r/t foreign relations in our nations history and second to worst in financial management. As far as keeping us more secure, go and read the 2007 NIE - but you won't like what you read.

Re-read your history, because the NK's started working on nuclear technology long before Clinton.

The ABM system might be inexpensive compared to the auto bailouts (but are completely unrelated). Why do supporters of the previous administration always try to get off topic to make an unrelated point? Why stoop to sophmoric insults? Could it be because they lack the evidence and/or arguments to sway the opinion of those unconvinced that the past 8 years of incompetence were somehow good for the nation? You aren't impressing me.

And you claim the bailouts of the auto industry are going to fail. No one, NO ONE, can come to that conclusion today.

The ABM tests that have been successful have only been so because transponders were installed into the nosecones of the target missiles. The tests, in short, have been RIGGED. Before you come after me complaining that I don't have a clue you might want to do some research. Because the facts are not flattering to your argument.

FYI, an ICBM can be tracked easily from source to destination. Cruise missiles are vastly more difficult to detect as they are so small (and fly so low) they are often filtered out of radar as a result. Determining where a cruise missile came from is a vastly more difficult problem. W/r/t a good offense and the tramp steamer - do you expect that our Navy/Coast Guard is going to sink every tramp steamer they find? Have you given the slightest thought to practicality?

Your supposition that the Iranians, North Koreans, and Pakistanis went out of control soley for the benefit of this administration is cause for concern, as it seems your memory is very short indeed. For example, the Iranians were the first muslim nation to offer condolences and aid to the United States on 9/11. They also gave the US huge intelligence on Afghanistan, and offered logistical support, plus use of airfields and hospitals, to support our invasion. Plus, they offered to put all issues on the table to resovle the problems of the past and renormalize relations. What did GWB do? He added them to the so-called "axis of evil" and effectively told them they were next. The Iranians might be a lot of things, but dumb isn't among them: they have repeatedly outmaneuvered the Bush administration and made deals with the Chinese and Russians to make it most difficult to go after them either militarily or through te UN (while bolstering their nuclear and defense efforts). Then the Bush Administration made a bad situation worse by invading Iraq, where the terrorists were not, thereby putting Iran into the powerbrokers seat in the middle east (which has angered our arabian allies, one and all).

The North Koreans have been problematic for every administration since the Korean War hostilities ended in the 1950's. You might recall how GWB did NOTHING in response to either the 2006 missile launches or nuclear test.

The open support and lack of oversight of the Pakistanis during the Bush years are also a sad testimony. They gave them $10B in aid, and just "hoped" they would spend the money on counterterrorism. Hint: they didn't spend even a decent fraction on counterterrorism. Next hint: NOW they DO.

It astonishes me how the expectations for presidential performance were so low just 5 months ago that you needed to pull your socks down to see the light of day. Now the expectation is so high that God Himself couldn't possibly make the grade.

I would rather have a competent liberal in office than an incompetent conservative (and vice versa if the case were reversed) because I am an American Patriot first, and I want this country to do well. The evidence I have read (from around the world, not just the so-called American main-stream media) makes me conclude that previous administration failed us miserably in that respect. I listened to what they said, and I looked at the results of thier actions. There is precious little to brag about (or be proud of).

I wonder if this is the "Test" Joe Biden was talking about during the election. I do know one thing for sure: IF something DOES happen, it will be blamed on TOTUS' action or inaction; whichever it may be. Can't blame Bush on this anymore...

Bill_Fold

Perhaps it is you who should get out that children’s history book and start reading. There is a exceptionally large difference between wanting something and having something. The North Koreans have wanted nuclear weapons since 1950s. Their Soviet masters absolutely would not allow this. The North Koreans did not have a credible nuclear weapons program until the 1990’s when they removed their first two fissile cores in 1993 for processing into weapons grade material. It wasn’t until 1994 that they withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty so that they could conduct experiments without the IAE watching them. Maybe with an excessive stretch of reality and imagination you could consider their experiments with separating weapons grade material from a university experiment reactors cores in the mid 1970s as a weapons program. I guess in the altered reality you must exist in that would be acceptable. The facts still remain: North Korea did not have a nuclear weapons program until the 1990’s; North Korea had been relatively pacified until very recently. Thank you very much.

