# Where to Now on North Korea and Syria?



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

What should Trump do now in regards to North Korea and Syria?

What should Canada do about these matters?

What should the rest of the world do?

Trump has shown he can be tough by bombing Syria and dropping the MOAB in Afghanistan. He has sent a strong message but now what should he do? 

To me he needs a coalition, support of congress and much of the world to seriously move forward. Of course I am not talking about something that he must respond to like a missile launch into South Korea or something. Being that we may be going head to head with super powers he also must not usher in a possible WW3. By bringing in WW3, all efforts to stop the North Korea's nuclear ambitions or bringing down Assad would be utterly stupid.

The reason to deal with these guys is so we don't have a catastrophe and not making it exponentially worse. It defeats the purpose if you cause the worst possible disaster to happen.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> What should Canada do about these matters?


 Nothing , just keep a low profile


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It would be good if Trump spent less time golfing and more time appointing ambassadors and other key administration officials. 

Running the Presidency from his resort in Florida with tweets isn't going to accomplish much.

88 days in office and he spent something like 20 of them in Florida golfing.

He needs to get serious about the job and responsibilities.

Oh wait............maybe that is the master plan.

Send Trump to Florida and have Pence, Mattis and the others take care of business.


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

Europe send the migrants from Syria back home. If a way can not be figured out to stop radical Islam spreading from Syria & certain Moslim countries to the rest of the world Nukes should be considered to wipe out the population of Syria & certain Moslim countries.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Europe send the migrants from Syria back home.


 Yes, European countries are sending Syrians back home.... Canada WAKE UP!


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

sags said:


> It would be good if Trump spent less time golfing and more time appointing ambassadors and other key administration officials.
> 
> Running the Presidency from his resort in Florida with tweets isn't going to accomplish much.
> 
> ...


Trump is a hard worker. A lot of business deals are made on golf courses the setting is perfect for level headed thinking


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

lonewolf :) said:


> Trump is a hard worker. A lot of business deals are made on golf courses the setting is perfect for level headed thinking


Good thing that sags doesn't know where and when many banking business deals are made


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

Is Trump is even making decisions? Perhaps he realized that foreign policy is too complex for him so he leaves it to others. 

Like Nero fiddling while Rome burns, Trump may be playing golf when WW3 starts.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Is Trump is even making decisions?


 No POTUS can change aggressive politics of US and A.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Maybe he gathers concerned wealthy resort members and they have a town hall meeting to decide what to do about North Korea.

Trump should go to Disneyworld and take a spin on the "It's a small world" ride.

_It's a world of laughter, a world of tears
It's a world of hope and a world of fears
There's so much that we share, *that it's time we're aware*
It's a small world after all.
_

Trump could have his ambassadors start diplomacy efforts..............if only he had ambassadors.

But let's be honest. Who among us would have thought that things are complicated and being President was a full time job ?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

olivaw said:


> Is Trump is even making decisions? Perhaps he realized that foreign policy is too complex for him so he leaves it to others.
> 
> Like Nero fiddling while Rome burns, Trump may be playing golf when WW3 starts.





olivaw you have a good grip on history, would you have any research about who ran US foreign policy during the last years of ronald reagan's presidency, when reagan had alzheimer's?

my hypothesis right now is that it's sec'y of state rex tillerson & sec'y of defense james mattis who are running US foreign & military policy. By this i mean not the foreign policy that trump dreams he wants, but rather the foreign _realpolitik_ which tillerson & mattis are prepared to deliver overseas.

olivaw do you know what happened during the last reagan years when the US president was demented? henry kissinger was still around but i don't believe kissinger was active during those years.

what i'm getting at is whether there's a precedent for strong moderates with the backing of congress and/or military to conduct america's foreign affairs when a president himself is non compos mentis.

.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

There is a simple way to defuse the NK-USA tension right now. 

Trump should invite Kim-Jong-Il to his mara-a-lair Florida estate for a round of golf and talk some sense into him, that if he continues with this nuke posturing, he could get wiped out!

The US still have enough nuclear tipped warheads to wipe out over half the world. 

One former president (Teddy Roosevelt) once said... "Speak softly and carry a big stick".


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> ... the Presidency from his resort in Florida with tweets ... maybe that is the master plan.
> 
> Send Trump to Florida and have Pence, Mattis and the others take care of business.




eliminate pence

in foreign trade & military policy it's tillerson & mattis imho

.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

> olivaw do you know what happened during the last reagan years when the US president was demented?


