NORK Resorts to Name Calling and Blaming US for Internet Outage

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
It looks like the only war we will get into with North Korea will be a war of words, involving mudslinging and name calling. In the latest round coming out of the NORKs National Defense Commission was to call President Obama a monkey and repeated the charge that the President was behind the Internet going dark in North Korea.

"Obama always goes reckless in words and deeds like a monkey in a tropical forest."
Click to expand...
 
MajorDomo said:
It looks like the only war we will get into with North Korea will be a war of words, involving mudslinging and name calling. In the latest round coming out of the NORKs National Defense Commission was to call President Obama a monkey and repeated the charge that the President was behind the Internet going dark in North Korea.
Click to expand...
Don't they mean darker?
 
58fcc6da41d14116f59089f0614de6d557a002c2a6829784bfa9f47bf31d562e.jpg
 
Saw the MSN article saying it's a racial slug, as if. Don't know why monkey is considered one. Sure Obama looks like one, hell, some of the people I see daily look similar to farm animals.
Bush jr looks like a monkey, he also looks like the MAD Magazine kid. And if you take his last name which is another name for pussy you can see why him and papa Bush started wars so people don't think they are.
 
bucketlist said:
Saw the MSN article saying it's a racial slug, as if. Don't know why monkey is considered one. Sure Obama looks like one, hell, some of the people I see daily look similar to farm animals.
Bush jr looks like a monkey, he also looks like the MAD Magazine kid. And if you take his last name which is another name for pussy you can see why him and papa Bush started wars so people don't think they are.
Click to expand...

Actually his dads war liberated Kuwait which Iraq invaded. I'm no Bush fan but don't be ignorant, facts are still facts.
 
Ultima99 said:
Actually his dads war liberated Kuwait which Iraq invaded. I'm no Bush fan but don't be ignorant, facts are still facts.
Click to expand...
Thread drift amuck. Well here are a few more facts for you. Read the first paragraph:

"1. Nationalism in the modern sense was largely unknown to the Arab world until the middle twentieth century. The maneuvering of powerful families and the interests of colonial powers often defined spheres of influence. To focus on the area of modern Kuwait, Britain had an agreement from 1899 with the ruling al-Sabah family that they would not cede or sell any territory without British consent. The al-Sabah family, always growing richer, kept trying to play British colonial interests off against the Ottomans, the Saud family to the west, and the provinces of Basra and Baghdad. It had been traditional in the Arab understanding to consider that the territory from Baghdad south to the Gulf (including what is now Kuwait) was "Iraq." The al-Sabah family (of modern Kuwait) wanted to "carve out" from that territory a fiefdom for themselves and their economic activities, free from any outside power -- Arab or colonialist."
 
The President will take executive action to pass SOPALITE regulations if federal government assets were at risk.
 
If every government computer was a zombie for the NSA or some other letter agency, would that agency not have the numbers needed to launch a pretty nasty DDOS?
 
It's official. Blacks is the most disliked race in the whole world. The Sony execs email exchange has confirmed my suspicion that it's just a facade that non-black Americans put up when they interact with blacks. This year marks the most openly hostile sentiment against blacks that I have ever witnessed.
 
It's a little more than a facade developing over the last 6 years or so... Almost seems as if a political correctness mandate was passed without anyone's knowledge. Hell pop culture cannot exist seemingly without prominently featuring black folks everywhere and in everything, deservingly so or not. As far as Jong Un calling the pres names, who really cares?
 
North Korea really should be in any of our news. They are completely irrelevant in pretty much every aspect.

Calling Obama is a monkey is practically a complement when compared to the insults the republican party, including fox 'news', constantly spouts. If I remember correctly didn't one of them crazy's said they wished he was dead on tv. I'm sure Obama gives no fucks about any of it.
 
bucketlist said:
Saw the MSN article saying it's a racial slug, as if. Don't know why monkey is considered one. Sure Obama looks like one, hell, some of the people I see daily look similar to farm animals.
Bush jr looks like a monkey, he also looks like the MAD Magazine kid. And if you take his last name which is another name for pussy you can see why him and papa Bush started wars so people don't think they are.
Click to expand...

G.W. helped build american power and kept us safe by keeping the fighting overseas and making damn sure no one wanted to risk pissing us off. For these last several years with the new guy we've had hope (our enemies go away and leave us alone) and change (our position to one of weakness). This keeps up we're in trouble... :(.
 
bucketlist said:
Saw the MSN article saying it's a racial slug, as if. Don't know why monkey is considered one. Sure Obama looks like one, hell, some of the people I see daily look similar to farm animals.
Bush jr looks like a monkey, he also looks like the MAD Magazine kid. And if you take his last name which is another name for pussy you can see why him and papa Bush started wars so people don't think they are.
Click to expand...



I don't think it had even the slightest thing to do with race there, hell Obama is half white anyway so it wouldn't even make sense.
 
Sweet! Monkeys are pretty much my favorite animal.

They're adorable and mischievous, kinda like Koreans.
 
