The Right Scoop- Extremely Right
No it’s not time to arm the South with nukes. It’s time to pull all our troops out of Korea. We are not welcome in many parts of the world and it it would not only save money but we need troops here. The hell with defending everyone. Let the bastards defend themselves. They have the money.
- Marie
I couldn’t agree more….It’s time for us to take care of ourselves and quit worrying about everyone else…I feel the same way about several other countries too…
- halfmadjesus
The Libertarian in me can see where you guys are coming from, but ignoring potential problems in the world and worrying only about ourselves will come back to bite us in the ass tenfold down the road. I would argue that was the one, true lesson learned on 9-11. This is why I agree with guys like Ron Paul on a lot of things, but when he talks foreign policy, he sounds like a raving loon to me.
As unpleasant and costly as it may be, the US needs to be engaged with, and promoting our interests in, the rest of the world. Bunkering down and assuming other countries will figure out their own problems is no way to lead, and the potential cost of being blindsided by some crisis because we’re not on top of things is too great.
- Extremely Right
I agree on not losing our power in the world. But ask someone who is losing their job in 6 months because it was just shipped to Korea. It does not benefit us to support Korea’s economic engine. Is working at McDonald’s and eating at Burger King the type of economy we end up with? There are consequences to all these stupid trade agreements. We can only import 4,000 cars per year to Korea. They can import an unlimited amount to the U.S. What idiot thought that was a good trade agreement?
- Paulchri
If anyone thinks that our government has been working in our best interests for the last 60 years, they should re-evaluate it. Don17k is correct. We have been a tyrant throughout the world. Our CIA is the scourge of the world, along with the military industrial complex. I saw a speech of Eisenhower saying “watch out for the MIC” on his way out of office. Global controllers, central banks, and the MIC are the end of us. If you take out any one of these three, you could not have had any of the wars of the last hundred years.
- Extremely Right
Yes but you fail to mention “Global controllers, central banks, and the MIC” are not limited to the U.S. I agree that simply put we should mind our own business more than we have. Those same sentiments were uttered in my Fathers generation, He served in the 15th Infantry, Europe. 1944-1946. Tyranny is not exclusively an American phenomenon.
- Paulchri
No, it is not exclusively an American Phenomenon. It should be fairly obvious that these wars were all financed by these banks in concert with one another. If the financing and resources were well distributed to all parties involved, why would we think that there wasn’t a conductor behind it all. Not a single individual, but a small consortium of planners. Doesn’t seem all that implausible to me. What we have been taught about history, is a detailed diversion from the control booth. The timing of events, and the way that they were entered into, is too coincidental for me to believe that it was all just a natural progression. If this were the case, then we would have to consider that what we think we are, is not actually who we are as a nation. Rather that we have become something that we would not have otherwise, without even knowing it. When we send our huge military industrial complex all over the world to do things that we wouldn’t want done to us, we should ask ourselves, is this who we wanted to become, or were we brought here through lies and deception?
- Anonymous
Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex.
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SVJ3DDOLXZNWP26H4CBJUHUEV4 John
Oh come on … That is soooooo yesterday.
And irrelevant too.~(Ä)~
- Anonymous
I posted that in reply to Paulchri’s statement above. ” I saw a speech of Eisenhower saying “watch out for the MIC” on his way out of office. Global controllers, central banks, and the MIC are the end of us “. BTW, Things that are so yesterday are the things people learn from. Have you learned anything from what hasn’t happened yet?
- Anonymous
I posted that in reply to Paulchri’s statement above. ” I saw a speech of Eisenhower saying “watch out for the MIC” on his way out of office. Global controllers, central banks, and the MIC are the end of us “. BTW, Things that are so yesterday are the things people learn from. Have you learned anything from what hasn’t happened yet?
- Don17k
You do know the fate of those who won’t learn the lessons of history, right?
- Don17k
We’ve been doing that for decades, and it’s most of our problem. A few positive things have come out of it, like the Panama Canal. But our relationship with Iran began in 1953 when we deposed their elected President Mossadegh and replaced him with a dictator like the Shah, to further our own interests. We then did the same thing throughout South America, backing corrupt totalitarian dictators. Ho Chih Minh lived and worked in the US for a time as a pastry chef, and he came to us for help and support first. Back then, he was something of a socialist, but not much different than most of Europe turned out to be. And anyway, if that’s the will of their people… what right do we have to dictate otherwise? How different would history have been had we taken him under our wing and showed him the successful nature of even moderate free enterprise, instead of, once again, backing a corrupt regime because it was in our short-term best interests?
