Slashdot Mirror
Russia Writes Off 90 Percent of North Korea Debt
jones_supa (887896) writes "In Russia, the State Duma (lower house) on Friday ratified a 2012 agreement to write off the bulk of North Korea's debt. It said the total debt stood at $10.96 billion as of Sept. 17, 2012. Russia sees this lucrative in advancing the plans to build a gas pipe and railroad through North to South Korea. The rest of the debt, $1.09 billion, would be redeemed during the next 20 years, to be paid in equal installments every six months. The outstanding debt owed by North Korea will be managed by Russia's state development bank, Vnesheconombank. Moscow has been trying to diversify its energy sales to Asia away from Europe, which, in its turn, wants to cut its dependence on oil and gas from the erstwhile Cold War foe. Russia's state-owned top natural producer Gazprom is dreaming shipping 10 billion cubic meters of gas annually through the Koreas. Russia has written off debts to a number of impoverished Soviet-era allies, including Cuba. North Korea's struggling communist economy is just 2 percent of the size of neighboring South's."
Debt goes poof. What's the result?
Russia sees this lucrative in advancing the plans to build a gas pipe and railroad through North to South Korea
Seriously? Lay critical crucial infrastructure through North Korea to South Korea?
There's no way Pyongyang would manipulate those rails and pipes in a fit of political pique that seems to happen, oh, once every eight months. Absolutely now way.
blog
Russia as a nation is 11 billion dollars poorer, and the communist party members that stole the money in the first place are 11 billion dollars richer.
"Russia has written off debts to a number of impoverished Soviet-era allies, including Cuba"
Is the number... "one"?
It's $11 Billion. I know that sounds like a lot, but it's not really. Not on a Global scale. It might help stabilize North Korea a bit though. They're a poor enough nation to notice it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Cuba is a huge tropical island with a well educated population. North Korea is strategically located between the vibrant state of South Korea and China, soon to be the world's largest economy. Both Cuba and North Korea are in prime locations for international trade and commerce.
In addition to all that, they have the most progressive socialist governments in the world. While the rest of the world has been wasting their time with free enterprise and capitalism, these guys took the progressive, enlightened approach.
So why can't they pay their bills?
I must say I am impressed with how Russia is standing up to the bullies and all those governments who are percieved as the, "we know it all" people.
Against Russia's will? Unlikely. You have to remember, this isn't going to be just about the South Korea, and North Korea is completely dependent on China and Russia due to its isolation.
Yeah, it's not like they've ever pissed off China, or do provocative things against Beijing's will ... oh wait.
I'm sure you're right that Russia's political calculus is exactly what you say: North Korea would never want to anger them just to get at the south. However, I suspect they (and you) are very mistaken. Remember, we're not dealing with an entirely rational entity here. We're dealing with a paranoid regime, whose behavior has on more than one occasion come close to batshit crazy. They've thumbed their noses at China's instructions on more than one occasion...I wouldn't rule out interrupting gas supplies to their "arch enemy" to the south if they don't feel they're getting enough attention that week, just because it would piss off the Russians (what are the Russians really going to do about it?).
"Liberate" the "Russian Speaking Majority" of part of North Korea.
Putin, for all of his shortcomings, knows a weakling when he sees one. And that a vastly superior military (that would be the US military) means nothing when headed by a weakling.
He also knows that North Korea wasn't going to repay those debts anyway, so why not try to make some lemonade out of those lemons.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Yeah like Ukrainian and Georgia
Rather... I am impressed as to how well Putin is acting in Russia's best interests. I can't say the same for Obama.
This is just Putin's latest dumb parlour trick to stir up trouble and poke the West in the eye. He's just acting out.
Getting tired of being randomly popped into beta mode. It's trash, I don't want it, make it go away.
Give it another 10 years and oil and gas will have much less demand.
You must be joking right? Powerful armies can and have been defeated many times. Remember the USA and Vietnam?
