PDA

View Full Version : Lets lay it all out on the table. What do you want to do about N. Korea


alnorth
02-10-2005, 07:30 AM
North Korea has just announced that they are not interested in Diplomacy. They claim to have nuclear weapons (though never independantly verified, and they have never actually tested one), and they have refused to even participate in discussions.

Lets assume that this crazy regime will never cooperate with the will of the US or the rest of the world. What do we do?

alnorth
02-10-2005, 07:36 AM
As far as I see it, we can

1) ignore the problem, maybe put a few economic sanctions in place. (unacceptable)

2) Go to war (unacceptable)

3) Some middle solution in between 1 and 2.

Since the 1960's, the US has set up and enforced a blockade of Cuba. Nothing goes in or out of the country without our permission, usually only food and medicine. This blockade has sent an island with a fairly good economy into utter economic ruin.

I dont see any reason why we couldnt do the same with North Korea. What I think we should do is tell China that they have X amount of time to do something about their friends or well introduce our own solution to the problem. Anything and everything is ok with us, if they want to invade North Korea and take it over, fine have a blast.

If China refuses to act, I think we should transform N. Korea into a giant prison. Absolutely nothing enters or leaves without our permission, any who tries gets shot down or sunk. Furthermore, absolutely no food or medicine enters, if they have another famine, too effin bad. North Korea couldnt attack from such a position, because they know they would be annihilated if they did. (On the other hand, if we actually invaded, theyd have nothing to lose). The blockade gets lifted when N. Korea agrees to an enforced diplomatic solution.

KCFalcon59
02-10-2005, 10:21 AM
vaporize

RINGLEADER
02-10-2005, 10:37 AM
I think we're trying to wait them out and hope they collapse from within. It's such an alien soceity I don't know how realistic that is, but their exportation of technology is a real threat. The problem is that if you attack them you have to be willing to ride out the counter-attack - unless you have great intelligence that tells you where all of their nukes are. You'd also have to take out their frontlines on the border with the South or make it clear that you'll respond to those troops if they make a move. The only way I could see that happening is if we drop nukes on them first or move so much hardware into the area that it would be tough for them not to know what's coming.

Of course most dictators tend to ply the international community for help when they feel threatened so projecting force could work...It's just tough to trust a xenophobic leader who's leading a xenophobic society to act rationally.

It's too bad the Clintons thought signing a treaty was the endgoal with N. Korea or we could have prevented a lot of this from happening.

StcChief
02-10-2005, 11:19 AM
I think we're trying to wait them out and hope they collapse from within. It's such an alien soceity I don't know how realistic that is, but their exportation of technology is a real threat. The problem is that if you attack them you have to be willing to ride out the counter-attack - unless you have great intelligence that tells you where all of their nukes are. You'd also have to take out their frontlines on the border with the South or make it clear that you'll respond to those troops if they make a move. The only way I could see that happening is if we drop nukes on them first or move so much hardware into the area that it would be tough for them not to know what's coming.

Of course most dictators tend to ply the international community for help when they feel threatened so projecting force could work...It's just tough to trust a xenophobic leader who's leading a xenophobic society to act rationally.

It's too bad the Clintons thought signing a treaty was the endgoal with N. Korea or we could have prevented a lot of this from happening.

We have been waiting out Cistro in Cuba for how long....Though now
not near the threat of N.Korea is.

Excellent point about Clinton's failed treat move.
History will point this out later as well, about his do nothing admin.

1) Try the blockade with China's help for year or so.

2) Double edge attack maybe forth coming from China /U.S.

3) Or oust him another way...Merceneries.

Pitt Gorilla
02-10-2005, 11:31 AM
I think we're trying to wait them out and hope they collapse from within. It's such an alien soceity I don't know how realistic that is, but their exportation of technology is a real threat. The problem is that if you attack them you have to be willing to ride out the counter-attack - unless you have great intelligence that tells you where all of their nukes are. You'd also have to take out their frontlines on the border with the South or make it clear that you'll respond to those troops if they make a move. The only way I could see that happening is if we drop nukes on them first or move so much hardware into the area that it would be tough for them not to know what's coming.
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and we attacked them; I'm guessing the same course of action would be appropriate.

BTW,
would dropping nukes be seen as a tad hypocritical?

Cochise
02-10-2005, 11:49 AM
If I were president, I would have the NSA or whoever controls this type of thing see to it that Kim-Jong Il was the victim of an unfortunate accident.

