Mitt Romney and North Korea’s missile launch

Defying international warnings, North Korea attempted to launch a multi-stage rocket Thursday that potentially would be capable of carrying a nuclear payload into space.

Being North Korea, its effort proved a dismal failure, with the rocket falling apart shortly after launch. However, that doesn’t mean that its ambitions can be safely ignored or downplayed. The U.N. Security Council will be taking up the issue today, and the Obama administration has indicated that a program to deliver food aid to North Korean citizens would be abandoned in response to the provocation.

Mitt Romney, however, immediately condemned the launch attempt as a sign of failure by the Obama administration.

“Instead of approaching Pyongyang from a position of strength, President Obama sought to appease the regime with a food-aid deal that proved to be as naive as it was short-lived,” Romney said. “This incompetence from the Obama administration has emboldened the North Korean regime and undermined the security of the United States and our allies.”

Now, if you want to dissect this problem in partisan terms, we could certainly do that. We could note that the United States first detected the North Korea nuclear program way back in 1989. That would have been early in the administration of the senior President Bush, who did little or nothing in response. In fact, by the end of his term he had pulled all U.S. nuclear warheads out of the Korean Peninsula.

In 2002 — under the second President Bush — North Korea publicly admitted its nuclear program, booted international inspectors from the country and restarted nuclear facilities that had been closed as part of a deal with the Clinton administration.

In 2003, North Korea announced its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In 2004 it announced it had built a bomb. And in 2006, it conducted its first test of a nuclear weapon.

In other words, most of the major advances made in the North Korean nuclear program have come with Republicans in the White House. Perhaps they too should have “approached Pyongyang from a position of strength” to solve this problem?

In reality, such a partisan analysis would be deeply foolish. I am not attempting in any way to argue that North Korea’s nuclear program represents a failure of Republican policy or Republican presidents. North Korea poses an extremely difficult challenge that has befuddled presidents of both parties going all the way back to Harry Truman. When a country has nothing and wants nothing, there are very few tools available to influence its behavior.

But I will admit to being curious. He has attempted to set up a dichotomy between “strength” on one hand vs. “appeasement” on the other. But what exactly would Romney do as president?

Would he take military action and provoke what by all accounts would be an extremely bloody war in Korea? Would he try to enlist the help of, say, the Russians? You know, the country that Romney recently denounced as “our number one geopolitical foe,” earning him a rebuke from the Russian president that “now is not the mid-70s”?

Would the Chinese — whom Romney has also harshly criticized — be equally willing to help him out? I rather doubt it.

I do know that I am leery of politicians whose first instinct is to bluster about using “strength” to solve international problems that might better be approached through wisdom, patience or cooperation. Been there, done that, and it didn’t turn out so well.

Based on Romney’s public statements, under his leadership we would still have troops in Iraq, despite Iraq’s insistence that they would not allow them. We would still be plotting how to extend rather than end our presence in Afghanistan. And you may remember that after an American drone crashed in Iran last year, Romney insisted that he would have sent troops into that nation to reclaim it, regardless of the consequences.

It’s also important to note that Romney has assembled a Cheney-esque foreign-policy team that is dominated by the same group of neoconservatives that led President Bush into the miscalculated invasion of Iraq.

By his second term, a chastened Bush had learned enough to discard many of those folks and ignore the rest, but by then the damage had been done, both to this country and to his presidency. By recruiting that crowd to his team, and by his evident willingness to follow their advice, Romney shows no such learning curve.

So I’m curious, and the American people ought to be curious as well: What exactly does “approaching Pyongyang from a position of strength” really mean? How would that approach play out, and what would its consequences be? Over the next six-plus months, maybe we’ll get an answer.

– Jay Bookman

645 comments Add your comment

stands for decibels

April 13th, 2012
8:59 am

Romney has assembled a Cheney-esque foreign-policy team dominated by the same group of neoconservatives who led President Bush into the miscalculated invasion of Iraq.

yeah, America’s gonna gobble up some of that.

Doggone/GA

April 13th, 2012
9:06 am

“yeah, America’s gonna gobble up some of that”

Unfortuneatly, some Americans will

Becky

April 13th, 2012
9:08 am

stands-sadly lots of the warmongers will eat that up.

And good morning.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

April 13th, 2012
9:10 am

Mitt Romney’s foriegn policy and North Korea’s missile have one great
similarity…..

both fall apart when launched.

ty webb

April 13th, 2012
9:10 am

it’s so much easier to campaign than it is to be CIC.