Secondly, I would very much like you to apply your scholarly historian skills to enlightening us all as to the difficulties the U.S. has had under so many past administrations that in any way are tantamount to the nuclear threats we currently face. Pakistan from its independence in 1947 has been predominantly a place ignored by the U.S. Iran was a place we imported pistachios from until the late 1970’s. So what were these great crises that all the various past administrations had? I would like to know seeing how unenlightened I am according to you. Please name them and contrast them in scope to the current difficulties. Korea has been a problem since its division after WW2 I will agree. But they haven’t had the ability to do much more than hurt South Korea until recently.

I have posted many times on the Military.com sites to correct you final oversight. In fact I remember you I believe and Policy Wank from the Chinese carrier and AMB stories if I am not mistaken. I also believe you were trading in the same B.S. Drivel then as now makes me wonder if you’re not the same person.

Policy Wank

First it is hatred for the last administration every single one of the last 5 articles you have comment on have the same theme “It’s all Bushes fault….. yay Obama” I have never once said that any one administration was right or wrong I have just pointed out how pathetically myopic your opinion is. You are little more than a broken record. Get over it its done and gone move on with you life. I couldn’t care less what a poll on Cspan says. If they polled us on a issue and got 9 results from you and your friends and one from me what would that poll mean in the real world…. Nothing exactly like every poll. The world is not governed by opinion it’s governed by cold hard harsh reality. But if the only way you can validate your world view is to find opinions that agree with your feelings and trumpet them as the certification for how the world is by all means have at it. I’ll just keep laughing at you. As far as getting off topic about the ABM I don’t see anywhere in your paragraph anything about the fact you were absolutely wrong on its success rate or cost. Maybe that’s why I resort to sophomoric insults because its all a craven liar with an agenda understands in my opinion. Please instead of whining about Bush again defend your accusation of its failure and excessive cost. But you will not because you simply can not because you lied and were caught. Then you compound it by saying the test were rigged, what poll came to that conclusion?

Than you for your little lesson on the few differences you understand between a Ballistic Missile and Cruise Missile. If you would like I can probably fill up a few pages on the differences between the two weapon types but I just don’t see the point; Which is exactly what you missed. ABM = anti ballistic missile it shoots down ballistic missiles it was never now or at any other time meant to shoot down a cruise missile. Additionally, cruise missiles are short ranged when compared to Ballistic missiles and they are by no means all that hard to track or particularly fast. Any good look down airborne radar would see them shortly after launch, like the kind that is always on patrol over the U.S. The surprise that they offer is that they can be launched fairly close to the target. The sudden appearance of the weapon and its random launch location prevent the opportunity to properly defend against them. My ship shot down cruise missiles rather successfully (5/5 2 skin to skin) after coming out of a shipyard period back in 92. But the issue still isn’t the cruise missile it’s the fact that you lied and now the best you can come up with is the test was rigged and Bush is bad. Wow such a breadth and diversity of intellectual prowess.

I was correct in asserting you wouldn’t understand what a good offense was I’d tell you but you’d probably start moaning “Bush lied they died” Maybe some day you will figure It out.

I’m getting pretty bored at poking holes in all your rhetoric now so I’m going to take a break. I may come back later to continue I may not. However, the most laughable thing you said in you last post was that you are a Patriot. Love your country, respect and defend the Constitution, and never give one second of concern for what anyone in any other country says of feels about the U.S. and maybe I might consider believing that.

The success or failure of America or its leaders is not measured by public opinion, world opinion or any poll, its measured by results. It took more than a decade for the merits of Truman’s presidency to be revealed but you have already made the call on the last one. My aren’t you just the most brilliant of us all.