This study states there was no sign of dementia while Reagan was still in office but there were signs of cognitive impairment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/...gans-words-for-early-signs-of-alzheimers.html



> n 1980, Mr. Reagan told me that he would resign the presidency if White House doctors found him mentally unfit. Years later, those doctors and key aides told me they had not detected any changes in his mental abilities while in office.
> 
> Now a clever new analysis has found that during his two terms in office, subtle changes in Mr. Reagan’s speaking patterns linked to the onset of dementia were apparent years before doctors diagnosed his Alzheimer’s disease in 1994.
> 
> ...


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

gibor365 said:


> Nothing , just keep a low profile


I thought Canada was trying to get back to its role as peacekeeper in the world. I am not sure what we can or could do about world matters.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

olivaw said:


> Is Trump is even making decisions? Perhaps he realized that foreign policy is too complex for him so he leaves it to others.
> 
> Like Nero fiddling while Rome burns, Trump may be playing golf when WW3 starts.


Sounds like he has something in common with Obama. Maybe he is making better decisions while be on a golf course. However now is the time to show he really is presidential and broker deals and resolutions with the rest of the world to end these crisis. If he wants to just go to war with everyone and everything that moves he just needs to bring McCain in as an advisor.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

new dog said:


> I thought Canada was trying to get back to its role as peacekeeper in the world. I am not sure what we can or could do about world matters.



time to wake up, guys

canada & presumably NORAD are re-arming the north

.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> olivaw you have a good grip on history, would you have any research about who ran US foreign policy during the last years of ronald reagan's presidency, when reagan had alzheimer's?


I always though that Nancy stepped up to fill the void when president Reagan's Alzheimer started to appear. He was still functional, he took the job seriously and he made decisions. He had a full team of advisors and ambassadors and Nancy was always at the ready to intercede when his mental sharpness started to skip. 

Do you think Trump will allow anybody to help him in that way Humble? He seems to delegate the work to the worker bees. Then, if he feels like it, he'll overrule them if his gut tells him to do something different.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

new dog said:


> Sounds like he has something in common with Obama. Maybe he is making better decisions while be on a golf course. However now is the time to show he really is presidential and broker deals and resolutions with the rest of the world to end these crisis. If he wants to just go to war with everyone and everything that moves he just needs to bring McCain in as an advisor.


Much as you refuse to admit it. Obama's presidency was a success. He left with good approval numbers. History will be kind to him. He golfed more than some of his predecessors, less than others. 

Trump is on track to break all presidential golfing records. His first 100 days have been a disaster. He lurches from crisis to crisis. He is under investigation. His approval numbers are in the tank. There are protesters on the streets. He sits on the toilette and tweets.

Sorry, I cannot share much optimism about the oaf in the WH and his newfound interest in America's military. Best case scenario, he is impeached before he can do too much damage. Worst case, he starts WW3 before his first term is up.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Olivaw, until you open your eyes to the kind of world we live in, you are always going to be confused as to why a leader like Obama could gain no traction, got nothing done and will be a footnote of failure in the history books. Really a Carter 2.0.

Obama was a leader made for a kumbya type world. That doesnt exist and never will. In one week, Trump outfoxed Russia, China and NK just by standing his ground and being a realist.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

Obama's foreign policy has left the world staring into the abyss of nuclear annihilation, chiefly due to his passivity in dealing with the Arab Spring revolution in Syria. 
He did not intervene militarily to arm the rebels or create a no-fly zone. He did not honor his red line regarding Assad's use of chemical weapons instead he invited the Russians in to make a deal and remove these weapons. This has emboldened an already belligerent Russian leader and has lead to the danger of nuclear war with Russia. Obama is partly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Syrians because of his failure to use American military force in Syria, He is partly responsible for the creation of millions of refugees in Syria and the refugee crisis we now see in Europe. He called Russia a "regional power" not realizing how easily it can spread its lethal tentacles everywhere. It takes half an hour for a Russian ICBM to reach North America I believe. 

He also is responsible to some extent for the rise of ISIS because he withdrew American troops from Iraq ,no doubt due to his pro-Muslim, anti-colonial predisposition. He referred to ISIS as the junior varsityHe was mistaken. He bares responsibility for the thousands that ISIS has slaughtered as well.

The deal with Iran, not a treaty ratified by Congress, is easily overturned by an executive order.

