|
That damned Clinton
|
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote:
Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Do you think Kim, JI would have allowed that? If so, then he's surely not one to do things because he gets a 'charitable feeling'. Tens of billions in war debt? From where? Hell, we'll have *trillions* of 'vote buying' debt very soon. Personally, I'd rather spend a couple billion taking away the nuclear option from Kim, JI. But I can also understand that you may hold with the liberal philosophy that the bad guys aren't really bad. -- John H |
That damned Clinton
Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. |
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote:
Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. OK, maybe you're right. Here goes... "Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.? How's that? -- John H |
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:42:55 -0400, Little John
wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. OK, maybe you're right. Here goes... "Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.? How's that? Oh, I guess I could have said Pelosi's a cute little thing. But being called the reverse of Harry is quite an honor. Thank you. -- John H |
That damned Clinton
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. |
That damned Clinton
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. |
That damned Clinton
|
That damned Clinton
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. That's what people find so dis-likable about you. |
That damned Clinton
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. That's what people find so dis-likable about you. And I thought it was because my feet smelled. |
That damned Clinton
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. That's what people find so dis-likable about you. And I thought it was because my feet smelled. Ask Karen about that. |
That damned Clinton
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. Well then Krausie, I guess that makes you a capital t Turd capital b Blossom of the highest magnitude. I'll bet you don't talk like this down at the union hall. The boys would lay you out cold. Id also bet that if they knew you were a pussy draft dodger, they'd lay you out for that too. |
That damned Clinton
it's me, Jim wrote:
H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. Well then Krausie, I guess that makes you a capital t Turd capital b Blossom of the highest magnitude. I'll bet you don't talk like this down at the union hall. The boys would lay you out cold. Id also bet that if they knew you were a pussy draft dodger, they'd lay you out for that too. Harry has a crinkled up 40 odd year old note from the draft board saying that he has flat feet. |
That damned Clinton
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. That's what people find so dis-likable about you. And I thought it was because my feet smelled. No, dear Harold, it's the whole package that stinks. |
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:55:00 -0700, jps wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being worshipped department. This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to get a former president to come to NK. If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department and official channels. I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine. The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear leader. That was payment enough. That's what the right wing talk show guys were saying. That is the minimum payment he got. -- John H |
That damned Clinton
BAR wrote:
it's me, Jim wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. Well then Krausie, I guess that makes you a capital t Turd capital b Blossom of the highest magnitude. I'll bet you don't talk like this down at the union hall. The boys would lay you out cold. Id also bet that if they knew you were a pussy draft dodger, they'd lay you out for that too. Harry has a crinkled up 40 odd year old note from the draft board saying that he has flat feet. Nope. I went from II-S to 1-A, but I was never got the letter telling me to report for a pre-induction physical. What's your point? It's not as if you ever saw enemy fire. Big brave "stateside" marine...big whoop. |
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:15:53 -0400, Little John
wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:55:00 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being worshipped department. This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to get a former president to come to NK. If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department and official channels. I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine. The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear leader. That was payment enough. That's what the right wing talk show guys were saying. That is the minimum payment he got. Jesus ****in' Christ, don't tell me we agree on something. |
That damned Clinton
|
That damned Clinton
jps wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:15:53 -0400, Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:55:00 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being worshipped department. This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to get a former president to come to NK. If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department and official channels. I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine. The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear leader. That was payment enough. That's what the right wing talk show guys were saying. That is the minimum payment he got. Jesus ****in' Christ, don't tell me we agree on something. Note that the herringoid actually admits he listens to reich-wing talk shows. |