GoldenTiger said:
G.W. helped build american power and kept us safe by keeping the fighting overseas and making damn sure no one wanted to risk pissing us off. For these last several years with the new guy we've had hope (our enemies go away and leave us alone) and change (our position to one of weakness). This keeps up we're in trouble... :(.
Click to expand...

LOL

Why do armchair strategists suck so much? I guess people aren't reading the classics any more.
 
GoldenTiger said:
G.W. helped build american power and kept us safe by keeping the fighting overseas and making damn sure no one wanted to risk pissing us off. For these last several years with the new guy we've had hope (our enemies go away and leave us alone) and change (our position to one of weakness). This keeps up we're in trouble... :(.
Click to expand...

America was already powerful long before Bush 1 came around.
 
GoldenTiger said:
G.W. helped build american power and kept us safe by keeping the fighting overseas and making damn sure no one wanted to risk pissing us off. For these last several years with the new guy we've had hope (our enemies go away and leave us alone) and change (our position to one of weakness). This keeps up we're in trouble... :(.
Click to expand...

Good god, I'm past my daily internet dumb limit and it's not even 8am.
 
JeffDC said:
Thread drift amuck. Well here are a few more facts for you. Read the first paragraph:

"1. Nationalism in the modern sense was largely unknown to the Arab world until the middle twentieth century. The maneuvering of powerful families and the interests of colonial powers often defined spheres of influence. To focus on the area of modern Kuwait, Britain had an agreement from 1899 with the ruling al-Sabah family that they would not cede or sell any territory without British consent. The al-Sabah family, always growing richer, kept trying to play British colonial interests off against the Ottomans, the Saud family to the west, and the provinces of Basra and Baghdad. It had been traditional in the Arab understanding to consider that the territory from Baghdad south to the Gulf (including what is now Kuwait) was "Iraq." The al-Sabah family (of modern Kuwait) wanted to "carve out" from that territory a fiefdom for themselves and their economic activities, free from any outside power -- Arab or colonialist."
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/17/opinion/l-iraq-recognized-kuwait-s-borders-in-63-852589.html

Your move sir.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Yep, and it remained so under his leadership. Now with our current failure, we are weaker every week. We're going the wrong way quick.
Click to expand...

yes... because spending a trillion dollars we didn't have on a war no reasonable person wanted is a sign of great strength and power.

I have no love for Obama, but to claim that we were strong under Bush is just delusional.
 
spintroniX said:
yes... because spending a trillion dollars we didn't have on a war no reasonable person wanted is a sign of great strength and power.

I have no love for Obama, but to claim that we were strong under Bush is just delusional.
Click to expand...

This. Only the foolish sheep think that one party or the other is to blame for our troubles. Reality is they both suck.
 
GoldenTiger said:
G.W. helped build american power and kept us safe by keeping the fighting overseas and making damn sure no one wanted to risk pissing us off. For these last several years with the new guy we've had hope (our enemies go away and leave us alone) and change (our position to one of weakness). This keeps up we're in trouble... :(.
Click to expand...

Yeah, pissing away money, lives and power makes us "stronger". So does crying wolf...err, "WMD", and killing our credibility with their world. Oh, and our moral position is shot when we ran around torturing people, even an innocent mentally ill person just to get another person to talk.

And keeping the fighting overseas...other than 9/11, you mean. Right.

Yeah, we're much better off from that kind of "leadership". <del> almost went Godwin.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Yeah, pissing away money, lives and power makes us "stronger". So does crying wolf...err, "WMD", and killing our credibility with their world. Oh, and our moral position is shot when we ran around torturing people, even an innocent mentally ill person just to get another person to talk.

And keeping the fighting overseas...other than 9/11, you mean. Right.

Yeah, we're much better off from that kind of "leadership". <del> almost went Godwin.
Click to expand...

spintroniX said:
yes... because spending a trillion dollars we didn't have on a war no reasonable person wanted is a sign of great strength and power.

I have no love for Obama, but to claim that we were strong under Bush is just delusional.
Click to expand...

Ultima99 said:
This. Only the foolish sheep think that one party or the other is to blame for our troubles. Reality is they both suck.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself as to not thinking we should have that war. We'll never really know if they had WMD's since they had ample time (weeks and weeks) to just shift them over the border into a neighboring terror state, but given the situation at the time it was a reasonable action to assert that the USA wouldn't tolerate attacks and killing our civilians.

Regarding CIA "torture", what they did was clearly necessary as there was no way to know whether or not another attack was about to happen at that point in time, and we had strong evidence that there was (you can debate whether the additional evidence/corroboration from the detainees ended up helping or not all you want, but while I think it did it's really beside the point there). Doing bad things to a few hardened terrorist leaders who were responsible for mass murder, widespread civilian attacks, burning hundreds of villages to the ground, and torturing thousands of people themselves, to try to protect hundreds of millions of innocent people was the right thing to do. You guys act like these detainees were the Pope or some other paragon of virtue on Earth: news flash! They weren't: they were about as evil as you get, bar perhaps Hitler, though I imagine some of their ilk in ISIS would love to do what Hitler managed to, today.

