Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Obama: Harder Than Bush?
You're going to love this:
Compare Obama's current stance/plan for dealing with North Korea with Bush's stance/plan.
When you see it you'll shit bricks!
Obama -is- a hawk. People should have picked that up when he declared during his campaign that he was more than ready to extend the War on Terror to nuclear-armed Pakistan. It's weird that folks in the U.S (left and the right) keep making him out to be some kind of Carter.
We're going to the UN Security Council for a resolution
Whoop de crap
from whitehouse.gov
"President Obama spoke today with Japanese Prime Minister Aso to review the situation following North Korea's nuclear test. The President underscored that North Korea's nuclear test was a clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions and therefore warranted a collective response by the international community.
The two leaders agreed that continued close bilateral cooperation is imperative, and decided to intensify coordination with the Republic of Korea as well as with China and Russia. They pledged to work closely in the United Nations Security Council to obtain a resolution with concrete measures to curtail North Korea's nuclear and missile activities. "
Yeah that'll get the job done.
"President Obama reiterated the United State's unequivocal commitment to the defense of Japan and to maintaining peace and security in Northeast Asia. "
Anytime a democrat vows unequivocal commitment to defense it's the kiss of death
Well, he's half black... of course he's harder...
ohhh, you mean politically 
Hillary will throw and ashtray after Kim if he doesn
So when N. Korea violates this writ, we can write another...
I can see the loop in computer code now
Premise 1: If N. Korea violates UN Protocol then action 1, else action 2
Result: N. Korea violates UN Protocol
Action 1: Write a writ against N. Korea
Action 2: N. Korea becomes accepted, end
If Action 1, then go to Premise 1, else end
We'll see in the coming months if he can make the hard decision to invade
North Korea. He's already doing better then Bush, who ran to the north
Koreans with his hands in the air after the first (2006) atomic test.
> [TI] Mrblonde wrote:
> That makes no sense
lol Blonde we don't say that out loud. Read the politics forum rules noob
I DO hope this president finally does something right. He lost most of my respect already. Handling this properly would regain a little of it.
Kim Jong Il started his nuke program in the 1990s. Albright paid him to stop. He took the money and kept at it anyhow. Bush called him on it and shut off the goodies. Kim behaved a little bit better. Now he is having a tantrum because we bawled at him for building IRBMs.
There aren't many good answers in Korea because Kim's conventional artillery could slag the top five cities in South Korea in the first day of a shooting war
But the idea that Obama's talk represents a bold new direction or somehow better than Bush is just agitprop
Resolving the North Korean crisis is absurdly easy. Announce you'll station nuclear weapons in South Korea and Japan, forcing China to intervene to stop North Korea in the interests of maintaining the balance of power.
If they turn up the heat, then you escalate. You show those mofos that messing around will be mutually costly.
Justinian you assume N. Korea listens to China anymore.
That stopped 20 years ago.
The Japanese and S. Korea would also never go for it. Those are two of the most rabidly anti-nuclear nations on Earth.
If you want to put pressure on Beijing then the answer is nukes in Taiwan. That will make them freak with a capita F, and many many curses after it.
But it still wont resolve the answer of N. Korea.
Sadly, in my view, the only answer is a lot of buses. Suddenly and quietly evacuate the main cities, in the dead of the night, no warning, no chance to call 'loved ones' by the spies, just put them on buses with armed guards watching the people board as they move them to the south, inspections when they get on the bus for electronics (confiscated into bags with their identification posted on the bag) and get them down south fast. Come back for more, who will be waking up to guards escorting them to rally points after checking them, cordon off area's because of a 'major natural gas leak', if done on Saturday they could probably get most out before N. Korea realizes it.
When N. Korea realizes it you then tell everyone to flee the cities as fast as they can, and tell N. Korea 'Your hostages are now out of range, do you wish to negotiate or die?'.
Tell China the cost to them is a promise of America leaving the Korean peninsula after the war, never to return, or if China objects then the nuclear arming of Taiwan, publicly, as well as recognizing it as an independent nation. China would roll over to get out of the way of that one.
Attack the artillery pieces, the tanks, the factories, and make ruins of them.
No China wouldn't have to freak out at all. All they would have to do is:
1. Cease purchases of U.S treasury debt and dump some of what they have. This would force the U.S to quickly have to resort to -very- large scale money printing to fund their immediate deficit and their obligations to other lender nations. The U.S would quickly go the way of Zimbabwe or any number of Latin American nations which have tried similar kinds of "economics".
2. Begin delivering nukes to those ideologically hostile to the U.S. Venezuela, Bolivia and Iran would be excellent candidates. Cuba I'm not sure about.
3. Even closer ties with Russia and its nationalist leader Putin. Strategic cash for oil deals which are already common will be stepped up to allow Russia to re-arm, re-organise and distract America's focus.
4. With the collapse of the United States as the consuming power it once was, this will have an immense impact on export-dependent S.Korea, Taiwan and Japan in forcing political changes which may reflect new priorities. This may make the Australian PM's idea of an Asian Union seem more attractive to provide a counter-bloc to the U.S. China would just have to push the idea harder.
TBH Number 2 is optional really, if China can prove that it can force the U.S to co-operate with the international community peaceably through non-military means this would be a political victory in itself.
China cant dump US treasuries without collapsing itself. It is trade dependent beyond any other nation on Earth. Without trade it dies, and it's only trade partner is truly the United States.
> -Nolio wrote:
lol Blonde we don't say that out loud. Read the politics forum rules noob
----
oh, my bad 
> Obama -is- a hawk. People should have picked that up when he declared during his campaign that he was more than ready to extend the War on Terror to nuclear-armed Pakistan. It's weird that folks in the U.S (left and the right) keep making him out to be some kind of Carter. <
> Well, he's half black... of course he's harder...
[...]
ohhh, you mean politically <
> We'll see in the coming months if he can make the hard decision to invade
North Korea. He's already doing better then Bush, who ran to the north
Koreans with his hands in the air after the first (2006) atomic test. <
Exactly; George "War on Terror" Bush tried to bribe the North Koreans with various cobinations of aid and sanctions. Barak "Pop a Nuke in Yo' Ass" Obama plans to cut aid, totally isolate North Korea, stomp them into the ground, and then convince North Korea's former allies that taking pity on North Korea and sneaking North Korea aid (knowing that it will be fed straight to Kim, the Generals, the Military, and finally the citizens if there is anything left by that time) will result in angry happening. Alot.
Obama could be the new Gouki of politics.
Then Obama gets blamed for 10 million dead. YAY!
Disgraceful, Flint, just disgraceful...
Why don't they just have him assassinated already ffs?
> Wild Flower Soul wrote:
> Disgraceful, Flint, just disgraceful... <
And highly hypocritical considering his rabid defence of GwB when accused of similar responsibility...
If Obama does something wrong with N. Korea 10 million civilians can die, it's a provable fact.
And the odds of Obama slipping is astronomical in my opinion, he lacks the experience.
"China cant dump US treasuries without collapsing itself. It is trade dependent beyond any other nation on Earth. Without trade it dies, and it's only trade partner is truly the United States."
Actually the U.S only accounts for about 17% of China's exports now. The Chinese haven't only been increasing exports to the U.S, in fact you'd be amazed at how many countries now have China as their largest trading partner.
The U.S is just as trade-dependent as well if not moreso it's just that it's #1 export happens to be U.S dollars (printed or borrowed) - for the Chinese it's manufactured consumer goods. It's not inconceivable that the Chinese would be the quicker to recover if a trade war of that magnitude were to occur.
I am sorry, could you answer how many factories closed in China due to the US Recession?
Imperial Forum → Politics → Obama: Harder Than Bush?
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.