Illegal Alien

April 13th, 2012
9:11 am

This is in line with Romney’s solution to the unemployment problem. Start WW3 and build a military the size of WW2; 12 million. or;

Drop a few nukes and when the Russians and Chinese respond, we won’t have to worry about finding all of us dead people jobs.

JF McNamara

April 13th, 2012
9:12 am

Mitt’s just posturing to look tough. He isn’t going to do anything. He may as well take off his shirt and magic undertop and beat on his chest yelling, “Me Strong, Obama weak”.

morally corrupt

April 13th, 2012
9:13 am

we want north korea with nuclear weapons as well as iran
if they have them then all their neighbors become our B*****!

godless heathen

April 13th, 2012
9:14 am

The “If you’ll be nice we’ll send you some food.” strategy is working so well,

Can't anybody around here play this game??

April 13th, 2012
9:15 am

Oh, come on, Jay. Of course he’s gonna say something like that.

A democratic candidate for president would have done the same thing were it a republican in the white house.

The opposition doesn’t get elected by speaking admiringly about everything the other side does. It’s called politics. Sucks, but there it is.

JamVet

April 13th, 2012
9:17 am

Romney is perfecting the art of Repulispeak.

As prophesied in the Book of Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter.

No matter how obviously jawdroppingly stupid and juvenile his fact-free political rhetoric, it will be are taken as gospel by the Republirubes.

This many years into the game and and as old as these cons are though, it is somewhat surprising that they still lap this kind of stuff up.

Oy to the veh…

Butch Cassidy

April 13th, 2012
9:17 am

Has Romney ever explained how he would pay for new excursions into Iran and North Korea while still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan while at the same time cutting taxes and lowering the defecit and the debt? Not to criticize the man, but I still stand by my original contention that Romney is a douchebag.

hmmm

April 13th, 2012
9:17 am

Romney vs. Obama: Leadership and the enemies list
Jack and Suzy Welch
Apr 11, 2012 12:52 EDT

Remember that incompetent boss you used to have? He was a good guy and all, but he just couldn’t make decisions or prioritize. Perhaps worst of all, he tried to make everyone happy, resulting in almost everyone being angry or confused or both. And remember how long it took management to move him out – and how aggravating that was?

Of course, at the time, you sort of understood why the Bigs had promoted the guy in the first place, and why they held out hope for so long. He’d been a superstar salesman. Best the company had seen in ages. But in the end, it turned out that all the things that made him great as an individual performer made him lousy as a people manager.

It happens all the time at work. A brilliant engineer promoted to run R&D. A gifted reporter elevated to editor. A cutting-edge scientist made head of the lab. First cheers. Then, after a bit, confusion about organizational direction, mixed signals about values, hurt feelings left and right and, eventually, chaos.

Look, in business, some people can really knock it out of the park in their current jobs. They just can’t lead.

Smart companies get that reality. In fact, most have learned the hard way that actually being a great leader involves unique skills that even the most promising candidate for a leadership job simply may not possess.

But do the American people get that reality, too?

You have to wonder. Because there’s an awful lot of noise out there right now about campaign styles. President Obama has a reputation built on his soaring oratory, while Mitt Romney, clearly no fan of crowd scenes, can’t seem to get through a week without an awkward (or worse, foot-in-mouth) moment.

The president really knows how to run for office, the pundits note. Romney – not so much.

As if it matters.

It doesn’t, of course. Just as in business, in politics, being very good at one job (like delivering well-written speeches from a teleprompter) doesn’t necessarily make you very good at the next (like leading the free world).

What voters need to do right now is stop focusing on stump skills, or lack thereof, and start fixating on which candidate will be the better president once the campaign is long over. They need to stop asking, “Who’s more appealing on TV?” and start asking, “Who’s got the right stuff to get America working again?”

Yes, in some part, every person’s answer to that question will be driven by the issues – from healthcare to taxes to energy policy. And in this election, the ideological divide is stark indeed, with Obama supporting government centralization that borders on European-type socialism and Romney in favor of decentralization, state and individual rights and free-market capitalism.

Stark, too, is the difference between the candidates’ leadership styles.

Over the past three years, Obama has taken a sort of divide-and-conquer approach, amassing a list of enemies that would make Richard Nixon proud – bankers, healthcare insurance providers, oil companies, wealthy taxpayers, Congress and, most recently, the Supreme Court. Surely his supporters must think this particular tactic is effective, but there can be no denying that the country is more polarized than when Obama took office.