O yeah, he could have helped Hilary by making an announcement about the investigation of Trump's campaign and the Russians. He didn't even do that.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Just a taste of what we live in;

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world...tester-as-human-shield’/ar-BBzY5rN?li=AAggv0m


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

tygrus said:


> In one week, Trump outfoxed Russia, China and NK just by standing his ground and being a realist.



lol please tell us about how donald trump outfoxed china .:biggrin:

was it when he told chinese president Xi jinPing over dessert in mar-a-lago that he'd just bombed an air force runway in syria?

main course no bombs, but see how we'd blown em to smithereens by dessert time, trump bragged to his distinguished guest.

mr Xi looked polite but mystified. After he got home, he phoned his neighbour kim Jong-un of north korea.

it's that sweet course at the end of a meal they call dessert, he explained. We don't have a course like this in far east cuisine, but in the west it seems they love their desserts. It's why they're so fat, while we stay in shape with tai chi at dawn on every city block.

thankx, forewarned is forearmed, said mr Kim. From now on we won't let em finish their meal, we'll attack while they're still serving the soup course.

that's right, said mr Xi. Kill em before the canapés.

.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

carverman said:


> Kim-Jong-Il [ ... ] if he continues with this nuke posturing, he could get wiped out!


NK basically has Seoul and increasingly Japan as hostages. They are poised to rain down death on SK at a few seconds notice in the form of conventional artillery with sarin and mustard -- it's technology from WW1. All their posturing with missiles is about threatening Japan, not the US, which they can reach with missiles at short notice.

I am deeply worried now because DJT really doesn't care about Japan or SK as allies. They are nothing but business competitors and a nice messy chemical weapons war in Korea and Japan would suit him just fine. The supply of cheap consumer goods, especially cars, would dry up and US manufacturing would go gangbusters. The military would get to spend pots of money on expensive war toys. He might even have an excuse to nuke someone -- imagine how big his hands would grow! All that at a comparatively safe distance, not affecting the rental rates at any of his hotels. What could be more desirable?

I can picture him right now painting the Chinese flag on the side of the drone that will fly into Pyongyang in order to touch the whole thing off.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

https://ca.style.yahoo.com/michelle-obama-officially-let-hair-173417382.html

Obama and Michelle on vacation in French Polynesia.

Why ?

He didn't do anything for eight years.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

tygrus said:


> Olivaw, until you open your eyes to the kind of world we live in, you are always going to be confused as to why a leader like Obama could gain no traction, got nothing done and will be a footnote of failure in the history books. Really a Carter 2.0.
> 
> Obama was a leader made for a kumbya type world. That doesnt exist and never will. In one week, Trump outfoxed Russia, China and NK just by standing his ground and being a realist.


You folks on the right like to say that history will judge Obama harshly but one of the few indicators that we have are the approval rating at the end of the term: 
GW Bush Jan 2009: Approve 34%, Disapprove 61%
Barack Obama Jan 2017: Approve 59%, Disapprove 37%

Trump's term is not over but his current numbers are: Approve 41.7%, Disapprove 51.4%

Do you really want to compare Obama's first 100 days to Trump's?



wraphter said:


> He didn't do anything for eight years.


1) Turned the great recession into a growing economy. 
2) Unemployment went from 7.6% in Jan 2009 to 4.8% (although you guys refused to believe the numbers when Obama was in office_
3) A bear market became a bull market and new highs. 
4) A national health care plan. 
5) Obama Bin Laden dead. 
6) Troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. 
7) Same-sexed marriage equality
8) Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010)
9) Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry
10) Recapitalized Banks
11) Repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
12) Toppled Gaddafi
13) Reversed Bush Torture Policies
14) Boosted Fuel Efficiency Standards
15) Coordinated International Response to Financial Crisis
16) Increased Support for Veterans
17) Credit Card Reforms
18) Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009
19) Improved Food Safety System
20) Expanded Wilderness and Watershed Protection


Check out a few more accomplishments *here*. 

I know you'll come back with a few ways in which the world is worse, but it is not really worse than it was in 2009, or even 2001. The world has always been dangerous and there have always been problem spots.

Truth is, I'd feel much better with Obama at the helm.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

From what I have read Ronald Reagan was ably assisted by his wife during his years in the Presidency.

There is also video on Youtube that shows Reagan was receiving direction much earlier than people think.

One of his "right hand men" was Donald Regan, who never left his side in public. He can be overheard whispering to Reagan that he needed to "hurry it up" during a speech to a Wall Street crowd.

Reagan was a great communicator, which Trump is not. Another major difference between Reagan and Trump is who surrounds them. 

Trump is surrounded and taking advice from too many people with no experience. He has a habit of taking his cues from people like Sean Hannity on Fox News and others with little or no credibility or experience. His latest foreign affairs policy may depend on the last segment he saw on television or read on a conspiracy blog.

