Get Jimmah On The Phone

You know what this means don't you?

Yeah, another Nobel Peace Prize for Jimmah.

As Ace of Spades points out, the official press release from the White House 'acknowledges that N. Korea has violated UN Security Resolution 1718' and then, asks N. Korea to abide by such Resolutions and avoid 'further provocative action'.

And, as a commenter says, Obama used harsher language to condemn the past administration's 'treatment of Europe'.

What will happen? N. Korea will, as will Iran, achieve its missiles and its nuclear arms, while Obama, who, in foreign affairs, deals only in rhetoric, proclaims his agenda of a 'nuclear arms free world' and a 'reliance on the UN'. That is, Obama is essentially removing the US from foreign affairs, and as he does with all policies, delegating it. To whom? To the UN.

Meanwhile, back at home, Obama, run by a socialist Gang, tightens that authoritarian control over Americans, restricting their independence of thought and action.

Yes. But did they use "green" fuel to power the missle? Maybe if they didn't,the Useless Nations can send them some bucks to improve their fuels??

The Norks are the sock puppets, unable to feed their own populace with out China's aid.

The Chicoms are the real global threat.

The US is in dire need of a Reagan for leader, not an narcissist empty suit.

Oh no, not the strongly worded letter!

Are the objections "sternly" worded or "strongly" worded?
Are western leaders "highly concerned", "very concerned" or merely "concerned"?
A Monty Python sketch springs to mind!

Maybe we have the zip code wrong, maybe they never get the " strongly worded letters". How else could you explain their total ignoring of the other " strongly worded letters" LOL

Good news out of N. Korea: Kim is sick, possibly very sick. They acknowledge at least one stroke, he didn't speak at 60th anniversary celebrations, he'll be dead in 10 years, max. From what I understand the dynasty will not continue, there is no heir apparent and the military is not interested in another Kim. Koreans are among the smartest and most productive people on the planet, if they ever unite they'll do well.

Bonus: official website of the N. Korean news agency, this is gold:

www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm

Sample:

" Joint Air Attack Exercises Staged in S. Korea
Pyongyang, April 2 (KCNA)
-- The U.S. imperialists and the south Korean puppet warmongers conducted a large-scale joint air attack rehearsal in the area of Mungyong, North Kyongsang Province on March 31, according to Yonhap News of south Korea.

Involved in the rehearsal were over 30 helicopters of various types, including Apaches of a special brigade under the 2nd operation command of the puppet army, the 21st wing of the puppet forces and the U.S. 2nd air combat brigade stationed in south Korea.

The warmongers got hell-bent on the frantic war rehearsal for making surprise air strike on someone's vantage position and dropping a special unit to occupy it.

The puppet warmongers prattled that this joint war rehearsal marked an occasion for increasing the capability of a joint operation of ground and air-support units.

The U.S. imperialists and the Lee Myung Bak puppet bellicose forces, preoccupied by a wild ambition to stifle the DPRK at any cost, are rendering the situation extremely strained by staging another anti-DPRK war exercises before the disappearance of powder smoke by the Key Resolve and Foal Eagle joint military exercises."

AND:

"PA General Staff Warns against Any Interception of Satellite
Pyongyang, April 2 (KCNA) -- The General Staff of the Korean People's Army in an important report on Thursday warned that if hostile forces take any slight move to intercept the DPRK's satellite for peaceful purposes, the KPA will make a prompt just retaliatory strike at it.

The report said:

It is the Japanese reactionaries, the sworn enemy of the Korean people, who are perpetrating the most evil doings over the DPRK's projected satellite launch for peaceful purposes.

The relevant countries are now taking necessary measures after accepting the working steps taken by the DPRK in line with the international regulations and usage.

However, only Japan is making much ado as if something serious had happened, finding fault with even the DPRK's above-said advance notice and terming the launch of "Kwangmyongsong-2," the DPRK's experimental communications satellite for peaceful purposes, a "hostile act."

Kongo and Choukai, guided-missile destroyers of the Japanese aggressor forces and the destroyer Great King Sejong of the south Korean puppet navy have already been deployed in the East Sea of Korea.

The Japanese reactionaries, bereft of elementary reason, declared it as a state policy to "intercept" the satellite if the DPRK launches it."