Without doubt, Romney is not the model leader (his apparent lack of authenticity can be jarring), but he has a quality that would serve him well as president – good old American pragmatism. Perhaps that’s the businessman in him. Or perhaps you just learn to do what you’ve got to do when you’re a GOP governor in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts or the man charged with salvaging the scandal-ridden Salt Lake City Olympics. If Romney’s long record suggests anything, it’s that he knows how to manage people and organizations to get things accomplished without a lot of internecine warfare.

Look, Obama may be a great campaigner and Romney (to date) somewhat the opposite. But neither man is running to be Campaigner-in-Chief.

In politics, as in business, the leader’s job needs to be filled by a leader, and no effective leader, regardless of ideology, keeps an enemies list.

Jack Welch was the CEO of General Electric for 21 years and is the founder of the Jack Welch Management Institute at Strayer University. Suzy Welch is an author, speaker and the former Editor of the Harvard Business Review.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

April 13th, 2012
9:18 am

godless

and the “we’ll bomb you to the stone age” strategery worked so well….

yes, godless

not all weapons work instantly, some don’t even have to go BOOM.

Normal, Plain and Simple

April 13th, 2012
9:18 am

The best advice I would give whatever man wins the White House. When asked about N. Korea, is to respond “Who?” North Korea is a very minor problem

Jm

April 13th, 2012
9:19 am

It’s political silly season

I actually think Romney shouldn’t say some of these things on foreign policy

Stick to domestic policy for criticizing Obama

Theres plenty of material there

HDB

April 13th, 2012
9:20 am

There in no way that we can approach the North Korean problem unilaterally; the problem is that Republicans are so myopic, that the can opnly see one way. The US must take a multilateral approach to solve this issue! It was the neoconservative approach that almost put this nation into a depression that we are slowly recovering from!! These guys need to wake up!!

Road Scholar

April 13th, 2012
9:20 am

I bet Romney’s “position of strength” won’t be in the budget either!

Let the chest beating begin!

Jay

April 13th, 2012
9:21 am

“Anybody,” I would agree with that to an extent, especially as it relates specifically to this one incident.

However, when you look at Romney’s foreign policy team, when you look at what he’s said about Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, when you look at his statements regarding China and Russia, they all do point to a much more militaristic, simplistic approach to foreign policy.

And that’s troubling.

Pizzaman

April 13th, 2012
9:22 am

Ah, come on Jay. Your being too harsh on ‘ole Mitt. Remember 04 when Bush/Cheney promised a gay marrage ammendment, a flag burnning ammendment, privatized social security and a closed border? Then “won political capital” and delivered none of the promises. All politicians lie to get elected. The Republicans just seem to me to lie more.

Butch Cassidy

April 13th, 2012
9:23 am

Road Scholar – “I bet Romney’s “position of strength” won’t be in the budget either! ”

I forgot about the “red ledger/blue ledger” tactic. Of course we can fight as many wars as we want, after all, those numbers will be kept in the “red ledger” not the “blue ledger” that we show to the public. :)

massachusetts refugee thug

April 13th, 2012
9:25 am

jack welch may know how to run a business (your results may vary), but he’s still a giant d*ck.

ByteMe - Political thug for sale

April 13th, 2012
9:26 am

So I’m curious, and the American people ought to be curious as well: What exactly does “approaching Pyongyang from a position of strength” really mean?

It means “I got nothing.”

JamVet

April 13th, 2012
9:26 am

It is to me, fascinating that Romney’s curriculum vitae and his history in politics is not shabby at all.

And had he run as that person – a reasoned and reasonable moderate and champion of compromise – he would be up on Barry by 12 points right now. And probably pulling away.

But…

He’s listened to his dolt handlers that are trying desperately to curry favor with the Teafloggers and the lunatic fringe and the extremist power brokers in the completely out of touch with middle America GOP.

Jay, writes of political realities and I understand that.

But is it commanded that one HAS to sell their soul in Faustian fashion and pander to the lowest common denominator in the Republican Party to win the nomination?

It would seem so…

ByteMe - Political thug for sale

April 13th, 2012
9:26 am

they all do point to a much more militaristic, simplistic approach to foreign policy.

I wouldn’t use the phrase “simplistic”. I would use the phrase “one-dimensional”.

Butch Cassidy

April 13th, 2012
9:26 am

I suppose Romney could rely on his “business experience” and buy North Korea, load them up with debt get rid of half the population and then offer to sell them to China for a profit.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:26 am

Good questions to ask, Jay.

Of course, in all honesty, I think Mitt Romney is simply being partisan political when it comes to every single issue – he is attempting to just seem like he’s taking the opposite approach than Obama has. It doesn’t matter if that approach is a good one, as long as it’s just the opposite of whatever he perceives or can portray is Obama’s position.

