North Korea Provokes, Dems Retreat

A missile defense system for the eastern seaboard that was dropped from the final version of the 2013 Defense Authorization Act is getting a second look, in light of North Korea’s escalating threats. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) characterized that threat as a “wake up call,” noting that “the next issue that needs to be taken up right away is [a] missile defense site to protect the East Coast of this country.”

It would appear to be a logical argument in light of the administration’s recent move to shift $1 billion in defense spending from developing a missile shield for Poland and Bulgaria, to adding 14 land-based interceptors in Alaska. The move would expand to 44 the number of long-range ballistic missile interceptors that comprise part of the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system.

On March 19, Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee used the decision to beef up West Coast defenses as a rationale to begin pressuring the Pentagon for a similar effort on the East Coast. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) took the issue up with Gen. Charles Jacoby, head of the Northern Command, which is responsible for the U.S. missile defense system. Inhofe contended that the Alaska system was a step in the right direction, “but that doesn’t resolve the problem of the East Coast,” he said during the hearing. “The threat is very needs to be corrected … it needs to be addressed,” he added.

Jacoby was forced to admit that even with the Alaska site, America was not in “an optimum position” to defend itself from ballistic missile threats, but he assured Inhofe that the Pentagon took the emerging threat of such attacks seriously. “I think that we need to continue to assess the threat and make sure that we stay ahead of it and not fall behind it,” Jacoby responded. “I think that that is a process that we are committed to.”

Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) shifted the discussion from North Korea to Iran, citing reports predicting that Iran could have an intercontinental ballistic missile as early as 2015, and asking Jacoby how long it would take to construct an East Coast system. His answer was hardly reassuring, calling it an “an issue of years,” due in large measure to the reality that the timeframe would be affected by how long it took to complete an environmental impact statement. Yet the general further noted that the timeframe “could be affected by urgency, any increased threat.”

A Congressional Research Service report written in 2012 dismissed the seriousness of the 2015 threshold. “It is increasingly uncertain whether Iran will be able to achieve an ICBM capability by 2015 for several reasons,” the CRS report concluded. “Iran does not appear to be receiving the degree of foreign support many believe would be necessary, Iran has found it increasingly difficult to acquire certain critical components and materials because of sanctions, and Iran has not demonstrated the kind of flight-test program many view as necessary to produce an ICBM.”

Such reports are hardly reassuring. A 2007 report by U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Iran had completely abandoned its nuclear program in 2003. Now the public is being reassured that ICBM capability is yet another straw man erected by Republicans such as Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), who contended that the failure to build an East Coast system before 2018 or 2019, even if we began today is “unacceptable.”  “The United States, as soon as possible, should begin the construction of an East Coast missile defense site,” she argued.

It is an argument that should resonate even more in light of North Korea’s announcement on Wednesday that it had officially authorized plans to conduct nuclear strikes on targets in the United States. Yesterday, they doubled down, claiming they had the capability of striking America with “smaller, lighter and diversified” nuclear weapons. That claim was apparently a rebuttal aimed at U.S. intelligence officials who contend that the Communist nation’s nuclear payload is too heavy to be deployed on ICBMs. Yet a senior official, speaking on condition of anonymity, revealed that the military is sending anti-ballistic missiles to Guam, because of increasing concerns that North Korean improvements on the range of its ballistic missiles may put Guam in danger.

Considering the dubious track record of threat assessments made by American intelligence officials over the course of several years, an uncomfortable question arises: what if they have underestimated North Korean capabilities? Right now, U.S. officials admit that North Korean missiles are already capable of reaching Alaska and Hawaii, as well as Seattle and San Diego in the near future. Furthermore, Adm. James Winnefeld, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters in the Pentagon on March 15 that one of North Korea’s ICBMs has emerged as a threat “a little bit faster than we expected.”

It is precisely these realities, along with the threat of an apocalyptic-minded regime in Iran, that ought to drive the debate on an East Coast missile shield. Yet for that to happen, Democrats would be forced to admit that their ridicule of such a system, going all the way back to belittling Ronald Reagan’s initial effort in 1983 as “Star Wars,” was short-sighted. They would be forced to own the reality that Obama administration’s gutting of America’s missile defense, one that included pulling the plug in 2009 on the same Alaskan system it is rebuilding now, was nothing less than ideologically motivated folly.