Yanqui69 Yes they can and these two will lead the charge. That’s Patriotism at its best.

quote:

Originally posted by PolicyWonk:

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

Hatred for the past administration? I'm simply not as willing as you are to make excuses for blatant incompetence. Perhaps you can elaborate on how successful they were? The Administration of G W Bush was deemed 36th out of 42 in the recently released C-SPAN Presidential Rankings: All-time worst w/r/t foreign relations in our nations history and second to worst in financial management. As far as keeping us more secure, go and read the 2007 NIE - but you won't like what you read.

Re-read your history, because the NK's started working on nuclear technology long before Clinton.

The ABM system might be inexpensive compared to the auto bailouts (but are completely unrelated). Why do supporters of the previous administration always try to get off topic to make an unrelated point? Why stoop to sophmoric insults? Could it be because they lack the evidence and/or arguments to sway the opinion of those unconvinced that the past 8 years of incompetence were somehow good for the nation? You aren't impressing me.

And you claim the bailouts of the auto industry are going to fail. No one, NO ONE, can come to that conclusion today.

The ABM tests that have been successful have only been so because transponders were installed into the nosecones of the target missiles. The tests, in short, have been RIGGED. Before you come after me complaining that I don't have a clue you might want to do some research. Because the facts are not flattering to your argument.

FYI, an ICBM can be tracked easily from source to destination. Cruise missiles are vastly more difficult to detect as they are so small (and fly so low) they are often filtered out of radar as a result. Determining where a cruise missile came from is a vastly more difficult problem. W/r/t a good offense and the tramp steamer - do you expect that our Navy/Coast Guard is going to sink every tramp steamer they find? Have you given the slightest thought to practicality?

Your supposition that the Iranians, North Koreans, and Pakistanis went out of control soley for the benefit of this administration is cause for concern, as it seems your memory is very short indeed. For example, the Iranians were the first muslim nation to offer condolences and aid to the United States on 9/11. They also gave the US huge intelligence on Afghanistan, and offered logistical support, plus use of airfields and hospitals, to support our invasion. Plus, they offered to put all issues on the table to resovle the problems of the past and renormalize relations. What did GWB do? He added them to the so-called "axis of evil" and effectively told them they were next. The Iranians might be a lot of things, but dumb isn't among them: they have repeatedly outmaneuvered the Bush administration and made deals with the Chinese and Russians to make it most difficult to go after them either militarily or through te UN (while bolstering their nuclear and defense efforts). Then the Bush Administration made a bad situation worse by invading Iraq, where the terrorists were not, thereby putting Iran into the powerbrokers seat in the middle east (which has angered our arabian allies, one and all).

The North Koreans have been problematic for every administration since the Korean War hostilities ended in the 1950's. You might recall how GWB did NOTHING in response to either the 2006 missile launches or nuclear test.

The open support and lack of oversight of the Pakistanis during the Bush years are also a sad testimony. They gave them $10B in aid, and just "hoped" they would spend the money on counterterrorism. Hint: they didn't spend even a decent fraction on counterterrorism. Next hint: NOW they DO.

It astonishes me how the expectations for presidential performance were so low just 5 months ago that you needed to pull your socks down to see the light of day. Now the expectation is so high that God Himself couldn't possibly make the grade.

I would rather have a competent liberal in office than an incompetent conservative (and vice versa if the case were reversed) because I am an American Patriot first, and I want this country to do well. The evidence I have read (from around the world, not just the so-called American main-stream media) makes me conclude that previous administration failed us miserably in that respect. I listened to what they said, and I looked at the results of thier actions. There is precious little to brag about (or be proud of).

Then the Bush Administration made a bad situation worse by invading Iraq, where the terrorists were not, thereby putting Iran into the powerbrokers seat in the middle east (which has angered our arabian allies, one and all).

You need to remember that most of the Democrats were all behind Bush removing Saddam. Can you please explain why nobody ever wants to remember that the Democrats wanted Saddam removed just as much as the Republicans?

"You need to remember that most of the Democrats were all behind Bush removing Saddam. Can you please explain why nobody ever wants to remember that the Democrats wanted Saddam removed just as much as the Republicans?"