And now he’s basically falsely accusing the President of appeasement. And the President already answered that charge:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR3XxnGfE3w

ByteMe - Political thug for sale

April 13th, 2012
9:28 am

Short Romney:

Bombs and butter!! Let’s keep this party rolling! Woo-hoo!!

Sorry, you can’t have beer, since I can’t drink it with people watching

:)

ByteMe - Political thug for sale

April 13th, 2012
9:29 am

load them up with debt get rid of half the population

Too late. Current management has already done that.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:29 am

It means “I got nothing.”

Then he should have SAID nothing too, heh.

carlosgvv

April 13th, 2012
9:30 am

Based on Romney’s comments, it seems clear that leaders in the Military-Industrial-Complex have made it clear to him just where his party’s funding comes from and that, if he wants to get elected and re-elected, he must fully understand the financial and political facts of life bought and paid for Republicans live under. So, Romney shows he knows the score – Party 1, People – 0.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:30 am

JamVet: And had he run as that person – a reasoned and reasonable moderate and champion of compromise – he would be up on Barry by 12 points right now. And probably pulling away.

And he also would not be the Republican nominee.

Jack

April 13th, 2012
9:30 am

Dont’t send them food. Let them at least be hungry while they perfect their nuclear weapons.

Butch Cassidy

April 13th, 2012
9:31 am

If Romney wants to test Obamas strength, perhaps instead of debating each other, they could simply set up Thunderdome and save us all a great deal of time. ;)

massachusetts refugee thug

April 13th, 2012
9:31 am

query – did romney say this via text/email/ or some other virtual statement, or did he say this to reporters? and if he said it to reporters, why didn’t any of them there liberal media types man up and ask him what his solution would be?

stevie ray..clowns to the left and jokers to the right, here I am...

April 13th, 2012
9:31 am

I have no idea why we care about what those stone-age cretins do in N Korea. Guess we have decades old treaty that needs dusting every now and then…ridiculous.

I agree that Romney has a blizzard of domestic shortcomings of President Trillion to critique the foreign policy that remains the same, big brotheresque crap we’ve been pitching to deaf ears since the 50’s…why don’t we tell the world we are taking 10 years off as world police to clean up our own weed infested back yard?

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:31 am

The Obama Administration and the far right agree on one thing – they don’t want Mitt Romney to tack back to the center :D

I mean, that’s gotta hurt, agreeing with Obama on something….

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:32 am

Butch: If Romney wants to test Obamas strength, perhaps instead of debating each other, they could simply set up Thunderdome and save us all a great deal of time.

Hey you never know. Romney might have some surprise martial arts moves and get asked to do porn.

Recon 0311 2533

April 13th, 2012
9:36 am

Jay’s little trip down memory lane skips over Madeline Albrights trip to the N.K. during the Clinton administration and that embarrassing failure at diplomacy. Romney’s correct there’s been a long history of broken commitments on North Korea’s part that disallows excusing the current administration for their failed attempts at diplomacy.

mm

April 13th, 2012
9:37 am

I guess the tape came of the bundle of bottle rockets taped together in the rocket housing.

Those clowns in North Korea are laughable.

Oscar

April 13th, 2012
9:37 am

If Mitt and the neos get back in, count on more wars and foreign policy disasters. We can’t afford the GOP to get back in the white house until the party completly changes its basic ideas.

TaxPayer

April 13th, 2012
9:39 am

How many tax cuts will it take to implement Romney’s foreign policy?

Oscar

April 13th, 2012
9:39 am

Jay

April 13th, 2012
9:21 am
“Anybody,” I would agree with that to an extent, especially as it relates specifically to this one incident.

However, when you look at Romney’s foreign policy team, when you look at what he’s said about Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, when you look at his statements regarding China and Russia, they all do point to a much more militaristic, simplistic approach to foreign policy.

And that’s troubling.

__________

Troubling. That’s an understatement. Calling a friend and getting an getting a busy signal is troubling. Hearing a funny noice when you atart your car is troubling.

straitroad

April 13th, 2012
9:41 am

The bottom line is this: At the very least, Romney was raised as an American and from that standpoint, he can form foreign and domestic policy as an American. Obama was not raised as an American but instead as an Indonesian. I suspect that there are those on this board that would argue that an Indonesian perspective is somehow better. I simply disagree.

stands for decibels

April 13th, 2012
9:41 am

I suppose Romney could rely on his “business experience” and buy North Korea, load them up with debt get rid of half the population and then offer to sell them to China for a profit.