That scale-back also included the downsizing of the Airborne Laser program, capable of taking out enemy missiles during their early launch phase, and the elimination of the Multiple Kill Vehicle and Kinetic Energy Interceptor that would have offered a better chance of taking out the decoys included in an ICBM attack that make taking out the missiles themselves far more difficult.

All of these developments go hand-in-hand with the Democratic Party’s insistence that much of America’s military capabilities are unnecessary (especially if such spending cuts into entitlement programs). It is an idea that dovetails quite neatly with President Obama’s dream of a nuclear-free world, one he believes can be achieved with little more than deft diplomacy, in combination with his personal charm. It coincides with the reality that newly-appointed Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was once on the board of the Ploughshares Fund, which has opposed the new Alaskan site. It is aligned with Secretary of State John Kerry’s inexplicable statement on Tuesday, in which he contended that the United States “will not accept the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) as a nuclear state.” That it already is has apparently eludes Kerry.

Thus, it is unsurprising that outgoing Senate Armed Services chief Carl Levin (D-MI) stayed true to ideological form, dismissing the idea that North Korean provocation necessitates the construction of an East Coast shield. “People who have reached their conclusions” on an East Coast defense system “need to step back a little” and “see what steps DOD has already taken to mitigate the threat,” Levin said, referring to the recent buildup in Alaska.

House Republicans refuse to accept Levin’s assertion. On March 19, a letter from 19 Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee requested that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel include “not less than $250 million” for the construction of a 20-missile interceptor facility for the Eastern Seaboard in the Pentagon’s 2014 budget. The request marks the second time in two years Republicans have asked for a system that compliments the one on the West Coast. “There is no legitimate reason to not similarly defend the eastern third of the U.S. from Iranian missiles,” the letter states.

Or missile attacks by any rogue state for that matter, which is precisely the point. It is worth remembering that the American left assailed George W. Bush for his “preventive,” or “preemptive,” war doctrine. An effective missile shield protecting as much of America as possible would seem like a no-brainer compromise between proactive and reactive warfare, yet as Phyllis Schlafly explains, a defensive missile shield “always posed the number-one non-negotiable issue between the U.S. and our enemies and, incomprehensively, between conservatives and the Left.”

Thoughtful Americans understand that technology, like time, marches on. At some point North Korea or Iran, or perhaps some other nation currently below the radar, will have the capability of striking any part of America with a ballistic missile containing a nuclear warhead. It makes sense to protect ourselves as best, and as quickly, as we can, even if such protection isn’t perfect. Yet as recently as late last year, Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system stunned the world when it achieved an 85 percent success rate in knocking terrorist missiles out of the sky. Missile defense will only improve in the future, and the Left’s tired arguments that such systems are “wastes” and the products of militarism will only become more irrelevant.

It is time for America to invest in domestic defense systems that protect the whole of the United States, not just parts of it. With the fanatical regime in North Korea increasing its threats against the U.S. and the apocalyptic government of Iran racing toward a nuclear weapon, America cannot afford to be complacent.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.


    The islamofascist regime of iran is watching.

    • Roger

      And now Iran knows that as long as the EPA thinks some endangered species won't like it, we can't build it.

      • patriothere

        Did you try to make sense?

        • Roger

          Did you post that paid comment correctly for your handlers?

          6 minutes ago @ – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
          I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

  • truebearing

    With the Left coast coming into North Korea's range, I expect some pressure on Obama to live up to his presidential oath, but he won't. The only thing that will motivate Obama and his handlers is the prospect of losing big in the next election. Even liberals are smart enough to fear nukes. Let the polling begin.

    • gerry

      It would be extremely amusing to see the libs reaction if Hawaii and the west coast were under the receiving hand of a nuke attack.


        They would blame the US as the regressive "progressives" blamed the US for 9/11.

    • Drakken

      Well if San Fransico happens to go, I certainly won't miss it.

