Palins latest gaffe

kathaksung

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
160
Palins latest gaffe

When asked by radio host Glenn Beck how she would handle the recent escalation in aggression in Korea she answered.......
"This speaks to a bigger picture here that certainly scares me in terms of our national security policy," said Palin.
"But obviously we've gotta stand with our North Korean allies"

Beck, the host, corrected her: "South Korea."
Palin then responded: "Eh, yeah. And we're also bound by prudence to stand with our South Korean allies, yes."


Read more: http://www.politic.co.uk/18316-palins-latest-gaffe.html#ixzz16nWo1zWW

Mark Joyella | 11:28 am, November 24th, 2010

http://www.mediaite.com/online/sarah-palin-confuses-whos-on-our-side-in-northsouth-korea/

Palin is just the candidate the ruler of this country needs.

Bush is an idiot who lost valuation of war and peace, right and wrong. He is a "yes" man, just know to follow the order of his master. That's why he was selected to be president for two terms.

Palin seems better. She has little knowledge and common sense in her small brain. She could be manipulated easier than Bush. I think she will be selected the next president.

What the Feds needed is a figure with appealing exterior but have a mindless brain.
 
Werbung:
This is such a weak criticism she misspoke... Im almost certain you could find a better criticism than that.
 
This is such a weak criticism she misspoke... Im almost certain you could find a better criticism than that.

I agree, as much as I dislike her, but some love to harp on those..like Pandora who seems to have disappeared...with that Obama 56 states thing..and what have you ( but not the McCain Border of Pakistan and Iraq one oddly)
 
I agree, as much as I dislike her, but some love to harp on those..like Pandora who seems to have disappeared...with that Obama 56 states thing..and what have you ( but not the McCain Border of Pakistan and Iraq one oddly)

Its silly we all make these mistakes not worth the time of day to mock them. Hell I dont even know why I bothered to post in this thread.
 
Its silly we all make these mistakes not worth the time of day to mock them. Hell I dont even know why I bothered to post in this thread.

becuse you know someplace people are making a big deal out of it, and its good to smack them up side the head from time to time...heck, I know most doing it are on my side politically...but I try to be fair on those slips....maybe fun for a joke or 2, but I don't take it as anything more then that
 
becuse you know someplace people are making a big deal out of it, and its good to smack them up side the head from time to time...heck, I know most doing it are on my side politically...but I try to be fair on those slips....maybe fun for a joke or 2, but I don't take it as anything more then that

Palin's gaffe aside, does anyone know what her ideas were for how she would respond to a situation such as this?
 
Palin's gaffe aside, does anyone know what her ideas were for how she would respond to a situation such as this?

I have not heard her say anything..outside generics like get tough or something...I doubt she could give much detail on anything about it..
I would not realy take much weight on how to deal with it, from anyone that did not have a decent or recent access to our more classified info on there military and nuclear program anyway...if you don't have that access,,,its really just a guess or at least a decent understanding of both our military and there capabilities... I think what people need to accept is , there is no good way to deal with them...just a least bad at best.
 
I have not heard her say anything..outside generics like get tough or something...I doubt she could give much detail on anything about it..
I would not realy take much weight on how to deal with it, from anyone that did not have a decent or recent access to our more classified info on there military and nuclear program anyway...if you don't have that access,,,its really just a guess or at least a decent understanding of both our military and there capabilities... I think what people need to accept is , there is no good way to deal with them...just a least bad at best.

You would need that information if you were only approaching the problem from a very narrow viewpoint of "military" being the only way to "deal" with North Korea... I do not think that is the case.
 
You would need that information if you were only approaching the problem from a very narrow viewpoint of "military" being the only way to "deal" with North Korea... I do not think that is the case.

well without knowing the actual chances of knocking out there nuclear program in a military strike...or a better idea of who and what powers would take over if you where to say take out the leadership in some way...its hard to know how good of a option they are...and would like the one deciding to have a better idea what china would do in any situation...for real, not just what they say publicly ( to the best we can know)

Problem as I see it being realistic is,
Sanctions are pretty limited to power as they are so hard already
Military options...basicly mean you have to roll the dice on a full scale war..
and our intel is to poor to do much in terms of a regime change push I think and get anyone we could deal with...
 
well without knowing the actual chances of knocking out there nuclear program in a military strike...or a better idea of who and what powers would take over if you where to say take out the leadership in some way...its hard to know how good of a option they are...and would like the one deciding to have a better idea what china would do in any situation...for real, not just what they say publicly ( to the best we can know)

Problem as I see it being realistic is,
Sanctions are pretty limited to power as they are so hard already
Military options...basicly mean you have to roll the dice on a full scale war..
and our intel is to poor to do much in terms of a regime change push I think and get anyone we could deal with...

Again, this limited scope of "military strike" and "take out their leadership." We don't have to eliminate the leadership of North Korea to contain them.

Remember under the Bush Administration when the Treasury Department basically went to banks all over the world and told them if they did business with North Korea they could not do business with the USA. That was a major blow to the North Korean regime, and we did not have to use the military, or go to the UN for more sanctions.... we need more thinking outside the box.


As an aside, if I remember right, you said you have a BA in International Relations right? Do you mind if I ask from where?
 
You would need that information if you were only approaching the problem from a very narrow viewpoint of "military" being the only way to "deal" with North Korea... I do not think that is the case.

If the north ever uses its army to attack the south (as it did before) then you would certainly have to deal with it from a viewpoint of "military".
 
Again, this limited scope of "military strike" and "take out their leadership." We don't have to eliminate the leadership of North Korea to contain them.

Remember under the Bush Administration when the Treasury Department basically went to banks all over the world and told them if they did business with North Korea they could not do business with the USA. That was a major blow to the North Korean regime, and we did not have to use the military, or go to the UN for more sanctions.... we need more thinking outside the box.


As an aside, if I remember right, you said you have a BA in International Relations right? Do you mind if I ask from where?

no my BA is in Pol Sci...I minored in IR...and have a AAS in Marketing...the BA is from UW River Falls ( Wisconsin)

and yes I recall what Bush did...the problem is...he did it...and where has that gotten us today? Unless we can get China, who has shown its not willing I think most can see, to cut off its help of North Korea...the leadership will stand, it will still have a powerful military, it will still have nukes, and it will still be a aggressor looking to to make shows of force to get the worlds attention and force us to bargain....and those actions could grow in size if they don't get what they want...leading to actions we may not have control over.

Sanctions I think can work..in a place like Iran..where the people, while limited have a voice and do have a understanding of whats going on...I am not sure the people of North Korea are going to put the pressure on there leaders to make the changes we need to see happen.

Also just putting as much Econ pressure as we can on them...could force some powers within Korea to move and possibly see a coup...but as for if who took over would be better is hard to say...I don't have much knowledge, nor do I think many in our government...of who such people could be, or how they would react.

so far our "containing" of North Korea has ended up with them getting nukes, sinking Naval ships, Firing on towns with Artillery....Now from a overall standpoint, the ship and Island issue could be lived with ( given the worse options) but how Secure can we feel with North Korea , as a nuclear power, and its current leadership....under and sense of "contained"

Unless the US is willing to lean on China enough, I think our Efforts are going to fall short...and the US does not have the willpower to lean on China as hard as needed I think.
 
Werbung:
If the north ever uses its army to attack the south (as it did before) then you would certainly have to deal with it from a viewpoint of "military".

I will make a bet with you right now that North Korea is not going to invade South Korea any time soon.
 
Back
Top