🚀 go-pugleaf

"toad-o-line" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:avf9uc$ltl$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...

> > I suppose you'd prefer that we sit on our collective hands and employ
the
> > Chamberlain maneuver until Iraq brings their next generation of
terrorism  to
> > our shores?   No thank you!

> No, I'd prefer we confront the threat that is, not the easy one that might
> be.  North Korea has nukes,  Iraq may have something.  Bush is just too
much
> of a pussy to confront the real threat.

    God, what a classic idiot. You see we already did that with North Korea.
We used the same head completely up the ass mentality. To borrow a phrase,
does stupidity on your level hurt?  You want us to confront a nation that
has nukes? Maybe you missed the NK Preimier saying yesterday that he "will"
nuke South Korea if there are "any sanctions" applied to his country. I read
your posts and wonder how much of it is just affect, because stupidity on
such a grand scale can't be real, can it?  Any "sane" man would be "too much
of a *pussy* to start military action with North Koea. You see it is a
problem because we didn't confront them when they were a threat that "might
be." Idiots almost as stupid as you said we shouldn't act just like *you*
are now sayiung we must not act with Iraq. And when Iraq is armed to the
teeth with nukes? What then oh military geniuis?  So with North Korea we do
what? You seem not to understand a nation with nukes with a mad man in
charge very well. Your processor has a dead short in it apparently. So you
as our imaginary President (not being a *pussy* and all) send in your
Marines, then NK nukes Seoul, so you nuke Pyongyang, so they nuke San
Francisco, so we nuke 30 other places in North Korea, and the Chinese get
pissed that tens of millions of their people are dying from the fallout of
our nukes, so they nuke 200 cities in America and we nuke them back and all
life on Earth ends so *you* won't be a *pussy!*
Good plan there dude! Let me know if you can ever get your head out of your
ass.

> > you mean the "real threat" that, like so many other threats in the world
> > today, that is the product of the Clinton administration?

> > Try again.  The nuke threat from North Korea well predates Bill Clinton.
> Guess your 'security clearance' doesn't provide you with actual facts.

    No actually you are wrong. North Korea has had the desire for many years
to have nuclear capability. It was not until 1992, however, that their
nuclear program (with China's aid) began in earnest after assurances from
the new Clinton administration that a blind eye would be turned at the
programs. (Try to recall the money coming from China to the Clinton
campaign) By 1994 with the historic Jimmy Carter intervention, North Korea
had already obtained an unknown number of nukes and was working on missile
technology with China. The guidance systems for which were supplied by
Clinton with allow China to now target 99% of America (which they could not
do before) and North Korea now to target approximately 30% of America and
their capacity to hit the other 69% is soon to follow.  Sorry, prior to the
Clinton administration, North Korea did not have nukes. They always have
been a military threat since the 1950's. But it has been the left that kept
us from cleaning out that rat's nest.

    The current conflict with Iraq is preventing creation of yet another
lunatic with nukes. The trick here is to neutralize the nuclear threat from
North Korea without ending all life on this planet. A problem that *idiots*
like you left us with because of your stupid ideas.