1) That doesn't fit into the Liberals agenda if they remember most D's voted to remove Saddam.

2) If asked about this most Liberals will reply with "Bush fooled them" or "Bush lied", you get my drift. It seems that the D's are easily fooled into things! Pelosis' defense is, she was fooled, not in so many words.

ET2BM3 Great post!!

quote:

Originally posted by SFC_Retired:
Very Well Said ET2BM3!!! Those two are obviously monitors of websites that have a majority of Conservative viewer's who don't drink the Obama Juice!!!

Great Post.

Exactly what I was thinking. Slimy, never wore the uniform individuals trying to rattle the cage with their typical liberal rants.

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

simply outstanding post!

quote:

Originally posted by 3529237:

quote:

Originally posted by PolicyWonk:

quote:

Originally posted by ET2BM3:
Policy Wonk I have read your comments all over this board for a while now and it’s apparent you’re little more than a full fledged cool-aide drinker with nothing of worth to contribute. Even worse than your endless cheerleading for the current administration hatred for the last you are now is the fact that you have almost always been factually incorrect and just plain wrong on everything you claim. For the record North Koreas nuclear weapons program began under the Clinton administration. It was just as impossible to easily resolve then as it was under the Bush administration as it will be under the current administration. You can’t effectively apply pressure to a lunatic who is holding millions of South Koreans hostage with Chemical and Bio weapons. But please keep spewing your retarded emanations about the last administration as if you know something. I will just keep chuckling at your limited intellect. Additionally, the ground based ABM system is over 80% efficient and costs far less annually than the bailouts we have already paid to the auto industry only to still watch them fail. No ABM system takes out cruise missiles but then again they are not called ACM systems. Any nation capable of delivering a cruise missile to the US has much more to worry about in regards to retaliation than does a country that can slap together a ballistic missile. As far as a nuke in a steamer well there is no defense against that other than a good offense. I’ll let you ponder that and see if you can figure it out but I doubt it. Overall your comments once again are just silly cheerleading and hate rhetoric. I can understand why you keep your profile anonymous I’d be embarrassed to let people know who I was too and I am not surprised to see that you never served which makes me wonder why you are even on this sight. Perhaps you should go to one as full of misinformed, deluded political activist where you would fit in much better and feel more welcomed?

Allibubba ¾ of what I said to Policy Wonk applies to you as well. You’re just another non serving political activist who is posting on this site for some unknown reason.

“Maybe the reason the boogey boy of Pyongyang is 'challenging' the new president is because of the dopey activities of the last one. A totally inconsistent approach to an early-identified 'axis of evil' saw it fed, watered and returned to the 'good books' for demolishing an outdated cooling tower.”

The above thought has to be the single most inane thing I have come across in a long while. I mean really, do you actually believe that yourself? Is that the best conclusion you can come up with? Let’s see ….North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have all gone out of control under the new administration but it’s because of the last administration. I can see no logical thought involved in that conclusion whatsoever, its just amazingly stupid. All of the above countries had 8 years to go out of control under the last administration but never really did. Now they are however. I think the reality is much closer to the fact that they all smell something emanating from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ……….Fear.

Hatred for the past administration? I'm simply not as willing as you are to make excuses for blatant incompetence. Perhaps you can elaborate on how successful they were? The Administration of G W Bush was deemed 36th out of 42 in the recently released C-SPAN Presidential Rankings: All-time worst w/r/t foreign relations in our nations history and second to worst in financial management. As far as keeping us more secure, go and read the 2007 NIE - but you won't like what you read.

Re-read your history, because the NK's started working on nuclear technology long before Clinton.

The ABM system might be inexpensive compared to the auto bailouts (but are completely unrelated). Why do supporters of the previous administration always try to get off topic to make an unrelated point? Why stoop to sophmoric insults? Could it be because they lack the evidence and/or arguments to sway the opinion of those unconvinced that the past 8 years of incompetence were somehow good for the nation? You aren't impressing me.

And you claim the bailouts of the auto industry are going to fail. No one, NO ONE, can come to that conclusion today.

