Maybe he means we could do what the great and mighty George Bush did.
6/2/2009 5:07:40 PM
please don't change the topic moron. i would like an answer to the question.
6/2/2009 5:09:18 PM
It's hilarious how some of you like to pretend that I don't answer your questions. I'll admit that I often don't answer them the way you'd like, but I do answer.
6/2/2009 5:17:33 PM
so are you saying that we threaten to attack them?
6/2/2009 5:21:58 PM
6/2/2009 5:23:45 PM
i don't claim to know the answer to that question.
6/2/2009 5:26:49 PM
6/2/2009 5:47:23 PM
Well, its tough to say what kind of "real consequences" there could be for NK's current misbehavior. Economic sanctions are rarely effective at fostering political changes in other countries and they would be even less effective in this case because NK is already one of the most isolated countries on the planet.A military response is also practically out of the question. Sure, conceptually we should never take anything off the table. But we still have our hands full with Iraq and Afganistan. Even if we conducted targeted air strikes on NK's nuclear facilities, we would not have the resources to support S.Korea or Japan if NK decided to respond. Personally, I think doing nothing for the moment is probably our best option. And I don't think there is anything wrong with that because its the Brinkmanship of GW's first term that got us in this mess in the first case:http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0405.kaplan.htmlWe still actually have no clue why NK is doing this (see link below). So we need to sit back and figure that out first. It could be this is all a bunch of posturing by Kim Jong Il to show his people that he is still a strong leader despite his failing health. In that case, it may blow over in a few months. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/18/clinton-says-north-koreas-combative-behavior-rooted-political-turmoil/My hope is that when all is said and done Obama will be able to pick up where Bill Clinton left off. During the election, John McCain's long-standing hawkish stance on NK was one of the few things that worried me about him. Given NK's current posturing, I am kinda glad he was not elected.[Edited on June 2, 2009 at 5:57 PM. Reason : ``]
6/2/2009 5:47:26 PM
6/2/2009 6:48:19 PM
6/2/2009 8:01:03 PM
I actually meant with regards to NK. When Clinton left office, North Korea was not testing nuclear weapons and we even had inspectors in place so we could track his nuclear activities. After years of Bush's cowboy diplomacy ("we wont negotiate with you until you stop being evil"), the inspectors are gone and NK is testing nuclear weapons. We are simply in a worse position now than we were before Bush took office. Even Bush realized that. That's exactly why he did a 180 on NK in his second term. This is 100% a total failure of the Bush administration and there is simply no other way to look at it. *No other way* Obama will be doing a damn fine job if he can clean up Bush's mess. PS* But if we're going to troll, I might point out that it isn't the job of the U.S. to enforce U.N. resolutions and Clinton's record on Osama seems about as good as Bush's (so far as I know neither got him "on the hook"). Though I think the point goes to Clinton because he didn't have to invade an entire country to fail at the task of killing Osama bin Laden. WTG Clinton![Edited on June 3, 2009 at 9:09 AM. Reason : ``]
6/3/2009 8:55:01 AM
To kooksaw:
6/3/2009 8:56:47 AM
6/3/2009 10:35:55 AM
hahaha man drudge is in hyper-obama-overlord-muslim overload today.. probably close to 15 inferences and non sequitur associationsi took a screenshot for my lol archivesi think i like the main photo the bestlol i mean i don't even know where to start
6/3/2009 10:52:11 AM
NBCNEWS ANCHOR BOWS BEFORE OBAMA?
6/3/2009 11:04:08 AM
oh my godmatt one-upped himself todayPRESIDENT SPORTS THIN MOUSTACHE IN EGYPT...
6/4/2009 9:42:21 AM
You truly belong here with us among the clouds
6/4/2009 9:46:15 AM
6/4/2009 10:15:33 AM
The US isn't a Christian country!!! It really pisses me off when people say that. by the way if you missed his speech yesterday you can read it herehttp://www.wral.com/asset/news/political/2009/06/04/5277627/Microsoft_Word_-_cairoaddress.pdfit really is an amazing speech. what a breath of fresh air!
6/4/2009 11:00:54 AM
6/4/2009 11:03:11 AM
because the US was created as a safe haven for people of all religions and to have the freedom to believe in what ever faith we personally decide to follow. additionally, our founding fathers made it a point to separate and protect the church from the state and to prevent the state from setting up an official religion. when people say the US is a christian nation it flies in the face of the first amendment.
6/4/2009 11:08:17 AM
HOORAAAAYY
6/4/2009 11:09:15 AM
That's not what bothers me. He's like "hey we're not a Christian country!" then he's like "ya know, if you took all the Muslim people in the US we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries.Oh how nice!
