Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: Awful Quiet Here Considering The North Koreans Detonated A Nuke

  1. #1

    Awful Quiet Here Considering The North Koreans Detonated A Nuke

    Not a single lib blaming Bush?

    Maybe it has to do with the fact Bill Clinton is responsible for this....

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Not a single lib blaming Bush?

    Maybe it has to do with the fact Bill Clinton is responsible for this....[/QUOTE]


    Not-for-nothing, but I am pretty sure it will be found that it wasn't a nuke afterall. However, the rhetoric coming out of that frootloop is sure to set the stones-a-rolling toward a major conflict.

    JMO

  3. #3
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Not a single lib blaming Bush?

    Maybe it has to do with the fact Bill Clinton is responsible for this....[/QUOTE]


    The US policy for the last 6 years. "Evil" Let the China's deal with it.

  4. #4
    You have been pretty quiet while YOUR party heads for the sh1tter.


    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Not a single lib blaming Bush?

    Maybe it has to do with the fact Bill Clinton is responsible for this....[/QUOTE]

  5. #5
    [QUOTE=cr726]You have been pretty quiet while YOUR party heads for the sh1tter.[/QUOTE]



    Unemployment is 4.6%, the stock market is at record highs, the deficit has dropped from 423 billion to 250 billion (Dims don't seem to talk about the deficit anymore) .... The economy has created 6.6 million jobs the past three years and we haven't had a terrorist attack in the US since 2001.

    You keep believing the polls conducted by the criminal liberal media and I'll see ya in November.... :D

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Unemployment is 4.6%, the stock market is at record highs, the deficit has dropped from 423 billion to 250 billion (Dims don't seem to talk about the deficit anymore) .... The economy has created 6.6 million jobs the past three years and we haven't had a terrorist attack in the US since 2001.[/QUOTE]

    Hard to debate with this IMO. You can argue tactics in the War on Terror, of course, but the homefront is a thriving as it has ever been.

  7. #7
    How is the actual debt?


    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Unemployment is 4.6%, the stock market is at record highs, the deficit has dropped from 423 billion to 250 billion (Dims don't seem to talk about the deficit anymore) .... The economy has created 6.6 million jobs the past three years and we haven't had a terrorist attack in the US since 2001.

    You keep believing the polls conducted by the criminal liberal media and I'll see ya in November.... :D[/QUOTE]

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,083
    [QUOTE=Warfish]...but the homefront is a thriving as it has ever been.[/QUOTE]


    Isn't it great! All of a sudden I need help managing my wealth! Thank God for all those incessant financial planning commercials during Sundays game. Who knew that they would help some dude who was downing Guinness, eating beer nuts and farting in his sweat pants!

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Hard to debate with this IMO. You can argue tactics in the War on Terror, of course, but the homefront is a thriving as it has ever been.[/QUOTE]

    'fish, the problem with this is it's also true that however well the economy is doing going by the metrics, few people [i]feel[/i] like its doing better.

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan]Isn't it great! All of a sudden I need help managing my wealth! Thank God for all those incessant financial planning commercials during Sundays game. Who knew that they would help some dude who was downing Guinness, eating beer nuts and farting in his sweat pants![/QUOTE]

    Sounds like someone has some personal respeonsabillity issues. If you got cash issues my friend, it's not the world fault, it's yours.

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Unemployment is 4.6%, the stock market is at record highs, the deficit has dropped from 423 billion to 250 billion (Dims don't seem to talk about the deficit anymore) .... The economy has created 6.6 million jobs the past three years and we haven't had a terrorist attack in the US since 2001.

    You keep believing the polls conducted by the criminal liberal media and I'll see ya in November.... :D[/QUOTE]


    Home foreclosures are also up 73% over last year. The economy is good but homes are still the No. 1 asset of the middle class and prices are falling. That makes people feel squeezed. I'm betting home owners in general make up a very large segment of the voting public? It will be interesting to see if they have the same perception that the economy is good when their debt costs are going up and they can't refinance cash out of their houses any more.

