Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » So ZVUG is getting his wish....NK says nuclear war unavoidable

So ZVUG is getting his wish....NK says nuclear war unavoidable

4 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Guest


Guest

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/391376/North-Korea-states-nuclear-war-is-unavoidable-as-it-declares-first-target-will-be-Japan

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

It is no one's wish, PD. But, I am glad the focus is shifting back to reality. If you are going to target rogue nuclear powers, you target the rogues who have nukes, not the ones who don't. The NK issue needs to be addressed before we worry about whether Iran has nukes or not.

We already know how you feel---Iran should have been bombed yesterday. That is how neocon (il)logic goes.....

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

I seem to remember that Clinton brokered a peace deal with NK, which was passed on to Dubyah, which he summarily dismissed and set the tone for today's situation by declaring the part of the Axis of Evil.

Never mind that NK is a paranoia driven oligarchy ruled by an insane dude with short man's syndrome, what could possibly go wrong by causing loss of face to an unstable freak with malice in his heart and a big old honking gun in his hand....?

Thanx Dubya. Your legacy lives on in the deals you brokered.

A great big pile of blowed up bits of nothingness surrounded by a black hole of national angst.

Guest


Guest

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:It is no one's wish, PD. But, I am glad the focus is shifting back to reality. If you are going to target rogue nuclear powers, you target the rogues who have nukes, not the ones who don't. The NK issue needs to be addressed before we worry about whether Iran has nukes or not.

We already know how you feel---Iran should have been bombed yesterday. That is how neocon (il)logic goes.....

NK could very well have some sort of nuclear device but even Kerry rebutted the LEAKED assessment from DIA:

"Hours before Kerry's arrival, a U.S. lawmaker on Thursday quoted a report by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, one of the 17 bodies that make up the U.S. intelligence community, as saying it had "moderate confidence" North Korea had developed a nuclear bomb that could be fitted on a ballistic missile.

Kerry poured cold water on the report and said it was "inaccurate to suggest that the DPRK has fully tested, developed capabilities" as set down in the document.

U.S. sources said the report was part of a very preliminary assessment not intended to be made public and never reached the senior levels of the American government.

In addition, South Korea's Defense Ministry said it did not believe North Korea could mount a nuclear warhead on a missile."

I would at least be as concerned about the freaks in Iran obtaining a device from Pakistan or Russia. Not much one can do to prevent that though war with either Iran or NK should be a very last resort. A war with NK would dramatically change the dynamic in that area - and not for good. Better the devil you know....

Guest


Guest

William wrote:I seem to remember that Clinton brokered a peace deal with NK, which was passed on to Dubyah, which he summarily dismissed and set the tone for today's situation by declaring the part of the Axis of Evil.

Never mind that NK is a paranoia driven oligarchy ruled by an insane dude with short man's syndrome, what could possibly go wrong by causing loss of face to an unstable freak with malice in his heart and a big old honking gun in his hand....?

Thanx Dubya. Your legacy lives on in the deals you brokered.

A great big pile of blowed up bits of nothingness surrounded by a black hole of national angst.

Your grasp of history is headline deep. Here, let me help you understand how dealing with the NKs is about like dealing with the ragheads in Iran:
For years, the United States and the international community have tried to negotiate an end to North Korea’s nuclear and missile development and its export of ballistic missile technology. Those efforts have been replete with periods of crisis, stalemate, and tentative progress towards denuclearization, and North Korea has long been a key challenge for the global nuclear nonproliferation regime.

The United States has pursued a variety of policy responses to the proliferation challenges posed by North Korea, including military cooperation with U.S. allies in the region, wide-ranging sanctions, and non-proliferation mechanisms such as export controls. The United States also engaged in two major diplomatic initiatives in which North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons efforts in return for aid.

In 1994, faced with North Korea’s announced intent to withdraw from the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which requires non-nuclear weapon states to forswear the development and acquisition of nuclear weapons, the United States and North Korea signed the Agreed Framework. Under this agreement, Pyongyang committed to freezing its illicit plutonium weapons program in exchange for aid.

Following the collapse of this agreement in 2002, North Korea claimed that it had withdrawn from the NPT in January 2003 and once again began operating its nuclear facilities.

The second major diplomatic effort were the Six-Party Talks initiated in August of 2003 which involved China, Japan, North Korea, Russia, South Korea, and the United States. In between periods of stalemate and crisis, those talks arrived at critical breakthroughs in 2005, when North Korea pledged to abandon “all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs” and return to the NPT, and in 2007, when the parties agreed on a series of steps to implement that 2005 agreement.

Those talks, however, broke down in 2009 following disagreements over verification and an internationally condemned North Korea rocket launch. Pyongyang has since stated that it would never return to the talks and is no longer bound by their agreements. The other five parties state that they remain committed to the talks, and have called for Pyongyang to recommit to its 2005 denuclearization pledge."