      • trickyblain

        You certainly can't spell it.


    The North Korean Kommies could put their rockets on ships and sail to the eastern Pacific or the Western Atlantic.

    The US needs to spit in the little fat boys face.

    He'll lose face, respect, and be over thrown.

    • ltcdmward

      And Iran or any other "power" (or lack of power) entity who can get inside our OODA loop and just cause a close enough proximity EMP. And what about from the Caribbean?

  • AdinaK

    It is no accident that the Radical-in-Chief has retreated. Most instructive, one must compare his lack of mettle, regarding the basket case of N Korea, in juxtaposition to the madmen ruling Iran, as the US (and gang) jaw-jaws Iran to the WMD finish line. Therefore, this was recently asserted –

    Adina kutnicki, Israel

    • Roger

      Showing weakness in the face on an aggressive enemy is a recipe for disaster.
      If only our president didn't want to destroy us….

      • EarlyBird

        What happens between the US and NK is not a comment on the size of your genitalia, Roger. Neither side wants a war.

        The US decided not to move forward with a planned show of force, because NK may misinterpret it and respond WITH said unwanted war. It's called being prudent and mature, something many on this board can't understand.

        Iran, NK and other enemies will not be more "emboldened" by our actions.

        • Roger

          Showing weakness in the face of an aggressive enemy is a recipe for disaster.
          And self defense is not a vice.

          You want all the same things obama does, are you Hillary or something?

          • EarlyBird

            Thank God cooler heads prevailed when we had real threats arrayed against us, i.e. the Soviet ICBMs. Unnecessarily ratcheting up tensions in a manner which could accidentally lead to war is not smart or necessary.

            Some times, the strong party can be relaxed, while the silly upstart has to act big.

          • Roger

            Thank The Lord we had spines when real threats arrayed against us.

            Reagan won the cold war, there is a nobility to winning.

            Some times, the smart strong people make liberals and diplomats look like limp wristed pansies.

          • EarlyBird

            Reagan – and many other serious anti-Soviets – won the Cold War, and God bless them for that. You'll notice that the Cold War was won by it remaining "Cold," and letting the Soviet system collapse.

            Are you saying that the NK regime is not ultimately going to collapse? Are just posting for the sake of posting because you're bored again?

          • Roger

            Why do you want to pretend and change the argument?

            I say Reagan won, and that winning has it's merits and you try to twist and morph it into something else.

            You don't care about winning you want nuanced diplomacy. I say that sucks and it wont' make the world safer as long as bad guys use tools like you to keep doing back things, like Iran with it's nuclear program.

          • patriothere

            Reagan was a nut case like you.

          • Roger

            I would expect an iranian paid hack sent here to act a fool would say that when told too.

            6 minutes ago @ – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
            I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

      • patriothere

        Yeah cause going to war with north korea and china is a great idea! Idiot.

        • Roger

          What else have your handlers told you to post?

          6 minutes ago @ – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
          I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

  • Gamaliel

    The comment that a missile defense system would have to wait for an environmental impact statement would be comical if it wasn't so tragic. What about the environmental impact of a nuclear bomb? Also the Democrats says missile defense systems are unnecessary because they want the money to go for entitlement programs so they can buy votes. What good are entitlement programs if everybody is dead.

    • gerry

      Well the fat guy in North Korea might provide with the required impact.Then they would have all the time in the world to study all the angles of it.This would be quite enjoyable!

    • ltcdmward

      Precisely. Giving new meaning to the term "Impact Statement". Statement, indeed. All the big Democovet cities on the West and East coasts in the crosshairs: Boston, New York, Washington DC, Atlanta, L.A., San Francisco, Portland, Seattle. Then of course there's the people and a very big reduction in "entitlements". As mentioned by 'Screw Socialism' above, a not so big freighter (freighters?) disguised as a cruise or small range ballistic missile launcher. And why not just an EMP attack close by.


      Gamaliel AKBAR!