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Home foreclosures are also up 73% over last year. [/QUOTE]

    Personal Responsibility 101: When you buy a home, make sure you can afford the payments. Variable rate means variable.

    I know, it's something you libs have a hard time comprehending.

  13. #13
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,083
    [QUOTE=Warfish]If you got cash issues my friend, it's not the world fault, it's yours.[/QUOTE]


    Yup....its my fault these a-holes owe me over 60,000...

    [url]http://www.gdc-homes.com/[/url]


    I don't have issues w/ cash...I just have issues when people don't give me all that they owe me and then give me some sob story about how they are broke through the rolled down window of their '06 Benz. :D

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]Personal Responsibility 101: When you buy a home, make sure you can afford the payments. Variable rate means variable.

    I know, it's something you libs have a hard time comprehending.[/QUOTE]

    We know who's fault it is - but it will have an eventual effect on the economy

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan]Not a single lib blaming Bush?

    Maybe it has to do with the fact Bill Clinton is responsible for this....[/QUOTE]

    Its laughable that somehow you will blame Clinton for this.

    Look at the calender. Clinton hasent been in office since January 2001. Bush has had almost 6 years with the full support of a Republican senate and House to do something about N. Korea. Hes done nothing. Nada.

    9/11- blame clinton, Iraq- blame clinton, terrorism is alive and well today- blame clinton, the defecit- blame clinton....

    at what point does Bush take some responsibility for the countless bonehead moves that have led to disasters? You Repubs like to talk about personal responsibility. How about you start with yourselves

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]Personal Responsibility 101: When you buy a home, make sure you can afford the payments. Variable rate means variable.

    [B]I know, it's something you libs have a hard time comprehending.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Conservatives don't take 30 year mortages unless they have the money in the bank. ;) Variable rates are only 1 part of the squeeze but I guess Conservatives don't refinance when rates are going down and housing values are going up to do things like invest, send their kids to college, etc., etc., etc.

    I guarantee you more middle class Republican conservatives are being squeezed by debt than are making a killing in the stock market. Keep believing the Dow indicates that the middle class homeowner who is the bedrock of the voting public thinks every thing is rosey. And keep believing only libs get into financial difficulty. That's exactly why George's dad got kicked out, he was out of touch with the real problems people face.

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]Its laughable that somehow you will blame Clinton for this.

    Look at the calender. Clinton hasent been in office since January 2001. Bush has had almost 6 years with the full support of a Republican senate and House to do something about N. Korea. Hes done nothing. Nada.[/QUOTE]

    Okay, so answer this then. Clinton supplied N.K. with the Nuclear Tech as part of his policy of Appeasement designed, in theory, to stop this very outcome.

    So, Bush takes over, a few months in has 9/11.

    What, specificly, should Bush "have done" to correct the flawed policy of Clinton, and stopped this outcome? And please, be very specific, don't bother prattling on and saying little. I want specifics, details, actions and plans YOU think Bush should have done that would have corrected Clinton error in judgement.

    Oh, and you better make sure your ideas are things the Democrats and folks like yourself would have supported in full BEFORE this detonation. No B.S. about "attacking" or even "sanctioning" N.K., becuase we both know the Dems would have supported neither.
    Last edited by Warfish; 10-11-2006 at 02:07 PM.

  18. #18
    This is both parties fault. They are sooo busy trying to make one another look bad that they forgot to run the fregging country. Plain and simple. I voted for Bush, Twice, I am not happy with every move he has made. While he was handed a well funded country that, I feel, He as squander on the rich with the tax cuts and the energy bill. I think the previous admin could have taken more interest in foreign affairs, Other then visiting every freggin nation twice. Our government needs to stop pointing fingers and deal with the issues that we are faced with. Enough with the BS scandals and dirt flinging and take care of your citizens. Off soap box

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Okay, so answer this then. Clinton supplied N.K. with the Nuclear Tech as part of his policy of Appeasement designed, in theory, to stop this very outcome.

    So, Bush takes over, a few months in has 9/11.

