BlueEyedMonster

Well the only problem is... We don't have anyone any better to replace him. Damn 22nd amendment!

I agree. However it is not working in the present time. In recent history it has failed to stop the genocide in the Balkans, failed to disarm Iraq, Is currently failing to disarm N Korea, and failed in Somalia along with the US. The UN was built in the past, for the threats of the past. Unfortunately one of the Organizations faults is its inability to reorganize to meet the needs of the future. All I am debating is its peacekeeping ability. The humanitarian roll is separate, and they are still not perfect but do quite well there. Are you talking about the WMD's that even the UN could not account for? If I hide something and you cannot find it, does that mean it does not exist? The UN inspectors proved they existed at one time. Saddam was responsible for proving they were destroyed. He failed to do that to the satisfaction of the UN. Two years is plenty of time to destroy and document. He gave the UN the run-around for more than 10 years. I am not advocating using nukes. I believe a large conventional force will be sufficient. A huge unsophisticated army is no match for lots of cluster bombs and technology. The people of France are very lucky they are not speaking German right now because they failed twice to recognize a danger in Germany and take pre-emptive action. We failed Europe both times because we sat back and let it happen. We learned our lesson. Apparently not everyone did. Actually I do, but I don't know that you understand why I am arguing. I am seeking knowledge... looking for others to counter my arguments and enlighten me. That's your loss. Giving up in frustration because you don't understand someone is not the way you learn to understand the feelings behind the arguments.

Actually that is smart politics. That way the president gets what he wants. Its just not fair to everyone else. But then president is not elected by everyone else, and he only has to face US for 1 more election.

Yeah, maybe.... but right now I am flirting with a cute boy. I'm thinking tandem in a couple weeks and AFF after that? *Jason is doing his wishful thinking again*

And should we use the UN at all when it can't even work in an obvious situation? ***Oh, so we should just nuke the place and kile a few million? or you are going to invade it (they have one of the largest armies in the world)... Well unless everyone else steps up to the plate and applies the Necessary pressure NOW, millions of Koreans are going to die no matter what. Now I'll let you make the choice? 10 million now, or 3/4 of the populations of Both Koreas, and half of Japan when Kimmy has the time to build his nukes and load them on rockets? Reality bites. The UN is going to fail to assert itself by backing its own resolutions again and millions of people are going to die either way.

Sorry I was trying to keep it short. I apologize. But I think we are talking about the same thing. By everything, I mean ALL Resources, not just hardware and money. I completely agree with your above statement.

011 is a standard throughout the country. Are you sure you weren't dialling 011?

You look damn sexy for a munchkin biker dude.

Is that surface density, core density, or average density?

Yeah its cool and all, but I think we should get some hottie FF boys there. And the rest of the guys' gals should come jump too. Don't you agree?

Since when? I dial Australia quite often... I start out with an 011 which is international access, then 61 which is the country code, then 3 which is for Victoria, then the number I am dialing in Melbourne. You don't need to add the extra 01 anywhere. That is if you are dialing into the US

Yup, now look up the number of shiites and political opponents killed between the wars. That is why giving into international pressure, attempting diplomacy and not doing the dirty job immediately, and thoroughly is sometimes the wrong answer.

I'm sorry, you must have missed the part where the US was trying to get the IAEA to turn the Korea Matter over to the security council as is REQUIRED by the resolution that brought the IAEA there in the first place. Hmmm If we backed it, then who was throwing the wrench in the works of the UN? And like I said before... while everyone sits around and plays with the complicated things and takes their time... More nukes are going to be built, and more lives are going to be lost because the simple answer was not used.

Yes we did. We did not fully commit the military deployment and throw more than enough at them to decisively win the war/battle. That mistake was already repeated in Somalia, so it probably will not be repeated for another generation.

Sarge, I know you care, and that is admirable. But I think you are going a bit far. You are not his mother. As a friend quickly and politely let your opinion be known, then support HIS decision.

You forgot the country code!!!! Try 011-61-3-12345678 or 011-61-03-12345678 my cell makes me delete the 0 before the 3

Umm that is what Bush has been trying to do! (I am not defending the moron bush, but he actually is trying) Bush wants the UN, The other nations to take care of this with our help. But do you see the Security Council enacting sanctions for the restarting the reactors. No, no one would go along with us. China is FINALLY going to start working on this. Where is France, Germany? Are they driving the Europe/the UN to a solution? nope. Again we are left holding the bag. Not to say I don't love your Idea, it would be great, but unfortunately reality rules. and more people are going to die of starvation and war ...again because of diplomacy..or lack thereof. Fewer lives would have been lost if we would have attacked their facilities 2 years ago than are going to be lost now.

That's obvious, there is more of them in those countries. If we let the arab countries handle it torture and other methods that we are not allowed to use can be used to produce results. Hmmm Bill, most of the Terrorist attacks against America HAVE stopped. A few here and there in Iraq... thats a war zone. The attacks that have happened have been mostly against the nationals of other countries. And, the only terrorists in the news on US soil are the ones going to jail/detention. No more hijacked planes? No more blown up buildings? Apparently this restrictive anti-freedom stuff is working. So lets all kill the Constitution now.

Even by the highest casualty estimates, fewer people were killed in the two gulf wars than were killed by saddam's regime in the time between them. Sometimes diplomacy/bickering/stalling costs more lives. So do you want to wait until Kimmy boy in N Korea has 50 nukes and all diplomatic avenues are exhausted... or do you want to jump the gun and attack him while he has 3?

This is exactly my issue with Europeans. Complain a lot, bicker about the complexities, but never offer viable solutions with any backbone. Find an idea that actually works, step up to the plate, stick to your guns. Then maybe we wouldn't have to be the bully. I'm sure we'd love to share the responsibility.

What's up with everyone telling this poor guy how to live his own life. He has been given the facts/consequences by the doctor. Its his life and his decision. Support him and help to make sure he has a safe skydive!

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/gallery/imageFolio.cgi?direct=Personal_Galleries/orbitmonkey Here ya go I can wink at ya, I'm sure Kev won't mind.

Product is in short supply, prices go up, newer suppliers make a bigger profit, have more money to ramp up faster. Raw material suppliers are MORE eager to sell to new manufacturers because they just lost their bread and butter.... and the economic hit will be minimal. Just like when the earthquake knocked out Taiwan's chip manufacturing a few years back. Prices went up, but only for a short time. Outsourcing, quick re-tooling by dynamic companies ensured that the shortage was quickly eased.

Who's putting their gross peter in sebazz's hole? Hey! how did this turn into a buttsex thread?

The only thing worse than a "Tax and Spend" Democrat is a SPEND SPEND SPEND Republican that can't balance his checkbook.