  • Chezwick

    It's a dangerous game, but if Obama had any vision, he would use this crises (manufactured entirely in Pyongyang) as a gift,…a way to isolate North Korea, detach it from China and Russia by beating the drums of war and trumpeting how destabilizing the regime is to international security. By ratcheting UP the pressure (instead of de-fusing it, which seems to be the preferred policy), we could compel China to have to choose between propping up an anachronistic, unstable, failure of a regime,….or ridding the world of a such a menace, once and for all.

    The US position should be openly enunciated….that a short-term Chinese military presence in the North would be an acceptable outcome if or when the regime collapses….and that afterwards, American withdrawal from the South and Chinese withdrawal from the North will be synchronized as the peninsula is re-unified.

    But such a bold policy initiative is beyond the grasp of this Administration. Instead, the crises will subside, North Korea will survive,…and today's dozen or so North Korean ICBMs that can reach Alaska will be tomorrow's DOZENS of ICBMs that will be able to reach all of the USA.

    • gerry

      The only policy that should be enunciated is that this is a Chinese problem.The point that should be made is that the US,cannot anymore prevent the Sout Koreans going nuclear,and that they would certainly be followed by other countries in the region.This would be a direct result of the Chinese getting the ball rolling!

      • Chezwick

        Not a bad suggestion….except that the South Koreans have expressed no desire to go nuclear. However, Japan's new government could be nationalistic enough that the threat might pay dividends.

        • Drakken

          You are so right about Japan Chezwick, they are not feeling the love as so to speak from the Obummer adminstration are are increasingly beefing up their defences in spite of what Obummer and company say.

        • johnnywoods

          A nuclear Japan? Now that would get some Chinese panties in a wad.

    • Looking4Sanity

      Dude. You're assuming Obama even HAS a pair. Something like that would never happen under this regime. Precisely why the world is acting like the substitute teacher just left the classroom. Everyone knows that no one is home at the White House.

      • Roger

        He doesn't want us to stay a superpower, being taken down a notch by this NK regime would further that goal. Obama really does hate this country.

    • EarlyBird

      Very sane, Chezwick. Especially this:

      "The US position should be openly enunciated….that a short-term Chinese military presence in the North would be an acceptable outcome if or when the regime collapses….and that afterwards, American withdrawal from the South and Chinese withdrawal from the North will be synchronized as the peninsula is re-unified."

      The reason NK is still around and kept that way by China is because of the US military presence. They don't want to rub shoulders with our troops in a future reunified Korea, and so us NK as a buffer. We leave and we'll see a very quick change of the tune in NK.

      • Ghostwriter

        Yeah,EarlyBird. We leave and the change in tone will be "Give us South Korea or else."

  • jacob

    A comedian once stated that an American politician is so smart, he is so shrewd, it is impossible
    to tell where the sage ends and the fool begins…
    Communist China holds the leash of the North Korean dog but I guess it s too deep for our
    political leaders to read the riot act to China :
    Either stop your dog or we will jack up import tariffs for all your products and you ain't gone like it….
    Does this call for a PhD to do or Obamba fears China will not loan him more money…?????

    • gerry

      No need to tell them that import tariffs will be jacked up.Just tell them forcefully in a very diplomatic way that the US,cannot stop South Korea from going nuclear and that Japan will certainly follow.This would call the Chines' attention!Quite sure the problem will quickly be solved.


        Taiwan would join the nuclear club too.

  • Softly Bob

    Hawaii is at greatest threat, so you think that Obama would at least feel some 'nostalgic' duty to protect his own birthplace.
    Oh, yeah, I forgot NKorea haven't threatened Indonesia have they?

    • Gamaliel

      He is helping out his birthplace, lots of American tax dollars are being given to Kenya.

      • WilliamJamesWard

        Also the devil is getting his due…………………..William

  • Mladen Andrijasevic

    Fortunately, in contrast to Iran, MAD still works with North Korea

    Or does it? Is Kim-Jong-un another Fidel Castro?

    James Woolsey:
    For example, we know now from Soviet documents that were released or stolen after the Cold War ended, that Castro pushed very hard during the Cuban missile crisis for essentially there be a nuclear war. Happily he did not care if Cuba would be destroyed. He wanted so much that the United States be destroyed, and he was not even a religious fanatic. He was just a fanatic sociopath. That almost tipped things into a tragic direction, but happily on the other side the Soviet Union was basically a bunch of thugs with a cover story their ideology was very substantially dead. By the early sixties there were more true believing revolutionary Marxist-Leninists in the bookstores of the Upper-West Side of Manhattan by that time, than I think there were in the Kremlin. Those guys did not want die for the principle of each according to his ability, to each according to his need – they wanted to remodel their dachas.
    They were not, on the whole, sociopaths. Unfortunately, the Castro model, the Hitler model, the model of the sociopath is one we may well need to deal with in Iran.

    We were, in a way, lucky with our opponent in the Cold War because they were thugs with a cover story.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "Fortunately, in contrast to Iran, MAD still works with North Korea …Or does it? Is Kim-Jong-un another Fidel Castro?"

      Even if it works to deter launching nukes, there is a lot to be gained within the scope of all this bluster. Guess who's on the losing end of these games?

    • EarlyBird

      We truly were a hair's breadth away from a nuclear exchange during the Cuban Missile Crisis. What ultimately derailed it was US toughness and back-channel exchanges with the Soviets. But the fact that we even had back channel exchanges with a mortal enemy is a lesson to be learned.

      Among the things that make NK and Iran so dangerous is that we have no back channel communications with those governments, only public pronouncements. NK and Iran bluster in public and either ratchet up the bluster, or back off, in public. The publicness of it makes that tough.

      Our old Cold Warriors knew that we're always better off talking to our enemies than not.

      • Ghostwriter

        But,EarlyBird,the Soviets may have been bad guys but they were rational. They didn't want to die themselves. The Mad Mullahs of Iran and the fruitcakes running North Korea aren't rational. We can talk to them until we're blue in the face. It's NOT GOING TO WORK!

  • κατεργάζομαι

    I fe-e-e-e-e-l SO secure with Community Organizer in Chief Obama, at the helm of America's vital National Security.

    ………Have you looked at the City of Chicago recently?

    ~ – Air-Ball Obama (HAIR BALL) invites Black Civil Disorder!

    Moreover, the Obama administration is calling Nidal Hasan's brutal mass shooting with 13 counts of premeditated terrorist murder at one of our own military bases simply,…
    …"An act of work-place violence."

    America's Chickens are roosting in the West Wing……….

    • jakespoon

      You know what piles up under a chicken roost,don't you?And that's the kind of President we have.

  • κατεργάζομαι

    When a CNN reporter axed President AirBall-Obama what his reaction would be if a North Korean missile struck an American city.

    Air-Ball-Obama's response, "Ah,…ah,….ah, ah it all depends on if the city was in a Red State."

    • jakespoon

      Why would the little psycho threaten to nuke Austin,Tx. Crazy.

  • hikerdude

    This is the price we are paying for not winning a War since WW II . Why even engage in war if you don't plan on defeating your enemy ? We had better hope North Vietnam doesn't go neucular.
    WW III may be loomingin 2013 .
    It will be tough for George Clooney to hold a $40,000 a plate dinner for the B.O. if N.Korea sends a Nuke to California . The upside is no THIRD TERM for the B.O.

    • EarlyBird

      "This is the price we are paying for not winning a War since WW II . Why even engage in war if you don't plan on defeating your enemy ? We had better hope North Vietnam doesn't go neucular."

      It is the price for never bringing our troops home after having fought the Korean War sixty years ago. We would not be in this crisis today if US troops didn't threate both NK and China by being stationed, unnecessarily, in South Korea.

      China doesn't want to fix NK and thereby have it reunify with SK, for a number of reasons, the biggest being that a reunification would put US soldiers on China's border. If we pulled out, we'd see a very quick change in NK.

      (FYI, there hasn't been a "North Vietnam" since the '70s.)

      • Ghostwriter

        Yeah. North Korea threatening all of Asia if we left. Please,EarlyBird. Why don't you live in the real world instead of your fantasy one?