On the other hand, I believe Russia has the [military] hardware to deliver serious havoc on the US should America take the unwise route.
What would the USA's most powerful president have done in the circumstances anyway?
Why would NK ever agree to do anything to help South Korea? They didn't care about paying bak the money anyway, so it's not that.
No, the real reason NK agreed to have a pipeline built through the country is they plan to insert NK frogmen spies into the pipeline to infiltrate the south. The beauty of the plan is, they cannot be spied upon the other way due to the pipe flow!
Masterful.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It was founded by Kim Il-Sung, who had communist ideals, yes. However it has ventured far, far, away from those ideals. Indeed the present day US is vastly closer to being an ideal free-market state than North Korea is to being anything that can be approximated as being close to actual communism.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Obama should approve the XL pipeline, because it would be in Russia's best interest if Americans died.
So the US won't trade with them. Ok, but while the US is a large nation, it isn't the be-all, end-all. Canada, the EU, China, Russia, they are all perfectly ok to trade with Cuba. So Cuba has access to most of the world for trade goods. Yet, they still have an extremely low standard of living.
Sorry, but the US boogeyman thing doesn't play, not in this day and age. Cuba has a large responsibility for the problems in Cuba.
Obviously N.Korea is a communist economic horror story. Russia has zero chance of getting paid back anyway. This method of presentation saves face for the Russian government as it was foolish to loan money to N.Korea in the first place and it also saves face for the concept of communism. This can be pushed as an image of one wonderful communist nation doing a good thing for another communist nation. N.Korea is an open sewer deserving the disrespect of all people, everywhere. And most wonderful fat, midget, leader, with really bad hair cut, is the icing on the cake.
Perhaps, stop the nonsense going on in Syria, as was threatened with a "red line", to prevent thugs from learning that they are free to do as they please until at least 2016, like annexing part of a neighbor? (That would be Crimea.) That's what the USA's most powerful President would have done. Or any of the other Presidents besides this one, actually.
(Hint: Step 2 is "defect to SK.")
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
How much is FSB paying you to shill?
I ask wanting to know if my rate from the NSA is competitive.
Finally some slack for Kim :)
You must be joking right?
Joking about what? Did you actually *read* the post you're bitching about?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Invading Syria would have worked as well as invading Afghanistan and Iraq did....
Everyone's all PO'ed at Obama for using diplomacy instead of War.
It's diplomacy that has Iran giving up their enriched uranium. It's (accidental) diplomacy that got Syria to give up their chemical weapons. Diplomacy works. War? Afghanistan and Iraq aren't going too well for us. There's no infrastructure, no democracy, tons of opium, and the Taliban are stronger now than they used to be.
There are other measures of strength besides blowing shit up.
That being said, Obama IS a weak president. :D
I'm really weirded out by all the people who give accolades to Putin lately. Russia's a shithole man. It's an oligarchy, flat out. He's not standing up to anyone. Standing up would be helping people and NOT debt slaving them with the IMF. How is invading the Ukraine when it's down in any way brave or good?
That weakling got Osama, has Iran giving up it's highly enriched Uranium to lift the sanctions, and cut a deal that got Syria to give up their chemical weapons. There are other measures of strength than blowing shit up. Diplomacy works.
Now, as a dirty lib, I do believe he is a weak president on the homefront. Dude hasn't even TRIED to fulfill his campaign promises and keeps trying to cut deals with the Republicans who clearly aren't going to give him squadoo even though he gives them 90% of what they wanted anyway. Sigh....
If you're going to hate on Obama, hate on him for real reasons. His foreign policy had strengthened us, not weakened us. Bush is the one that took us from having the whole world supporting us to having everyone revile us. Again....
What does China think of this? Will they check their records and realize they have have claim to Posyet Bay and surrounding territory?
Do you really think the US President should play chicken with Putin? Russia is annexing Crimea on its own instead of supporting a ally in such an endeavor as was the case with all the proxy wars the US and USSR fought, The same applied then as does now - both leaders know that if their respective armies ever end up fighting each other, it will be a Pandora's box that neither of them wants to open since among other things the box contains nukes. So since Russia is already there, the US cannot intervene too much. During the cold war, the motivations were ideological but now Russia is going for territory so do you really think the US should escalate the situation? It really sucks for Ukraine and what Russia is doing is absolutely wrong but from a broader (i.e. global) perspective, there isn't much the US can do without making things worse.
Syria was and is a gigantic clusterfuck since there isn't really any side that should preferably win. More or less crazy groups of Islamic fundamentalists and militants and a dictator are fighting each other so whom would you support? The US (and its allies) have, however, successfully pressured them to abstain from using chemical weapons, which I think is the best result achievable through any intervention. Now the West can - and should - only wait and see if any moderate group emerges in Syria and then consider supporting them but at the moment waiting might be the least bad option.
They say they'll give up their Uranium. They've made various broken promises before.
Which was originally suggested by Putin.
Seriously? Because of him, Egypt and Libya are in turmoil. Israel is laughing at us.
We're cutting back our military, and ultimately foreign policy is based on military power. Nobody takes us seriously.
Didn't you just prove his point? Power military that was handicapped by policy...lost a war (i.e. Vietnam).
Do you know where Vladivostok is? Russia not need Korea to ship gas.
...except it might not be too mysterious. Potential win for everyone, if they half way behave themselves...
Is the US vastly superior?
Globalfirepower rank them about the same, though they include a lot of factors, but shouldn't all those be included?
Sure the US have twice as many people and earn more money (but it's much more unevenly spread and less end up in the government coffins) and spend more money on the military (then again I don't know whatever Russia pay them and if so I guess they pay less and that more production may be government owned or at least be bought for cheaper.)
US seem to have bigger navy and air force and Russia bigger army. Who got the best missile defence? Anti-air?
Even if US is better what are their odds at Russian soil? Because if we are speaking fear of the bully I guess that's where it would be thought?
Many of the US project seem to deliver so-so and cost way more than what was originally planned.
I know lots of people say Russia got old gear but how much truth is there in that? Even if they do how much is newer? How much is newer in the US?
Do F-35 really beat the better models from Russia? Is F-22 clearly superior? I assume the F-15, F-16 and F-18 maybe is more cost effective?
I don't know whatever the SM-2, SM-3 and the S-300, S-400 and S-500 gear/systems is of similar scale but how are they really performing against each others?
I don't really know the composition of either sides nuclear weapons.
How hard is it to sink a carrier? How efficient is the total anti-missile and possibly torpedo defence in a carrier group?
Who win on the ground?
http://www.globalfirepower.com...
I assume the US may rely on missiles from ships and air-force and sure air-plane vs artillery may be a battle with an advantage to the air-plane but this being Russia how many missiles will actually hit and how well would the planes do? Throw in a bunch of submarines in the equation too.
Joking about the US actually able to threaten Russia military I suppose?
While US is spread all over the world I assume Russia isn't all that much so you may have to bring the war to their side.
Even if they wasn't somewhat equal simply fighting in someone else home court likely bring disadvantages, also again people defending their home country relative people who.. Well. I don't know. ... but I've been told?
That being said, Obama IS a weak president. :D
Make Bill Gates president.
Seriously. Maybe he have some ideas about how to do what's good for companies while also having an interest in making the world better.
I doubt other world leaders would be very upset at Bill Gates either? For what? Their XP service being discontinued?
Rather... I am impressed as to how well Putin is acting in Russia's best interests...
Is it in Russia's best interest to become isolated as an international pariah and have its economy shrink?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Go to Canada some time, one of the US's closest allies. You'll find that you can travel to Cuba freely, buy Cuban goods (cigars being the most prominently advertised as being of Cuban origin) and so on.
The US is the only country that clings to an embargo and it is purely a face-saving maneuver, not wanting to admit it was a bad idea and hasn't worked to unseat Castro.
However for all that, Cuba is still poor... So sorry, you can't blame the big, bad 'ole US for this. Their policy is not helpful, but it isn't why Cuba is impoverished. That lies at the feet of their own government.
If you figure in the amounts given in foreign aid (military and development) as well as loans that are simply "forgiven" each year which amounts to $15-$20 billion in total each year. Directly it is $3.11 billion (and increasing) per year. In other words... $10 billion (give or take a few) of its total accumulated debt is chicken feed in the grand scheme of things.
"Don't sweat the technique."
Gates's "interest in making the world better" consists of writing checks (on accounts swelled by monopoly business practices) to big drug companies so they can experiment on people without their knowledge or consent.
... and ultimately foreign policy is based on military power. Nobody takes us seriously.
I wonder why. Do you respect the father who beats his child?
What caused Russia to lose in Afghanistan?
Gates's "interest in making the world better" consists of writing checks (on accounts swelled by monopoly business practices) to big drug companies so they can experiment on people without their knowledge or consent.
Yeah he should write them to Get-a-freaking-clue Foundation, Science Whaa' and Paranoid Inc. instead.
Fundamentally, you seem to believe that Iran and Syria have, in fact, given up their WMD's (poison gas in the one case, enriched uranium in the other).
So, do you have any actual evidence that this is true?
Without international inspections (which neither country has allowed), it's not like there is any way to know for sure whether all the poison gas manufacturies (in the one case) have been revealed, much less shutdown. Ditto the enriched uranium (in the other case).
And then there's Ukraine.
Next week, Obama is going to the Far East to reassure our allies there that he won't leave them hanging out to dry the way he left Ukraine hanging out to dry. While there are definite differences between Ukraine and Japan/Phillipines/etc, it'll be interesting to see if Japan/Phillipines/etc buy what he's selling.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
OP writing And that a vastly superior military (that would be the US military) means nothing when headed by a weakling. pretty much indicates that he doesn't see the US being a threat to Russia.
Besides, the two cardinal rules of would-be military invaders are:
(1) Do not invade the Chinese mainland.
(2) Do not invade Russia.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Is in American's best interest to become an international pariah and for the average American income to fall?
And the US is not an ruled by an oligarchy?" http://www.scribd.com/doc/2184...
If you care to read the news it was Russia that was providing financial support to Ukraine, and when a pro-Russia government was democratically elected the United States overthrew the elected government through a coup and the use of US mercenaries.
Really? Name one.
Obama was on Seal Team Six? I didn't know that. He was working with the CIA to track down Bin Laden in Pakistan, before he was President? I didn't know that either. Lastly, I didn't realize that he was so successful in Syria that there are no longer entire cities that Assad has ringed-off and isolated for starvation, obstructing ANY human rights organizations from providing food or medicine. Keep drinking that Kool-Aid, regurgitating talking points, and ignoring actual facts.
They say they'll give up their Uranium. They've made various broken promises before.
Yes. However, promises made to them have also been broken not to mention that plausible winners in the US presidential election have pledged to bomb them. From the POV of a non-democratic country, democracies are not trustworthy since a democracy can completely change course when its leader changes. Which happens frequently from their POV.
Which was originally suggested by Putin.
So what? Was it a bad idea when there's no side in the war whose victory would result in a "good" outcome. If the only sensible policy is to wait and see, making the war a tiny bit more bearable for the civilian population is the best option.
Seriously? Because of him, Egypt and Libya are in turmoil. Israel is laughing at us.
WTF? Did Obama hand a lighter to the guy in Tunisia who set himself on fire? That protest against their corrupt government was what got the ball rolling since it inspired people in other Arab countries to revolt too. Obama had nothing to do with it and helping overthrow Ghaddafi was a worthwhile cause - the rebels still seem like a better option than his rule and he did blow up a Pan Am 747 over Lockerbie..Neither the US nor anybody else has done anything that affected the outcome in Egypt. The fact that more radical Islamists than we'd prefer came to power was a consequence of their democratic elections. Should the US once again appoint despots instead of letting a people choose their rulers? Has Iran worked out so well that it seems like a good strategy?
Oh, and Israel has always been laughing at the US. It might be more evident now, though, because Netanyahu and Obama don't get along on a personal level.
We're cutting back our military, and ultimately foreign policy is based on military power. Nobody takes us seriously.
WTF? Seriously, WTFF? Your statement makes no sense whatsoever. It cannot be parsed. There are no logical claims in it.
10 posts in and no "In Soviet Russia..." joke?
Beta must be causing more damage than I thought...
Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
Just to put that into perspective, the American federal government spends that much money EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Oh, PLEASE tell us all how the Arab Spring was Obama's fault... And Fuck Israel.
Nobody takes us seriously because we started two wars over bad intelligence. No one takes us seriously because we talk about democracy and freedom and then invade countries that don't do what we say. Nobody takes us seriously because we've overthrown democratically elected governments. No one takes us seriously because we're a f'in joke.... We're a child with a giant stick running around hitting other children
It's weird, but plenty of countries are taken seriously without waving their military around. Japan's taken seriously, and they don't even have a military to speak of! We wield enough economic and cultural power that we shouldn't even have to use our military. And strangely enough, when we DO use diplomacy and sanctions, stuff gets done.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0
"Syria’s ability to produce chemical weapons has been destroyed and its remaining toxic armaments secured, weapons inspectors said Thursday, as President Bashar al-Assad has offered unexpectedly robust cooperation".
Yes, I have evidence that this is true. That's because I listen to evidence before coming up with my opinion, instead of forming my opinion and then looking for evidence. That took me a 15 second google search to find. Should I look it up for Iran too? Nah. I'll let you do it. You need the practice. Also, there's a story ON SLASHDOT about Iran getting rid of their 20% uranium.
Ukraine? Sanctions are starting to have an effect. We'll see. Huh, weird, and just a few days ago, Russia and Ukraine signed a deal to let Crimea be it's own independant region... which it's always been anyway.
So, basically, you're wrong on every account, and a few minutes of googling would have told you that were you actually interested in the information and the context of the situation. I'd suggest not paying attention to mainstream news. They suck at context.
Russian democracy may well be even more a pack of sneaky bastards than Putin likes to think he is. Cases could maybe be made about whether the debt forgiveness will actually improve the Russian economy if North Korea thus decides it can afford to spend spend spend with Russia, but on the face of it, this is less income to Russia when recently the news blathered about NASA still paying cash money to Russia for shuttle service.
Does the U.S. give an money to the Arab world? Africa? Eastern Europe? Is there a cost to the naval fleet that protects the Pacific after Japan was disarmed after WWII? $10B is chicken feed in the grand scheme of things, but there are far better examples than aid to the only non-Western-hating country in the region, who we use as a lightning rod to deflect anger away from the mainland U.S.
Besides, the two cardinal rules of would-be military invaders are: (1) Do not invade the Chinese mainland. (2) Do not invade Russia.
In other words, never get involved in a land war in Asia.
If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
The Cheney administration was probably the best thing that could have happened to the foes of America.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Not being USA-ian, I'm not sure what actions or statements are treason. But some of the Republican statements that have come out publicly against Obama are not only personally offensive but are against the State: i.e. Treasonous - that the opposition won't support a bill because they don't consider Obama capable. It was much worse than, implicating the majority that voted him in twice! But I forget the actual insult. I think Obama would of had more than enough to arrest the leadership of the Republican party for treasonous statements. Yet he has done nothing.
As for the Russians? Well history since WWII has clearly shown that Russia has used their gas pipelines, forcing nations into dependency, raising and lowering prices ad hoc, putting political and economic pressures on these now dependent countries. That was the bribe used against the Ukraine in late 2013 - cheap gas and billions of rubles for them to stay out of the EU.
Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
Or give it directly to individuals so they can buy mosquito nets.
Obama wasn't president when the most recent crash happened? So it's not his recession!
Since when have corporations cared about America's best interests? Obama needs to issue even more food stamps because CEOs of companies don't dare for the General Welfare.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2012/05/whats_good_for_exxon_is_not_go037099.php
never get involved in a land war in Asia.
That movie quote popped instantly to mind, but had read the specific quote about the mainland long before I watched the movie. Plus, European Russia isn't... Asia, and you invade it either.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Not being USA-ian...statements that have come out publicly against Obama are not only personally offensive but are against the State: i.e. Treasonous
Agreed, you're clearly not a USA-ian. We don't respect authority, here. And we don't really respect people who suggest that we should respect authority. So, go kiss your king's ...ring. Ya, know, I've lost a lot of respect for my country in the last decade-and-a-half, but thanks for reminding me why this is still the place for me and my treasonous attitudes.
Just to be fair, Obama was pushing to use military action against Assad until Putin stepped in and cock-blocked him. The evidence that the Assad's government even used chemical weapons was shaky at best and the Obama administration refused to share with anyone any clear ties that they supposedly had evidence of. Oh yeah, and the US is supporting Islamic rebels with ties to Al Qaeda.
The income from the debt was immaterial anyway. Just create another loan or asset, to get more virtual income if you want to.
America certainly has it's issues but Putin seems determined to turn Russia into a nuclear armed banana republic. Look at this list. Russia, styling itself a great power, has impoverished its people to a state worse than Croatia and 56 other countries. Not far ahead of Botswana. Amazing power, that.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
You must be joking right? Powerful armies can and have been defeated many times. Remember the USA and Vietnam?
Yes, I do remember.
Vietnam won the Vietnamese-American war, but the Vietnamese generals say that they did not defeat the US army, but rather that they won the political battle in the USA to get the Americans to leave.
Keep in mind that the US pulled out all of its troops on 1973, the US congress passed a bill stopping all aid to South Vietnam in 1973, and it took until 1975 for the Soviet-supplied North to invade the South. That's two years after the USA pulled out.
On the other hand, I believe Russia has the [military] hardware to deliver serious havoc on the US should America take the unwise route.
Yes, pretty much anyone who has submarines and nuclear weapons can deliver serious havoc on the US, which falls under the heading of "so what"? Without the nukes, there's no way for anyone to inflict havoc on the USA. No one has the ability to fight their way against the USA across the oceans to get to the USA. OTOH, if the anyone tried to do anything military near Russia's borders, yeah, it would be a bad mistake.
Obama was on Seal Team Six? I didn't know that. He was working with the CIA to track down Bin Laden in Pakistan, before he was President?...
When Obama became President, no one in the CIA was tracking down bin Laden in Pakistan. In 2005 George W. Bush shut down the CIA unit tasked with tracking bin Laden (code named Alec Station and established in 1996 by Bill Clinton). "C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden".
It took an executive action by Obama to recreate an intelligence unit to pick up the hunt, and then a tough call to send the SEAL team in when the intelligence about bin Laden's presence was still uncertain. A weaker man would have temporized about the uncertainty and done nothing (GW Bush and Tora Bora?).
BTW - the right's adulation of GW Bush as a hero, strutting in front of his "Mission Accomplished" banner, when he had never fired a shot in the invasion, while pretending Obama had nothing to do with the termination of bin Laden "because he wasn't on Seal Team Six" is a double standard so glaring that it makes one stand dumb-founded at the intellectual dishonesty involved. Yeah, and Reagan defeated the Soviet Union single-handedly. Right.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Is the US vastly superior?
Globalfirepower rank them about the same, though they include a lot of factors, but shouldn't all those be included?
I would take the "Globalfirepower" rankings a tad more seriously if they revealed the model they used to combine and weight all those factors, and if they weren't a "link farm" site that lists itself as being "for entertainment only" and the people running it weren't completely anonymous. There is no reason to attach any credibility to the ranking scores they offer.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
I hardly know where to begin, but I'll say this:
If socialist policies don't fix everything, we'll try again. And again. We'll pay attention to what we did right, and what we did wrong. We'll do better. We'll make progress. That's why we're called 'progressives'.
What we will _not_ do is stick our heads in the sand and pretend some mythical 'invisible hand' is going to make it all better. Name me one complex problem that was made better by doing nothing about it?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
That weakling got Osama, has Iran giving up it's highly enriched Uranium to lift the sanctions, and cut a deal that got Syria to give up their chemical weapons. There are other measures of strength than blowing shit up. Diplomacy works.
Now, as a dirty lib, I do believe he is a weak president on the homefront. Dude hasn't even TRIED to fulfill his campaign promises and keeps trying to cut deals with the Republicans who clearly aren't going to give him squadoo even though he gives them 90% of what they wanted anyway. Sigh....
If you're going to hate on Obama, hate on him for real reasons. His foreign policy had strengthened us, not weakened us. Bush is the one that took us from having the whole world supporting us to having everyone revile us. Again....
Seriously? Are you that naive?
1. The US Military and Intelligence Services got Osama. All Obama did was say: "OK" and a day later "I gave the order to kill Osama..."
2. Do you really think that Iran doesn't have other sites that inspectors have not yet found? Also, they can still make more because they didn't give up the capability!
3. Do you really think that Syria gave up all its chemical weapons?
Whichever side is currently losing.
Instead of an anonymous bullet they've used Polonium to make the point that nobody but them could possibly have done it.
See also the USA using Syria for "extreme rendition". You are clearly not stupid enough to suggest that the USA and Syria are allied, but just have not considered that it may be a similar mostly hands off approach with N.K.
Go to your local version of chinatown and if you ask around enough you are bound to find someone that both comes from a part of China close to N.K. and hates both governments so will give you an unbiased view. Another place to try is a Korean food shop since some Chinese ethnic Koreans (there are nearly as many as outside China) or escaped North Koreans may be found there. One view I heard from a Chinese Korean from the border area is that the best way for China to deal with N.K. is to wait until the wind is blowing away from both China and S.K. and before nuking it.
As for "the old guard" - didn't you notice an article today about Apollo program people dying of old age? Anyone who was old enough to make major decisions twenty years before that is already dead.
So then - which side do you back to "stop the nonsense going on in Syria"? Look at them all (not both anymore) long enough and it's not so simple is it?
So what makes a strong President? Reagan who's first act was handing over a ransom to terrorists or Carter who would not deal with them but couldn't stop them either? There hasn't been a "strong" President in a long time but is that really a bad thing? Would having someone "strong", such as a Putin type who people like to please by killing off journalists he doesn't like for a birthday present, actually be a good thing?
While a "strong" President will go to extreme lengths to get what they want personally a "weak" President may actually consider what is good for a country and let a constitution tell them what to do.
There would probably be a "strong" President if Hillary had won. How do you think that would work out for anyone apart from Hillary? It doesn't sound like such a good idea now does it?
Unfortunately NK frogman would probably mean the guy that hunts for frogs to feed his unit.
Seriously? Are you that naive?
1. The US Military and Intelligence Services got Osama. All Obama did was say: "OK" and a day later "I gave the order to kill Osama..."
Uh, didn't he first order the intelligence services to have finding Osama as their top priority when it towards the end of Bush's presidency no longer had any high priority. That was one of the few election promises he actually kept.
And saying "OK" wasn't exactly as simple as you seem to think. It was OK to the right option of a) bomb the shit out of the compound making it impossible to verify that he ever was there, b) doing it with the Pakistanis to reduce the diplomatic complications but also increase the risk that Osama gets a warning or c) doing it alone even though Pakistan & the US pretend to be allies and subsequently there would be diplomatic consequences. And he had to consider the fact that the intelligence information was far from certain and that the raid was not a walk in the park but might also go terribly wrong. We know what Operation Eagle Claw did to Carter's re-election bid and I'm pretty sure that if Neptune Spear had failed, we would have a mor(m)on president now.
Every correct decision seems trivial with the benefit of hindsight.
2. Do you really think that Iran doesn't have other sites that inspectors have not yet found? Also, they can still make more because they didn't give up the capability!
I for one do not know and neither do you. And furthermore we don't know what military intelligence says. One of the problems in a democracy is that elected politicians (who're all dishonest) receive some information that citizens don't so we don't have all the information we'd like when judging politicians. Sometimes it works in their favor and sometimes against them. However, bombing Iran would certainly have adverse consequences for the US but because you and I don't have access to military intelligence we don't know if Obama's judgment in that particular question is good or bad. The best we can do is guess based on other decisions he has made.
3. Do you really think that Syria gave up all its chemical weapons?
It doesn't matter whether they did or not. The intention has been to reduce civilian suffering by preventing them from using chemical weapons and at least that outcome seems to have been achieved even though the civil war is otherwise just as brutal as a civil war between a dictator's army and more or less fanatic Muslim groups can be expected to be. There is little else the West can do. There is no sufficiently moderate party in the conflict that it would be a good idea to help them beat the others.
(Hint: Step 2 is "defect to SK.")
4. Have your family thrown in prison camp for life.
When an institution receives money, it vanishes through "operationa costs" and at the end, we should consider ourselves lucky if 10% is really used for the real purpose. Doesn't matter the -ism .... without full transparency, money ends in the administrator's pockets.
Every govt office should have the obligation to have open and free access books, so we, the people, can understand why they are spending more and doing less.
...gas from pipe is the neverending flow of Supreme Leader's farts!
Without Supreme Leader's farts, world would lack light. Darkness is constant reminder to Korean people of light provided by Supreme Leader's farts.
He was going to take all of North Korea, and the Chinese had made an ultimatum that if you went above so and so meridan, we were gonna come down there and pwn you.
MacArthur did, the Chinese did, and MacArthur got sent packing home with a retirement care package if I remember correctly.
The war did drag on, the Chinese pushed us back to the current border and all was well in the Koreas. (For definitions of well that don't actually involve the Korean peoples themselves.
I agree that Russia is an oligarchy (and so is the US, and Europe, btw, we simply don't call our plutocrats "oligarchs"), but you have to get some things straight. Like the IMF, the Ukraine had the alternative of *either* cooperating with Russia, and continuing to get money from Moscow, or cooperate with the EU and get money from the IMF (with the usual strings of privatization, deregulation, and generally screwing the people over attached, see Greece, et al). Yanukovich in the end decided that it would be in the interests of the Ukraine to continue trade with Russia rather than go along with EU demands of "us or them" (and the opinion polls I have seen seem to indicate that the Ukranian people were not too keen on the EU agreement either in the end, I guess the example of Greece must have scared them). This is when the "Euromaidan" protests started, supported by both US and EU politicians who enthusiastically came in person and egged the protests on, the fact that they were sharing stage and shaking hands with Svoboda and the Right Sector did not seem to bother them. Once the coup was fully realized, the new government (surprise surprise) signed the deal with the EU as well as the IMF, despite not being an elected government. It bans political parties which are seen as being too "pro-russia" (such as the communist party), includes representatives of both Svoboda and Right Sector, but none from the eastern part of the country where the majority of the population lives. Western media calls it "democracy"...
There's a difference in destroying property and killing people vs actually being able to hold onto the ground too.
There are tens of thousands of North Korean refugees in the "Korean autonomous region" in Northern China that borders North Korea. It's considered a bit of a social problem in that region.