Here is your simplistic view:

So ZVUG is getting his wish....NK says nuclear war unavoidable Its-all-bushs-fault

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

We should begin aerial bombardment of NK with cows, chickens and some fruit....If the people had the strength to rebel they might....We should feed them and watch...maybe drop the peasants bags of recently confiscated American guns fully loaded...now that would be a 'proper" Fast and Furious...hey that could be a cool plot for a TV movie....a terrorist group hires choppers to fly over prisons and drop guns in the yard....

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

The United States also engaged in two major diplomatic initiatives in which North Korea [was] to abandon its nuclear weapons efforts in return for aid.

We should have also done the same thing with Israel--that is, cut off the gravy train when we found out they had a secret nuclear arsenal. Afterall, they showed the world how to develop an illicit nuclear arsenal while thumbing your nose at all nations.

What are the nuclear crimes committed by Israel?

-Lying to the world about how they would never be the first nation to introduce nuclear arms to the Middle East--and then developing one of the largest nuclear arsenals in the world.

-Stealing 269 kilograms of enriched uranium from U.S. nuclear facilities in the 1960s.

-Conducting secret above ground nuclear tests.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:It is no one's wish, PD. But, I am glad the focus is shifting back to reality. If you are going to target rogue nuclear powers, you target the rogues who have nukes, not the ones who don't. The NK issue needs to be addressed before we worry about whether Iran has nukes or not.

We already know how you feel---Iran should have been bombed yesterday. That is how neocon (il)logic goes.....

Nukes? Are they going to throw it at us, Japan or SK? That's the only way they have to do so as their missile tech won't allow them to put a nuke on the missiles they have.

Pay attention, this isn't about Iran homey.

Guest


Guest

William wrote:I seem to remember that Clinton brokered a peace deal with NK, which was passed on to Dubyah, which he summarily dismissed and set the tone for today's situation by declaring the part of the Axis of Evil.

Never mind that NK is a paranoia driven oligarchy ruled by an insane dude with short man's syndrome, what could possibly go wrong by causing loss of face to an unstable freak with malice in his heart and a big old honking gun in his hand....?

Thanx Dubya. Your legacy lives on in the deals you brokered.

A great big pile of blowed up bits of nothingness surrounded by a black hole of national angst.

Changed your avatar twice today....the heads must be talking inside your head.

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
William wrote:I seem to remember that Clinton brokered a peace deal with NK, which was passed on to Dubyah, which he summarily dismissed and set the tone for today's situation by declaring the part of the Axis of Evil.

Never mind that NK is a paranoia driven oligarchy ruled by an insane dude with short man's syndrome, what could possibly go wrong by causing loss of face to an unstable freak with malice in his heart and a big old honking gun in his hand....?

Thanx Dubya. Your legacy lives on in the deals you brokered.

A great big pile of blowed up bits of nothingness surrounded by a black hole of national angst.

Changed your avatar twice today....the heads must be talking inside your head.

...............................

Just once stalker, but I might change it again. Since you're so interested in avatars, go ask BP Snacks/ghandi/gulfbeach why he keeps using MY images. Otherwise, GFYS


Keep stalking me.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Guest


Guest

William wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
William wrote:I seem to remember that Clinton brokered a peace deal with NK, which was passed on to Dubyah, which he summarily dismissed and set the tone for today's situation by declaring the part of the Axis of Evil.

Never mind that NK is a paranoia driven oligarchy ruled by an insane dude with short man's syndrome, what could possibly go wrong by causing loss of face to an unstable freak with malice in his heart and a big old honking gun in his hand....?

Thanx Dubya. Your legacy lives on in the deals you brokered.

A great big pile of blowed up bits of nothingness surrounded by a black hole of national angst.

Changed your avatar twice today....the heads must be talking inside your head.

...............................

Just once stalker, but I might change it again. Since you're so interested in avatars, go ask BP Snacks/ghandi/gulfbeach why he keeps using MY images. Otherwise, GFYS


Keep stalking me.


Now three times. LOL.

Guest


Guest

Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
William wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
William wrote:I seem to remember that Clinton brokered a peace deal with NK, which was passed on to Dubyah, which he summarily dismissed and set the tone for today's situation by declaring the part of the Axis of Evil.

Never mind that NK is a paranoia driven oligarchy ruled by an insane dude with short man's syndrome, what could possibly go wrong by causing loss of face to an unstable freak with malice in his heart and a big old honking gun in his hand....?

Thanx Dubya. Your legacy lives on in the deals you brokered.

A great big pile of blowed up bits of nothingness surrounded by a black hole of national angst.

Changed your avatar twice today....the heads must be talking inside your head.

...............................