  • Donald DaCosta

    Obama, official spokesperson for the pacifist left, believes, as they do, that America is the only terrorist nation in the world and that eliminating that "threat to world peace" will result in? you guessed it……. world peace. He can probably produce texts, lesson plans and "intellectual" treatises from his college days, written by tenured professors, that "prove this beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt," despite all opinions otherwise and despite the "distorted" history that prevailed before these "geniuses" decided their post historical musings were obviously more accurate versions of the truth, their truth, that which they need to believe to support their Utopian ideology.

    I said, before the 2008 election, that a President Obama would be a disaster for this country. Nothing that has happened under his watch since has persuaded me otherwise. Consider that EPA approval is “required” before an east coast ballistic missile defense system can be implemented (the genesis of this idiocy cannot be laid exclusively at the feet of Obama). Off topic but equally demonstrative, their positions on the Keystone Pipeline, Green energy, Anthropogenic Global Warming, the moratorium on fossil fuel exploration and production and Anti-Fracking zealotry. The environment uber alles. Reality is a fiction. No greater examples of the progressive left's Utopian, dictatorial, mindset, that which informs all of their destructive policies.

    The problem here is exacerbated when the progressive left proceeds down this path, the inevitable failures occur and they are able to successfully blame these failures on feckless, gutless, conservatives, republicans, Tea Baggers, etc. who, with few friends in the media that controls what is euphemistically called the “News,” flounder about, wringing their hands, struggling to defend themselves before they face their next election defeat. Where oh where is Ronald Reagan II??

    America has descended or is certainly descending into a very dangerous and vulnerable place.

  • marios

    Obama's appeasements before Islamo-Nazis regimes and his repeatedly apologizing for our Great country "faults" convinced all the World and sure, our enemies that we are weak country. Barak Hussein Obama embolden our enemies and North Korea's demarche is one of it result. Radicalization of the ME where pro-Western regimes were toppled and Power seized Muslim Brotherhood, salafits and probably Al Quade is another result. He wanted destroy our country and he did it. Corrupted, biased, controlled by WH and Co MSM will cover everything. So he and Dem's don't care actually what's happened with us.

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Obama's rule learned early on by one of his greatest teachers…."What me worry?"….William

  • Looking4Sanity

    Has anyone else noticed the earthquakes popping off in that part of the world lately? Quite a coincidence that days after little "mentally" Ill starts making threats they start getting 5.9's and 7.2's in that part of the world. Someone must be playing the HAARP again.

    • 4_Constitution

      I thought this would put a smile on your face.

      • Looking4Sanity

        Indeed it did! The comments were even more humorous than the article. Anonymous ain't as anonymous a they thought they were. I'd be looking for a visit from the Mossad if I were them. I just can't help myself…I love Israel!

        • 4_Constitution

          The hacker was arrested in Jordan.

          • Looking4Sanity

            It's beyond funny that all the nerds in America couldn't unmask these idiots and Israel popped them like a teenage zit in less than a week or so. That sanity I've been looking for in the world? Apparently Israel has been hoarding most of it all along!

            The comments on weaselzippers get funnier and more prescient as the story progresses. Apparently, we'd have been in better company hanging out with zipper weasels than 75% of those so called "wolverines". The weasels all seem to be on the same page!

            Thanks for that delightful update! ;O)

          • 4_Constitution

            LOL….Paulbots definitely don't have a sense of humor and I have NO doubt they pestered Rob until he shut it down. Oh well, they can all "make a difference on Facebook" or whatever else they do besides drugs. They don't have a real plan to take America back besides voting "other" and posting old videos of their Messiah who can cheat, lie and steal like the rest of 'em in the District of Corruption.

            Israel rocks and we're thinking of emigrating there….J/K. :o)

          • Looking4Sanity

            I've thought seriously about going there myself upon occasion. The only thing holding me back is my obligation to family, and a promise I made to God to try and get through this life without taking anyone else's. So far I've lived up to both. Just lucky, I guess…especially with the attitude I'm saddled with.

          • 4_Constitution

            ROTFL. You can be sure I wouldn't spend one thin dime on this: The Ron Paul homeschool curriculum.

