Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

McCain favors boarding NKorean ship
AP ^ | 2009-06-21

Posted on 06/21/2009 8:43:37 AM PDT by rabscuttle385

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John McCain says the U.S. should board a North Korean ship it is tracking if hard evidence shows it is carrying missiles or other cargo in violation of U.N. resolutions.

McCain says that such cargo would contribute to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to nations that pose a direct threat to the United States.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: bho44; bhoasia; mcbama; mccain; mccaintruthfile; mcqueeg; northkorea; obama; sanctions; usnavy; wmds
The North Koreans were so hungry that they stole McCain's strawberries.
1 posted on 06/21/2009 8:43:37 AM PDT by rabscuttle385
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: missanne; Dick Bachert; 50mm; stockpirate; Eaker; ducdriver; ChrisInAR; AvOrdVet; MaggieCarta; ...

The Juan McCain Truth File.

"I have great respect for Al Gore."
—John McCain, October 2, 2008

FR Keywords: mccaintruthfile, mcqueeg, mcbama

Please tag all relevant threads with the aforementioned keywords.

This can be a very high-volume ping list at times.

To join the ping list:
FReepmail rabscuttle385 with the subject line add  mccaintruthfile.
(Stop getting pings by sending the subject line drop mccaintruthfile.)
 
Republican Commissar’s Warning: By joining this ping list, you may be subjected to the delusional rants and ramblings of McCainiacs, of "moderate" Republicans, of pragmatic conservatives resigned to voting for the lesser of two Democrats, and of countless RNC shills who simply want to meet a new overlord.


2 posted on 06/21/2009 8:44:00 AM PDT by rabscuttle385 ("If this be treason, then make the most of it!" —Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
"The North Koreans were so hungry that they stole McCain's strawberries"

Strawberries and yellow cake. That's the ticket.

3 posted on 06/21/2009 8:47:05 AM PDT by jonrick46 (The Obama Administration is a blueprint for Fabian Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I wish he would!


4 posted on 06/21/2009 8:47:27 AM PDT by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Senator McCain:

I respectfully request that you sit down and be quiet.

(1) Somebody else is President,
(2) I'm tired of policing the world, and
(3) North Korea has a right to ship anything it wants to.

If that fact doesn't sit well with the UN, let the UN — without American support — take whatever action it deems appropriate.

If, however, North Korea fires a missile at the US, we should bomb that nation off the face of the earth. See, that's not complicated.

5 posted on 06/21/2009 8:52:28 AM PDT by July4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: July4
If NK sells the technology to non-state actors, it gets far more complicated. NK sold a nuclear facility to Syria that the Israelis blew up. They have sold long range missiles to Iran. If the US continues to let NK and Iran thumb their noses at us and our allies, eventually countries like Japan and Saudi Arabia will acquire nuclear weapons rather than depend on the US security umbrella.

I agree with McCain on this one.

6 posted on 06/21/2009 8:59:53 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I understand what you’re saying and agree on the dangers, but on what grounds does one country or a group of countries tell another sovereign nation what defensive or offensive weapons it can have or sell?


7 posted on 06/21/2009 9:09:39 AM PDT by July4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
"McCain favors boarding NKorean ship"

A happy reunion with Communist captors and brain-washers?

8 posted on 06/21/2009 9:16:56 AM PDT by river rat (Semper Fi - You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kabar

For years the U.S. has been the defense guarantee mechanism for Saudi Arabia, Israel, south Korea, Germany as well as others.
None of these pay for the security we provide. And most treat us like crap.
I for one am tired of being the worlds cops.
Let the dogs of the world kill one another.
Do I really care if Iran and Saudi Arabia have nukes and destroy each other?
Tired of seeing our boys killed for others.


9 posted on 06/21/2009 9:18:40 AM PDT by Joe Boucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Why are we still talking about McCain? There is a real reason he could not carry the GOP. He is NOT a conservative. He is, at best, a RINO. More concerned with being loved by all than advancing conservative ideology. He cannot back away from the first bailout package where he proved to be part of the GREAT Liberal "Tell the rubes whatever they want to hear" crowd.
10 posted on 06/21/2009 9:22:51 AM PDT by Bobbuzzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
"McCain favors boarding NKorean ship "

WEll...............let him.