- http://twitter.com/MooseOfReason MooseOfReason
I disagree on 9/11. There is a report that just came out. 40% of Afghan citizens think our troops are over there in an attempt to occupy and destroy their country.
http://www.icosgroup.net/modules/reports/afghanistan_transition_missing_variables/press_release
The supposed “lack” of “engagement” with the world is not why 9/11 happened.
- Don17k
Exactly. Remember, it was only 25 years ago – that’s one generation – that we were the Afghans only allies against the Soviets. Then, we left, having armed the warlords far more than the rest of the Afghani people, and the warlords were a bunch of brutal drug-dealing thugs, accountable to nobody.
That was what gave rise to the Taliban, who at least promised the Afghani people that all would answer to the Koran, including them. The Koran, which the people understood well, would be the law, and nobody would be above it.
We came in and took out the Taliban, now. And we left again, and the warlords are back to their old tricks. So the Taliban sees themselves obligated to return.
That’s why I say we have to make a deal with the Taliban. There’s no way we can outlast them on their own turf, and the warlords shift their alliances at their convenience.
- Paulchri
We need troops here to man the checkpoints on the highway. We need them to secure our streets and large events. We need them in the airports disrobing us and patting us down. We need them to disarm us when we have a natural disaster. We need them setting up detention centers for citizens. We need them home to keep us safe from our own freedoms.
- Extremely Right
No it’s not time to arm the South with nukes. It’s time to pull all our troops out of Korea. We are not welcome in many parts of the world and it it would not only save money but we need troops here. The hell with defending everyone. Let the bastards defend themselves. They have the money.
- halfmadjesus
Right on, Krauthammer. That’s the kind of ballsy, straight-up pro-US move pretty much no US president would ever make – especially not our limp-wristed current one.
We will continue to ignore North Korea and placate China until the region turns to clustershtoop one day. Like our current situation with Iran, only when it’s too late will we begin to pay lip service to recognizing the problem, then drag our feet like the proverbial clay they’re made of.
- Paulchri
Why not let them all fight with each other and if they become an imminent threat to us directly, take them out. An imminent threat doesn’t mean that they might have a nuke, either. If we were protecting ourselves at home and doing things to secure our independence, we would have no need to go anywhere. Nobody would have a problem with us, and if they tried screwing with us, we could handle it? Your mind set, or mentality, is one that keeps us afraid, stirred up, broke, and falling fast.
- Don17k
Riiiight.
So then Russia can start selling their old nukes, maybe even to their former friends in Cuba, and their current ones in Venezuela. That’s good, they need cash. Iran would be more local customer…. I’m sure Ahmadinejad is salivating at the prospect. He might even go against the clerics for this one. And Pakistan’s A Q Khan can go right back into business, with our blessings. Who knows, with a little luck, plutonium may find its way onto the CBOT. Of course, as an energy future, it would be unregulated…. so that’s good.
China, of course, can probably make really cheap nukes and sell them to Vietnam AND North Korea…. which means we would have to nuke-arm Taiwan, right?Mushroom (cloud) soup. Yummm!
- Anonymous
Arm the Japanese with Nukes; are you serious ? We fought them four bloody years throughout the Pacific from 1941-1945; only to arm them with nuclear weapons. I don’t think this is the answer to N. Korea. Isolate and cut them off on the international front. Make this China’s problem; not ours….
- http://twitter.com/MooseOfReason MooseOfReason
Should we even be running the world’s affairs?
- Shorthorn
Agreed it’s not the best course of action, but it might be the only one. We fielded tactical nukes in Germany to oppose the USSR and it worked. The leadership of North Korea is first and foremost concerned with preserving it’s own skin. They know they would be eliminated in a nuclear exchange, therefor they would be deterred by a nuclear armed South Korea. Face it, our troops there would be overrrun in days if the North Koreans attacked now. They are there as a tripwire the North dare not cross for fear of US intervention with nukes. If you want to pull the troops out, you’ve got to put nukes in.
- halfmadjesus
Yes, very well put. And it would tip the scales against China’s domination of the region, which they will inevitably press in future years if nothing whatsoever is done, which, I expect, is exactly what we have to look forward to.
I recognize that such ideas are aggressive and warmongery to some, but that approach often works to deter those who would seek to dominate others. Clearly, China has this agenda in the region, and will press it more and more as their power grows and they feel emboldened by US weakness.
If you’re coming at it from the POV that seeking to dominate others is what the US itself is all about, then we can’t really communicate here.
- http://community.livejournal.com/black_avenger_1/profile Virus-X
I’m no fan of that idiot, and not becoming one, now. We don’t really need to army the South Koreans and Japanese with nuclear weapons, considering the portability of our own. The 8th Army, stationed in South Korea, can be given nuclear warheads for their TLAMs (Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles). Additionally, there’s the MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System (ATacMS), which I’m sure they could affix nuclear warheads to. These are solid land-attack, surface-to-surface systems that could devastate anything even THINKING about moving toward the DMZ. This can be additionally reinforced by naval TLAMs, which can be launched from carriers, cruisers, guided missile cruisers, missile frigates, etc. What the US Army missile assets could not hit, the Navy could. This also does not address the SLBMs the Navy could bring to bear. A single USN Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine (“boomer”) can shower targets with up to 24 SLBMs (Sub-Launched Ballistic Missiles). The Trident II SLBM has the capability to fly at over 6,000 meters/second for over 11,000 km. It contains some 12 MIRV (Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehicle) W88 nuclear warheads, capable of striking 12 independent targets, simultaneously. That means they can strike 288 targets, at once. More than enough to handle both the NORKS and ChiComs, at the same time.
However, moving these assets into place will be a MASSIVE provocation against already mentally unstable governments. The Chinese will take great offense, and may even make provocative moves against the US, the South Koreans and/or the Japanese. They’ll, of course, be monkey-dooed by the NORKS, and then there’s the Russians (who will always be Soviets, to me). We’ve already had problems with the Soviets making hostile flights into allied territories:
http://defensetech.org/2010/03/25/russian-blackjack-bombers-over-scotland/
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20100325/158312005.html
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/military/read.main/81397/
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1199504/pg1
That is because they are unafraid of the current government coalitions, and they’ve also very graphically demonstrated their lack of fear of the Dalai Obama, Joe Biteme, Shrillery Clinton and the rest of their stunted, cowardly ilk:
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/04/great-news-russian-attack-subs-spotted-off-east-coast-of-us/
The result of such maneuvers would be more incursions of enemy bombers (weapons of war that carry WMD) into allied territories, including, eventually, our own (Alaska). Remember the days of USN pilots getting into non-shooting furballs with Russian pilots that got too close? Well, they’d most certainly come back with a roar. Soviet and Red Chinese military assets would inch closer-and-closer to the US and our allies, raising the threat levels around the world (and especially in the ROC/Republic of China, where the Chinese good guys live). We’re already financing the PRC’s military (through continually giving them our debts, as opposed to slashing our spending and paying them off); how hard is it to think of them concentrating on building more carriers?
NEWS FLASH, PEOPLE: The Dalai Obama’s pushing the USN to pre WW2 levels of equipment and readiness, while the ChiComs are pushing for the 21st century (on our dime). The Russians, after nationalizing the oil industry and being in OPEC, can get money anytime they want, and outpace the US in military infrastructure (which Ronaldus Magnus helped break down, along with the wall). While the Red Chinese are starting to build fleets, we’re retiring and cancelling ships (http://smadanek.blogspot.com/2009/01/obama-gutting-navy.html), specifically to hobble the USN. While they are increasing in strength, Obama is intentionally working to cripple us militarily (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/04/gates-rips-hear/) (http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=4777), fiscally (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/18/obama-is-killing-the-economy/) and politically (http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2010/11/mission-accomplished-obama-celebrates-americas-diminished-role-in-world/).
Yes, it could be pulled off, but let’s not forget that the Cold War IS NOT OVER. If it was, none of those stories would exist (especially the 2010 stories). We are still involved in LIC (Low Intensity Conflict), and the ASD/SOLIC (Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict) had damned sure better be competent (though our Secretaries of States and Defense aren’t). A president like Ronaldus Magnus could pull it off. The Russians and Chinese would know in no uncertain terms that the United States would not hesitate to defend itself against hostilities, nor to deter hostilities with pre-emption, even if it’s DIRECTLY AGAINST the Russkies and Red Chinese. Remember: Reagan terrified and surprised the Russkies and Red Chinese by showing them we’d acquired the technology to launch SLBMS without having to surface BY HAVING A SUBMERGED BOAT LAUNCH A MISSILE INTO THE SKIES. The Dalai Obama is an invertebrate, mollusk-like creature with a soft body, no intestines and no capability of hard line leadership. Same for all things Clinton. Just ask any Iranian. This is further aggravated by Joe Nobody on the street that believes “cut-and-run” is the solution to everything, and that we should just run from the fields of battle, bringing our troops home for some great and joyous reunion with their grateful families. The last liberal with the kind of strength necessary to do pull something like what Krauthammer’s suggesting was Kennedy. Militarily, he was robost. He brought us one of the greatest weapons in the WORLD, bar none: the United States Army Special Forces. The Dalai Obama? He’s about as robust as Michael Moore after inhaling a couple of deep fried turkeys. If we had a Ronaldus Magnus (or even a scummy JFK), the enemies of the US would know full-well we will not hesitate to jump to DEFCON 2 or even 1. Right now, as it stands, we’re getting sand kicked in our faces, while the Dalai Obama pounds it up his own ass and lectures us that this shows how strong he is (when, really, it just shows how strong his colon is). This condition will continue, persist and worsen, as enemies increasingly see the US as a political entity that will back down from bullies, and will not help anyone else that is bullied. Mark Levin was right when he condemned the Dalai Obama as being responsible for our allies no longer having faith in us, not knowing if the US can be counted on in a fight.