The ABM tests that have been successful have only been so because transponders were installed into the nosecones of the target missiles. The tests, in short, have been RIGGED. Before you come after me complaining that I don't have a clue you might want to do some research. Because the facts are not flattering to your argument.

FYI, an ICBM can be tracked easily from source to destination. Cruise missiles are vastly more difficult to detect as they are so small (and fly so low) they are often filtered out of radar as a result. Determining where a cruise missile came from is a vastly more difficult problem. W/r/t a good offense and the tramp steamer - do you expect that our Navy/Coast Guard is going to sink every tramp steamer they find? Have you given the slightest thought to practicality?

Your supposition that the Iranians, North Koreans, and Pakistanis went out of control soley for the benefit of this administration is cause for concern, as it seems your memory is very short indeed. For example, the Iranians were the first muslim nation to offer condolences and aid to the United States on 9/11. They also gave the US huge intelligence on Afghanistan, and offered logistical support, plus use of airfields and hospitals, to support our invasion. Plus, they offered to put all issues on the table to resovle the problems of the past and renormalize relations. What did GWB do? He added them to the so-called "axis of evil" and effectively told them they were next. The Iranians might be a lot of things, but dumb isn't among them: they have repeatedly outmaneuvered the Bush administration and made deals with the Chinese and Russians to make it most difficult to go after them either militarily or through te UN (while bolstering their nuclear and defense efforts). Then the Bush Administration made a bad situation worse by invading Iraq, where the terrorists were not, thereby putting Iran into the powerbrokers seat in the middle east (which has angered our arabian allies, one and all).

The North Koreans have been problematic for every administration since the Korean War hostilities ended in the 1950's. You might recall how GWB did NOTHING in response to either the 2006 missile launches or nuclear test.

The open support and lack of oversight of the Pakistanis during the Bush years are also a sad testimony. They gave them $10B in aid, and just "hoped" they would spend the money on counterterrorism. Hint: they didn't spend even a decent fraction on counterterrorism. Next hint: NOW they DO.

It astonishes me how the expectations for presidential performance were so low just 5 months ago that you needed to pull your socks down to see the light of day. Now the expectation is so high that God Himself couldn't possibly make the grade.

I would rather have a competent liberal in office than an incompetent conservative (and vice versa if the case were reversed) because I am an American Patriot first, and I want this country to do well. The evidence I have read (from around the world, not just the so-called American main-stream media) makes me conclude that previous administration failed us miserably in that respect. I listened to what they said, and I looked at the results of thier actions. There is precious little to brag about (or be proud of).

Then the Bush Administration made a bad situation worse by invading Iraq, where the terrorists were not, thereby putting Iran into the powerbrokers seat in the middle east (which has angered our arabian allies, one and all).

You need to remember that most of the Democrats were all behind Bush removing Saddam. Can you please explain why nobody ever wants to remember that the Democrats wanted Saddam removed just as much as the Republicans?

Simple - the same information that was cherry-picked and "used" by the administration is the same information that was given to both houses of congress. In short, they were all, and we as a nation, were duped.

No one gets better access to information than the office of the president (and vice president). And the warnings were many from our allies that the information they were using and counting on was weak/questionable at best. But at some point, considering the access to information the President has (and congress does not), the people and the congress have to trust the president to do the right thing. I myself even gave the president the benefit of the doubt and went along with it - and lived to deeply regret it.

GWB's father (GHW Bush) gave consent to Brent Snowcroft to go public with an editorial in the Wall Street Journal to advise the president to NOT attack Iraq. Eventually, it came out that the same advice came from James Baker III, George Schultz, and the presidents own father, etc. These are hardly bleeding heart liberals - these folks are amongst the most experienced foreign (and military) policy officials this nation has ever had - all advising against going into Iraq - and they still have access to much of the information GWB had. Still - he refused to listen to daddy's advice.