Come on, you can't tell me that we don't have the resources to do something like this. Make it look like a political dissident did it. Mechanical failure on his transport aircraft. Bomb placed on his limosuine perhaps. Maybe cyanide in his food or something.

Iowanian
02-10-2005, 11:56 AM
Historically, the N Korean govt has said ALOT of things. They like to talk and bluff and Act tough.

I think in this case, considering the number of lives at risk on all sides in the region, diplomatic sanctions and pressure are the only way to go. Its ironic that they can afford Nuclear Weapon development and construction, but can't feed their own people.

Courting China to exert their influence is probably the best answer.

With a little luck, the Nut Running that sess Pool will have a massive stroke soon. Kim Jong Il's untimely death would be the best thing to move this process forward.

HC_Chief
02-10-2005, 12:10 PM
Courting China to exert their influence is probably the best answer.

With a little luck, the Nut Running that sess Pool will have a massive stroke soon. Kim Jong Il's untimely death would be the best thing to move this process forward.

Nodding in agreement.

China cannot be happy about this. KJI is a crazy little ****er who is bringing some serious heat to the region.

patteeu
02-10-2005, 12:59 PM
If I were president, I would have the NSA or whoever controls this type of thing see to it that Kim-Jong Il was the victim of an unfortunate accident.

Come on, you can't tell me that we don't have the resources to do something like this. Make it look like a political dissident did it. Mechanical failure on his transport aircraft. Bomb placed on his limosuine perhaps. Maybe cyanide in his food or something.

Someone tried to blow up his train a while back. It was a pretty big explosion, but somehow they missed him.

Radar Chief
02-10-2005, 01:04 PM
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and we attacked them; I'm guessing the same course of action would be appropriate.

BTW,
would dropping nukes be seen as a tad hypocritical?

Just FYI, but MOPP4 gear doesn’t do much to protect a soldier from radiation, it’ll help keep them from breathing radiated dust but that’s about it.

RINGLEADER
02-10-2005, 01:19 PM
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and we attacked them; I'm guessing the same course of action would be appropriate.

BTW,
would dropping nukes be seen as a tad hypocritical?


N. Korea hasn't invaded it's neighbors lately or used WMDs like Saddam did. That's a point that many liberals who complain about the speed with which we went after Iraq seem to miss. Also, it's too late to game plan a N. Korea invasion without assuming they can hit back with nukes which changes the dynamics of any possible action considerably.

Whether or not you want to say they support terrorism is debateable, but I believe they do because they've become the missile and weapons technology supermarket for many rogue states.

Dropping nukes on a rogue country would be terrible, but not hypocritical. Hell, I think N. Korea has already said they're going to leave Los Angeles in flames if we ever attack them, so if we were to strike first they'd have only themselves to blame (the leadership that is...I feel sorry for the N. Korean people, brainwashed or not).

Radar Chief
02-10-2005, 01:32 PM
Hell, I think N. Korea has already said they're going to leave Los Angeles in flames if we ever attack them,

IIRC, the term was, “lake of fire”.

Calcountry
02-10-2005, 01:38 PM
I want to pre emtively Nuke the shit out of them.

Amnorix
02-10-2005, 01:50 PM
Since the 1960's, the US has set up and enforced a blockade of Cuba. Nothing goes in or out of the country without our permission, usually only food and medicine. This blockade has sent an island with a fairly good economy into utter economic ruin.

I dont see any reason why we couldnt do the same with North Korea. What I think we should do is tell China that they have X amount of time to do something about their friends or well introduce our own solution to the problem. Anything and everything is ok with us, if they want to invade North Korea and take it over, fine have a blast.

If China refuses to act, I think we should transform N. Korea into a giant prison. Absolutely nothing enters or leaves without our permission, any who tries gets shot down or sunk. Furthermore, absolutely no food or medicine enters, if they have another famine, too effin bad. North Korea couldnt attack from such a position, because they know they would be annihilated if they did. (On the other hand, if we actually invaded, theyd have nothing to lose). The blockade gets lifted when N. Korea agrees to an enforced diplomatic solution.

Cuba is an island 90 miles (or whatever) off our coast. Basically, within US shore-based fighter range, and easily blockaded by our navy.

Korea is literally as far away from the US as it gets, is not an island, and has a land connection with one of the US's biggest rivals for global dominance (military and economy) in this new century -- China.