That I could respect. Let Mitt be Mitt.

stands for decibels

April 13th, 2012
9:43 am

Jerome Horwitz

April 13th, 2012
9:43 am

I agree with ty webb – it’s campaign speech which is easied that actually being in charge. When you are responsible for your actions and lives are in the balance. Having agreed with ty for once think I’ll take in the pond.

Contrarian

April 13th, 2012
9:43 am

Romney’s a total DB. Sorry to be callous, but it’s true.

ty webb

April 13th, 2012
9:43 am

“In reality, such a partisan analysis would be deeply foolish.”

and that’s stopped Jay before?

St Simons - codewords are the new black

April 13th, 2012
9:44 am

“…has emboldened the North Korean regime and undermined…”

wow, chock full your minimum daily requirement of neocon codewords
(polite golf clap)
now if he can pull of “gon take yore guns” in a southern accent

Romney bumpersticker – “Pardon, do you have any grey poupon?”

Lyman Hall

April 13th, 2012
9:44 am

“Based on Romney’s public statements, under his leadership we would still have troops in Iraq, despite Iraq’s insistence that they would not allow them.”
.
By the way.we still have troops in Iraq. The costumes and the tax-payer funded pay-scales might have changed ……but the troops remain.
.
Sheeesh…….Romney/Obama supporters BELIEVE what they WANT to believe.
.
There’s a word for that.

stevie ray..clowns to the left and jokers to the right, here I am...

April 13th, 2012
9:47 am

Can anyone tell me of any favorable foreign policy outcomes in the past 15 years? Our “best” ally in the middle east has no oil. We get zippo in return for all of our charity, we think all countries, no matter how ancient, are ready for our brand of democracy…It doesn’t matter who is in office..Hillary Clinton’s (I will forever picture her as the blueberry girl from Willy Wonka…her blueberry dress at first Clinton inauguration)appointment was a favor for conceding same as Gingrinch is hoping for before bowing…it’s all a joke and we are the butt.

Lyman Hall

April 13th, 2012
9:48 am

This weekend the big news was that the North Koreans shot off a rocket. They claimed they were making an attempt to put a satellite in orbit, which they have a right to do under international law.

Space is supposed to be open to all those individuals who want to use it. Of course, the West, including our government – or especially our government – reacted almost in a hysterical fashion.

They called for an emergency UN meeting and this meeting of the UN met and they are trying to decide now what to do about the North Koreans.

Here it is: The North Koreans, they have a rocket, not an intercontinental ballistic missile. We don’t even know for sure if they have a bomb that they could launch, and we are now wondering, what are we going to do with this country?

I mean, they can’t even feed themselves. They do not have a Navy, what kind of an Air Force do they have, and yet it just seems like this is an excuse for the West, and in particular our military-industrial complex to have another excuse to have a massive build up.

It just seems so unnecessary. Ironically, it seems like the Chinese had the most measured response as they, “why don’t you just sit back a minute and think about this?” And I think that is what we ought to do.
It is just preposterous to think that the North Koreans are a threat. I think they are playing cat and mouse. I think they are laughing. I think they love to see us go nuts over this, but what they don’t understand is, they might not realize how much we might overreact, and this whole thing that some of our politicians are saying, “Well, we should have gone in there and bombed that site before the rocket even took off.”
.
Ron Paul.

ty webb

April 13th, 2012
9:49 am

Jerome Horwitz,
“pool and a pond…pond would be good for you.”

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:49 am

Obama was not raised as an American

……………………………………..________……………………
………………………………,.-‘”……………….“~.,………………
………………………..,.-”……………………………..“-.,…………
…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,……..
…………………,?………………………………………………\,…..
………………./…………………………………………………..,}….
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}….
……………/……………………………………………,:”………/…..
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../…..
…………./__.(…..“~-,_…………………………,:`………./……..
………../(_….”~,_……..“~,_………………..,:`…….._/………..
……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….“-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}………..
………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……“;,,./`…./”…………../…………
…,,,___.\`~,……“~.,………………..`…..}…………../………….
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”……………
…………/.`~,……`-………………………….\……/\……………….
………….\`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..\,__………..
,,_……….}.>-._\……………………………..|…………..`=~-,….
…..`=~-,_\_……`\,……………………………\……………………
……………….`=~-,,.\,………………………….\…………………..
…………………………..`:,,………………………`\…………..__..
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“…….
…………………………………._\……….._,-%…….`\……………
……………………………..,<`.._|_,-&“…………….`\…………..

ByteMe - Political thug for sale

April 13th, 2012
9:50 am

Awww, Adam, I was just going to let the spasm of “stupid” slide. A facepalm is good, but ignoring a drive-by moron is easier.

stands for decibels

April 13th, 2012
9:50 am

Romney’s a total DB.

decibel?