          • Looking4Sanity

            I found this quote particularly hysterical:

            “For people who have been wondering what Ron Paul has been up to since retiring from Congress, then here’s your answers,” Woods said in announcing the start of the program. “This, I am convinced, will prove to be Ron Paul’s most significant contribution to the cause of liberty.”

            So…he sat in Congress for 24 years, and is "only now" making his "most significant contribution" to liberty? What a load of beans! What a shyster and flim-flam artist he is! I'm with you. I wouldn't let this psychopath's thoughts anywhere near my children.

  • Western Spirit

    An Nuclear attack is coming. As the egoists and crazies of the world get nuclear power the bombs will drop there is no doubt about it.

    America's best defense is to return to its roots of integrity and unity but that's not going to happen. We're going to keep going downhill spiritually and therefore be physically blinded by the immorality of the times.

    Let the good times roll because tomorrow, without question, will bring the unthinkable as long as lack of restraint is the zeitgeist of the times.

    When restraint is lacking in our lives and is a worldwide phenomenon, we must know that without worldwide restraint there is no tomorrow. But then wisdom is also lacking in the world today.

  • lanovelhistory

    Alaska the "East Coast"? Surely the excellent Ahlert and the admirable Ayotte mean the West Coast?

    • WatcherOntheWall

      Did you read the article?
      Congress is asking for 'a missile defense system for the eastern seaboard,' because, 'Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee used the decision to beef up West Coast defenses as a rationale to begin pressuring the Pentagon for a similar effort on the East Coast.'
      Rest assured that Senator Ayotte meant the EAST coast. Please read the entire article
      before responding. . . .

  • nickly999

    The American people voted, Obama was democratically elected and the the world will pay a heavy price for that. In the same way that the German paid a heavy price for electing Hitler. Just goes to show you just how effective and destructive propaganda can be.

    Although it has to be said that Hitler would have NEVER been elected had the German people not been in such a desperate situation.

    What excuse do Americans have? BTW, I'm actually interested to know and I'm not being derogatory towards Americans. Are the Media to blame for this and if they are should they be brought to justice at some point in the future?

  • Cathy

    Reagan Outlaws Russia

    "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes," President Ronald Reagan joked during a sound check prior to a radio address to the nation in 1984 at the height of the Cold War.

  • Leslie Satenstein

    The new anti-ballistic shield will knock down a 737 plane that is coming in too fast. Better to explode the plane in the air, than to have it land on civilian houses.

  • Cathy

    North Korea posts shocking YouTube video of New York in flames after 'nuclear attack' on America… as Michael Jackson's 'We Are The World' plays in the background
    5 February 2013


  • john

    North Korea is only barking. If they are really provoking war with the US they may have something coming they don't like. If they don't shut up they could be awakening by an abomb

    • trouble06

      Are you serious? It wouldn't surprise me if this President did nothing IF there was a direct hit in the US from NK. He's a woosie. Although I don't want a nuclear war there has to be some semblance of standing your ground instead of capitulating.

      • EarlyBird

        How have we actually "capitulated," though? Did we hand over an aircraft carrier or Guam to North Korea?

        That NK idiot is blustering to try to get something from us, probably money, but not a war, surely. Let him bluster. It means nothing to us. And by backing off of a planned show of force that could be misinterpreted by that paranoid regime, we don't accidentally start a war which neither side wants.

        As long as we don't give him something, and don't get into a war, the US wins, and the evil midgets lose, again.

        • Roger

          We cancelled a missile test so we wouldn't enflame the passions of the NK.

          It was reported on Al Jazeera and linked on drudge.

          • EarlyBird

            It was so it would not be misinterpreted as a strike. But let's say for argument' sake that it was so as to not "inflame the passions of NK."

            So what? Are we so insecure that we have to be worked up by this gnat? We're the United States of America for God's sake.

          • Roger

            We are a super power, even if liberals hate that and want to destroy it.

            We could have launched it quietly and unless it was released to the press nobody would have known. Announcing it and broadcasting it was as stupid as paying a bully for the right to eat our own lunch. Weakness breeds contempt.