I agree with Humble that Mattis and Tillerson are strong and badly needed voices, but can they hold the fort against all the others.

I would also include Mike Pence, simply because he is the VP.....but he is too much of a Trump arse kisser to be counted on in a crunch.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

When Trump met with the Chinese Premiere, they may not have solved the situation in North Korea, but apparently they did manage to successfully straighten out Ivanka's trademark issues in China, and they approved her trademarks the same day as the meeting.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Basically Obama just told the fed to print up 20 trillion and threw it into the banks, bond market, auto industry, US debt and somehow he is to be commended for this action? Probably accelerated a financial crisis in the USA.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

That is an impressive list olivaw.

I agree with tygrus and have many of my own criticisms of Obama as well.

However many politicians who could be president on both sides are prisoners of their donation base and so on. So would most be any different then Obama? The thing is most would not and would have done the same as Obama and only Trump has tried to be different, although that may be changing. 

Obama's support of the rebels/ISIS/al-quada is bad but probably better then WW3. If McCain was in power instead of Obama none of us would probably be alive today and Obama did get Assad to give up the chemical weapons, even though some would argue this point. So the way I see it there is very few who could be president on either side and really be any good.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Claiming that Obama got Assad to give up chemical weapons is bad. Really, really bad. Obama's administration propagated the same lie before it was exposed in such a horrible manner.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

I didn't mention chemical weapons in my list but there was an agreement in place (UNSC resolution 2118). 600 metric tonnes of chemical agents were destroyed over a 42 day period. Short of invading Syria under the pretext of searching for hidden WMDs, the world (specifically US and France) had little choice but to accept Syria's declaration. 

With the benefit of hindsight, some think that Obama should have exceeded his authority and launched a large scale attack on Assad.

I wonder if the same folks are hoping that Trump will exceed his authority and launch a large scale attack on Syria or North Korea...... Or.... ?


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Read post 1301 from Humble on the Trump discussion. 

http://canadianmoneyforum.com/showthread.php/107474-Trump-discussion/page131

I think an invasion of Syria would be a very bad idea and cause far more potential damage to the world then trying to work with Russia.

Same with North Korea, we need China to be fully on board for this to work unless NK does something that has to be dealt with immediately.

Also there are 2 million christians under Assad's protection according to Rand Paul. 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/18/opinions/less-military-intervention-opinion-paul/


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

olivaw said:


> With the benefit of hindsight, some think that Obama should have exceeded his authority and launched a large scale attack on Assad.


Obama himself admitted he did not need Congressional authority to bomb Assad for the use of chemical weapons.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/07/donald-trump-us-missile-strikes-syria-legal



> In 2011, the Obama administration argued its bombing campaign in Libya was within the president’s legal authority as its intent was aimed at “preserving regional stability and supporting the [United Nation Security Council’s] credibility and effectiveness”.
> 
> 
> When Barack Obama was seeking to respond to Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons in 2013, he asked Congress to authorize the use of military force through what is known as an AUMF (authorization for use of military force).* But the president notably underscored that he did not require congressional approval to take limited military action, contending instead he deemed it the appropriate thing to do.*


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autho...seeks_Congressional_approval_for_intervention



> Following the publication on 30 August of the U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government’s Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013, President Obama gave a speech in the White House Rose Garden on 31 August in which he announced that he would seek authorization from Congress before using American military forces to intervene in the Syrian civil war.[33][34] In the speech, he announced that he was "prepared to give that order," referring to ordering a strike on Syria
> 
> ...............
> 
> In his speech, Obama also said that,* "while I believe I have the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization, I know that the country will be stronger if we take this course, and our actions will be even more effective."[35] Introduction of S.J. Res. 21 in the Senate soon followed.*


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

new dog said:


> Read post 1301 from Humble on the Trump discussion.
> 
> http://canadianmoneyforum.com/showthread.php/107474-Trump-discussion/page131
> 
> ...


I was telling it many times.... There is no alternative to Assad....


> America has no national security interest in this war. It isn't clear that the Islamic rebels who would replace Assad would be friends of America. However, it is clear that the 2 million Christians in Syria who are protected by Assad fear his ouster.


Can you imagine what gonna happen to those christians?! I guess, genocide


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Apparently the naval armada the Trump administration said was steaming towards North Korea has been discovered doing naval exercises near Australia.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

wraphter said:


> Obama himself admitted he did not need Congressional authority to bomb Assad for the use of chemical weapons.


Obama said that he believed that he was not constitutionally required to seek congressional but felt it was in the national interest that he do so. It was the right thing to do. On the heels of the Bush's Iraq fiasco, the last thing that America needed was a war ordered by a Democratic president without consulting the Republican congress. Congress denied him. 