    What, specificly, should Bush "have done" to correct the flawed policy of Clinton, and stopped this outcome? And please, be very specific, don't bother prattling on and saying little. I want specifics, details, actions and plans YOU think Bush should have done that would have corrected Clinton error in judgement.

    Oh, and you better make sure your ideas are things the Democrats and folks like yourself would have supported in full BEFORE this detonation. No B.S. about "attacking" or even "sanctioning" N.K., becuase we both know the Dems would have supported neither.[/QUOTE]


    First off, I dont think Clinton's Agreed Framework with North Korea was an appeasement. It was a negotiation (something this president and obviously you, know nothing about. North Korea built its first reactor in 1984 (yes under Reagan's presidency) and seperated enough plutonium two make 2 bombs under Daddy Bush's watch. It was Bill Clinton's Agreed Framework wich stopped N. Korea from going forward with plutonium enrichment for much of the 1990s. It wasent until the end of the Clinton presidency that our intelligence started detecting signs near that the North Koreans were trying to evade the freeze by beginning a uranium program. When they were confronted with this , they admited to it. Im not saying that the Agreed Framework was perfect as evidenced by the fact that North Korea was not in 100% compliance. But it was the only thing that stopped North Korea from producing nuclear weapons and separating plutonium at the time. During the Clinton administration, North Korea didnít make any nuclear bombs.

    In 2002, then Bush Sec of State Collin Powell said he wanted to continue with and expand on Clintons program with the North Koreans. But Bush wanted no part of that. He wanted No part of that and refused any one on one negotiations with N.Korea.

    So what would i do? I dont know. This is ridiculous to ask me how to solve the problem with Korea. I probably would start with one-on-one talks with them. This is along the lines of what Powell wanted to do. But to expect someone with no experience in diplomacy/international negotiations to come up with a SPECIFIC solution is assinine.

    But since you seem so defensive when I criticized Bush's failure to come up with a solution in 6 years, please tell us all , using SPECIFICS of course , why you think Bush's policies toward North Korea have been so successful in your mind?

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]First off, I dont think Clinton's Agreed Framework with North Korea was an appeasement. It was a negotiation (something this president and obviously you, know nothing about. North Korea built its first reactor in 1984 (yes under Reagan's presidency) and seperated enough plutonium two make 2 bombs under Daddy Bush's watch. It was Bill Clinton's Agreed Framework wich stopped N. Korea from going forward with plutonium enrichment for much of the 1990s. It wasent until the end of the Clinton presidency that our intelligence started detecting signs near that the North Koreans were trying to evade the freeze by beginning a uranium program. When they were confronted with this , they admited to it. Im not saying that the Agreed Framework was perfect as evidenced by the fact that North Korea was not in 100% compliance. But it was the only thing that stopped North Korea from producing nuclear weapons and separating plutonium at the time. During the Clinton administration, North Korea didnít make any nuclear bombs.

    In 2002, then Bush Sec of State Collin Powell said he wanted to continue with and expand on Clintons program with the North Koreans. But Bush wanted no part of that. He wanted No part of that and refused any one on one negotiations with N.Korea.

    So what would i do? I dont know. This is ridiculous to ask me how to solve the problem with Korea. I probably would start with one-on-one talks with them. This is along the lines of what Powell wanted to do. But to expect someone with no experience in diplomacy/international negotiations to come up with a SPECIFIC solution is assinine.

    But since you seem so defensive when I criticized Bush's failure to come up with a solution in 6 years, please tell us all , using SPECIFICS of course , why you think Bush's policies toward North Korea have been so successful in your mind?[/QUOTE]

    First, nice cut and paste job. Which Lib Radio-head you snag these talking points from, just for the record of course. :rolleyes: Yep, Ol' Appeasement Clinton sure stopped all the bad guys in the world. When you get back to relaity, let me know, maybe we can talk then.

    Second, I am already on record that I do NOT support Bush's policies on NK, nor his tactics taken in Iraq. Difference is, I place blame on our enemies for putting us in an all-but-impossible situation, not on America and Americans trying to do the best they can. But a worthless little appeaser like yourself would never understand such things. If it isn't "Hate Bush", you just won;t get it.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us