Ask any Georgian.
Quite frankly, if we’d've had the Dalai Obama back during WW2, and Churchill knew that they needed our help, he’d've called a press conference, put a gun in his mouth, and blown the back of his head out. Face it, people: once again, Krauthammer is wrong. This time, because he’s saying we should send Barney Frank to fight Brock Lesnar.
- John
The world doesn’t need any more weapons of mass destruction! We already have the firepower to destroy the world, why should we want a world with MORE nukes??
We should be encouraging no-one to have nuclear weapons. The solution is to disarm North Korea, not create more weapons of unspeakable horror and destruction.
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Ally/100000172241964 Susan Ally
” Our CIA is the scourge of the world, along with the military industrial complex.”
in 1991 I lived in Moscow Russia,my ex-husband’s family took controlling shares of Pravda- I first learned that in fact American CIA (the bureaucrats, not the boots on the ground) are the WORLD’S PUSSIES.
THe Russian Mafia knows this fact, the Mullahocrats know this fact, the Jihadists the Dictators know this fact-the US ‘military industrial complex’ does not have the WILL TO FIGHT.
SO yes bring the troops home to American soil then the enemies around the world can freely come to our land showing all Americans-extremely right, exremely center, and extremely left and everyone in between what it means to have the WILL TO FIGHT.
(Listen up Ronulan anarchist gunnuts-you do not have the might nor the will to fight the war on American soil all by yourselves-the enemies are greater in number than you and they have something you do not-the WILL TO FIGHT FOR YOUR SURVIVAL.)
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SVJ3DDOLXZNWP26H4CBJUHUEV4 John
Dr. K is absolutely correct.
South Korea is a more important ally than most people understand. While the ChiComs attempt hegemony over the Pacific, they are laughing their arses off as America has to keep dealing with the Norks, Iran, Russia, et al. As we should ALL be aware by now, China is in it for China, both economically and militarily. ANYTHING that makes life miserable, and expensive, is a good thing for them. After all, it was a Chinaman who wrote The Art of War. Sadly, BillyJeff Clinton (who obviously never read it) enabled them to enter the 21st Century with a literal high-tech bang.
S. Korea, Taiwan, and Japan deserve, and should PAY for, our military might.
Will it take Tet² to finally wake up President Slappy?~(Ä)~
- Don17k
We are selling Taiwan modern arms. Just not nukes.
Do you understand that if we arm South Korea with nukes, that clears the way for Pakistan to arm Iran and Syria with them? After all, what would we be doing with South Korea vis a vis North Korea that they wouldn’t be doing with Iran and Syria vis a vis Israel? The main difference being that where NK only has the threat of acquiring nukes someday, Israel already has a few dozen stockpiled.Do you also understand that the South Korean government has a history of corruption too? You might try Googling “Tongsun Park.” He was the first person convicted in the oil-for-food scandal regarding Iraq, and served time in US Federal prison, but he was released two years ago and is back in SK now.
Of course, I wouldn’t expect Krauthammer to know this…..
Krauthammer says if we want to stop North Korea from continuing its nuclear ambitions, then he says we must set our policies with China’s leadership in mind. If we offer South Korea a nuclear arms program and encourage Japan to arm itself with nuclear weapons as a deterrent, then that will get China’s attention and they will begin to act:
Lefty heads exploding in 3…2…1…
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SVJ3DDOLXZNWP26H4CBJUHUEV4
- http://twitter.com/MooseOfReason
- http://twitter.com/MooseOfReason
- http://community.livejournal.com/black_avenger_1/profile
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Ally/100000172241964
- http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SVJ3DDOLXZNWP26H4CBJUHUEV4
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.