At the very least, Romney was raised as an American

Mais oui!

carlosgvv

April 13th, 2012
9:50 am

mm – “those clowns in North Korea are laughable”

Of all the countries on Earth, North Korea comes closest to the nightmarish regime described in the Novel 1984. Big Brother rules and the people suffer unspeakable cruelties. Somehow, “laughable” is not a word I would use to describe this hellhole place.

stevie ray..clowns to the left and jokers to the right, here I am...

April 13th, 2012
9:51 am

ST SIMONS

And President Trillions bumper stickers: “Not our Fault”, We Promise to Do Better and Will Tell You How After We Get re-Elected, Death to Those Evil 1%’ers…The BAIN of our Economic Existence…

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:52 am

Space is supposed to be open to all those individuals who want to use it. Of course, the West, including our government – or especially our government – reacted almost in a hysterical fashion.

Interesting argument. Are you saying that there is no reason for concern? That the rocket they launched, if successful at any later point, would have no capability of delivering a nuclear weapon?

Lyman Hall

April 13th, 2012
9:52 am

Quite frankly, I think if we would not be in South Korea, which I have advocated for years, South Korea and North Korea probably would be unified and they would be westernized by now. But this whole idea that we are there and we persists with this confrontation…

Communism is a failure, and that is why the Soviet system collapsed. But when you play these games, just like we did with the communists in Cuba. Castro lasted a lot longer because we put sanctions on them, on Castro, and gave him cover, but that is going to come to an end eventually. After all these years, sanctions don’t work.

People are now crying for even more and more sanctions. So it just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever for us to pursue these policies of antagonism. You say these people are a bit nuts. Well, if they don’t want to talk to us, fine. But if they would talk to us, I would not give them any money. So often when we talk to the North Koreans, we think they are going to do something, we give them money.

Why don’t we try this third option? Instead of either attacking people or giving them money, just offer out friendship. If they want to trade with us, fine. But communism fails, it will fail, their system is failing. The Soviet system, we didn’t have to attack it. They had thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons, and we didn’t have to confront them.

And now, we are acting hysterically over this whole notion that we have to attack them. Sure, they might be working on a weapon, but just think in the age in which we live. People need to understand and study what fourth generation warfare is.

They need to understand that we were really brought down and chaos was caused by 19 individuals with boxed blades. That is what we have to think about, but we have to understand fourth generation warfare. You have to understand why people want to attack us. You have to understand why we do these things and how fruitless they are.
.
Ron Paul

carlosgvv

April 13th, 2012
9:52 am

stevie ray – 9:47

Money talks and BS walks.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:52 am

ByteMe: Awww, Adam, I was just going to let the spasm of “stupid” slide. A facepalm is good, but ignoring a drive-by moron is easier.

True, but I couldn’t resist the urge to use the facepalm :D

kimmer

April 13th, 2012
9:53 am

I hope the democrat party pays at least part of your salary. You put Hannity to shame when it comes to being one-sided.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:54 am

Lyman Hall Translated:

Attack on Obama

Attack on Romney

Attack on something that has nothing to do with either one, but in a Libertarian mind fits in with the false idea that all parties are the same except their own

Attempt to persuade a vote for third party on above specious bases

Ron Paul

Lyman Hall

April 13th, 2012
9:54 am

Adam -
.
Get a clue.
Google earth is only a TRS-80 compared to what our military has.
We can count the hairs on Long Dongs butt.
Ditto iran.
.
Why are you progressives so frightened? And what makes you so certain that Washington can protect you?……Afterall, they allowed 9-11.

stevie ray..clowns to the left and jokers to the right, here I am...

April 13th, 2012
9:55 am

CARLOS,

Why is it our responsibility to clean this hellhole and all others? How we gonna continue to pay for this? Screw those evil 1% ‘ers? Suggest you read Ron Pauls comments posted above which are the best I’ve seen posted in some time..

Lyman Hall

April 13th, 2012
9:56 am

We have to realize that our foreign policy has blowback to it and that is the biggest threat to us. The best thing that we could do is to take the advice of the founding fathers and say, “Look, let’s trade with people. Let’s talk with people, try to be friends with people, and be more tolerant with people, and look to our own problems.”

When we make our own mistakes, if we have imperfections in protecting human rights and civil liberties here in this country, let’s take care of it before we preach and lecture to everybody else and expect them to respond to us.

If we do that, I think we could come up with a much better chance of having peace in this world and certainly a lot more prosperity. We don’t need to be spending these hundreds of billions of dollars on international warfareism.