That damned Clinton
On Aug 5, 1:23*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 12:52:27 -0400, H the K wrote: The 737 was "donated" for the mission. I bet the plane came from the CIA. Who else has a 737 with absolutely no writing on it beyond a registration number (that may be bogus)? I don't know. maybe John Travolta? |
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 21:24:26 -0400, H the K
wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Also, as his term was ending, Clinton was involved in ways to improve relations between the U.S. and North Korea. The idiot who succeeded Clinton thought *that* was a bad idea, and now, eight years later, the North Koreans have nuclear bombs. Yet another legacy of Bush the Idiot. Careful Harry. Now that Obama has been in office for six months, you can't blame Bush for anything over the past 8+ years. It's all Obama's fault now. Just like it was Clinton's fault when the economy tanked after Bush took office. Huh? |
That damned Clinton
On Aug 5, 8:24*pm, H the K wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Maybe Bubba is the only friend he's got? |
That damned Clinton
jps wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 21:24:26 -0400, H the K wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Also, as his term was ending, Clinton was involved in ways to improve relations between the U.S. and North Korea. The idiot who succeeded Clinton thought *that* was a bad idea, and now, eight years later, the North Koreans have nuclear bombs. Yet another legacy of Bush the Idiot. Careful Harry. Now that Obama has been in office for six months, you can't blame Bush for anything over the past 8+ years. It's all Obama's fault now. Just like it was Clinton's fault when the economy tanked after Bush took office. Huh? It's like they want to forget the idiot who served after clinton and before obama. Can't blame 'em for that, eh? |
That damned Clinton
Tim wrote:
On Aug 5, 8:24 pm, H the K wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Maybe Bubba is the only friend he's got? What about Jesus? When's he's about ready to die, Kim Jong-il may discover Jesus and therefore be admitted through the pearly gates, right? |
That damned Clinton
On Aug 5, 8:35*pm, H the K wrote:
Tim wrote: On Aug 5, 8:24 pm, H the K wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Maybe Bubba is the only friend he's got? What about Jesus? When's he's about ready to die, Kim Jong-il may discover Jesus and therefore be admitted through the pearly gates, right? 1 John 1:9 Harry, I'm not about to put limits on Gods grace. |
That damned Clinton
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 19:55:41 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote: On Aug 5, 8:35*pm, H the K wrote: Tim wrote: On Aug 5, 8:24 pm, H the K wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Maybe Bubba is the only friend he's got? What about Jesus? When's he's about ready to die, Kim Jong-il may discover Jesus and therefore be admitted through the pearly gates, right? 1 John 1:9 Harry, I'm not about to put limits on Gods grace. You've assumed he has grace, why not estimate its boundaries? |
That damned Clinton
|
That damned Clinton
On Aug 6, 2:44*am, jps wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 19:55:41 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: On Aug 5, 8:35*pm, H the K wrote: Tim wrote: On Aug 5, 8:24 pm, H the K wrote: wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:43:42 -0400, NotNow wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. And what do you think would have happened if there was a (R) in office? If Nixon had won in 1960 there wouldn't be any Soviets in Cuba because we would have supported the Bay of Pigs the way we promised the Cuban nationalists we would. Castro would be a footnote in history and they would speak english in Miami. Kim asked specifically for Clinton. Clinton had the fortitude and compassion to help DESPITE what he knew the naysayers would say about him. What has come out here in rec.boats is foolish even on a Harry scale of political one-sidedness. I imagine they asked for Bill Clinton because Hillary wouldn't go. It does give Kim a level of satisfaction with plausible deniability from the US government. Actually not a bad move in retrospect as long as we don't care what Kim says about it.. Do you boys *ever*' do more than guess? When Kim Il-sung died in 1994, President Clinton sent a note of condolence to his son, Kim Jong-il, the current dictator, who remembered Clinton's thoughtfulness 15 years ago, and wanted to repay that act of "kindness." Maybe Bubba is the only friend he's got? What about Jesus? When's he's about ready to die, Kim Jong-il may discover Jesus and therefore be admitted through the pearly gates, right? 1 John 1:9 Harry, I'm not about to put limits on Gods grace. You've assumed he has grace, why not estimate its boundaries? Not necessrily. However, I believe you assume He doesn't and is limited. |
That damned Clinton
|
That damned Clinton
Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. OK, maybe you're right. Here goes... "Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.? How's that? -- John H I rest my case, antiHarry. |
That damned Clinton
Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:42:55 -0400, Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. OK, maybe you're right. Here goes... "Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.? How's that? Oh, I guess I could have said Pelosi's a cute little thing. But being called the reverse of Harry is quite an honor. Thank you. -- John H If you think so. |
That damned Clinton
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. That's what people find so dis-likable about you. Amazing that someone who's done NOTHING for his country, let's others keep his fat nasty ass safe and cozy comes up with **** like that. It seems there are very few here that are truly open minded and middle of the road. Some can say nothing good about anybody or anything with a hint of conservative in it, and some can say nothing about anybody or anyone with a hint of liberal in it. |
That damned Clinton
it's me, Jim wrote:
H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. Well then Krausie, I guess that makes you a capital t Turd capital b Blossom of the highest magnitude. I'll bet you don't talk like this down at the union hall. The boys would lay you out cold. Id also bet that if they knew you were a pussy draft dodger, they'd lay you out for that too. Hmmmm, perhaps we should let his union buddies know? |
That damned Clinton
Little John wrote:
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:55:00 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being worshipped department. This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to get a former president to come to NK. If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department and official channels. I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine. The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear leader. That was payment enough. That's what the right wing talk show guys were saying. That is the minimum payment he got. -- John H John, did you happen to catch the home coming of the reporters? Maybe you should try to tell them it was all a staged event to make Obama look better, and that you think Clinton should not have gone there to get them even though Kim asked that he do so to gain their release. |
That damned Clinton
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:37:49 -0400, NotNow wrote:
BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: H the K wrote: BAR wrote: NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Clinton was used. Clinton got the young ladies out of North Korea. That's what matters. Where was your president, you know...Dubya...drunk? What did Obama do to get them out? Absolutely nothing! How would you know that? Enlighten me. Enlightening you would be a Sisyphean task. Your grasp of politics as played, yes played, on the world stage is staggeringly light. This from a dummy who joined the marines instead of going to college? It sucks when a guy you believe is dumber than you actually knows more about the world than you do, isn't it Harry? And it is Marines with a capital M. A. If you are referring to yourself, I've not seen anything to substantiate your claim. ' B. Sorry, but "capital M" doesn't pass my who gives a **** test. It is marines. That's what people find so dis-likable about you. Amazing that someone who's done NOTHING for his country, let's others keep his fat nasty ass safe and cozy comes up with **** like that. It seems there are very few here that are truly open minded and middle of the road. Some can say nothing good about anybody or anything with a hint of conservative in it, and some can say nothing about anybody or anyone with a hint of liberal in it. Not true at all. I give a lot of credit to the Blue Dog Democrats who had the integrity and balls to stand up to Pelosi. They are willing to acknowledge there were some big problems with the health care bill, even though they were well hidden. There are actually a few Democrats who have the future of our country as a priority. They're not quite ready for a socialistic state. -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. |
That damned Clinton
NotNow wrote:
Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. OK, maybe you're right. Here goes... "Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.? How's that? -- John H I rest my case, antiHarry. John is anti bull****. It doesn't matter who serves it up. I don't think John or anyone else cares weather or not Harry lives or dies. When Harry ceases his ranting, some other bozo will take his place. The bull**** will continue. |
That damned Clinton
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:41:44 -0400, NotNow wrote:
Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:55:00 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being worshipped department. This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to get a former president to come to NK. If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department and official channels. I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine. The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear leader. That was payment enough. That's what the right wing talk show guys were saying. That is the minimum payment he got. -- John H John, did you happen to catch the home coming of the reporters? Maybe you should try to tell them it was all a staged event to make Obama look better, and that you think Clinton should not have gone there to get them even though Kim asked that he do so to gain their release. Now that you mention it, the news this morning presented the fact that telephone negotiations about who, what, when, where, have been underway for some time. Was it a staged event? It sure as hell wasn't a 'spur of the moment' thing! -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. |
