That isn't going to help since NK apparently has hackers located in China. I'm pretty sure we won't be blocking all IP addresses from China.

FTFY

Bush: No Saddam Links To 9/11
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE WAR

Let's see who you're going to bat for:

Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag
North Korea 'testing chemical weapons on political prisoners'

I find you extraordinary.

The saga of never ending butthurt over Iraq continues to play out in dishonest rhetoric on unrelated issues.

But yes, the time to act was then since Saddam was buying his way out of sanctions with the immense corruption of the Oil for Food program and the charges against Saddam were correct, including having banned long range rockets and unfilled chemical warheads. (Not to mention the 5000+ chemical and biological weapons found in Iraq.) The only one missed was he didn't have current production of WMD, but that would have resumed once he was free of sanctions.

You also don't give credit where credit is due: Saddam had the Iraqi government act as if it was hiding its WMD programs to fool the Iranians because Saddam thought he could rely on people like you to block the West from taking action so he could continue his crimes against humanity, support for terrorism, massive corruption, and ultimately resume WMD production.

Saddam was far shrewder than you.

Who do you think it is that deals with international organized crime at the US Federal level? I take it you have never heard of the term "legat" either?

Whom among the CIA, NSA, and FBI do you think is responsible for investigating computer crime in the US?

You've got this wrong in multiple respects. Relations between the US and North Korea aren't governed by a court, so any talk of a court being involved in evaluating this is nonsense. Second, courts aren't simply "judges of fact" but are where the law is applied. The application of the law involves individual rights, limits on how evidence is obtained, limits on what can be considered in judging legal culpability. None of that applies to North Korea.

You seem have fave fallen for the common mistake of believing that nothing is a fact unless a court of law says it is. That is nonsense. Courts often have little or nothing to say about many imortant issues in society, including those of major political importance such as international relations.

You view is popular, but simply wrong.

The FBI and intelligence community are competent to evaluate and pass judgment on the evidence in this matter, and no court is either required to even welcome. This is not a matter for the courts.

Some of them do. Not all of them fit your template.

Man does that bring back some memories..... Borland used to make some truly awesome toasters, what ever happened to them?

Engrish

So it really didn't change anything in regard to voting. It is still "one man, one vote," and corporations still don't get a vote.

I would attribute that to inadequate familiarity with the subject area.

You don't seem to provide any demonstration of actual harm in those two words although the POTUS did try to intimidate and threaten the SCOTUS over it. That risks damage to more than one institution.

Funny that your post includes the word "dick," because that is what you have for proof that has gone on.

You're writing fiction in which the "seriousness" of the "charge" is its own "evidence." You might as well claim that you have proof that every judge on the Supreme Court has sold their soul to the Devil to be appointed to the court. And spare me the "before Snowden" routine on this one since that is bull in this case.

There is equal proof that you are the FSB agent that recruited Snowden as a Russian agent on Putin's order.

That is completely false. The US never supplied any chemical weapons to Iraq. Iraq manufactured its own chemical weapons in programs developed with Egypt, and IIRC Syria.

Saddam was not allowed to retain any of those weapons and was frustrating inspections, and that violated his obligations.

President Bush didn't violate international law. Iraq regularly violated its cease fire agreement by firing upon coalition aircraft and other actions. Those are commonly known as acts of war. And that is before you get to Saddams many crimes against humanity, acts of aggression, and violation of UN Security Council resolutions.

Your paragraph above reveals a huge stumbling block in discussion. You are making "socialism" do double duty. In your usage it isn't a question of economic arrangements and social safety nets, but it has to double for nice, caring, sustainable, and so on. That is the real reason you find it difficult to acknowledge the socialist roots and policies of the National Socialists - they weren't nice and you can't imagine socialists are that aren't nice. Good = socialism, and socialism = good. Unfortuantely the socialists of the Marxist Communist persuasion have provided an enormous example of socialism that isn't good, caring, and all the rest. The Communists managed to kill 100,000,000 people in the last 100 years and yet it is farsical to try to claim that they weren't socialists. In fact while they were establishing state ownership and controlof the practically all of the economy they were also enacting class warfare, exterminating the class enemy, just as Marx and Engels wrote. But if you bother to watch the Soviet Story, or do some research, you'll know that Marx and Engels advanced the idea of exterminating both classes and races. The Communists (international socialists) destroyed by class, the National Socialists (Nazis) destroyed by race.

Then we will probably be at an impass until you stop trying to make the word "socialist" to double, or triple duty. You can't reasonably refuse to call certain groups of socialists socialist just becuase you don't think they were nice enough to merit your overloaded use of the word socialist even though they enacted socialist policies.

And for the record, yes, there were industrialists that backed Hitler, much to their later regret. They thought they had a deal and could control Hitler, but it ended up being a deal with the devil and that devil had the upper hand that grew ever more powerful. Ultimately the Nazi state controlled the industrialists.