Toddler With A Hand Grenade

Carrera said:

When you think about it, the previous month hasn't been particularly good for George W Bush and the neocons. Anybody get the impression that the neos have this fixation with trying to control the world but are now finding it tough going without the alliances John Kerry had been in favour of fomenting?
Here are the keys areas where Bush has his problems cut out:
(1) North Korea: Seeing as the Administration endorses the kind of policy that suggests that if you bomb the hell out of one particular country in a particular geographical region, freedom and democracy will spread outwards to surrounding countries, it's no surprise that North Korea should suddenly decide to expand its nuclear arsenal. So, having blitzed Iraq, Bush is now faced with a far more dangerous set of circumstances.
(2) Iran: The Iranians seem set to develop a nuclear program, having moved much of the operation underground. Bush could well risk a land invasion to try and get at the secret laboratories but he's sure to have his hands full with Iraq as well.
(3) China: Inconveniently, China has threatened to invade Taiwan should the latter formally attempt to break away from China. The neos have promised to defend Taiwan should China invade but there is, of course, a slight problem. Unlike Iraq, China does in fact have WMD and, unlike Iraq, China can launch ballistic missiles within 45 minutes.
(4) Europe: Bush has urged Europe not to sell arms to China but will Europe Take heed? Now even the Italians are p----d off with the neos as a result of the friendly fire incident that involved an Italian secret service operative in Iraq. As for the Germans, the average German on the street simply expresses astonishment that Bush should ever have made it to the White House.
(5) Russia: Bush has already irritated Vladimir Putin by claiming Russia isn't a democracy (Putin reigned in the State Media). Problem is, the neos have recently been found out broadcasting their own propaganda as news on the American media, hoodwinking the American public into thinking they're watching genuine, unbiased journalism. So, how come Russia isn't a democracy if Bush is employing similar tactics? And isn't it inconvenient that Putin plans to sell oil to China and assist Iran in its nuclear ambitions.
You kind of get the impression of a huge playground where the kids are running riot. Nobody listens to the teacher when he blows a whistle for order since there is little respect for his authority. The [censored] that Kerry predicted would result from a Bush victory are slowly starting to appear.

Well put, now reply to my Nancy Pelosi thread in kind 😉 It has 0 hits, like this one before I replied to you. One hand washes the other, only joking :p Incidentally, this is a good topic/thread, maybe the title put people off 😕

Well, cheers. I'll have to find that Nancy Pelosi thread later today.
I thought I'd give you a totally irrelevant piece of information seeing as you raised the proverb. "One hand washes the other" is actually a Roman saying and originally read "manus manum lavat". So, this is something else we got from the Romans although I'm surprised they didn't invent a bike.
At some point I thought I'd raise a thread about Muhammad Ali and the Vietnam war and will have to get round to that.

davidmc said:

Well put, now reply to my Nancy Pelosi thread in kind 😉 It has 0 hits, like this one before I replied to you. One hand washes the other, only joking :p Incidentally, this is a good topic/thread, maybe the title put people off 😕

I didn't even see a Nancy Pelosi thread, only a Maureen Dowd one. What's up with Nancy?

lokstah said:

I didn't even see a Nancy Pelosi thread, only a Maureen Dowd one. What's up with Nancy?

Who cares about NP...she's an idiot.

Yes, I went through columns of posts getting dizzy and couldn't find david's post in order to rescue it. Finally I did a forum search for "Pelosi" and then "Nancy" and nothing came up. But can someone tell me who she is as the name isn't familiar?

lokstah said:

I didn't even see a Nancy Pelosi thread, only a Maureen Dowd one. What's up with Nancy?

lokstah said:

I didn't even see a Nancy Pelosi thread, only a Maureen Dowd one. What's up with Nancy?

Your'e right, its the Maureen Dowd thread. She is a modern day "Patriot" 🙂

Carrera said:

Yes, I went through columns of posts getting dizzy and couldn't find david's post in order to rescue it. Finally I did a forum search for "Pelosi" and then "Nancy" and nothing came up. But can someone tell me who she is as the name isn't familiar?

She is an American Patriot who happens to be the current House Minority Leader, in our Congress. She's not fooled by the current administration's shenannigans. And I mistakenly put her name down instead of Dowd's. Both are National Treasures. 😉

lokstah said:

I didn't even see a Nancy Pelosi thread, only a Maureen Dowd one. What's up with Nancy?

She's just doing the usual: Trying to prevent Bush/Cheney from handing the key's to the country to the uber-rich, energy firms, Wall st., ect... Not an easy job even though she makes it look like it is.

We have an impressionist over here who does a phenomenal take on Bush as well as his David Blunkett which is hilarious.
During one of these impressions he did a staged interview with someone trying to defend Bush.
"He may seem like a narrow-minded, stupid buffoon but really all his actions are based on deep, well-thought out meditations. Bush attacked Iraq because he knew it would bring democracy to Egypt."

davidmc said:

She's just doing the usual: Trying to prevent Bush/Cheney from handing the key's to the country to the uber-rich, energy firms, Wall st., ect... Not an easy job even though she makes it look like it is.

Carrera said:

"He may seem like a narrow-minded, stupid buffoon but really all his actions are based on deep, well-thought out meditations. Bush attacked Iraq because he knew it would bring democracy to Egypt."

Well when you put it that way... :p

Carrera said:

When you think about it, the previous month hasn't been particularly good for George W Bush and the neocons. Anybody get the impression that the neos have this fixation with trying to control the world but are now finding it tough going without the alliances John Kerry had been in favour of fomenting?
Here are the keys areas where Bush has his problems cut out:
(1) North Korea: Seeing as the Administration endorses the kind of policy that suggests that if you bomb the hell out of one particular country in a particular geographical region, freedom and democracy will spread outwards to surrounding countries, it's no surprise that North Korea should suddenly decide to expand its nuclear arsenal. So, having blitzed Iraq, Bush is now faced with a far more dangerous set of circumstances.
(2) Iran: The Iranians seem set to develop a nuclear program, having moved much of the operation underground. Bush could well risk a land invasion to try and get at the secret laboratories but he's sure to have his hands full with Iraq as well.
(3) China: Inconveniently, China has threatened to invade Taiwan should the latter formally attempt to break away from China. The neos have promised to defend Taiwan should China invade but there is, of course, a slight problem. Unlike Iraq, China does in fact have WMD and, unlike Iraq, China can launch ballistic missiles within 45 minutes.
(4) Europe: Bush has urged Europe not to sell arms to China but will Europe Take heed? Now even the Italians are p----d off with the neos as a result of the friendly fire incident that involved an Italian secret service operative in Iraq. As for the Germans, the average German on the street simply expresses astonishment that Bush should ever have made it to the White House.
(5) Russia: Bush has already irritated Vladimir Putin by claiming Russia isn't a democracy (Putin reigned in the State Media). Problem is, the neos have recently been found out broadcasting their own propaganda as news on the American media, hoodwinking the American public into thinking they're watching genuine, unbiased journalism. So, how come Russia isn't a democracy if Bush is employing similar tactics? And isn't it inconvenient that Putin plans to sell oil to China and assist Iran in its nuclear ambitions.
You kind of get the impression of a huge playground where the kids are running riot. Nobody listens to the teacher when he blows a whistle for order since there is little respect for his authority. The [censored] that Kerry predicted would result from a Bush victory are slowly starting to appear.

1)To think that Kim has expanded his nuclear arsenal to brace for a war with the U.S. is crazier than he is. That man is [censored] and Stalin reincarnated...His motives are plain and simple...He wants South Korea back for starters...When he gets that he will move on to the next. This man is insane and the world...as with the US...has no one to blame but themselves for allowing him to get this powerful...This is a mistake that in the very near furture will cost a lot of lives to reconsile.

2)Iran will never become a nuclear power because Israel will not allow that. Iran has tried several times and everytime they are about to start a nuclear program Israel goes in an blows it up...Plain an simple!

3)What do you mean should attemp to break away...that is the problem China has is becasue Taiwan has already done that. They did so a long time ago. China wants Taiwan back because China wants to be the new Big boy on the block and they need the economy of Taiwan to push them over the top. The world can not, the US can not allow that to happen. And for right now The only threat China is to Taiwan is a nuclear one. China does not have the ability to land an invasion force and take Taiwan and still be able to use it and they know that or else they would have invaded. China flexes its muscles with the threat of nukes just like russia did time and time again during the cold war. It is cat and mouse!

4)Selling any type of weapons to anyone because of some stupid friendly fire incident is equivilent to shooting your father because he spanked your bottom in public becasue you could not have a candy bar...

5)I can not comment on Russia because I don't really follow what is going on there.

davidmc said:

She's just doing the usual: Trying to prevent Bush/Cheney from handing the key's to the country to the uber-rich, energy firms, Wall st., ect... Not an easy job even though she makes it look like it is.

Give me a break...She can't even make reading a teleprompter look easy...She is a.....hosebag!

I doubt North Korea is dangerous but it is paranoid. Bush has done a good job convincing the North Koreans he poses a serious threat to them which is why the North is stepping up its nuclear program. The fate of Iraq has provided clear, concrete proof that countries outside of NATO face a threat. Bush has proved he is more than willing to kill thousands of people, either due to his ideological convictions or his need for oil.
Left alone, North Korea will probably never invade the South. But if Bush is foolhardy enough to tangle with them, he'll find he's facing a far superior fighting force than any Arab nation he might encounter. South East Asians are extremely tough in combat, same as the Viet Kong. The North Koreans are all militarily trained and drilled and a war with these people would be an extremely bloody affair.
Best leave them to their own devices is my view.

jaguar75 said:

1)To think that Kim has expanded his nuclear arsenal to brace for a war with the U.S. is crazier than he is. That man is [censored] and Stalin reincarnated...His motives are plain and simple...He wants South Korea back for starters...When he gets that he will move on to the next. This man is insane and the world...as with the US...has no one to blame but themselves for allowing him to get this powerful...This is a mistake that in the very near furture will cost a lot of lives to reconsile.

2)Iran will never become a nuclear power because Israel will not allow that. Iran has tried several times and everytime they are about to start a nuclear program Israel goes in an blows it up...Plain an simple!

3)What do you mean should attemp to break away...that is the problem China has is becasue Taiwan has already done that. They did so a long time ago. China wants Taiwan back because China wants to be the new Big boy on the block and they need the economy of Taiwan to push them over the top. The world can not, the US can not allow that to happen. And for right now The only threat China is to Taiwan is a nuclear one. China does not have the ability to land an invasion force and take Taiwan and still be able to use it and they know that or else they would have invaded. China flexes its muscles with the threat of nukes just like russia did time and time again during the cold war. It is cat and mouse!

4)Selling any type of weapons to anyone because of some stupid friendly fire incident is equivilent to shooting your father because he spanked your bottom in public becasue you could not have a candy bar...

5)I can not comment on Russia because I don't really follow what is going on there.

Carrera said:

I doubt North Korea is dangerous but it is paranoid. Bush has done a good job convincing the North Koreans he poses a serious threat to them which is why the North is stepping up its nuclear program. The fate of Iraq has provided clear, concrete proof that countries outside of NATO face a threat. Bush has proved he is more than willing to kill thousands of people, either due to his ideological convictions or his need for oil.
Left alone, North Korea will probably never invade the South. But if Bush is foolhardy enough to tangle with them, he'll find he's facing a far superior fighting force than any Arab nation he might encounter. South East Asians are extremely tough in combat, same as the Viet Kong. The North Koreans are all militarily trained and drilled and a war with these people would be an extremely bloody affair.
Best leave them to their own devices is my view.

I'm not sure. Understanding North Korea is like trying to get inside Michael Jackson's head: they're an oddly unknowable entity, a truely unique non-member of the global community. A real Orwellian novelty.

You're certainly right about their formidability, as far as we can guess. I don't think a significant war involving North Korea could avoid being a meat grinder for more than one party.

Carrera said:

I doubt North Korea is dangerous but it is paranoid. Bush has done a good job convincing the North Koreans he poses a serious threat to them which is why the North is stepping up its nuclear program. The fate of Iraq has provided clear, concrete proof that countries outside of NATO face a threat. Bush has proved he is more than willing to kill thousands of people, either due to his ideological convictions or his need for oil.
Left alone, North Korea will probably never invade the South. But if Bush is foolhardy enough to tangle with them, he'll find he's facing a far superior fighting force than any Arab nation he might encounter. South East Asians are extremely tough in combat, same as the Viet Kong. The North Koreans are all militarily trained and drilled and a war with these people would be an extremely bloody affair.
Best leave them to their own devices is my view.

Yep. Fought them before. Kicked their asses till the Chinese intervened and the politician got involved. Had they let McArthur have his way there would be no N. Korea today.

Carrera said:

I doubt North Korea is dangerous but it is paranoid. Bush has done a good job convincing the North Koreans he poses a serious threat to them which is why the North is stepping up its nuclear program. The fate of Iraq has provided clear, concrete proof that countries outside of NATO face a threat. Bush has proved he is more than willing to kill thousands of people, either due to his ideological convictions or his need for oil.
Left alone, North Korea will probably never invade the South. But if Bush is foolhardy enough to tangle with them, he'll find he's facing a far superior fighting force than any Arab nation he might encounter. South East Asians are extremely tough in combat, same as the Viet Kong. The North Koreans are all militarily trained and drilled and a war with these people would be an extremely bloody affair.
Best leave them to their own devices is my view.

The US fought and beat North Korea once before and we can do it again...Kim is a psycho...plain and simple and if you think that his intentions are to remove the US from South Korea and then stop you are sadly mistaken. Also I might add that South Korea does not want to be a part of North Korea and I do not see any European Countries stepping up to the plate to defend her. Seems to be the typical European response of let the US come to everyone's aid and them chastise them when it is not done to their liking. Hey Europe how about picking up a gun and helping out a little for once in your lives. I mean most of these idiots we are eradicating are in your back yard and are your trash we are taking out!!!

jaguar75 said:

The US fought and beat North Korea once before and we can do it again

It would be very bloody.

lokstah said:

It would be very bloody.

Perhaps...or it might be another Iraq. The world thought both Iraq wars would be bloody but it turned out to be a bunch starving soldiers standing infront of a murderous gorilla with no will to fight...It might be round 3 of the same [censored]...Soldiers that only stand because if they don't they will be killed by their own sick leader.

lokstah said:

It would be very bloody.

Hard to say. They may just be a paper tiger. They were in the Korean war. Unless they do in fact have nukes. Then it would be bloody and also no more N. Korea.

However it would be prudent to enter any war expecting it to be bloody.