It's not enough we have to get back-seat driving from Carter and Clinton...now McCain't has to chime in from the alsoran running board.

Truthfully, McCain't has shot his wad, and he lost. I didn't see a lot of difference in the left's policies and his anyway. While if given a choice, I'd rather have McCain't than commiebama....it is, what it is.

Juan, sit down, and shut up.
11 posted on 06/21/2009 9:30:45 AM PDT by FrankR (We are only enslaved to the extent of charity we receive....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: July4
You are making a moral equivalency between the US and NK. I gather you believe that Iran has as much right to a nuclear weapon as Israel.

Under the Bush doctrine, our policy was one of preemption even if the danger was not imminent. There are limits to what we can do. We could not disarm the Soviets or the Chinese for very real reasons. It was beyond our capability to do so without suffering massive destruction ourselves. I believe we can have a policy of differentiation that deals differently with NK and Russia. Nuclear proliferation represents a significant danger to us and our allies. Rogue regimes like NK and Iran will destabilize their regions and threaten our national interests with their nuclear weapons.

Your logic is similar to that used by Obama and his left wing cronies. Obama says the US should not try to impose its political ideas on other countries. I gather we should remain silent about human rights and freedom and liberty if we are not directly involved. I disagree. Here is what another Dem, JFK, said in his inaugural address in 1961:

The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans—born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage—and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge—and more.

I was in Poland during martial law. I can tell you firsthand how powerfully Reagan and the Pope influenced the Polish opposition, Solidarnosc'. As the world's lone superpower, we still have the ability to influence the world's future and outcomes. That ability is declining as our country plunges into debt fueled by increasing entitlement programs and socialism that will force us to choose between guns and butter. And no doubt, we will choose butter.

12 posted on 06/21/2009 9:31:17 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Joe Boucher
For years the U.S. has been the defense guarantee mechanism for Saudi Arabia, Israel, south Korea, Germany as well as others. None of these pay for the security we provide. And most treat us like crap.

That simply isn't true. We do get cost offsets and some burden sharing from countries like South Korea and Germany. Saudi Arabia repaid us fully for the costs of the Gulf War and they pay for all the arms they receive from us, which provides jobs for Americans and lowers unit costs. I agree that our allies can and must do more in providing for their own security. We can no longer afford to do so by ourselves.

Do I really care if Iran and Saudi Arabia have nukes and destroy each other?

If that occurred, the world's economy would plunge into the toliet. Saudi Arabia has the world's largest proven oil reserves and is the biggest exporter of oil in he world. Most of Iran's exports go to Japan and China.

We must protect our strategic national interests around the globe. We should only put our personnel at risk when those interests are involved.

13 posted on 06/21/2009 9:39:07 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: July4

(3) North Korea has a right to ship anything it wants to.

umm no. Whose side are you on anyway?


14 posted on 06/21/2009 9:39:43 AM PDT by ari-freedom (Fiscal conservatism without social conservatism is dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Well, what’s keeping him?!?


15 posted on 06/21/2009 9:40:24 AM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: July4

“I understand what you’re saying and agree on the dangers, but on what grounds does one country or a group of countries tell another sovereign nation what defensive or offensive weapons it can have or sell?”

principles of freedom and morality


16 posted on 06/21/2009 9:40:53 AM PDT by ari-freedom (Fiscal conservatism without social conservatism is dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Joe Boucher
"Do I really care if Iran and Saudi Arabia have nukes and destroy each other?" I do because they will most likely nuke us
17 posted on 06/21/2009 9:42:15 AM PDT by ari-freedom (Fiscal conservatism without social conservatism is dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I still say, we do not have the right to board another nation’s ships on the high seas. To do so is an extreme provocation and perhaps an act of war. We had better have a really good reason and feel that the consequences are worth the risk.


18 posted on 06/21/2009 9:51:52 AM PDT by July4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Go away, John. Just please goaway.


19 posted on 06/21/2009 9:56:30 AM PDT by noname07718 (Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction-Ronald Reagan 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ari-freedom

What happens if NK tells the US that it feels intimidated by our superior forces and demands that we give up certain types of weapons and ships? I’m pretty sure their twisted minds see their interests in terms of “principles of freedom and morality.”