No leader is perfect, but Obama going around on apology tours and literally bowing to foreign leaders (when he himself is in the most powerful office on Earth and supposed to represent the free world), sweeping Benghazi attacks on our embassies under the rug as "incited by a video" (which had a whopping 15 hits until the incidents, and there was proof of pre-planned attacks discovered within hours of them happening... they knew damn well it wasn't a "spontaneous demonstration"), and continuously showing weakness to people who want nothing more than to crush anyone that doesn't bow down to them and agree to worship their radical insanity, is horrifying. Yeah, I have no lost love for politicians either on any party, but just because some guys suck doesn't mean others aren't far, far worse. He's practically made it his mission to demean the USA, lower our standing in the world, and weaken our military and political capabilities. With radical extremist groups like ISIS going around literally subjugating entire regions of countries to their brutal and Nazi-esque rule, that's not what we need to do right now. And we certainly don't need to be encouraging rogue nation states like North Korea to try to take things to a nuclear level.
 
And just to add, you can never prevent 100% of bad things(tm) from occurring. However, you need to and can do absolutely everything possible to help prevent them, and you can stop virtually all of them. What your ridiculous argument is, TwistedAegis, is saying "Well, someone got through once, guess we shouldn't bother now boys!". It's absolutely asinine.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Speak for yourself as to not thinking we should have that war. We'll never really know if they had WMD's since they had ample time (weeks and weeks) to just shift them over the border into a neighboring terror state, but given the situation at the time it was a reasonable action to assert that the USA wouldn't tolerate attacks and killing our civilians.
Click to expand...

We will never know where they put the WMDs that the West - including the US - sold them. Yep. We will never know!
We will never know how the US spy technology got them the 'proof' that they had WMDs, only to have said technology fail to locate where those WMDs went.
We will never know, how the delivery method that could hit US civilians vanished into thin air.

WE.WILL.NEVER. REALLY. KNOW.

But, apologists sure know how to turn a blunder of humongous proportions into a righteous crusade!

Guess what, you can spin it and twist the facts all you want, ISIS IS the consequence of the US' intervention in Iraq.
It reminds me of another great achievement of US foreign policy, after they replaced an elected - WE WILL NEVER REALLY KNOW HOW GOOD OR BAD HE WOULD HAVE BEEN - official, with a ruthless dictator, only to have radical fundamentalists topple their puppet dictator, the Shah of Iran.

Own up! No more excuses!
 
They say Bush lied about WMD chemical weapons. .Went to war and there were no WMDs Well he did lie, he said they found no weapons.
Truth is, they did find weapons, over chemical 5000 warheads. Those sure are WMDs
They did admit if you remember finding a couple mobile labs that can be used to make the WMB chemical and a few old war heads that were degraded.
Also reading the news of ISIS using chemical weapons now, weapons that were Sadams that are now in ISIS hands. ISIS is said to have killed several hundred Kurds. Does not sound like it is degraded too much if it can kill people by the hundreds.

No WMDs in Iraq, like your plan/keep your plan,like your Dr. keep your Dr. I never had sex with that woman, Miss Lewensky
I found out about the IRS targeting groups when you did, when I read the paper. I'm not a crook.

The NY Times reports WMD were found.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014 ... -news&_r=0
 
Bill1024 said:
Try this link or add your own http://www.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...p-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Click to expand...

Yes... Actually, I've heard of that story, not that long ago.
But you want to know what is ironic? The Pentagon tried very hard to keep this story quiet. Reason being, those WMDs "remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West."

So, while there were WMDs, - WMDs are WMDs right? - they were the ones the West helped Saddam build, and not a rogue, built-from-scratch clandestine program that Saddam initiated.
I remember the day Colin Powell addressed the UN, and made a case against Saddam, but at no time did he mention anything about Western countries supplying such weapons. How the saying is true "What goes around, comes around."

And yes, the possibility that ISIS might get their hands on such weapons is a grim prospect to contemplate.
 
JeffDC said:
Thread drift amuck. Well here are a few more facts for you. Read the first paragraph:

"1. Nationalism in the modern sense was largely unknown to the Arab world until the middle twentieth century. The maneuvering of powerful families and the interests of colonial powers often defined spheres of influence. To focus on the area of modern Kuwait, Britain had an agreement from 1899 with the ruling al-Sabah family that they would not cede or sell any territory without British consent. The al-Sabah family, always growing richer, kept trying to play British colonial interests off against the Ottomans, the Saud family to the west, and the provinces of Basra and Baghdad. It had been traditional in the Arab understanding to consider that the territory from Baghdad south to the Gulf (including what is now Kuwait) was "Iraq." The al-Sabah family (of modern Kuwait) wanted to "carve out" from that territory a fiefdom for themselves and their economic activities, free from any outside power -- Arab or colonialist."
Click to expand...

The USA was native American land, Texas belongs to Mexico, those past times are over and are not a legitimate excuse to go reclaim territory and it is not the fault of the current people living in that society. Even if they are avalid excuses to you and all out anarchy is fine, then you have no leg to stand on because the USA was just bigger in an anarchy scenario and took Kuwait back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top