6/4/2009 11:09:55 AM
6/4/2009 11:13:36 AM
someone in the administration he hired is.
6/4/2009 11:16:18 AM
yes i do know that he didn't write the speech. i'm not talking about Obama being a breath of fresh air but our foreign policy all together.
6/4/2009 11:17:06 AM
Pat....please tell me that you have some understanding of persuasion. Step 1. Create commonality and comment of positive qualitiesStep 2. Get to the meat of it. Identity the issues and propose solutions that support a common goalStep 3. Revisit areas of common ground and common purpose with the idea that your solutions are the way to achieve thatThis is exactly what Obama did in his speech
6/4/2009 11:20:59 AM
6/4/2009 11:32:48 AM
6/4/2009 11:33:17 AM
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm
6/4/2009 11:37:03 AM
^^did you read the speech?? its nothing like the foreign policy of the bush administration with his talk of crusades and its god's will that he invade iraq and shit like that.^^^ several of our founding fathers hated organized religion including christianity.[Edited on June 4, 2009 at 11:40 AM. Reason : ...]
6/4/2009 11:38:33 AM
just finished watching the speech. it was a fantastic speech. now let's hope the words come to fruition
6/4/2009 11:39:54 AM
are you five?come on dude, even hardcore Obama supporters can admit that nothing much has changed on the foreign policy front
6/4/2009 11:40:39 AM
6/4/2009 11:41:45 AM
^^ from an action standpoint I agree. we continue our efforts in Iraq and have stepped up military presence in Afghanistan. However, what I'm referring to more so is the attitude. As seen through yesterdays speech, America is now on a path or mutual understanding and reconciliation instead of colonialism and forcing democracy down peoples throats like it was during the bush administration.[Edited on June 4, 2009 at 11:44 AM. Reason : ^^]
6/4/2009 11:43:43 AM
yeah, who knows if all the contact and communication with the Middle East and the Muslim world will lead to substantial policy changes or changing attitudes from Muslims to the US and the West, but my god, what a change in attitude from the US to them. Thankfully the years of Bush's cowboy diplomacy are gone, and we don't have to listen to our President make idle threats and insults to anyone to disagrees with him. I think Obama's larger goal here is to build support among normal Muslim's for him and the US, because then they will be more willing to stand up to and denounce radical Muslims like Al Qaeda and the Taliban. With Bush's attitude, normal Muslim's couldn't be expected to care much when Al Qaeda took out attacks on the West, because we weren't giving them any reason not to. But if Obama can help shift the view of the US, then hopefully Muslims will be able to marginalize and diminish their own radical elements.
6/4/2009 12:43:28 PM
I gotta agree. No actions have been made by Obama yet but it has only been a few months. Foreign policy doesn't turn on a time. But I like the direction he's going in (even though I don't think the speech was that amazing). Hopefully something will actually come of it. But if nothing does, I hope Obama will be strong enough to handle things if it doesn't. [Edited on June 4, 2009 at 1:09 PM. Reason : ``]
6/4/2009 1:05:51 PM
6/4/2009 1:10:34 PM
if he had said "western world" instead of "world" it would be accurate.
6/4/2009 1:11:40 PM
^ and even more accurate if he was talking about the U.S. being the largest Muslim country in North America! Boy its fun to change the meanings of things.
6/4/2009 1:30:12 PM
ok?[Edited on June 4, 2009 at 1:32 PM. Reason : "if he had" == i know that he didn't actually say that.]
6/4/2009 1:32:13 PM
6/4/2009 1:35:40 PM
6/4/2009 1:42:27 PM
i find it conceivable that he misspoke and isn't dumb enough to think that we have a large muslim population when compared to the rest of the world. he may not have. there's not really a way to know.
6/4/2009 2:33:48 PM
6/4/2009 2:46:47 PM
6/4/2009 3:59:10 PM
To say America is a Christian nation is to say it has a Christian identity, which it certainly does not. Most of the founding fathers were deists at best, and the phrase "endowed by the creator" was added in later by a christian editing Jefferson's original Declaration of Independence, which did not include any deistic wording.In a 1797 peace treaty with Tripoli (John Adams' administration), there is this statement: "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."
6/4/2009 4:29:06 PM
^^ just because you can say it doesn't mean its not retarded
6/4/2009 5:19:08 PM
The US is not a Christian nation in any meaningful sense.Certain people for the purposes of idiocy might choose to view us as being one, but they really don't matter.
6/4/2009 7:50:22 PM
6/4/2009 10:57:23 PM