see, now it's rolling in. just because BNO is on twitter is not a reason to write them off; all it means is they have selected a very convenient and powerful method of distribution. Obviously using it as your only source is retarded, but 90% of the time they are the first ones to post it and thus I can be on a lookout for more info.
see, now it's rolling in. just because BNO is on twitter is not a reason to write them off; all it means is they have selected a very convenient and powerful method of distribution. Obviously using it as your only source is retarded, but 90% of the time they are the first ones to post it and thus I can be on a lookout for more info.
The problem is that they had no citations
AMP'd on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
BusterKNegativity is Boring Cynicism is Cowardice Registered Userregular
see, now it's rolling in. just because BNO is on twitter is not a reason to write them off; all it means is they have selected a very convenient and powerful method of distribution. Obviously using it as your only source is retarded, but 90% of the time they are the first ones to post it and thus I can be on a lookout for more info.
The problem is that they had no citations
Being first also means being most likely to be wrong
see, now it's rolling in. just because BNO is on twitter is not a reason to write them off; all it means is they have selected a very convenient and powerful method of distribution. Obviously using it as your only source is retarded, but 90% of the time they are the first ones to post it and thus I can be on a lookout for more info.
The problem is that they had no citations
If you scroll down their feed, a lot of their posts DO cite a source. If not, you're smart enough to use google. It's not a primary source, man. It's a tool, and should be treated as one.
see, now it's rolling in. just because BNO is on twitter is not a reason to write them off; all it means is they have selected a very convenient and powerful method of distribution. Obviously using it as your only source is retarded, but 90% of the time they are the first ones to post it and thus I can be on a lookout for more info.
No, I was writing them off because they didn't source their information and it wasn't anywhere else.
I will remain skeptical until I see the story proliferated about with some good sources.
NotASenator on
0
Options
ArtreusI'm a wizardAnd that looks fucked upRegistered Userregular
edited May 2009
What we have seen from the reliable sources is pretty in line with North Korean rhetoric thus far. I really hope we manage to keep a good policy of engagement and dialogue with them to prevent any further escalation. Unfortunately it seems like the DPRK is always moving the goalposts just out of range. If any country gave the kind of message to them that they give to us, it would be war. It is pretty frustrating.
Edit: But unless or until something happens to Kim Jong Il, I think it is just going to be nuclear sabre rattling for a while.
every few news cycles, when North Korea's pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader feels lonely or forgotten, he pulls a stunt like this, gets all the news media on him and is happy
One day North Korea is going to bomb Randall for that crack
AMP'd on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
ArtreusI'm a wizardAnd that looks fucked upRegistered Userregular
edited May 2009
Fari, North Korea has had that attitude for a long time. You do know there have been skirmishes here and there since the armistice anyway right? I am talking pretty small scale, but even a few soldiers and a boat or two is a big deal in this kind of situation. I'm hoping we are smart enough to just keep South Korea as un-involved in any seizure as possible.
But the thing that worries me is that yeah, South Korea would "win" the war if it came to that, but Seoul is within range of North Korea's artillery. So. A very short but destructive war would be bad. Hell, we don't even want the North Korean state to collapse, because that would also be very bad.
But as I've been saying, I don't think it will come to that and those articles are being alarmist.
every few news cycles, when North Korea's pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader feels lonely or forgotten, he pulls a stunt like this, gets all the news media on him and is happy
repeat ad infinitum
Zero.
That is the number of times the pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader has "pulled a stunt" like an underground nuclear test, three missile launches in two days and restarting a plutonium production plant before.
every few news cycles, when North Korea's pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader feels lonely or forgotten, he pulls a stunt like this, gets all the news media on him and is happy
repeat ad infinitum
Zero.
That is the number of times the pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader has "pulled a stunt" like an underground nuclear test, three missile launches in two days and restarting a plutonium production plant before.
don't be pedantic
he's done almost this exact thing numerous times
starting up his nuclear program and running tests? um, how do you think he's managed to blackmail the past thirty years of American presidents to give him a bunch of money and not do anything to him?