And some people expected our new administration to actually cut it back. They are increasing this military budget, and if you would have just listened to the comments from our administration today, they were more provocative than anything I have heard in weeks, if not months about what we must do about this.

We ought to just sit back and take a breath and realize that North Korea is not a threat to the United States of America.
.
Ron Paul…………………….the voice of Reason.
NOT the voice of violent immoral statism ala Romney/Obama.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:56 am

Why are you progressives so frightened?

I think you’re confusing being laughed at for having an overly simplistic viewpoint, while also accusing everyone else of having an overly simplistic viewpoint (Everyone else is insane, not me) with fear.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
9:57 am

Oops. My bad. I actually stoked the flames. Apologies.

./ignore

Intown

April 13th, 2012
9:57 am

Romney himself may be a smart and talented guy. He was also the pick of the Republican primary litter by far. (Which ain’t saying much.) But, he will take the nation in the wrong direction on several tracks. I’m sticking with Mr. Obama.

St Simons - codewords are the new black

April 13th, 2012
9:57 am

“What exactly does ‘approaching Pyongyang from a position of strength’
really mean?”

I’ll take that one for 500 (minus the $65 Ga pre-k upcharge)
(Some, a very few) of my neighbors talk like this. It is impersonal,
aloof, removed, and as mrsstsimons says, ‘there’s $200k of potential
therapy in that revealing sentence.’
Calling a nation of human beings, however misquided/misled, by an
impersonal name ‘PyongYang,’ like they’re an inanimate object, to
be bombed of course by neocons, says everything we already know
about Captain Fancypants with little connection to the race of human
beings out there struggling to live their lives.
Haven’t we made this mistake before?
with Little Nero with a Cowboy Hat?
or at least had it forced on us by a biased Republican Supreme Court?

stevie ray..clowns to the left and jokers to the right, here I am...

April 13th, 2012
9:58 am

ADAM,

They are all the same…the GOP and the DEMs only difference is where they get all the cash to get elected……How is what Ron Paul said specious? NKorea is not threat to us and won’t be for a few decades unless they starve first….why bother with them?

mm

April 13th, 2012
10:01 am

“Somehow, “laughable” is not a word I would use to describe this hellhole place.”

These clowns are no threat to the US. South Korea, you bet.

But you are welcome to hide under your bed if it makes you feel better.

Joe Hussein Mama

April 13th, 2012
10:03 am

Jay — “I am not attempting in any way to argue that North Korea’s nuclear program represents a failure of Republican policy or Republican presidents.”

Well, why not? Bush scrapped the Agreed Framework, and off the Norks went with their bomb experiments and tests. And how they have it. Wasn’t that the reason we invaded Iraq? His speech on TV immediately before the invasion sure made it sound that way.

TaxPayer

April 13th, 2012
10:04 am

We have billionaires launching rockets into space. What if one of them goes to the dark side. I could see it happening with people like the Koch crooks or one of those billionaire backers of Newt or Rick.

Matti

April 13th, 2012
10:04 am

carlosgvv @ 9:50,

Well said. These people are oppressed and starving. Just because they’re brainwashed into thinking their creepo leader is a savior of some kind does not mean they deserve to suffer this way. Even FAT Americans can’t think straight if we miss a meal or two! If we really cared about ridding the world of the Kim Jong dictatorship, we should pump food and freedom propaganda into their wasteland to inspire a Korean Spring. Whole grains and garden-fresh veggies really do make the world a better place!

Peadawg

April 13th, 2012
10:04 am

” a program to deliver food aid to North Korean citizens”

Why the hell are we doing this to begin with? Deliver the food to AMERICAN citizens who need help. No a bunch of Asian communists who want to nuke us.

DOH!

barking frog

April 13th, 2012
10:04 am

why are we still in south korea?
romney’s policy
will be the same as obama’s policy,
which is the same as bush’s policies etc.

Jm

April 13th, 2012
10:05 am

Ann Romney more popular than bieber yesterday

:D

Don't Forget

April 13th, 2012
10:06 am

N Korea f’d up big time. They violated the agreement that would have given them food and then look completely incompetent with the ICBM and have gotten the opposite effect that they desired. For the first time in memory, it is the civilized world that will feel emboldened to crack down on them. Oh, and so much for N Korea selling missile technology to other rogue states. That strengthens our position elsewhere as well. Iran is now more isolated than ever too.

0311/8541/5811/1811/1801

April 13th, 2012
10:06 am

Not Good. Norf Korweea wost face.

But Jay, what do we do if they decide to come across that border without ANY provocation?

Let them have South Korea ?