Notice the vapid empty response of Obama:

"Now is the time for a strong international response and North Korea must know that the path to security and respect will never come through threats and illegal weapons".

Nonsense. The path to security and respect doesn't come through community activist 'dialogic' hand-holding sessions.

Obama delegates all actions to others. Again, his foreign policy delegates all actions to the UN while his internal policy delegates all actions to the BackRoom Gang of the Democratic Party. His role? He is The Performer.

He zips from city to city, from carefully orchestrated Town Hall to Public Speech. Using his teleprompter or using carefully pre-selected audience 'questioners', he performs his empty emotional rhetoric of 'we're all the same; we're all equal'...and I'm the Boss.

Notice how he treats everyone - and that includes the N. Koreans. As children, as adolescents, while he is a member of the Guardian Elite Class, and will chide them, gently, and tell them how to behave.

What will happen? Certainly the UN won't move into the gap that is emerging because Obama is removing the USA from the world stage. Other countries are salivating at this gap he is creating. Russia, China, Iran. Their increase in power will be Obama's legacy.

Everyone, including that goofy-looking dork who runs the Nork anthill, knew Obama was bluffing. His bluff has just been called. Look for more despots of the dork's mind-set to challenge The One. What's that sound? Nothing really -- just an echo from Plains, Georgia.

I know . . . the UN can call for a ban on food exports from North Korea . . . that'll teach 'em ya can't mess with the civilized world and not face the consequences.

But Owe promised that the US would no longer act arrogantly, therefore he must send Kimmy a letter of congratulations.

Send in the Clowns.

was the launch at 3am Washington time.

was the teleprompter president able to take the call or was it delegated and organized over to Hill and Billy Clinton?

"Cardinal Fang! Poke her with the soft cushion!"

"It doesn't seem to be working, Lord"

"Have you got all the stuffing up one end?"

"Yes Lord"

"She must be made of sterner stuff..."

I got distracted by Michelle Obama's outfits on this junket. Never wore the same thing twice. Now, I am no fashion expert, but they don't look like JC Penney outfits. I hope the American people aren't paying for her styling.

You know that they did to Palin!! By contrast, Obama wears the same suit everyday. I wonder if Hillary would wear the same pantsuit every day.... I wonder.

Now, what was this post about. Oh yeah, the United States leading the world by disarming itself first... Great idea. The US scares me more than N.K., if only because they are closer to Canada...

If you want to have some "fun", go look at what all the Useful Idiots are saying at CBC.ca.

Perhaps the classic was this:

"I grew up during the cold war, jumping under the desks at the tone of a siren, I remember being afraid the Russians were coming, the Iron Curtain falls and it turns out it was all a bluff, their weapons were inferior we over estimated their nuclear capabilities by about 10x and it turns out Russians are nice folks, and they don't stew all day trying to think of ways to kill us. I am tired of worrying about war it's all posturing for power and most of it is just talk. With technology coming along the way it is in 20 years a high school science teacher will have the tools at hand to build a nuke. Life is too short to worry about all this crap. I'm at a far greater risk of being in a fatal car accident than a nuclear blast, and I don't hesitate to drive."

This must end badly....

Nature abhors a vacuum.....

Just heard a talking head on CNN state twice that this was a boost for 0bozo, because it helped illustrate his point about nuclear weapons. It's all good!!!
Wow, maybe he can arrange for iran to fire one off the next time he wants to make a point.

Let's see. Jimmy Carter expressed his disappointment when the Russians destroyed the civil society in Afghanistan. He was shocked and saddened. Meanwhile, Afghanistan is turned into a failed state, crushed under the Soviet boot. We pay the price for Jimmy's weakness in 2001.

To heck with the strongly worded letter.Time to up the ante.

Give the dirty look. If they see ya go for the hands on the hips and the full scaramouche.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/04/05/obama-nuclear.html

an smiling children stand by rivers of flowing chocolate, everyone has a unicorn and ride bikes faster than light. where Obama pays my mortgage and for gas in my car.

Now all of Obuma's ass air sole mates will really be screaming lets do something, including the O ring himself. What will be done? Nothing, absolutely nothing, but a lot of hot air will be expended in the good old fashioned liberal spirit, look good, be seen to look good sound good and do nothing, absolutely nothing.

