Vince said:
How can you state that you don't believe in this school of philosophical thought and in the same breath push for intervention on the Korean Peninsula? A move that is culturally abrasive and will entail "means" that could reach several hundred thousand dead Korean's from conventional means alone and potentially be the first time Pandora's let out this century -- all to reach a minimalist "end" state that won't be realized for decades.
The problem is that previous American Administrations didn't preempt this situation as was just done in Iraq. What has happened is that the Korean Peninsula is no longer a Zero-Sum Game like Iraq was and as such we can no longer approach it in the same idiosyncratic manner. If anything, this demonstrates that the actions taken in Iraq by the current Administration, no matter how much controversy is raises and how fervently you argue against them, was the correct path.
Just as I've heard a Harvard historian refer to the World Wars as the "Thirty Year War of the Twentieth Century," it's become apparent with the recent revelation brought forth by the Iraqi nuclear scientist (who was a member of Saddam's Nuclear Mujahedin) that the nuclear program would be reinstated as soon as possible, ultimately leading to another state of re-armorment and conflict with much greater force projection. It's become abundantly clear that by preventing a hostile regime from maturing into another Korea, we were doing the right thing (which follows by your very logic concerning Korea, unless you advocate waiting until a device shows up in NYC).
It can only be stated that your views are inconsistent at worst and ignorant at best Natoma. To resist the removal of a hostile regime with NCB aspirations while it's still a No-Sum Game in which the absolute 'ends' far surpass the 'means' in magnitude -- but then support a policy leading us towards a "Game" that will most-decidedly not have a winner and in which the means (as counted in hundreds of thousands of bodies) far outstrips the ends amazes me.
And then to state that you'll never believe this? The icing on the proverbial cake of bullshit....
The means used to go into Iraq were falsified or mishandled. NK is a completely different story. Taking the Administration's bellicose logic and language (see I'm a convert now. Amazing what a few months of "Dems de evil doers! We's gotsta get im" will do
) to it's conclusion means that we should have taken down NK no matter what the cost. I mean, the administration has shown a complete and utter disdain for the thoughts, cultures, wishes, and safety of other nations all around the world over the past couple of years.
But now all of a sudden we're expected to believe they had Asia's best interests at heart? What about the fact that even while NK was was starting its reprocessing, the White House instructed the CIA to stay hush hush about its evidence of NK's terrorist/nuclear threats to the US in order to concentrate solely on Iraq? We were led away from the real threat to a paper weight.
You say that my reasons for wanting to go into NK are inconsistent and ignorant? You've just described this administration's reasons for wanting to go into Iraq. My reasons for wanting to go into NK are a direct reflection of those values. It's amazing what taking a logical thought process to a set of values can do to expose the idiocy of those original values. Thank you for pointing that out.
p.s.: You are honestly going to sit there and give me a reason for not going to war against NK is because it would be culturally abrasive?? Uhm, where was this argument a few months ago when everyone was afraid of what the arab/muslim street would do after seeing troops in the holy land?
Oh wait!
I was one of the people arguing that this could cause another Osama Bin Laden to appear. We went into Iraq for legitimate reasons 12 years ago, and Osama was still pissed enough at the infidels that he and his merry men decided to make America and Americans target 1b after their 1a target, i.e. Israel.
Please don't talk to me about culturally abrasive wars. This administration doesn't know the meaning of the word culture, nor have they shown any respect to anyone that doesn't have a citizenship with this country or doesn't outright kowtow to their hard line beliefs. And actually, thanks to the Patriot Act and other assorted goodies, they don't have much respect for the citizenship of this country or the founding ideals upon which this country was created.
p.p.s.: In case you couldn't tell, I've been drilling this sarcastic point home wrt NK since the day the reasons for war against Iraq were brought to the fore. Because frankly, those reasons for taking down Iraq, but then ignoring the NK threat, were, as you say, inconsistent, ignorant, and just downright dumb. But that is neither here nor there at this point anyways. But I'm glad you're able to see the truth wrt our Iraq policy and how full of holes it was.
It only took you what, 6 months to see what I did from the get go? I'm glad this little experiment has born some fruit.
Basically what you, Russ, Pete, Joe, et al are saying is that we're not in fact taking down Iraq because they are a threat, but because they are a paper weight threat. It's because we knew they'd roll over that we went in and took them down. Not because they were truly as much of a threat to us as NK is. Now I get it....
And btw, this still doesn't answer my little ditty to Pete wrt Cuba. Cuba is a bite sized morsel. They are right there, just a few miles away from Florida. Castro has been one of the most brutal dictators of the last half century. Why haven't we taken him down yet? I mean yeesh, Cuba is far smaller than Iraq, and the people living there would be just as happy to have a brutal dictator gone.
There is no soviet union anymore to put nukes on Cuba. It's just basically a dirty old man there now. Let's gang up on him since he's easy and free those Cubans. That would be the right thing to do right? I mean, we're not just going into countries for other reasons than it being the right thing to do and freeing peoples from an awful and brutal dictator right?
That alone justifies a war started under other pretenses right? So let's do it. Let's take out Cuba.
You heard it here folks. I'm all for dismantling Cuba and beating the crap out of their forces just like we did to the Iraqis. C'mon now everyone get together and lets sing some songs about the imminent threat Cuba poses, just mere miles away from our borders! They can get nukes from NK through Al-Qaeda! I have incontrovertible evidence to show that Cuba harbors Al-Qaeda and seeks and manufacturers 500,000 Billion Tons of Chem-Bio Agent and have used their Trillions of Quatloos to purchase the raw materials to build a Nuclear Bomb from Mexico!
And the sad thing is, my evidence would be just as real as the evidence used by this administration to take us into a war/occupation with Iraq. I can go on for months with this material.
This must be like what the republicans felt like when Bill Clinton lied about Monica Lewinsky. Funny that some of those same republicans were later forced out due to their own sexual scandals. But lets not call the kettle black.
Republicans have for years decried Bill Clinton the devil incarnate for lying about his sexual scandals. Yet when we have almost incontrovertible proof that the administration lied, or at best covered up evidence in order to make the case for taking out Iraq, which is costing us $1 Billion per week and has cost the lives of hundreds of american soldiers and thousands of Iraqis, those same conservatives clam up. And you want to talk about inconsistent?