Much has been written about the president's authority to unilaterally order military intervention. Many constitutional lawyers argue that an attack on a foreign nation represents a declaration of war and that power rests exclusively with congress. International law must also be considered.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/politics/military-force-presidential-power.html?_r=0

The pressing question now: *Should Trump have the authority to start a war with Syria's Assad, North Korea, Iran, Russia, China or any other country? * The answer must be NO. America does not need to go to war over a Trump branded building permit or Ivanka's clothing line.


----------



## mordko (Jan 23, 2016)

Putting aside the issue of whether Obama should have enforced his "red line", the point I was making was that the Obama administration was either incompetent or knowingly lied when it claimed that the Assad regime no longer had chemical weapons capability,

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ting-obama-track-record-syrias-chemical-weap/

And setting red lines to fascist dictators, then doing nothing about them, happens to be the most reliable way of maximizing mass murder and encouraging other dictators to invade and kill. As they did. The Obama policy had a hand in 500 thousand deaths plus millions of injured and refugees.


----------



## olivaw (Nov 21, 2010)

In the political world you find a way to blame a US president that you dislike for civil strife in another country. In the real world, you consider the realities and risks of unilateral American military adventurism. You consider the lessons of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. You think about terrorist groups. You think about consequences.

The questions posed in this thread were relevant in 2013 and they are relevant now. Should Trump invade or attack Syria or North Korea?. Does he need a formal declaration of war by congress? Should he be prepared to escalate the conflict should Russia, Iran or China intervene? Is the U.N needed. Is patience the best course ... or diplomacy?


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

olivaw said:


> Should Trump invade or attack Syria or North Korea?.


Trump has already bombed Syria and there is no great clamor to impeach him for it. Assad still had sarin gas despite the Obama-backed deal to remove it.

Trump did himself some good with this military action. Perhaps Congress will be less likely to impeach him now because he is needed to conduct military actions in a world teeming with multiple hot spots--North Korea,Syria, Ukraine,Iran, Iraq, Yemen,Somalia,Afghanistan. 

By bombing Syria Trump confronted and antagonized their sponsor Russia,thereby weakening the argument that he is in collusion with them
and that they helped get him elected.

You wish to limit the President's power to use military force yet you support Presidential authority to bind the United States without congressional approval to an enormously important deal to limit nuclear weapons . Rather inconsistent ,some might say. 

There is now a review being started of the appropriateness of lifting sanctions in connection with the Iran deal,which was just an executive order.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

If Syria goes down they will go after Iran next and there is no end to these wars until WW3 starts. 

I have to admit though the bombing of Syria was a good move for Trump for the reasons you mentioned. However now comes the hard part and that is to make the world a better and safer place. Going it alone will not make the world safer it will also have consequences down the road. By going it alone you also send a message to Russia and China that they to can go it alone when they want to. No, Trump needs to work with congress and the world to resolve these issues.


----------



## SMK (Dec 10, 2015)

wraphter said:


> Assad still had sarin gas despite the Obama-backed deal to remove it.


You make such a deal sound easier than it could ever be, especially when dealing with Russia-Syria. Remember what Kerry said, that 100% of the *declared *chemical weapons were removed. Who produced the list of such weapons, and who ever believed there was no undeclared list?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0Q1Iw1uV8Q


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

new dog said:


> I have to admit though the bombing of Syria was a good move for Trump for the reasons you mentioned. However now comes the hard part and that is to make the world a better and safer place. Going it alone will not make the world safer it will also have consequences down the road. By going it alone you also send a message to Russia and China that they to can go it alone when they want to. No, Trump needs to work with congress and the world to resolve these issues.



new dogcom sometimes you do make a lot of sense, as here 

now if you would just kindly stop offering up those stale refried beans zerohedge & infowars, one could even be happy to have lunch with you. Fresh seafood salad, of course.

you're on the west coast, are there some good fresh fish in the markets today?

when i was a student at UBC we sometimes went down to a chinese restaurant on the lower East Side. It was a tiny hole in the wall. All the patrons were chinese.

we sat at tiny tables clustered close to the open kitchen, so everything was in full view. The chef chopped up fish with a chinese cleaver on a giant tall wooden chopping block that was so old & so well-used that its surface had become as wavy as a brisk ocean swell.

there was no menu. They brought heavenly delicious food to the table, we never knew what it was. At the end, a bill in chinese. Scribbled on the bottom in dollars & cents, a very small number.

i'm sure the place is long gone, but it was unforgettable.

.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Russia was supposed to oversee the removal of the chemical weapons in Syria.

They not only failed to fulfill their obligations, but they also participated in the bombing of the hospitals/clinics where people were taken for treatment. The Americans "know" that a Russian drone circled the area providing surveillance just prior to the Syrians arriving to bomb the hospital/clinic. The Russians knew they were passing information that would be used by the Syrians to bomb the hospitals.

If anyone has the blood on their hands...it is Russia. Assad is their puppet and everything he does clings to them.

What is different in North Korea today than when Obama was President ? 

They are further along on their nuclear development but it is not yet complete.

Trump is faced with the same world problems as Obama. 

We will see if Trump and the Republicans have real solutions or just continue to blame Obama.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

olivaw said:


> Obama said that he believed that he was not constitutionally required to seek congressional but felt it was in the national interest that he do so. It was the right thing to do. On the heels of the Bush's Iraq fiasco, the last thing that America needed was a war ordered by a Democratic president without consulting the Republican congress. Congress denied him.
> 
> Much has been written about the president's authority to unilaterally order military intervention. Many constitutional lawyers argue that an attack on a foreign nation represents a declaration of war and that power rests exclusively with congress. International law must also be considered.
> 
> ...





i'm just re-posting the above because it's wise & forward-looking & sets a constructive marker in this discussion.

there's no point regressing backwards to spew personal fury & ell-words at barack obama. History will judge the post-bush democratic oval office in the middle east, but no one will ever forget how powerful was the pan-american determination to stop losing american lives & dollars in iraq, when obama was first elected in november 2008.

.


----------



## wraphter (Sep 21, 2016)

SMK said:


> You make such a deal sound easier than it could ever be, especially when dealing with Russia-Syria. Remember what Kerry said, that 100% of the *declared *chemical weapons were removed. Who produced the list of such weapons, and who ever believed there was no undeclared list?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0Q1Iw1uV8Q


Yes excellent video SMK. First Kerry said "declared" but later he said !00% of the wmd.

Obama allowed himself to be rolled. He figured he could throw a few hundred thousand Syrians under the bus as long as it furthered his goal of saving the world by making the iran deal.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Russia is buzzing around in air space near Alaska for the past couple of days, and now claim to have an EMP device that would disable the US military.

The Russkies seem to be cruising for a bruising and challenging Trump.

Maybe it is time for the US to release the weaponry they have developed in Area 51, that is based on the alien craft that crashed at Roswell.

Many don't believe it........conspiracy theories and all that, but I think there are too many regular folks who were eye witnesses and there have been too many unexplained events to dismiss it all as "nothing to see here".

Several Presidents have said they would investigate what is going on and report on it. None of them have reported anything.

They didn't report they didn't find anything, which probably means they found something but it is highly classified..........right ?


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> new dogcom sometimes you do make a lot of sense, as here
> 
> now if you would just kindly stop offering up those stale refried beans zerohedge & infowars, one could even be happy to have lunch with you. Fresh seafood salad, of course.
> 
> ...



I like the free speech and extra info, while not always true, that these websites give, that the mainstream media doesn't. I have explained all this before but let us look at it as an episode of CHOPPED or Guys Grocery Games. They may give you rib eye steak, cotton candy and canned green beens and expect you to make a dessert out of it. The mainstream may be the rib eye or the canned beens and the alt media the cotton candy but we still must make a dessert out of them.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Lewis Black on North Korea.


----------



## s1231 (Jan 1, 2017)

- WHO MAKES THE PROFITS (from war) ? :
http://www.wanttoknow.info/warcoverup

The normal yearly profits of a business concern in the U.S. are 6 to 12%. But war-time profits, that is another matter – 60, 100, 300, and even 1,800% – the sky is the limit. 
Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people. The average pre-war earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6 million a year.

Now let's look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. $58 million a year profit we find! 
Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950%.

…..We must take the profit out of war. And we must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.


- Guess Which Country’s Companies Profit Most From War? :
https://www.fastcodesign.com/3042669/guess-which-countrys-companies-profit-most-from-war


- Syria - Sovereignty and Peace. Press Conference, United Nations, 9 Dec. :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebE3GJfGhfA

Full Press Conference at the United Nations. Against propaganda and regime change, for peace and national sovereignty. 9 December 2016, the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations. Speakers: 
Dr. Bahman Azad, Member of the Coordinating Committee for the Hands Off Syria and Organization Secretary of US Peace Council,
and Eva Bartlett, Independent Canadian Journalist.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Thanks s1231 that is exactly what it is all about and why they buy off just about every candidate for president, congress, senate or whoever will forward the war agenda. War in Syria and a new cold war is exactly what they want. Of course war anywhere else is also much appreciated.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I should also add owning and directing the mainstream media to sell the war propaganda is key to their success.


