Looks like War

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2003-03-17 02:10pm

You're right in a way, can you imagine what would have happened if a, *gasp*, DEMOCRAT was leading.. like Al Gore??

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-17 02:11pm

Trytostaydead wrote:Not saying he was wrong, except for his reasons, just that he's an idiot.

The same idiot who's left his opponents standing around gape-mouthed while he scores one victory after another. Call the Gephardt for President campaign headquarters if you don't believe me. He's not an intellectual like Clinton was, but in his own way, he's just as good a political operator (it probably helps having Karl Rove and George H.W. Bush as advisors). He'd never make a move that boneheaded-hell, I can't think of anyone who'd be that stupid.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-17 02:14pm

Trytostaydead wrote:You're right in a way, can you imagine what would have happened if a, *gasp*, DEMOCRAT was leading.. like Al Gore??

Depends on which Al Gore we would have gotten; would it be the conservative Democrat Al Gore of the 80s, the Third Way Clintonite of the 90s, or the neo-populist Hug-a-Tree Gore we saw in the 2000 election.

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2003-03-17 02:15pm

it was all our fault this whole mess from the beginning..

That's pretty interesting, by our, I assume you mean the U.S. I heard something funny a while back by one of the idiot engineers on our team that contributes lots of hot air and little else. (How else can someone be working on the same circuits for the last six months and still not get any results)

His logic is that it's the America's fault that the NK can't feed themselves. and that's why NK decided to go with nukes. That's about the same logic as person A blaming person B for not helping him because person A doesn't want to work.

Now, getting back to reality. The prisoners dilemma assumes that you have to do something. In this case, the U.S. literally has to do nothing. The choices are:

1) do nothing and let the regional powers deal with it
2) withdraw completely and let the regional powers deal with it
3) initiate forward actions that deals with NK, be it direct talks or military action

Time is not exactly on NK side. Sit back and do nothing. The worst that could happen is Kim goes ballistic and do something suicidal. And I submit that long before that happens, the other regional power will deal with the issue. If Japan, SK, China, and Russia doesn't resolve the NK problem, they'll have more to lose. And in the classic thought of enlightened self interest, you can expect the regional countries to do deal with NK before things get too out of hand.

The biggest problem SK have is that Seoul will be in big trouble from artillery if things kicked off. But it's highly doubtful that the NK will be able to push too far into SK before getting thrown back. That assumes everything stays conventional. And outside of that, they have to cross one of the most heavily fortified frontiers on the planet.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-17 02:16pm

RedImperator wrote:
Trytostaydead wrote:You're right in a way, can you imagine what would have happened if a, *gasp*, DEMOCRAT was leading.. like Al Gore??
Depends on which Al Gore we would have gotten; would it be the conservative Democrat Al Gore of the 80s, the Third Way Clintonite of the 90s, or the neo-populist Hug-a-Tree Gore we saw in the 2000 election.

How about the empty suit Al Gore that could not get me to give a single shit about anything he stood for. Clinton chose a great VP, someone that would never steal the limelight away from him.

0.1 · Post by **0.1** » 2003-03-17 02:25pm

People consistently underestimates Bush.

You see everyone on the planet calling him idiot, moron, etc, and then you look at the results he has achieved, and everyone rationalizes that it must be his subordinates that are doing the work.

But then, the primary quality of a good leader is the ability to pick good subordinates and have the willingness to delegate the authority to those subordinates and letting them handle the situation. The leader in question steps in only when his immediate subordinate has serious trouble and is asking for help. And the most important quality is the realization that one person in such a position can't do everything.

Bush has managed every one of the above, and in the arena that truly matters, he has excelled. We'll see whether or not he can maintain that streak down the road.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-17 02:29pm

Gore need Naomi Wolf to tel him what color sweaters he should wear to atract the "soccer moms" He would wait for poll numbers every moring to make a decision on wether or not to take a piss.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-03-17 02:29pm

Algore would have launched a spate of cruise missiles at the bad guys and left it at that, possibly funding a lot of money to the Northern Alliance and little else.

Bush isn't so bad but I find him only marginally inspiring. If it were John McCain in the Oval Office-- even if he were doing the exact same things that Bush is doing now-- I'd feel more confident. The guy has tasted war before and knows the bad possibilities inherent in it. Any US Joe or Jane (God forbid) will go through what he went through, or worse, and that would give him an insight that I feel Bush lacks. It is good that he is leaning on the likes of Powell...

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-03-18 01:55am

Bin Laden's big problem has nothing to do with our presence in Saudi Arabia. He just hates us because we're a successful and secular country and his fundie nation is a shithole.

What? Those are the very reasons he gives- for the US to get off holy land- if you didn't know, Osama offered his 'holy warriors' to defend Saudi Arabia and save Kuwait from the aggression of the secular infidel that is Saddam- and took it as a great affront that the House of Saud would rather bring in the US. The thought that he's mounted a campaign of murder against the United States because they're better off than Saudi Arabia is absurd, and goes against all available evidence.

correctly predicted the Axis of Evil

Are you suggesting that Iran, Iraq, and North Korea are allies?

brought vengeance down on the Taliban

Oh come on, like that was a hard thing to do.

put France in its place

Actually, if anyone stuck it to anyone, I'd say France stuck it to the US, diplomatically. Bush utterly failed to secure even the 9 votes needed to make a veto necessary.