4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

I've read his publications.  It's got nothing to do with the fact he's Russian.  Just don't agree with his writings.  Is that against the law?  Or a violation of forum rules? LOL

Not true. 

Here's the evidence: 

go to post #40.

 

2 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Not true. 

Here's the evidence: 

go to post #40.

 

I think him being Russian does influence his writings.  I wasn't as diplomatic in that post as I was in this thread.  Is that against forum rules? LOL

Sounds like a pre-war declaration - scary! 

9 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

Whilst this is clearly a very serious and difficult situation, this woman is not a UN spokesperson, her comments without doubt have a bias.

 

Any comments on this subject from the UN should be made by a position / person authosized to speak on behalf of the UN.  

Given that she is the US Ambassador and is involved in negotiations with those who make the decisions then one would imagine she would have a little more knowledge than someone who is not involved and relies on speculation to offer their opinion.

 

She would know if there is any further movement that the UN could take but given what she has stated, and is doing so on behalf of the US, then she is being transparent and letting the American people and the world know where the USA stands and what could occur if the UN cannot curtail this dictator.

 

Do you have problems with her being open and frank and of course she will be biased, given the maniacal rhetoric that is being espoused by the person in charge of North Korea.  She has clearly outlined that the US does not want war, no one does but how much can the US and the world take of this dangerous dictator, one who kills his own citizens and relatives and is threatening all out nuclear war under the pretext of the US and South Korea planning to attack.  

 

  

Baiting post removed.  

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

And what makes your remark particularly foolish is that it opens the door to discounting what you say because of your nationality. Or what anyone posts here because of their nationality.  What grounds do you have for making such a foolish assumption about his nationality affecting his analysis?

'Too funny. LOL'? Or 'Stop trolling'?

20 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

Whilst this is clearly a very serious and difficult situation, this woman is not a UN spokesperson, her comments without doubt have a bias.

 

Any comments on this subject from the UN should be made by a position / person authosized to speak on behalf of the UN.  

Correct.  The UN is exhausted and of no use, PERIOD.

 

Silliness about her "not being an official UN spokesperson" is ludicrous, and just a transparent attempt to try and marginalize what she has to say.  The US is a member of the Security Council and as the US ambassador to the UN she certainly has a right to express the view that there's nothing more the UN can or will do.  She's not speaking "on behalf of the UN" and is not claiming to speak on behalf of the UN.  But she IS stating her view about its continued efficacy on this particular matter.  I actually think she's going out of her way to be diplomatic in not referencing the UN's total uselessness.

 

 

Posts reported and removed.  

On 9/18/2017 at 6:47 AM, webfact said:

Mattis has warned the consequences of any military action would be “tragic on an unbelievable scale” and bring severe risk to U.S. ally South Korea.

yeah, wouldnt want to be living in seoul right about now