Obama goes to war?

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Charles

And Korea is another Tar Baby.

Chas

What an astute reference. I don't think I've read that story for over forty years.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Charles]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

What an astute reference. I don't think I've read that story for over forty years.

Regards,

D-Ray

At times, I wonder if our fearless leaders have ever read it at all.

Chas

[piece-itpete]

"Fellow citizens, we have always tolerated North Korea's brutality, time and again. We did so because we have always had a genuine longing for peace on the Korean Peninsula," he [South Korean President Lee Myung-bak] said. "But now things are different. North Korea will pay a price corresponding to its provocative acts."

"The United States fully supports President Lee's responsible handling of the Cheonan incident," said Clinton. "The measures that President Lee announced in his speech are both prudent and entirely appropriate."

(PiP: SK has ruled out military action for now. But wanna bet what happens if NK fires again?)

Shook up the Japanese:

'The attack has provided political cover for Japan's government -- only the second opposition party to take power in nearly 50 years -- to end an eight-month-long feud with the United States and accept a plan to relocate a U.S. Marine base within Okinawa. On Sunday, Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama announced that his country would abide by a 14-year-old agreement to move the Futenma air base in Okinawa to a less populated part of the island.

Hatoyama's government had campaigned on a platform that rejected the Futenma deal and advocated a more Asia-centric view of Japan's place in the world. But the Cheonan incident reminded them "that this is still a very dangerous neighborhood and that the U.S.-Japan alliance and the basing arrangements that are part of that are critical to Japan's security," the senior U.S. official said. '

It's really putting China on the spot.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...rc=nl_politics

Pete

[JCricket]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Pre-emptive - like fighting Europes' fight in Bosnia?

So if we start bombing the hell out of NK the left's OK with it?

Pete

Is the right okay with it?

This kind of lumping together of people puts a bad taste in my mouth.

I doubt anyone is really oaky with it. I also bet there is a very wide range of opinions on boths sides of the line. I doubt there really could be a categorization based on party affiliation here.

Mark

[piece-itpete]

If NK fires on SKs ships again it won't really matter if anyone's OK with it, I can't imagine us not supporting SK up to and including militarily.

I was wondering if the left would support Obama on it.

Pete

[JCricket]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

If NK fires on SKs ships again it won't really matter if anyone's OK with it, I can't imagine us not supporting SK up to and including militarily.

I was wondering if the left would support Obama on it.

Pete

Like I said, no one group in its entirety will support or condem it. I think this categorization and "support" of division(party line politics) is what is harming this country most.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

If NK fires on SKs ships again it won't really matter if anyone's OK with it, I can't imagine us not supporting SK up to and including militarily.

I was wondering if the left would support Obama on it.

Pete

I don't really think "the left" would have a unified response to it. Of course, the exact nature of the "it" would be important.

John

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by JCricket

Like I said, no one group in its entirety will support or condem it. I think this categorization and "support" of division(party line politics) is what is harming this country most.

We are a two party system.

Originally Posted by Boreas

I don't really think "the left" would have a unified response to it. Of course, the exact nature of the "it" would be important.

John

OK, perhaps to go further then, in the event of the resumption of hostilities NK will (most likely) walk over SK. The only thing that can (will?) stop them is the US.

That does mean ground troops in combat.

Pete

[merrylander]

So the south has terminated all trade and investment in the north, no shots fired and now that stupid little fart will have to eat crow.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

If NK fires on SKs ships again it won't really matter if anyone's OK with it...

Bullshit.

If fired upon, it kind of matters to me what South Korea's ships were doing, at the time, before I pledge support.

I realize nobody wants to touch the subject of Israel for fear of being branded with the BS anti-Semitic brush, but it's the same model: What IF Iran attacks Israel? Before we willy-nilly support them, I'd like to know what the Mossad was doing in Tehran, for example...

Everything is relative. If you aren't "hands clean," support should NOT be guaranteed.