We can only "blockade" it if China agrees. Otherwise, anything Korea wants/needs can get funneled in from China, and moved out through China.

Amnorix
02-10-2005, 01:52 PM
It's too bad the Clintons thought signing a treaty was the endgoal with N. Korea or we could have prevented a lot of this from happening.

Right, as usual it's Clinton's fault. Every problem in the world today is Clinton's fault, got it.

Kindly tell me how, especially in light of your first few paragraphs (which I have not copied into the quote above), what Clinton should have done differently that would have worked? Keep in mind that I doubt the Clinton Administration purposefully negotiated the worst deal possible. Having them sign nothing wouldn't have changed much.

Amnorix
02-10-2005, 01:54 PM
If I were president, I would have the NSA or whoever controls this type of thing see to it that Kim-Jong Il was the victim of an unfortunate accident.

Come on, you can't tell me that we don't have the resources to do something like this. Make it look like a political dissident did it. Mechanical failure on his transport aircraft. Bomb placed on his limosuine perhaps. Maybe cyanide in his food or something.

I don't have a problem whacking him, but we need to be reasonably sure that an equally whacko, or bigger whacko, doesn't move into the empty chair. Otherwise it's fairly pointless.

Iowanian
02-10-2005, 02:00 PM
China's other reason for getting North Korea straightened out, and off the world's shatlist........Hordes of the starving North Koreans bolting into China looking for something to eat.

There are some heavy hitters in that region with some serious reasons to want stability, not named the United States. Japan, South Korea, China all have a need for stability.

RINGLEADER
02-10-2005, 02:03 PM
Right, as usual it's Clinton's fault. Every problem in the world today is Clinton's fault, got it.

Kindly tell me how, especially in light of your first few paragraphs (which I have not copied into the quote above), what Clinton should have done differently that would have worked? Keep in mind that I doubt the Clinton Administration purposefully negotiated the worst deal possible. Having them sign nothing wouldn't have changed much.

You're right...signing nothing would have been better than what they did:

Sending Madeline Albright over to give legitimacy to Dear Leader (Clinton admin sure got a lot of value for that trip :rolleyes: );

Negotiating something more than an Agreed Framework and making sure that there were verifiable checks and balances to that Agreed Framework they did sign;

Not given Dear Leader the idea that he can bluster and threaten the world community into giving him nuclear reactors or free food to do what normal nations do without nuclear extortion.

That's a few ways they could have handled it better. I know it's easy to use the "Oh, you blame everything on Clinton" routine, but in this case the facts show that Clinton does deserve the criticism. It's fairly obvious that Clinton - as he was in other cases throughout his administration - was more interested in getting a piece of paper signed then what that piece of paper actually said. Seriously...an "Agreed Framework" for a future plan is progress? To the Clintons it sure seemed so because it took the Bush administration to call them on the fact that they were skirting everything from the spirit to the actual agreements they had promised to make sometime in the future. If you need more examples of how Clinton screwed the pooch on N. Korea I'd be happy to get into this in more detail with you, but I think you're smart enough to realize that this - like Reagan's pull-out of Beirut - was not the president's finest hour.

Chief Henry
02-10-2005, 02:23 PM
Hell, send Madiline Albright back over to figure out the problem.

RINGLEADER
02-10-2005, 02:26 PM
I don't have a problem whacking him, but we need to be reasonably sure that an equally whacko, or bigger whacko, doesn't move into the empty chair. Otherwise it's fairly pointless.


I agree totally with this...it's a great testament for why we have to go in and completely destroy the entire regime in places like Iraq that don't want to acknowledge the rule of law.

Rausch
02-10-2005, 10:57 PM
If my choices are to use nukes or send in our lads and ladies to die in that $#ithole country just to get rid of Dip Dong Il, I'll go with nukes...

The Pedestrian
02-10-2005, 11:07 PM
Destroy North Korea...China will understand.

Loki
02-10-2005, 11:36 PM
where's maggie and ronnie when you need them?

RIP ronnie...

trndobrd
02-11-2005, 08:45 AM
Kim Jong Il has followed the exact course of every James Bond villian, even Dr. Evil for that matter. Namely, get his paws on nuclear weapons and exthorting money and food from the S Koreans and Japan. The N. Korean military, while large, is a disaster and incapable of successfully attacking S Korea. From that perspective, N. Korea is little more than a nuisance. The problem is the penchant of N. Korea to export arms. As the exports grow, so does the likelyhood of nukes getting on the market.

The best options I see are,

1) make it clear that any sale or transfer of nuclear capability will be considered a direct attack on the US and dealt with in a swift, complete and overwhelming manner that would include regime change.

2) Engage the Chineese. They have even more at stake than we do. They are tired of the refugees, tired of the instability, don't need amateurs playing "world of discovery" with nukes right on their doorstep, and have no illusions that the N. Koreans would turn on them in a heartbeat. The Chineese are the key. They can enforce a blockade and bring pressure to bear.

KC Jones
02-11-2005, 09:37 AM
Call in TEAM AMERICA, just make sure they have an actor with them to cover their backs.

Iowanian
02-11-2005, 09:40 AM
Suprise, suprise.........Today, 1 day after making those threats, Kim Jong Il wants Bilatteral talks with the US to bolster their world standing and give them more bargaining power before reopening negotiations.

I hope W takes heed from the Battle of the Bulge and just sends him a note that says "NUTS"

alanm
02-11-2005, 10:39 AM
If I were president, I would have the NSA or whoever controls this type of thing see to it that Kim-Jong Il was the victim of an unfortunate accident.

Come on, you can't tell me that we don't have the resources to do something like this. Make it look like a political dissident did it. Mechanical failure on his transport aircraft. Bomb placed on his limosuine perhaps. Maybe cyanide in his food or something.
All the NSA does is monitor communications throughout the world. You would be looking at the CIA in conjunction with the Navy Seals and perhaps the spooks of South Korea.

MOhillbilly
02-11-2005, 10:46 AM
put the screws to china & walmart.

Calcountry
02-11-2005, 11:23 AM
Right, as usual it's Clinton's fault. Every problem in the world today is Clinton's fault, got it.

Kindly tell me how, especially in light of your first few paragraphs (which I have not copied into the quote above), what Clinton should have done differently that would have worked? Keep in mind that I doubt the Clinton Administration purposefully negotiated the worst deal possible. Having them sign nothing wouldn't have changed much.Clinton could have NOT given N Korey money to STOP building nuclear reactors.

Do you remember the Jimmy Carter deal? Where Jimmy is running arround trying to broker a deal with them?

Calcountry
02-11-2005, 11:28 AM
If my choices are to use nukes or send in our lads and ladies to die in that $#ithole country just to get rid of Dip Dong Il, I'll go with nukes...Agreed.

Be free or die.

Calcountry
02-11-2005, 11:29 AM
Suprise, suprise.........Today, 1 day after making those threats, Kim Jong Il wants Bilatteral talks with the US to bolster their world standing and give them more bargaining power before reopening negotiations.

I hope W takes heed from the Battle of the Bulge and just sends him a note that says "NUTS"jDon't worry, after Bush crushes this Iranian thing, he will have the whole world swingin by his NUTS.

BIG_DADDY
02-11-2005, 11:37 AM
Nuke them or leave them alone for the time being. We don't need to further fragment our fronts at this point.

whoman69
02-11-2005, 06:43 PM
The problem with trying to place Cuba type economic sanctions is the guy does not care if his people starve. The only thing he will do is to scream about how we are mistreating his people. Additionally, any sort of embargo would be unenforcable due to their border with China.

BigOlChiefsfan
02-11-2005, 07:06 PM
Dear Leader keeps trying to get bilateral talks w/the US, we keep insisting that there be multilateral talks involving the other 'major players' in the region, as we have nothing to gain from bilateral meetings. Not only do we gain zip while he 'gains face' but frankly, NK nukes are also Japan and China's problem no matter how much Dear Leader pouts and shouts. They have a dawg in the fight.
Dear Leader wants to blackmail us again, thinks that we're stretched a little thin & figures he could get a few boatloads of wheat and some money to spend on daffy duck cartoons if he makes enough noise. This has worked for him before & he seems to think it'll work for him again. I think he may find a different response to the same old stimulus. I suspect we'll just keep ignoring his cranky ass, maybe suggest a time out if he can't play nice and use his indoor voice.

I feel sorry for the N. Koreans. Dear Leader has discovered that chronic starvation can be a good political move for your 3rd rate tinpot Polpot. I keep hearing reports of cannibalism & the horror stories from their gulags are about as grim as anything I've run across.

Cochise
02-11-2005, 08:03 PM
All the NSA does is monitor communications throughout the world. You would be looking at the CIA in conjunction with the Navy Seals and perhaps the spooks of South Korea.

Sorry, I have been playing too much Splinter Cell I guess. But, I'm certain that we have 'ghosts' in our employ who would be capable of something like this.

Someone like this wacko has got to have local opposition, as well, maybe who would be friendly to us. I'm sure that we could act in concert with China and others in the region to ensure that a less volatile regime came to power. A more... it pains me to say it... progressive... government, perhaps.

DenverChief
02-12-2005, 02:37 AM
If I were president, I would have the NSA or whoever controls this type of thing see to it that Kim-Jong Il was the victim of an unfortunate accident.

Come on, you can't tell me that we don't have the resources to do something like this. Make it look like a political dissident did it. Mechanical failure on his transport aircraft. Bomb placed on his limosuine perhaps. Maybe cyanide in his food or something.

We couldn't even get to Saddam that way and you think lil Kim is gonna be easy :shake:

DenverChief
02-12-2005, 02:41 AM
Cuba is an island 90 miles (or whatever) off our coast. Basically, within US shore-based fighter range, and easily blockaded by our navy.

Korea is literally as far away from the US as it gets, is not an island, and has a land connection with one of the US's biggest rivals for global dominance (military and economy) in this new century -- China.

We can only "blockade" it if China agrees. Otherwise, anything Korea wants/needs can get funneled in from China, and moved out through China.

NK also shares a sizeable border with Russia

trndobrd
02-12-2005, 05:10 AM
NK also shares a sizeable border with Russia


Area - comparative: slightly smaller than Mississippi

Land boundaries:
total: 1,673 km
border countries: China 1,416 km, South Korea 238 km, Russia 19 km


http://geography.about.com/library/cia/blcnorthkorea.htm

Boyceofsummer
02-13-2005, 01:47 AM
You “nuke-em” ****ers are just like the crazy leaders in North Korea and Pakistan! You’re so tough. Your boy in D.C. “screwed the pooch” and you can’t stand it. If London or N.Y. were hit this morning you would be making excuses and blaming people years out of the loop. You clowns better get a grip soon and face reality.

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 02:46 AM
You “nuke-em” ****ers are just like the crazy leaders in North Korea and Pakistan! You’re so tough. Your boy in D.C. “screwed the pooch” and you can’t stand it. If London or N.Y. were hit this morning you would be making excuses and blaming people years out of the loop. You clowns better get a grip soon and face reality.
That is your solution?

Wow, you really can't implement that one overnight, can you?

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 02:47 AM
We couldn't even get to Saddam that way and you think lil Kim is gonna be easy :shake:
We weren't allowed to get Saddam that way due to stupid laws made by POTUS Carter.

Amnorix
02-13-2005, 10:17 AM
where's maggie and ronnie when you need them?

No need for Ron. If we want to sell arms to N. Korea in order to finance an illegal act somewhere else, I'm sure Ollie North can explain how to do it...

Saggysack
02-13-2005, 10:57 AM
No need for Ron. If we want to sell arms to N. Korea in order to finance an illegal act somewhere else, I'm sure Ollie North can explain how to do it...

North Korea doesn't have very many, if any cocaine fields. It's out of his league.

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 11:01 AM
No need for Ron. If we want to sell arms to N. Korea in order to finance an illegal act somewhere else, I'm sure Ollie North can explain how to do it...
If only Carter had the same courage, Americans wouldn't have been illegally kidnapped in Iran for years, right?

But hey, diplomacy is cool as long as you aren't the kidnappee

Cochise
02-13-2005, 11:06 AM
We weren't allowed to get Saddam that way due to stupid laws made by POTUS Carter.

Yes, Mr. Peanut is still screwing us in some ways to this day

DenverChief
02-13-2005, 01:18 PM
We weren't allowed to get Saddam that way due to stupid laws made by POTUS Carter.

thats why before the invasion we were trying to hit him (unsucessfully) with tomahawk missiles

Ultra Peanut
02-13-2005, 01:23 PM
Lets lay it all out on the table. What do you want to do about N. KoreaI dunno.

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 01:33 PM
thats why before the invasion we were trying to hit him (unsucessfully) with tomahawk missiles
I don't think we were trying to hit any individual with a missile. If that was the byproduct - good, but it certainly wasn't the primary reason. We knew of his protection against initial missile strikes long before the first tomahawk was launched.

DenverChief
02-13-2005, 01:51 PM
I don't think we were trying to hit any individual with a missile. . THE United States president was halfway through his third meeting of the day when George Tenet delivered the crucial piece of information.

The director of the CIA told George Bush that the agency believed it knew the precise whereabouts of Saddam Hussein. Immediately, the US administration was offered the prospect of a decisive opening salvo in the war with Iraq.

It was the sort of moment which can define a presidency; to order an immediate strike or to wait?

This unexpected glimpse of the enemy presented what one US government official called "a target of opportunity" that might not reappear.

To Mr Bush and the key aides he was meeting, it would have seemed an improbable piece of news.

Saddam is known to employ numerous body doubles and he has proved an elusive target, even for a country with the most sophisticated satellite surveillance system on the planet. During the 1991 Gulf war, numerous unsuccessful attempts were made to target the Iraqi leader.

Yet according to US government sources, the CIA had pinpointed Saddam’s location to an isolated private residence in southern Baghdad and intelligence suggested he would remain ensconced there with his senior aides for several hours.

Mr Bush weighed this information up with the knowledge that the Iraqi leader is a slippery character. He may be a man of many palaces, but he avoids them at moments of greatest danger.

Analysts have described him as a quasi-refugee in his own country, moving constantly and without predictable pattern, often in and out of the homes of ordinary Iraqis.

But George Tenet’s message was clear: act now or we could lose him.

Mr Bush is said to have listened calmly while his director described the sources and limits of his information, the likelihood that it was true and the length of time Saddam could be expected to spend at the site.

The US president was acutely aware that the carefully-choreographed start to war, planned for months by the US Central Command, would have to be torn up were he to strike now, on the basis of this single piece of intelligence.

Although he had much to gain, Mr Bush was also aware he had much to lose. Striking and failing yet again at an oft-missed foe carries its own costs.

The president consulted his key aides in the Oval Office. The vice president, Dick Cheney, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, the defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and the national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, were among those gathered for a crucial meeting that had stretched on for more than three and a half hours.

Mr Bush took final counsel from his closest advisers and opted to strike. This so-called "decapitation attack" aimed to blast through the roof and walls of an anonymous Baghdad home, and deep beneath it, with the aim of toppling Saddam and the Iraqi government in a single blow.

"If you’re going to take a shot like this, you’re going to take a shot at the top guy," said a government official with knowledge of the sequence of events. "It was a fairly singular strike."


http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=340902003

DenverChief
02-13-2005, 01:54 PM
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Military action to disarm Iraq has begun, U.S. President George W. Bush has said.

The first strikes early Thursday, he said, were against "selected targets of military importance," including what Pentagon officials said was a "decapitation attack" to take out Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.


http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/19/sprj.irq.int.main/

DenverChief
02-13-2005, 01:59 PM
March 31 issue - He was the ultimate spy who came in from the cold. For months, the CIA and U.S. Special Forces had been working on the extraordinarily difficult and dangerous job of trying to penetrate Saddam Hussein’s inner circle.



According to a knowledgeable intelligence source, Delta Force, the supersecret commando group, had managed to tap Saddam’s underground phone lines in Baghdad. But the real break came when the CIA managed to recruit an asset, a senior Iraqi official in a position to know Saddam’s greatest vulnerability: where he sleeps each night.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3068662/



we see how well that worked out

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 02:14 PM
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/19/sprj.irq.int.main/
You mean AFTER we announced we were going in? That doesn't play into the conversation at all of covert operations to assassinate Hussein, does it?

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 02:15 PM
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=340902003
You just ascertained what I was saying, that an individual cannot be targeted by a large missile like the Tomahawk for a variety of reasons.

Rausch
02-13-2005, 02:24 PM
You just ascertained what I was saying, that an individual cannot be targeted by a large missile like the Tomahawk for a variety of reasons.

Shhhhhh...

A certain @$$hole in Libya doesn't know that...

KCWolfman
02-13-2005, 02:28 PM
Shhhhhh...

A certain @$$hole in Libya doesn't know that...
Isn't he still alive? Unfortunately we got his kid instead of him when we tried in the past.

Inspector
02-15-2005, 09:33 PM
We should go all out.

Capture all of them and make them endure women prison guards fondling them and rubbing their boobs on 'em.

That'll show 'em!