Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Worked out well for Saddam.

Interesting article on it: http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/24/opinio...rby/index.html

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I don't get the crazy part. Here is a long explanation of how he is acting rationally:

The Lethal Weapon comparison doesn't follow. Riggs tells the police to fire. Kim isn't doing that.

Americans have a long, lazy habit of describing foreign leaders as crazy instead of understanding why they're doing what they're doing. Hussein wasn't crazy, either.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Are you just quoting the article I posted back to me?

I understand the principle, which is why I mentioned Saddam.*

That said, I wouldn't put it past him to attack South Korea tomorrow. Because he's crazy.

TM

*From the following article:

"The record made clear that Saddam Hussein both possessed WMD and used them against both external enemies (Iran) and his own citizens. After the first Gulf War his regime now faced a dilemma. The resolution provided theUnited Statesand its allies with authority to use force inIraq. The United Nations resolution 687 was partly a repetition of its resolution 678 which authorised member states ‘to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.’ This meant that if it was proven that Iraq had WMD, Saddam would risk a new western intervention.

On the other hand, if it was made clear that Saddam had no chemical or biological weapons, then he would lose one of his key instruments of inflicting fear both among his own population and Iraq’s neighbours. This could diminish Iraq’s position as a major force in the region. Saddam’s rational choice would then be to create uncertainty or ambiguity as to whether or not he actually had these weapons. Without proof of Iraq having WMD, it seemed unlikely that the West would intervene, and without proof of Iraq not having WMD, it would keep insurgents and Iraq’s neighbours at bay.

Therefore it would seem rational for Saddam Hussein to pursue the choice of ambiguity, as illustrated in Figure 1. This line of tactics is in compliance with what is known as signalling in game theory, i.e. revealing, concealing and eliciting information about one’s intentions and capabilities. The general principle is that you want to release your information selectively."

http://www.popularsocialscience.com/...raq-in-2003-2/

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I'm not sure I understand.

I think it is just a matter of time with that lunatic in the WH before he does something like this, whether it is Syria, Iran, North Korea, Germany, or Berkeley. I think he's fuckin nuts, and that makes us a bigger risk than North Korea when it comes to Nukes.

We ought to be rethinking the idea that the Commander in Chief gets the codes and can do what he will with them.

Also, the lunacy of our own leader should help us realize: some leaders are indeed crazy. A key lesson I learned once was when I gave a client the advice that the other party would have to be crazy to sue him on an issue. What we didn't focus on was that we had good reason to realize that the other party was indeed crazy (they sued him, he got paid millions but they killed his company in the process). When you say "he'd have to be crazy to xxxx" always assess the change that he might actually be crazy. There are lunatics in the world.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Well, then he certainly played his cards all wrong, because it did not turn out well for him.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I thought you were stating that he doesn't have the authority to act without Congressional approval. Instead, we are agreeing. My bad.

TM

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

I wish he didn't. It's frightening.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Yes -- don't get why the author calls Kim crazy, since most of what he describes is pretty sane.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "attack," but I think North Korea is pretty clear that they're not going to win a war with South Korea, and that the regime likely would not survive the experience. So I don't see them going to war.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

That is really what we have to hope for. Long time dictators have good survival skills?

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

This is a little crazy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZnBNuqqz5g

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Agreed, but I'm a little disappointed that Dennis Rodman didn't show up.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Confession: I don't eat ham, so I'd want to do Mexican, too.

Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
 

Sounded like they might have been at Taylor Gourmet (which is delicious, btw, and I want one here), which has non-ham options too.

Fucking Stupid
 

I am amazed at the levels of stupidity in Trump's circle (and family). That's saying something because I always knew he and his family are fucking stupid. But this is just overwhelming.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/u...one-share&_r=0

TM