----------



## s1231 (Jan 1, 2017)

new dog said:


> Thanks s1231 that is exactly what it is all about and why they buy off just about every candidate for president, congress, senate or whoever will forward the war agenda. War in Syria and a new cold war is exactly what they want. Of course war anywhere else is also much appreciated.


Moral > profits (expecting)
Marketing tools of arms industries --- Fear ( dictator, terrorist, tension etc) 


- U.S. Defense Contractors Tell Investors Russian Threat Is Great for Business : August 19 2016
https://theintercept.com/2016/08/19/nato-weapons-industry/

Weapon makers have told investors that they are relying on tensions with Russia to fuel new business in the wake of Russian’s annexation of Crimea and modest increases in its military budget.

The National Defense Industrial Association, a lobby group for the industry, has called on Congress to make it easier for U.S. contractors to sell arms abroad to allies in response to the threat from Russia. Recent articles in National Defense, NDIA’s magazine, discuss the need for NATO allies to boost maritime military spending, spending on Arctic systems, and missile defense, to counter Russia.
Many experts are unconvinced that Russia poses a direct military threat. The Soviet Union’s military once stood at over 4 million soldiers, but today Russia has less than 1 million. NATO’s combined military budget vastly outranks Russia’s — with the U.S. Alone outspending Russia on its military by $609 billion to less than $85 billion.

“Companies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing have pledged to increase the share of exports in their overall revenues, and they have been seeking major deals in East and Central Europe since the 1990s, when NATO expansion began,” said William Hartung, director of the Arms & Security Project at the Center for International Policy. Hartung noted that as some nations ramp up spending, U.S. firms will be “knocking at the door, looking to sell everything from fighter planes to missile defense systems.”
“Russian saber-rattling has additional benefits for weapons makers because it has become a standard part of the argument for higher Pentagon spending — even though the Pentagon already has more than enough money to address any actual threat to the United States,” he said.


- North Korea - Sixty Years of Failed Sanctions: 30 août 2010
http://www.cetri.be/Sixty-Years-of-Failed-Sanctions?lang=fr

In the six decades following the start of the Korean War on June 25, 1950, the United States has built a complex system of restrictions on trade, finance, and investment related to North Korea. 
President Truman imposed a complete embargo on all exports to North Korea just three days after the war’s outbreak, and sanctions have since been a mainstay of U.S. foreign policy toward the country.

The United States, then, has had virtually no trade with North Korea for 60 years (67 years on 2017), which begs the question: what kind of leverage could this new round of sanctions possibly have?

Many Korea experts argue that these new prohibitions will not affect North Korea as intended, and sanctions policies will continue to fail to meet their objectives. For 60 years, Washington has tirelessly advocated that sanctions against the north will eventually incentivize the regime to change its foreign policy agenda and domestic behavior.


- pictures of poverty in North Korea :
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/shocking-pictures-poverty-north-korea-9443365


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

One of the very few here who get it and of course it goes far deeper then this.

Vietnam was a good one but they made one big mistake and that was bringing in the draft which turned public opinion against war. 

The Iran and Iraq war was good for arm sales in the 80's.

The end of the cold war was very bad but it left an opening to run over the middle east.

Of course once they had gone far enough they needed to run over Syria, so Assad must go. The Russians got in the way which is perfectly all right because now we can have a cold war again.

All sides of course claim how horrible it is for the people and they must bomb everything to save the people which of course are only a tool to sell war to the voters at home.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The US should use their satellite technology to determine where the North Korean leader is at all times and post his position live online.

If he knows the US knows exactly where he is at all times, maybe he will value his own life, even if he doesn't value those of his countrymen.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Miniature robotics........

A robotic drone the size of a house fly that can deliver a lethal chemical dose by spray.

Have it run on solar and make short hops into North Korea until it reaches it's destination. It flies in an open door or window and waits.

A little spray and the glorious leader keels over from "natural causes" an hour later. The drone is long gone by then.

Problem solved.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

What about doubles how will they know it is him they are dealing with. I remember Saddam had a number of doubles working for him.

What about the underground does Trump have a plan for this.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-12-07/news/0312060129_1_north-korea-south-korea-underground

This article is from 2003, so how much more underground do the North Korean's have now.


----------



## s1231 (Jan 1, 2017)

Great speech from President Moon.