          • EarlyBird

            The North Koreans would know if we were flying B-52s around their airspace, doing naval maneuvers off its coast, etc. That's the entire point of "show of force" maneuvers, you moron.

            Go find a hobby.

          • Roger

            Go find a brain, we have stealth bombers.
            There is more to a 'show of force' than just having toys out moving around.
            The will to win matters, and Obama doesn't seem to have that.

            And NK seems to understand he's missing it.
            That's why weakness in the face of an aggressive enemy is dangerous.

  • Asher

    This is the outcome when you have idiots and appeasists running the country. Kim Jong Un is another untried Tinhorn Dictator who wants to be recognized, he just loves Dennis Rodman, but is there anyone that can talk rationality to him…Doesn't look like it! Our celebrities go over there and think its cool to hobnob with Dictators, so hope they are the first ones to find out if we get bombed! NKorea may be able to reach the West Coast with missiles.

  • EarlyBird

    A question begs to be asked: What are we still doing on the Korean Peninsula? We fought the Korean War over 60 years ago. South Korea is more than capable of taking care of itself on its own, and with the help of US weapons.

    A couple of others are: Why doesn't China force NK to behave, or better yet, to follow China's own example of opening up its economy and joining the world?

    China wants to use NK as a buffer against the US military presence in South Korea. China gives NK just enough money and support to remain a basket case hostile to the South. If NK reformed, or totally failed, it could become unified again with SK and to China that would mean 25,000 American troops on its border, something it does not want.

    Just another reason to bring our boys home.

    • Roger

      Freedom for SK is a good thing.

      You don't seem to value the things our veterans fought to put in place in as many places as the politicians would allow.

      • EarlyBird

        Freedom for SK is a good thing. Freedom for NK would be a good thing. I'm a big fan of freedom.

        Try to follow the bouncing ball of my argument: as long as US forces are in SK, China doesn't want it's satellite, NK, to reform and re-unify with SK, because it would mean that China suddenly has 25,000 very well-armed US troops on its border. Which is why we need to come home, and should have a long time ago. Our forces there are redundant to SK security. Get it?

        As for your nonsense about me not appreciating freedom, lil' Rogie, I served in uniform whereas I bet you did not. And, speaking specifically speaking of Korea, my father and uncle both served in that war, my uncle a combat Marine. Korea was one of the most noble causes we fought during the 20th Century.

        Go soak your silly partisan head. And shave that hideous moustache while you're at it.

        • Roger

          How about you soak your silly partisan head in this.
          They are animals and if we don't treat them accordingly we get bitten.

          And if you want to do the veteran routine both my grandparents, my father, an uncle and brother, along with a nephew served. So what, I'm speaking for them and they'd say a lot more. I try to be polite unlike them. They'd just call you a well deserved name.

          Neville Chamberlain didn't bring peace, and neither did stopping halfway up the Korean peninsula.

          • EarlyBird

            You're a bigot, and a fool. Now even the North Koreans are "animals," with motives that are utterly incomprehnsible to us, killer robots who must be destroyed before they destroy us. The only way that the US and NK will ever end its conflict is if one party is annihilated. Aggression is the only way.

            Like we can't possibly figure this out in a manner which actually extricates ourselves from an unnecessary conflict. Duh.

            What a simpleton!

            No, moron, we get the eff out of SK, because our presence there is no longer necessary to its or our security, and suddenly the entire NK regime collapses because China is no longer threatened by our presence on the peninsula. NK and SK re-unite, nobody gets hurt, and we don't have another war.

            Which would disappoint you, because wars are cool, what with the tanks and planes and bombs and stuff!

          • Roger

            Tell the people in the prison camps that the NK's are not animals and try explaining it to them.

            You are wrong, your thinking fails every time and you realize it. So, you make this into a personal attack. Typical of liberal thinking.

  • Ghostwriter

    Well,EarlyBird. Why don't you tell that to those who are rotting in a North Korean prison camp? You'd rather have North Koreans starving rather than them being free. You've just graduated from an anti-semitic slug to an all-around slug.