Lyman Hall

April 13th, 2012
10:07 am

“why are we still in south korea?”
.
To keep the capatilists hoards from freeing North Korea.
.
Bogeymen for the MIC are getting mighty scarce now.

stands for decibels

April 13th, 2012
10:07 am

>“yeah, America’s gonna gobble up some of that”

>>Unfortuneatly, some Americans will

Some, but let’s do remember that once our excellent Iraq adventure had turned completely to crap and there was no more papering over its crappiness—I’d say that was, conveniently, about half a year after Bush had (barely) been re-elected—Bush’s approvals also turned to crap. Yes, there were other factors—Katrina, the Schaivo clusterfoxtrot and oh yeah, his aborted SS Piratization tour—but mostly Americans sent his approval into the toilet over Iraq. All the brave “SURGE!” talk didn’t do diddly for them in 2006 or 2008.

I doubt it’s any more attractive to swing voters in 2012. Yes, people have short memories, but I doubt many have completely forgotten thousands of Americans who died for a vanity project.

Jm

April 13th, 2012
10:08 am

(on the twitterverse)

barking frog

April 13th, 2012
10:08 am

is south korea powerless
and unarmed ?

Don't Forget

April 13th, 2012
10:08 am

Whole grains and garden-fresh veggies really do make the world a better place!

Brocoli diplomacy? :lol:

Brosephus™

April 13th, 2012
10:09 am

I fault the press for our spate of pathetic candidates. When Romney made that statement, there should have been a camera and microphone in his face to answer the question, “What would you do?” As somebody stated earlier, it’s easy to campaign. If you want my vote, you have to display you have sense enough to lead. I don’t feel confident in any of the choices we have this year.

——————-

Adam

:)

ty webb

April 13th, 2012
10:09 am

“SS Piratization tour…”

garrrrrrr, matey!

Joe Hussein Mama

April 13th, 2012
10:10 am

Recon — “Jay’s little trip down memory lane skips over Madeline Albrights trip to the N.K. during the Clinton administration and that embarrassing failure at diplomacy.”

No failure at all. The Clinton Administration set up the Agreed Framework which, for a time (until the Bush Administration decided it didn’t like it) halted weapons reasearch and development by the DPRK.

“Romney’s correct there’s been a long history of broken commitments on North Korea’s part that disallows excusing the current administration for their failed attempts at diplomacy”

Well, considering that we’re technically in a cease-fire with them, we can either *keep on trying* diplomacy, or we can go back to war with them. What’s your recommendation?

stands for decibels

April 13th, 2012
10:10 am

garrrrrrr, matey!

Shiver me political capital timbers!

Adam

April 13th, 2012
10:10 am

Stevie Ray: How is what Ron Paul said specious?

Not what I said. What I said was that making the case that the two parties are “the same” is specious. It fails to take into account anything other than the observers viewpoint that his or her chosen party is different than the other two. That does not, in itself, make the other two the same. In fact, a Venn diagram showing that all three of these parties overlap on some issues, and that each party agrees with one of the other two in similar proportion, would be much more accurate.

Don't Forget

April 13th, 2012
10:11 am

Let them have South Korea ?

No way. Of all the foreign countries we have a strong military presence, that one is the most justified.

casual observer

April 13th, 2012
10:11 am

wow…some of you people (and you know who you are) really need more productive things to fill out your day. How about shutting down the Mac, turning off MSNBC and going outside? It’s really quite beautiful out there today!

Butch Cassidy

April 13th, 2012
10:11 am

Taxpayer – “We have billionaires launching rockets into space. What if one of them goes to the dark side.”

We’d call it Moonraker.

Adam

April 13th, 2012
10:13 am

Brosephus: I must have missed where that came from, but :D

Matti

April 13th, 2012
10:13 am

I bet they’d really go for some cajun cooking. If our soldiers stood on the border cooking up a massive low-country boil, the NK’s would start defecting and lining up for a bowl of mmmm-mmmm good! The border would be open because those guards would be the first on the other side, marveling at the amazing symphony of spices, meats, and veggies in their mouths.

Woodstock Mike

April 13th, 2012
10:14 am

Liberals are so funny! What do you expect Romney to say, great job Obama!! Obama has nothing to even campaign on besides trying to make the poor hate the rich and to still blame George Bush for a bad economy. What else can he say?

Butch Cassidy

April 13th, 2012
10:15 am

Woodstock Mike – “What else can he say?”

Actually, in this case, he didn’t have to say anything.

Woodstock Mike

April 13th, 2012
10:15 am

GDP growth is the worst under Obama than any president in history. Wait, that’s not his fault…