Or, will the issue will be dropped like a now I really have to do something hot potato and not a peep will be heard from press or politician?

Obama had harsher words for America when he was in Europe.

Obama is a Chamberlain in the making. He & Clinton already sold out Ukraine & Georgia with respect to NATO membership for "Russian friendship". France sold them out for Gas and Germany's Merkle (who was a communist youth member in East Germany) no doubt sold out for gas supply. Appeasement does not work.

Ms. Clinton already sold out human rights in China for buying of US debt/bonds.

What will Obama sell out to get a smile from Dear Leader.

I suspect the seeds for WW3 are being planted as we speak.

Robert W. points to a CBC commenter; "I'm at a far greater risk of being in a fatal car accident than a nuclear blast, and I don't hesitate to drive."
Yes, Twit, you are, and that's thanks to a LOT of Service folks who spent the last 60 years standing between you and your latte, and the Soviet and Chinese war machine(s).
I keep on saying it; aggression is the human species' default state of mind. Peace is an aberration.

Did they remember to Capitalize AND underline?????

I don't understand the point of this thread. North Korea has been testing rockets for years. Why is this one a big deal (minus the fact that Obama is in office)?

To put it mildly, what would Bush/Clinton/Bush Sr/Reagan do? Not much. At all. Another round of sanctions? Those things don't work too well. Like all sanctions, the most poor and most vulnerable are the first to be sacrificed. Saddam survived it all.

Reagan? What would he do? Outspend North Korea? Wouldn't work - the North Koreans are not competing with the US on the same scale as the USSR.

War? Now we're talking. Heres the problem with declaring war on North Korea. Their main deterrent is not their nuclear weapons. Their main deterrent is the 10,000 or so artillery pieces hidden away in moutains - all of which are aimed at, and within range of, Seoul. A three-minute orchestrated barage would devastate Seoul more comprehensively than a nuclear weapon. This nuclear weapon show and tell on the side is a pretty pointless gimmick. One day they will be able to hit the US. Over time, technology improves. They have the basics to produce these missiles. Its really only a matter of time - technological inevitablity.

The only real option is to go in with force. Neither Japan nor South Korea will allow it because they will bear the brunt of the artillery pieces and the short range missiles that North Korea has already mastered. Both these countries are hostages of North Korea. Can America go it alone? Probably.

At the cost of two of its allies? Unlikely. Japan and South Korea are too important in the grand scheme of things. They are necessary for the containment of the real threat - China. North Korea is, after all, a client state of China.

I won't go so far as to conclude that this test was done with China's consent. Nor would I dismiss it. They get to test a new President.

Now what? Go after China? The US may be able to militarily overwhelm China, but at what cost to its own economy? I suspect it may be too high.

This North Korea thing is going to plague many many US Presidents for some time to come. Its been around for 60 years and its going to continue apace. They get missiles. America gets missile defence. Nothing really changes.

Oh, and for ET's sake - North Korea tested the missile because Obama is a narcissist. Makes perfect sense. If McCain/Bush had been in power, this test would not have happened.

Obama on, so he gets to try his approach AND he gets to wear the response and effects.

Not saying don't criticize but events will either make him look like a hero or a chump. The irony is that Korea was the one place the Bush Admin was acting multilaterally and not threatening military action. Obama's approach is not much different, but if he fails he ends up discrediting the whole approach.

I figured they were going to fire the missle, what did they have to lose? Worst case the US or Japan would have fired patriot's at the missle.

If they missed the NK's end up big winners and if they hit it, so what...NK gets to say the US is a warmonger and shot down a sattelite.

Can the COIC (Community Organizer In Chief) get the other players in the region to play ball without th US paying everybody off....the Europeans praised Obama and gave him nothing, so why should the Asians be any different.

To be fair we will see if Obama is just setting up a "we tried, you didnt respond" excuse to use the military.

Bottom line, for good or ill he won, he gets the laurel leaves if his approach works and wears it if it fails. Less than 2 years to the mid terms.

The next Obama - Jay Leno interview

So does this mean Nork is officially on probation?

We need to get Bill Clinton back so he can help his wife deal with this. After all, he fixed them last time he was in office... or did he?

Now, if Billy is acting as an advisor to Ohno, then Mongolia had better defend it's aspirin factories.

NK can expect to get what Iran got for thumbing its boogery nose at the world. Its ass kissed.

Vitruvius, the violins, please...

Sylvain: I agree with you: this test would have happened on Bush's (and Clinton's) watch too. I'm not sure about McCain, though. Obama needs to show a break with past practice (whether it's real or not is another matter), whereas that would have been less of an issue for McCain. McCain has a more realistic attitude towards international relations.

Anyway, you're talking about what should be done now that the test has taken place. But it shouldn't have come to this. The US should have taken care of (destroyed) the missile before its launch or (not as good) shortly after the launch. There was zero chance that Obama would do this (as Robert Gates acknowledged a few days ago).

The talk now is that the "international community" will handle this crisis. In my opinion, the belief that there is such a thing as an international "community" lies behind past failures to deal with the problem that Obama woke up to this morning. Simply, there is no international community. That phrase implies agreement, cooperation, common purpose and goals. The world isn't like that and never was because human nature is unchanged for thousands of years and won't change (read Homer and Thucydides).

So the assumption that the international "community" will deal with the problem is firm proof, right from the start, that there will be no success in solving the crisis.

Of course, that's not to say that it can't be solved, only that this predisposition ensures failure. Politicians will sometimes talk in public about the importance of the international community and then reserve the right to do -- "unilaterally" -- what is needed.

I don't see Obama possessing that level of realism, but hey -- who knows? The ability to be unpredictable -- and keep your friends and enemies off-balance -- can be a very powerful weapon.

Re Ian @ 2:16

No, NK is on DOUBLE SECRET probation!

MJ - I agree with you in part. I don't think that McCain would have allowed the test; but I don't think that Bush would have allowed it either. Clinton - yes.

What I think this shows, however, is that Obama has handed over all responsibility for international affairs to that 'international body', in particular, the UN.

Notice how rapidly he has moved on this; he's removed the US from Iraq, he's removed the reality of the war on terror, changing terrorist acts to 'man-caused disasters' which removes all intentionality from such disasters.

He's in Afghanistan only because it's a NATO project but he failed in his attempt to hand it over to NATO this past week; the international community refused to pick up that action.

He is removing the US from the international scene completely, just as he is removing the individual from the scene in the economy in the US.

Again, since there is no international consensus, this gap left by Obama's removal of the US will be filled by - China, Russia and Iran.

The test is, among many things, a calculated insult to the US President. It has shown his nature clearly - talk without substance.

"And, as a commenter says, Obama used harsher language to condemn the past administration's 'treatment of Europe'."

Obama used harsher language on Rick Waggoner, fer cryin' out loud.

Note the results so far of Obama's 'foreign policy'.

He has managed to insult the leaders of key nations in the world, including Brown of the UK, Sarkozy of France, as well as Havel of the Czech Republic.

He has rejected the war on terror as a reality, redefining such actions to unintentional 'man-caused disasters'.

He has withdrawn the US from Iraq.

He has failed to hand over Afghanistan to NATO, for the NATO community refused to step up its military activities in Afghanistan, leaving US troops there..but for how long?

His response to the N. Korean 'test of the USA' has, so far, been to hand all reaction over to the UN. And, to suggest to N. Korea that if they want to be 'members of the gang' then, they have to 'be nice'. But what if N. Korea isn't interested in such school gangs?

Will he be able to persuade China to take a key role in dealing with N. Korea? No?

Then if that is the case, Iran knows it can do what it wants.

MJ,

There was no way to avert this test. It would have taken place even if McCain was in power. America can, militarily speaking, carry out a precision attack on the launch pad quite comfortably. The problem lies in the message it is sending both to North Korea (where it is akin to a declaration of war), and two important allies in Japan and South Korea, who are being told that the America doesnt care about their concerns- a terrible message to send two of your most important allies in the context of containing an increasingly expansion-oriented China. McCain would be realistic enough to understand that. There is no easy answer.