Randall_Flagg on
0
Options
ArtreusI'm a wizardAnd that looks fucked upRegistered Userregular
Kim Jong Il isn't the god emperor, its Kim So(u?)ng Il.
Kim il Sung is the President for eternity. There is no god emperor. Kim Jong Il is the "Dear Leader" while his dad was the "Glorious Leader." Unfortunately, when Kim il Sung died, even though Kim Jong Il was groomed for a long, long time to take over for his dad, it took him 3 years to solidify his power. Oh and guess how he did it? He took the power away from the party and gave it to the fucking military.
That's right. There isn't a politburo really making decisions over there. It is him, in charge of the military. Nobody knows who is going to succeed him. His kids basically all suck. So. yeah.
Posts
Hahahaha, really?
Really?
except
those articles aren't about abandoning the armistice
i assume those are being written right now
EVER
says BreakingNews with no indication of where this information is coming from.
most of their stuff has the source right in there
earlier for NK news they've been quoting AP
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_KOREAS_NUCLEAR?SITE=MALOW&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-05-27-00-13-41
i guess it's an example of twitter's forced cutting of context in order to fit in 140 characters
http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE54Q0LW20090527
no wait
another article:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25546060-12377,00.html
see, now it's rolling in. just because BNO is on twitter is not a reason to write them off; all it means is they have selected a very convenient and powerful method of distribution. Obviously using it as your only source is retarded, but 90% of the time they are the first ones to post it and thus I can be on a lookout for more info.
The problem is that they had no citations
Being first also means being most likely to be wrong
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
No, I was writing them off because they didn't source their information and it wasn't anywhere else.
I will remain skeptical until I see the story proliferated about with some good sources.
Edit: But unless or until something happens to Kim Jong Il, I think it is just going to be nuclear sabre rattling for a while.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE54Q0LW20090527
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSSEO14165620090527
So none of those articles are "the armistice is over"
They all say "NK doesn't want its ships checked, it wants to be treated like a real nation, it wants its sovreignity"
http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm
but it appears that they update daily, so you won't be getting up to the minute news from it. Well, "news".
this is totally bullshit
every few news cycles, when North Korea's pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader feels lonely or forgotten, he pulls a stunt like this, gets all the news media on him and is happy
repeat ad infinitum
But the thing that worries me is that yeah, South Korea would "win" the war if it came to that, but Seoul is within range of North Korea's artillery. So. A very short but destructive war would be bad. Hell, we don't even want the North Korean state to collapse, because that would also be very bad.
But as I've been saying, I don't think it will come to that and those articles are being alarmist.
If they want to be treated like grown ups they have to act like grown ups
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
I totally respect Kim-Jong Il
he is the only malevolent God-Emperor left in the entire world
the dude deserves some props for that
Zero.
That is the number of times the pathetic, impotent little Glorious Leader has "pulled a stunt" like an underground nuclear test, three missile launches in two days and restarting a plutonium production plant before.
he's done almost this exact thing numerous times
starting up his nuclear program and running tests? um, how do you think he's managed to blackmail the past thirty years of American presidents to give him a bunch of money and not do anything to him?
Kim il Sung is the President for eternity. There is no god emperor. Kim Jong Il is the "Dear Leader" while his dad was the "Glorious Leader." Unfortunately, when Kim il Sung died, even though Kim Jong Il was groomed for a long, long time to take over for his dad, it took him 3 years to solidify his power. Oh and guess how he did it? He took the power away from the party and gave it to the fucking military.
That's right. There isn't a politburo really making decisions over there. It is him, in charge of the military. Nobody knows who is going to succeed him. His kids basically all suck. So. yeah.
kim jong-il is the "dear leader," but kim il-sung is the "great leader" and "eternal president"
edit dang, beat