Additionally, if you have a mind for recent history and do a reading of The Downing Street Memos (that ended Tony Blairs career) you will find that almost a full year before the invasion of Iraq (when the administration claimed it would use every possible diplomatic means to resolve its problems with Iraq diplomatically in return for authority to use military force if necessary), that the Bush Administration had already decided that they were going to war and were only looking for justifications for doing so (regardless of whether Iraq decided to cooperate or not).

So the president never had the intention of doing the right thing (or excercising appropriate judgement) - and there is plenty of documentation to back it up - from Saddams own diplomatic measures, to the 935 documented lies told to the country, our allies, and both houses of congress, in addition to the Downing Street Memos.

There was no imminent threat, and they knew it. The neoconservatives (including Feith, Brooks, Adelman, Wolfowicz, Perle, Gaffney, etc) had a vision (or hallucination) for how this nation should operate, and the president bought it. So did the American people, until they ran this country into the dirt, which is why only 23% of the country admits to being republican anymore, and the numbers continue their downward trend. You can listen to what they said all you want. But at the end of the day the results do not reflect successful foreign, military, or financial policies, by even the most generous of measures.

Some of the other posters claim that I've been drinking the Obama juice - but if you have read my postings I've been critical of him when I thought he was wrong.

But if for some reason any of them think somehow the previous incumbant did even a marginal job w/r/t leading this nation, it isn't me that has been drinking the Kool-aid. I look at facts, and call 'em as I seem 'em. And sometimes (if you've been reading my postings) then you know that I even admit to error, and have even changed my mind due to information given to me by others that post herein.

The previous administration was awesome if you wanted to give Bin Laden and our adversaries a victory they couldn't have imagined in their wildest dreams - but I personally wanted them annihilated.

Cheers

PW said--"Simple - the same information that was cherry-picked and "used" by the administration is the same information that was given to both houses of congress. In short, they were all, and we as a nation, were duped."

See my post above. Easy cop-out "We were fooled!!" That to me is an unacceptable response from an elected official who is privy to classified info, especially from certain commitee members who have access to intel some don't in the House and Senate. If these people were so incompetant (the same saying "we were fooled") and did not do their "homework" or were seriously questioning the intel they were provided they should have voted NO!! Or better yet they shouldn't be in the position they're in, they should be sweeping Mc Donalds parking lots.

PW said--"No one gets better access to information than the office of the president (and vice president). And the warnings were many from our allies that the information they were using and counting on was weak/questionable at best. But at some point, considering the access to information the President has (and congress does not), the people and the congress have to trust the president to do the right thing. I myself even gave the president the benefit of the doubt and went along with it - and lived to deeply regret it."

This is not fact but your opinion. There is no evidence to your claim Bush slanted any of the intelligence, or as Dean said "corrupted". I don't know how you know what the Congress and the Senate saw in regard to intelligence but the intelligence is still "TOP SECRET". In fact the NIE supported what Bush has said, although it was faulty. Numerous commisions have still not turned up any proof that the Congress or Senate was "duped" into voting for the war.

Words chosen by Bush and Cheney may have been speculative but you're saying the intelligence was slanted or "cherry picked" and that is simply your opinion because like I said before the intelligence that both bodies had presented to them is still locked up tight so unless you have some sort of clearence that allows you to see those documents it sounds like partisan rhetoric.

PW said--"which is why only 23% of the country admits to being republican anymore, and the numbers continue their downward trend."

Simple the R's (the political types) have turned their backs on their core principals and Bush has pretty much been the leader of the parties demise. Most former R's have swithced allegience whether it be the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party or an independant like myself, but that doesn't mean they won't vote for an R. Beside after 04 all the "experts were saying the D's are outta touch and so on, kinda like 94. Everything comes around in full circle and when the R's get an "Obama" of the right they will be fine.

"The previous administration was awesome if you wanted to give Bin Laden and our adversaries a victory they couldn't have imagined in their wildest dreams - but I personally wanted them annihilated."

As was the admin before Bush. BTW I replied to your posting concerning Clinton and his dealings with terrorism while president, but it looks like that story is no longer on the site. I think it was a story about NK?

Have a good one and I'm sure you will reply!