Taking it down after the launch would have achieved precious little, beyond brownie points. A launch of this kind is an intelligence gathering exercise for countries like Japan and the US as well as North Korea. It gives all observing nations an idea of where North Korea stands, and how its missiles behave. There are many valid reasons for not intercepting the missile either- especially because this one is relatively new.

A satellite launch is technologically less advanced than a intercontinental missile launch. Consider the case of India, which is one of only a handful of nations that can launch the geo-stationary satellite launch vehicle (succeeded about half a decade ago), but which has still not mastered the art of the intercontinental missile.

Obama may not be a realist, but eight years of Republican rule in Washington means that more than a handful of policy-makers are realist. Obama does not have carte-blanche to do as he wishes. Wiser heads will prevail in the event that he decides to, for lack of a better phrase, hug/hump a tree.

The statements he is making is just about going through the motions. There is not much else he can do. There is not much else anybody can do. We can try to persuade the Chinese to help us, but the hermit kingdom is too erratic, and they don't want to alienate their 'allies'. Part of the international community gambit is to put pressure on China too - to force them to play their hand to whatever degree possible. If only to maintain there prestige in light of a percieved international consensus. On the bright side, everyone is kind of scared of North Korea. Dear Leader can't count on the support of the morons who support Mugabe, Saddam et al.

Long, long ago, Douglas MacArthur

ET: "I don't think that McCain would have allowed the test; but I don't think that Bush would have allowed it either. Clinton - yes."

Didn't NK attempt a launch two or three years ago, but fail in that attempt? If my memory is correct, then it would seem that Bush allowed that launch, at any rate, to take place. I believe that Bush would have allowed this one too, but that's something we'll never know.

What's your basis, ET, for claiming that Obama has removed the US from Iraq. I don't believe that a single (net) troop has been removed since Jan. 20; and if we look at the terms of his scheduled withdrawal, it leaves open the possibility (as some conservatives pointed out at the time) for a continued presence well past the announced date -- even the possibility for combat operations. On Iraq-Obama, I think the jury is still out.

ET

"He has managed to insult the leaders of key nations in the world, including Brown of the UK, Sarkozy of France, as well as Havel of the Czech Republic."

Really. Sarkozy was gushing with praise over Obama having helped him at the G20, though I assume you refer to the disagreement over Turkey. Brown even hugged the guy - all a bit wierd for someone who has been insulted.

Interesting. You list the war on terror separate to the war in Iraq. I would presume the war on terror involves Afghanistan, where he is keen to send in more troops. I dont understand that particular criticism.

Withdrawing the US from Iraq was part of his electoral mandate. They voted him in in spite of it. The American voters would appear to want the US out from Iraq. Its hardly a unilateral Obama move - the entire population had a chance to vote on it.

As for North Korea - I would like to know your opinion on what any other (presumably non-narcissistic) leader would do in his position? Honest question.

"Will he be able to persuade China to take a key role in dealing with N. Korea? No?"

The Chinese know North Korea can be the wedge between the US and its allies in South Korea nad Japan. They are not going to pressure North Korea unless the whole world pressures them on it and even then questions remain.

I know its convenient to criticise Obama and his response given the general antipathy to him over here, but I think we ought to judge him relative to what other leaders might have done in his place, and frankly his response has been weak in terms of rhetoric, but I doubt anybody in his place would have engaged in any activities of real consequence. Perhaps you will be so kind as to explain to me what another might have done in his position.

MJ - yes, in 2006, N. Korea fired one long range and five short range missiles. All failed within minutes. After this, the UN came in the picture, with its Resolution 1718 in 2006 forbidding (if the UN can be said to have such authority) any further ballistic tests.

With this resolution now in place, my point is that Bush/Obama/Clinton/whoever would have international agreement against allowing a violation of that UN Resolution. Would Bush have stopped the launch? As you say, such an answer is pure speculation.

As for Obama's leaving Iraq, I refer to his speech in February declaring that all combat forces will leave by August 2010 and all troops by December 2011. This, by the way, confirms Bush's similar agreement, but Bush was doing it, I suggest, as part of his overall strategy of empowering Iraq. Obama rejected the Iraq War in the first place and rejected the 2007 sruge. His focus is - on leaving.

As for Afghanistan, I maintain that his intention and his pre-European rhetoric was to get NATO and others to take over; he has failed to accomplish this...and it will be interesting to see what he does in the next months to achieve his goal of removing the US from the scene.

ET

Didnt see your earlier post but thats besides the point. Bush didn't stop North Korea from starting up its Nuclear power plant - the one that produces the material for its nuclear arsenal. Do you really expect me to believe that they wouldn't try to test a missile in the same period (which, as MJ points out, they did)?

Again, I see your ideology has overtaken your objectivity. No North Korean would dare carry out such tests if a Republican had been in power. Sure. You're beginning to sound like Denny Crane - some bright insights here and there tempered by statements that are almost absurd.

"Again, since there is no international consensus, this gap left by Obama's removal of the US will be filled by - China, Russia and Iran."

You forgot Europe, India, South Africa, Japan, Australia, and Brazil. Welcome ot the multipolar world. Plenty of bad guys. But plenty of good guys to balance them off.

Despite waht Obama says, and its a mistake for him to say it, there is no difference in approach to Nork between Clinton, Bush and Obama. It is a multilateral carrot and stick approach.

The only difference is that we are further down the road and the players might be getting tired of the Nork's antics. At some point the buzzer goes and someone, likely the US but possibly China decides enough is enough.

The question is wll it happen before the Nork's are crazy enough to let a wild weasal missle fly as a final act of defiance, ah and let the plans and a bomb got to Al Queda, for the heck of it.

The Chinese don want these guys to have ICBM's either, because that gives the Japanese and the SOuth Koreans an excuse to have one. But the also dont want 8 million north koreans flooding over their border looking for food.

stephen - my point is that Obama is deliberately withdrawing the US from its former role as key nation in the world - both economically and with regard to setting foreign policy.

Therefore, with regard to N. Korea, his intention will be to have the UN and China confront it.
As you say, China is extremely vulnerable to N. Korea because of a prospective refugee situation at the border, but S. Korea and Japan are far more vulnerable to N. Korea's military.

My point is that Obama is moving the US into an isolationist stance that is comparable to pre WWI and II. This may, at first glance, seem of little consequence but with the rise of nuclear powers, intercontinental missiles and the imperialistic desires of Russia, China and Iran, this post war isolationist agenda may have a very different and unwelcome result.

As for his economic mode of socialism - that is totally alien to the origins and industrial success of the US.

Therefore, both in foreign policy and economic policy, I consider that Obama is deeply harming the prosperity and capacities for peace, of the USA.

Given the fun new information we have that Bary isn't letting the banks pay back their TARP money, another possibility arises.

He (or his puppeteers) don't -care- what N. Korea does. Their focus is back home, makin' the rich PAY. What's important is on Wall Street. Korea? Whatever!

There is no downside for them in handing the whole mess over to the UN and letting it fester there forever. Hell, its what their nutroot base has been screaming for.

North Korea isn't the enemy to these guys. We are.

ET,

I think Obama is surprised that the world isnt doing what he wants because he wants it....he is soaking up the accolades, and the world is more than willing to give him those. But in terms of results, Obama isnt getting them and wont for a number of reasons.

1) US is vulnerable right now becasue the wealth flow is threatened.

2) The world works on real power not high ideals, you cannot compel a Putin or the Chicoms unless you have the resources to back up your words.

The world works more like Chicago politics but I dont think he is really ready for that because he is a result of Chicago not a player in Chicago.

stephen - I fully agree. Nice comments.

With regard to your first point, it will take a bit of time for Obama, as a pathological narcissist, to realize that the world is cheering his Performance but, in actual fact, it is utterly ignoring him as president of the US. You are right - he's not getting the results.

And yes, it's because the wealth flow is threatened, but, Obama is the one who is threatening the recovery of this wealth flow by changing the very infrastructure of the US economy to prevent wealth generation and accumulation...and setting up that enormous debt and handing over the control of that debt to China.

Exactly - the world works on real power, not rhetoric - and Obama is only rhetoric. He himself has never exercised real power - For example, his interactions with the bank CEOs haven't been based on power (which includes respect for theirs) but on pure thuggery and intimidation.

Right, he is a result of Chicago politics but not an agential player.