Just once stalker, but I might change it again. Since you're so interested in avatars, go ask BP Snacks/ghandi/gulfbeach why he keeps using MY images. Otherwise, GFYS


Keep stalking me.


Now three times. LOL.

..................................

Dawes...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8S-jl0yIAQ

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

TEOTWAWKI wrote:We should begin aerial bombardment of NK with cows, chickens and some fruit....If the people had the strength to rebel they might....We should feed them and watch...maybe drop the peasants bags of recently confiscated American guns fully loaded...now that would be a 'proper" Fast and Furious

Best idea I've heard since the whole thing started. Just think about how cool it would be to do that. Give them food and guns. I would actually donate to that cause. In fact what would be even cooler is if some billionaire decided to use his money to do it and screw the politicians.
Only thing though, do those maniacs have a good anti-aircraft system. Because flying over it with cargo planes would be pretty dangerous.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I wonder if choppers carrying the guns and food and flying below the radar could get in and out there.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

That's right, I said it. North Korea is a much bigger threat to America than Iran ever was or will be. Iran doesn't have a nuclear bomb yet. Iran doesn't have a 1-million man army to threaten its neighbors with. Iran has not threatened to be a nuclear proliferator, as NK has. Iran is not as bellicose in its threats as NK is.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

And at the very same time we're dropping the food and guns, we drop a MOAB on top of where those little freaks are hole up in the middle of Poontang.

In the words of the mexicans in Treasure of the Sierra Madre, "Nukes. We don't need no stinking nukes".

Guest


Guest

China would never allow it... it's not as easy as arming mexican criminals or muslim brotherhood terrorists.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

PkrBum wrote:China would never allow it... it's not as easy as arming mexican criminals or muslim brotherhood terrorists.

I know, but I'm trying to write the sequel to Dr. Strangelove. I'm gonna call it Dr. Strangeduck and cast Dennis Rodman in the Peter Sellers roles.

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

So you take a racial slur and equate it to a word meaning:
1. a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.
2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

Nothing racial about infidel. Infidel even applies to me since I fit in #3 above.

Guest


Guest

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

So you take a racial slur and equate it to a word meaning:
1. a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.
2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

Nothing racial about infidel. Infidel even applies to me since I fit in #3 above.

Racial? Making fun of what someone wears on their head is RACIAL? LOL whatever.

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

So you take a racial slur and equate it to a word meaning:
1. a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.
2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

Nothing racial about infidel. Infidel even applies to me since I fit in #3 above.

Racial? Making fun of what someone wears on their head is RACIAL? LOL whatever.

So I guess you are making up your own definition for words now.

A derogatory term used to describe a male of middle eastern descent, the part “rag” refers to a turban and the part “head” refers to the chocolate coloured face of the person.

Guest


Guest

Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

So you take a racial slur and equate it to a word meaning:
1. a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.
2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

Nothing racial about infidel. Infidel even applies to me since I fit in #3 above.

Racial? Making fun of what someone wears on their head is RACIAL? LOL whatever.

So I guess you are making up your own definition for words now.

A derogatory term used to describe a male of middle eastern descent, the part “rag” refers to a turban and the part “head” refers to the chocolate coloured face of the person.

And what is your source reliability for that definition? It must be from the PC version of Websters.

They wear rags on their head, hence the term. We call them Haji too for the pilgrimage that they make to Mecca, guess that is slang as well, huh? Give it a rest.

Guest


Guest

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Ghost_Rider1 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
I don't recall Z wishing for war with North Korea. And nochain, your use of the term "ragheads" speaks volumes.

Z did....he wanted us to go after NK instead of Iran. And the RH term....so what? They call you and I "infidel."

So you take a racial slur and equate it to a word meaning:
1. a. a person who does not accept a particular faith, especially Christianity.
b. (in Christian use) an unbeliever, especially a Muslim.
c. (in Muslim use) a person who does not accept the Islamic faith; kaffir.
2. a person who has no religious faith; unbeliever.
3. (loosely) a person who disbelieves or doubts a particular theory, belief, creed, etc.; skeptic.

Nothing racial about infidel. Infidel even applies to me since I fit in #3 above.

Racial? Making fun of what someone wears on their head is RACIAL? LOL whatever.

So I guess you are making up your own definition for words now.

A derogatory term used to describe a male of middle eastern descent, the part “rag” refers to a turban and the part “head” refers to the chocolate coloured face of the person.

And what is your source reliability for that definition? It must be from the PC version of Websters.

They wear rags on their head, hence the term. We call them Haji too for the pilgrimage that they make to Mecca, guess that is slang as well, huh? Give it a rest.

..........................................

It's interesting that SRCSB and the USAF refer to Middle Eastern men as "ragheads".

Do you say that in the classroom and on active duty...?

If not, why not...?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » So ZVUG is getting his wish....NK says nuclear war unavoidable

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum