Obama fails: North Korea attacks South Korea, Iran to aquire nuke

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well, let's not forget the Clinton campaign payback to Doral whereby the N. Koreans were able to acquire ballistic missle technology in the first place.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Hopey Changeys promised us a Messiah but instead they gave us a clueless "Community Organizer." I'm not surprised though. I saw all this coming. It's very sad.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

A failed Socialist/Marxist "Community Organizer" in sheep's clothing. Beware of false prophets. This guy ain't no Messiah.

 

[Avatar4321]

Please. this isnt just Obama's problem. This has been going on for the last two decades atleast.

Course, his incompetant leadership isn't helping anything.

 

[Father Time]

And you say "What happens in Korea is Korea's problem?" Wow. Would you have said the same in WW2 Europe about Germany invading Austria, Belgium, France, England, etc???

There's a massive difference in scale between what happened between the Koreas and the start of WWII. Although no one would blame the USA because Germany was starting fights.

Or, by your logic, we should build a huge wall on the Mexican border, and all those people who "are just good people looking for jobs" should stay in Mexico and suffer. Because hey, what happens in Mexico is Mexico's problem. Thats not very global citizen-like of you now is it?

Wow that's a non-sequiter if I ever saw one. If an illegal immigrant moves to the US then it's no longer something that's contained within Mexico now is it.

 

[Father Time]

Bush didn't "allow" any attacks. They happened during his presidency, yes. If anyone "allowed" anything.......it would be Bill Clinton. Who literally told the CIA "Do not kill Bin Laden" when they had 2 chances to do it. In the crosshairs. Shot ready. Clinton: Don't take the shot. Why? It would ignite jihad, which he didn't want to deal with because he was getting BJ's and impeachment. Could Clinton forsee 9-11? No. So he also didn't cause 9-11, but he did literally "allow" Bin Laden to carry on with his activities, which led to 9-11.

This thread is veering towards a who prevented/caused what attack, etc, when the thread is about international dimplomacy and bribery of massive scales. Failed attempts to negotiate with Iran. Blatant mockery North Korea is making of our alliance with South Korea. And promising secretary of the Navy job to a politician in exchange for not running against Obama allie Arlen Spector. Shameful stuff.

Sure, Bush didn't "allow" them much in the same way Obama "allowed" the Ft Hood attack

Spin much?

Bill Clinton came closer to killing bin Laden than Bush did. It was Bush who pulled back his troops at Tora Bora and allowed Bin Laden to escape

so when clinton was offered bin laden and refused, that is better than Bush bin Laden to escape?

Source?

It makes no sense for Clinton to say no. Even if he was in the midst of scandal this would still be a minor victory to point to try to take the heat off him.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Things with Korea and Iran have gotten much worse,not better. We really are on the brink of a terrible calamity. Kind of throws a wrench into that whole Hopey Changey Messiah thing no? The Hopey Changey nutters viciously attacked the previous administration on these same issues. Where are they today? Things are much worse not better. Haven't seen the same vicious criticisms of this administration from the Hopey Changeys. Gee,i wonder why? Hmm?

 

[ProudFossil]

And memories are so short. President George W. Bush warned us all about Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. Remember the "Axis of Evil"? Do you miss him yet?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Things with Korea and Iran have gotten worse,not better. The Hopey Changeys should think about that a bit more. This administration has handled these issues much more incompetently than the previous administration did. We really are on the brink of something terrible. God help us.

 

[Intense]

Well, let's not forget the Clinton campaign payback to Doral whereby the N. Koreans were able to acquire ballistic missle technology in the first place.

Close.... cute?..... Maybe.

Was this what you meant?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Clinton-Loral-China axis

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 26, 1998
1:00 am Eastern


By Joseph Farah
© 2010 WorldNetDaily.com




Bernard Schwartz, chief executive officer of Loral Space & Communications, tells The New York Times he considers President Clinton a friend, "but not the kind of friend that you can call upon for favors."
We're supposed to believe that Schwartz invested $1.3 million in Clinton's political campaigns without the expectation of special treatment. If that's true, you would expect Loral stockholders to demand an explanation for such reckless disregard of their interests. I doubt you'll see such a move. Because Loral got plenty of bang for its buck.

"I can say absolutely, categorically, I have never spoken with the president about any Loral business, except on one occasion," he says. Notice the careful wording of that statement. Never ... except on one occasion. Furthermore, it's clear Schwartz and his company did ask the president and his administration for favors -- for special treatment -- on more than one occasion.

Last February, Schwartz needed a quick decision from the government about the launching of a Loral satellite aboard a Chinese rocket later that month. Within two weeks the president gave Loral permission -- overruling the advice of his Justice Department, which was investigating Loral's satellite deals with China. Clinton also broke with past policy and the advice of his State Department and Pentagon.

When was the last time you got an answer -- any answer -- from the federal government in less than two weeks? This was a big favor -- a huge one. By working with the Chinese, instead of U.S. satellite launchers, the deal saved Loral potentially hundreds of millions of dollars.

Nevertheless, Schwartz maintains he never personally asked the president for anything that would benefit his company. These are lawyerly word games -- the kind America has become accustomed to since this administration came to power.

This was just the most recent favor. In 1994, Schwartz pushed hard for a seat on a trip to China led by Commerce Secretary Ron Brown. The trip paid off in spades for Loral. A meeting in Beijing with a top official led to Loral winning a deal to provide cellular telephone service to China, an agreement that will soon be worth $250 million annually.

Later, in May 1996, Schwartz wrote to Clinton urging him make the Commerce Department the clearing house for approval of export licensing of commercial satellites rather than the State Department. Once again, Schwartz got his way.

But still, we're supposed to believe that Clinton would have made the same decisions with the same timing had Schwartz not been the single biggest donor to the his political career. For Pete's sake, last year Clinton even threw Schwartz a birthday party at the White House.

None of this stuff is really new or particularly earth-shaking, however. Money has always been linked to political influence. No matter what kinds of campaign finance reforms America adopts, it simply seems to get worse. But the real horror, the real crime, the real treachery of the Clinton-Loral-China axis comes in the substance of the deals with China -- the dirty little details about technology transferred to China because of this political patronage.

This is a scandal unlike any other in American history. Clinton and Schwartz have nothing on Benedict Arnold. The sensitive technical data shared with the Chinese for simple greed and power has apparently enhanced the reliability of Beijing's long-range nuclear missiles -- missiles, by the way, targeted at the United States.

Schwartz doesn't like such talk. He objects when people like me suggest he placed his own avaricious business interests ahead of national security. But, you know what? I don't really blame Schwartz. There are always greedy businessmen willing to sell out their country's long-term interests for a little short-term financial gain. What is shocking, however, is to consider the fact that we have a president of the United States who is willing to make such treasonous decisions.

"To attach words like 'treason' and 'traitor' to these activities is a deeply disturbing development," moans Schwartz.

I'll bet it is. It's always disturbing when a criminal gets caught. It's even more disturbing when our highest elected officials, entrusted, first and foremost, with protecting the nation's vital interests, sell their political souls to nuclear-age tyrants. The only trouble I have with words like "treason" and "traitor" is that they don't seem harsh enough to describe the shameful activities of Clinton and Schwartz.


The Clinton-Loral-China axis