N. Korea attacks S. Korea

Palin isn't a good example of what I would look for in a president but killing animals face to face should be a requirement for any president who even thinks about going to war.

 

Couldn't have said it better my self.

 

Just saw on Have I got News For You (UK political satire show) that Palin was on a radio interview, host asked what she thought about the korea situation. She said US should support their North Korean allies. Wonder if its a genuine slip of the tongue...probably not.

Not that I can comment on what its really like over the pond, having never been there, but the bits I've seen of US news programs don't bode well. Fox in particular, Bill O'reilly, Sean Hannity and Glen Beck are fucking weird, absolutely nuts. Especially Glen Beck. Sky and Five news in UK can be bad...but not that bad. Kay Burley wants knocking out though.

 

Have you even read the thread? That's been commented several times. Though I can't understand why, bringing Palin up when people say Obama should stand his ground on this issue feels like a sandbox argument.

 

European propoganda? What? If anything, it is the US which influences a lot of decisions by many European countries. It even has military bases in many NATO (if not all) countries, which are U.S. soil and not the soil of the host country. The media in Western Europe tend to be biased in favor of the US unless the US directly endanger the interests of the politicians, which is if it ever happens is just on economical but never military grounds. Making propoganda against a country which has a direct presence in your territories like the U.S. has, is asking for trouble. Unless you were Cuba, but that's another thing.

While the opinion about the US that we Europeans have might be wrong in some parts, especially regarding internal matters, about external matters it's 90% truth. The reasons are obvious.

I do not judge someone for being American. There are good and bad people everywhere. But their government surely has a bad track record. Think of the Soviet Union. The American government in foreign policy is barely different.

 

Fox news is not a good thing to base your opinions on though. News in general is pretty polarized in the USA, that is true. People like Glenn Beck tend to represent a more extreme side of political news (republican sided).

To clarify, my comment was a retort to Ground Zero's comment. When you criticize another country and talk about past misdeeds, you have to make sure your own country is whiter than white, otherwise your own history resurfaces in ways like this.

To your other point, no one can be sure that the information they receive is impartial and complete unless they witness it first hand. However, from my experience of living in Europe for over 20 years, there is a definite negative slant in any media coverage of the USA. By media, I extend the definition beyond news broadcasting. Perhaps in mainland Europe it is less so, but in the UK it is pretty bad. However, I suppose that is partially rooted in historical deeds too.

 

I was lucky enough to escape before he came to stardom, but from what little I've seen, the guy is a circus act.

 

Yeah but they paid for it big time, probably more than was needed. Now it's time to move on.

 

It's funny, Before he went to Fox he had a talkshow on Headline News that was pretty decent. After he moved is when the batshit crazy came out.

 

Those Roosevelt pictures are amazing. Truly Amazing.

So seems NK stopped luckily...
Any theories on what they are going to do next?

 

I get the feeling he is just a garden variety evil genius. I watched about 20 minutes of a show of his a few months ago and it was 100% bullshit with made up facts interspersed with a handful of real ones with conclusions that grasp at straws that have long ago been given to some kids for their water.

What he seems to do is talk to his listeners in such a way that makes them feel empowered - empowered that they have picked the one guy who truely knows what is actually going on and that everyone else has had the wool pulled over their eyes. Because he has convinced his viewers of this they will refuse to even contemplate that he may be wrong and that another viewpoint is correct for ANYTHING. That is until he speaks of it then they accept it as fact. What I'm unsure about is wether or not he believes the shit he spouts on TV and the radio. He could simply be living a lie in order to garner a huge following and personality cult with god knows what for a goal (putting aside the obvious amount of cash he must earn from these people). Ultimately he might be hoping to sway the public enough to achieve an American dictatorship but that is grasping at straws I admit.

Truth be told this sort of thing could happen to any demographic if you manage to find them. A democratic could have instead done this against Republicans but I have a feeling the Democratic party has the tendency to attract those of higher education more so than the Republican party does. Which doesn't necessarily mean anything as I'm far more self-taught than my credentials begin to show, however someone who gets the short end of the stick from the government in Alabama isn't likely to view the government favorably - less so post-Katrina.

Ultimately people just aren't as intelligent as they want you to think they are. Most people want easy answers and don't think for themselves enough to bother with fact checking with reality. Then you get the people who think they think for themselves and buy into bullshit like 9/11 conspiracies but when faced with facts that disrupt their "truth" they pull a Glenn Beck.

 

um, i wasn't comparing it. you asked since when is war consdering dropping bombs...I just gave a historical bombing. sir, you don't understand the context despite me quoting your exact words.

 

That's gotta be one of the shittier things about being conservative. Sure the liberals have their fair share of crazies, but it's nothing like the ones on the right... at least they're not nearly as popular. Anne Colter, Palin, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and of course Beck. The worst one we have in the media world is, as stated, Nancy Grace, who is conservative in her (fry first prosecute later) thinking if you ask me.

 

Holy Shit

(URGENT) Explosion sounds of artillery fire heard on Yeonpyeong Island, official says

http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2010/11/28/47/0401000000AEN20101128001900320F.HTML

 

ive lived in europe, the u.s., and throughout the southern hemisphere and i want to tell you youre all equally lousy. it seems like the u.s. has been trying to provoke north korea for a long time, conducting war games during a tense situation like this makes it pretty evident that the u.s. wants a war with them. its fucking ridiculous, the north koreans have the nuclear technology to potentially inflict massive amounts of casualties on the people in that region. add to the mix the sheer size of the north korean military, its not going to pretty if war does break out. south korea would be making a fatal error in judgment trying to take north korea head on.
who ever is in charge of u.s. policy as it relates to north korea is a fucking moron. maybe we should be using diplomacy, instead of the threat or use of force. weve been effectively hitting a stray dog with a stick, while everyone else stands around watching, expecting the situation to resolve itself. by trying to resolve the situation in this manner the outcome isnt going to be for the better regardless if north korea backs downs or not.
you think life will be pleasant for south koreans with north korea descending into chaos? it wont.

the crap you see on t.v. defies logic. fox news and their pundits would have us nuke half the world into a sheet of glass. the american 'free press' is more concerned with lindsay lohans tits than actual news, and no one seems to be advocating any sensible resolution to the issues we face anymore. whats even worse is that we seem to have elected complete fucking idiots to public office, people in positions of power have the mental capacity of a turd. life on planet earth has decided to exalt the mentally retarded and denigrate intelligence.

 

Because diplomacy has worked so well with North Korea in the past. The North Korean idea of diplomacy is to try and threaten until they get something and then break any promises made only to come back and threaten again. That is blackmail and not diplomacy.

And by all means please explain how the US "provokes" North Korea because it seems to me that petty much everything the US or South Korea does is in response to North Korean provocation. The only thing I can think of in recent memory that could be construed as the US provoking North Korea was Bush including them in the "Axis of Evil". While I admit that was a stupid move it was also nearly ten years ago. If you can think of anything more recent then feel free to enlighten us.

 

People saying the US needs to take a diplomatic stance aren't looking at the whole situation. The US doesn't want to get involved with diplomatic relations with North Korea. An instructor I have currently explained it best that the US hasn't had a strong foreign form of diplomacy since the Cold War and they've just played it from crisis to crisis. The US wants China to take a stand and for China to become the diplomat for foreign affairs. In this case China has done that. Immediately they sent top officials to Pyongyang and to Seoul to prevent this from spiraling into all out war. People saying these war games are just to provoke the North Koreans in light of current events are stupid. They were planned over a year in advance and China knows it. China isn't going to ask the US to leave the region either because then it becomes their problem.

 

i dont really want to talk about this anymore because i feel like id be beating my head against a wall. with bush during his two terms there was absolutely no diplomatic relationship with north korea unless you consider threatening war, imposing sanctions and sinking their trade ships diplomacy...thats fucking eight years though. obama gets into office and what does he do? imposes more sanctions. the only serious attempt to talk to north korea was back when clinton was in office by jimmy carter. he comes back saying north korea wants direct talks and is willing to end its nuclear program, and then nothing...we completely fucking ignore north koreas invitation. now north korea has nukes and is pretty much pissed off at the rest of world. you imply diplomacy hasnt worked in the past...thats mainly due to the fact that diplomacy has not been used in the past. with a new leader in north korea this would be the time to reach out to them.

skaarg: saying that because the war games were planned far in advance doesnt change the fact that its a bad fucking idea. hostilities have been running between the u.s. and north korea for longer than most of you have been alive. you think this is a new development its not, these war games are being used either in preperation of conflict or to threaten military action. because thats pretty much the purpose war games were designed to fufill. north korea is right to be concerned about it. the u.s. and its lack of diplomacy is the reason for most of the bullshit we now have to deal with...a couple of wars, a bunch of dead people, a fucked economy, a couple failed states, a rise in terrorism and general unrest. yeah i know the u.s. does this and the rest of world does that, though wouldnt it be nice if they didnt? thats what i would like anyways, using diplomacy instead of bombing the fuck out of people.

 

lol wut.
If America wants a war it just invades.

The day they announced their enriched Uranium program Bush stated, "I have no plans to invade North Korea". Obviously... they have no natural resources.