That damned Clinton
it's me, Jim wrote:
NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:33:34 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:46:49 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:51:54 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:56:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 16:06:58 -0400, NotNow wrote: That no good dirty, nasty liberal ******* went to North Korea, and used that damned namby-pamby liberal bull**** called diplomacy and got those journalists released. Of course, we don't know (yet) what we gave them. Forgiveness for developing nukes? Missile development details? Promises for reduced penalties? Or do you think it was just 'personality'? Remember, diplomacy is a two-way street. -- John H The White House is saying Clinton went on his own. I didn't know he had the authority to do any of the above. But, I do notice that without one shred of evidence or even hearsay, you've swept it under the carpet as a bad thing. I said no such thing. My, you are good at attempting to put words in the mouths of others. Do you believe that diplomacy is a one way street? Do you really believe Kim did thissimply as a reflection of North Korea's "humanitarian and peaceloving policy"? -- John H Okay, so I was wrong. You like the fact that Clinton is a humanitarian on a humanitarian mission and you like the fact that he was, indeed great enough to get the reporters released. Yes, you were wrong. Are you changing your line from 'diplomacy' to 'humanitarian mission'? Do you honestly believe Kim, Jong Il will get nothing out of this but 'charitable feelings'? -- John H I don't know John, perhaps we should have left those asshole sissy journalists to die at the hands of Kim? Or would you suggest 10's of billions in war debt? I don't know either. But why make all the negative comments because the questions are asked. Why would you suggest the journalists be left to die? Because Clinton did what he could do to get them released. And in narrow mindedness, some here just can't except that because Oh, my God he's a liberal........ I have never, ever heard you utter one statement here about any liberal that wasn't negative. It's the reverse of Harry. OK, maybe you're right. Here goes... "Obama can spend money faster than anyone I've ever heard of.? How's that? -- John H I rest my case, antiHarry. John is anti bull****. It doesn't matter who serves it up. I don't think John or anyone else cares weather or not Harry lives or dies. When Harry ceases his ranting, some other bozo will take his place. The bull**** will continue. Not true at all. I have never heard him make an anti-conservative statement about anything. |
That damned Clinton
Another John wrote:
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:41:44 -0400, NotNow wrote: Little John wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:55:00 -0700, jps wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:41:31 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:00:54 -0700, jps wrote: We are not really sure what was in the bag, we just know who the bag man was. I imagine we gave them a fat foreign aid package. The lesson reaffirmed was, take hostages or threaten us and the US will pay up. That has been true at least since the Kennedy administration when JFK gave Kruschev everything he wanted to get the missiles out of Cuba, in spite of a lot of gothic theater and saber rattling. We gave them a photo op. KJI made it into a state visit to bolster his own image within the country. He's trying to manipulate handing power to his son and he's not doing as well as he'd like in the being worshipped department. This was purely KJI proving that he had the stones and the leverage to get a former president to come to NK. If we gave them anything, it'd have come through the State Department and official channels. I am sure the concessions did come through the State Department. The former president does speak to the SoS occasionally ... I imagine. The deal was that Clinton's appearance would reflect well on dear leader. That was payment enough. That's what the right wing talk show guys were saying. That is the minimum payment he got. -- John H John, did you happen to catch the home coming of the reporters? Maybe you should try to tell them it was all a staged event to make Obama look better, and that you think Clinton should not have gone there to get them even though Kim asked that he do so to gain their release. Now that you mention it, the news this morning presented the fact that telephone negotiations about who, what, when, where, have been underway for some time. Was it a staged event? It sure as hell wasn't a 'spur of the moment' thing! -- John H All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking. Go tell the reporters and their families and children that they should go back and turn themselves back to Kim to begin their 15 years of hard labor because you think the only reason the admin. did it was to look good. Now, I'm sure that if it were a republican that did this exact same thing, in your eyes that would have been the greatest humanitarian effort ever. Hell, you totally agreed with Bush about Iraq. A war that was several years long, thousands of innocent people killed, loss of U.S. military servicemen, because of humanitarian reasons. A liberal goes and has talks with someone, get's two U.S. reporters freed and it's all bull**** to you. Pure reverse Harry. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:00 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com