- Full text of President Moon Jae-in's U.N. General Assembly keynote speech (Updated : 2017-09-21　23:13)
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2017/09/103_236857.html


....Among other things, it is truly meaningful that the theme of this session of the U.N. General Assembly "Focusing on People" is in line with the philosophy of governance of the new Administration in the Republic of Korea. "People come first" is the slogan I have used for several years to express my political philosophy. And the "people" are at the center of all policies of my new Administration.

As of now, my Administration is pursuing bold measures to change the economic paradigm in order to deal with economic inequalities that stand in the way of growth and social cohesion. We are now pursuing economic policies focusing on the income growth of individuals and households, and promoting an economy where growth is led by job creation and all people can enjoy equal opportunities and the fruits of growth. This is what we call a "people-centered economy."

My Administration's determined endeavors to realize inclusive growth will not be confined to our country. In accordance with this new paradigm, the Republic of Korea will render support for sustainable growth in developing countries.




…..I was born in a refugee town in the middle of the Korean War. This civil war, which evolved into an international war, devastated the lives of countless people.
Over three million lost their lives, and many of the survivors were deprived of decent living. My father was also one of them. 
My father, who thought he was taking temporary refuge at that time, could never make it back to his hometown before he passed away.
I come from one of the separated families, the victims whose human rights were violated by the War.

For me, the President of the only divided country, peace is a calling and a historical duty.
I am representing my fellow citizens who sent out a message of peace through the candlelight revolution to the global village where wars
and conflicts know no end. At the same time, I am entrusted with a responsibility to safeguard the people's rights to peace — to an undisturbed daily life — as a universal value.

For these very reasons, I hope North Korea will be able to choose on its own a path leading to peace. I believe peace when chosen willingly becomes sound and sustainable.


- President of South Korea Moon Jae in speech at UN General Assembly. September 21, 2017 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw_lzu5UCPE


----------



## s1231 (Jan 1, 2017)

The Voices of America!

- Senator Rand Paul On America’s Unlimited Unconstitutional Wars: (text)
http://lybio.net/senator-rand-paul-on-americas-unlimited-unconstitutional-wars/speeches/

- Rand Paul FULL Speech on Voting on Military Force | AUMF :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEJBLf5Skrk

...And what we should think about is we have a $20 trillion debt. We borrow a $1 million a minute.

Even if you thought it was a good idea to try to create a country in Iraq or create a country in Afghanistan or create some sort of paradise in Yemen or Somalia or Nigeria or Libya or any of the places we are even, if you thought some paradise was a great thing. We have no money to – country from within. We are eating out the substance of the very greatness of America by borrowing a $1 million a minute. We are flat, broke, and we can’t afford to be everybody’s Uncle Sam.

We need to look at our country and say it’s time we did things for our country, for our people and it’s time we quit borrowing a $1 million a minute. 

The question is will the senators, will those who gather to vote will they stand for the rule of law, will the senator stand for congressional authority for war. Will they stand for what the Constitution clearly says in Article I Section 8 that Congress shall declare war, not the President. Congress shall declare war, or will the senators idly sit by and let the wars continue unabated and unauthorized.


...Let’s look at our country first, rebuild the problems we’ve got here.
Rebuild our roads, our bridges our schools and not borrow it, not add to a $20 trillion debt. Take the money we’re sending in welfare to foreign countries and let’s rebuild our own.



- U.S. Soldiers Told To Repay Thousands In Signing Bonuses From Height Of War Effort
October 23, 20162:43 PM 
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...s-in-signing-bonuses-from-height-of-war-effor

That's the gist of a report by The Los Angeles Times, which says nearly 10,000 soldiers are now scrambling to pay back signing bonuses that helped the Pentagon cope with the task of using an all-volunteer service to fight two prolonged international conflicts.

Another veteran — former Army Master Sgt. Susan Haley, who served in Afghanistan and spent more than 25 years in the service — tells the newspaper that she's now sending the Pentagon $650 each month to repay $20,500 in bonuses.
"I feel totally betrayed," Haley says.



-Defense Secretary Mattis: US Cannot Survive On 'Puny' Military Budget :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZCKVhSixzI


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I like Rand Paul and his dad Ron Paul better, they often make good points. Ron Paul during the Republican race before the 2012 election was drawing huge crowds and the media was ignoring him. So we got Trump instead because he was so loud he couldn't be ignored by the media.


----------



## tygrus (Mar 13, 2012)

Here is a little glimpse into what we would be fighting against in NK. Its all a big bluff. 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/pi...r/news-story/737aa0a47776922b4fd1df19b77f21fd


----------