To me, it all comes down to being prepared to fight and win. I am ready to help my friends — Britain, Israel, Poland, Australia, etc. — and face my enemies.

I wish peace for all the world, but we must stay ready to defend our freedoms and prevail.


20 posted on 06/21/2009 10:10:48 AM PDT by July4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: July4

I must respectfully disagree.

North Korea is not a “sovereign nation.” True sovereignty requires legitimacy, and the government of North Korea is not legitimate. Legitimate governments govern by the consent of the governed and respect the implicit human rights of those they govern, at least to some degree. North Korea does neither - it is a rogue state that exists purely as a result of its ability to hold the North Korean populace hostage by force.

The same was true for Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi regime and the same is true for the Iranian ayatollahs. Illegitimate regimes have no legitimacy and thus can NEVER be considered sovereign. When they act in ways which potentially infringe on truly legitimate and sovereign nations, those nations have a right to preemptively step in and end it before real damage is done. We have a right to step in and prevent a bully who has threatened to shoot our friends from even loading his gun.

Appeasing dictators and affording them the rights of sovereign nations has never worked and has always led to unnecessary bloodshed.


21 posted on 06/21/2009 10:19:17 AM PDT by MWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: July4

“What happens if NK tells the US that it feels intimidated by our superior forces and demands that we give up certain types of weapons and ships? I’m pretty sure their twisted minds see their interests in terms of “principles of freedom and morality.””

I don’t care what those those friggin commies think. I believe in moral absolutes. They are evil and they want to screw over the entire world. It’s not PC and it’s not ‘nuanced’ diplomatic thing to say but it is the reality we face.


22 posted on 06/21/2009 10:40:52 AM PDT by ari-freedom (Fiscal conservatism without social conservatism is dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: July4
Nothing you said made any sense.

So Senators are supposed to be quiet while "someone else is President". What's that all about?

You are "tired of policing the world"? We haven't been policing the world or we wouldn't be worrying about Iran and NK.

NK does not have the right to ship anything it wants if it threatens the security of the world. Just like you don't the right to do anything you want or transport anything you want if it threatens others.

23 posted on 06/21/2009 10:47:55 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MWS
NK governance may not suit our democratic notions of sovereignty, but I think it does meet the commonly accepted requirements of authority, boundaries, etc.

We may not like these bully nations, but they're here to stay until they implode or their own people rise up and make some changes. Meanwhile, we need to strengthen our defenses and make it known that we'll defend ourselves and stand by our friends.

Walking softly and carrying a BIG stick implies that we'll have the good judgement to “ask permission to board” before stepping on the deck of another nation's vessels.

24 posted on 06/21/2009 10:49:07 AM PDT by July4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I tend to doubt NK has nukes. If they did, they would be trying to hide the nukes, not gallivanting about declaring “we have nukes, no really, we do, we dare you to find them.” If I were in charge of NK, I would be figuring out a way to FEED the population before they revolt and rip out Kim Jong Il’s beating heart and put it on a stake at the edge of Pyongyang.


25 posted on 06/21/2009 10:52:47 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: July4

I can see where you are coming from. With that said, I simply cannot agree. Mere possession of authority does not make that authority legitimate, and a government without legitimate authority cannot be said to be legitimate and thus possesses no sovereignty. I don’t necessarily consider “democracy” as a prerequisite of the legitimacy of which I am speaking - European monarchies were legitimate yet clearly were not democratic. The difference is that they governed by implicit consent.

The American Revolution was fought in recognition of this principle. The British government had the requirements of authority, boundaries, etc. vis-a-vis the colonists but lacked legitimacy in those areas by virtue of abuses and lack of consent. Our founding fathers had a right to overthrow them by virtue of that lack of legitimacy in ruling over us, hence the Declaration of Independence. The British presence in the Americas had far more legitimacy than the North Korean government’s rule over its people.

Governments which do not recognize rights have no rights. I would like to see a peaceful resolution to this affair but I cannot in good conscience recognize or respect the sovereignty and privacy of a nation which refuses to recognize or respect the sovereignty and privacy of the people it rules over.

Were the roles reversed, North Korea would not hesitate for a moment to board our ship. They do not deserve dignity they are not willing themselves to extend. All they care about is power.


26 posted on 06/21/2009 11:24:38 AM PDT by MWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson