Sometimes War is OK

Not that I'm an advocate for violence by any means.

When NK attacked Sk I wrote a FB status saying:
but NK wouldn't be so dumb to attack SK right? right?!

I had a friend write back:
NK wouldn't attack with the full force of the US military glaring down it's throat. This is all propaganda to gear up for a US/SK attack on the North IMO. I've developed a keen nose for war propaganda since 2003

He's one of the conspiracy theorist type people who believe the US is evil and all war is bad. Yeah, one of those.

Yes I agree that NK is just doing it for attention.

But I categorically disagree with every other word in his statement. This is why:

A) Yes, SK owes A LOT to the US. We aren't under the rule of crazy Kim Jong Il because the US helped us in the Korean war. This doesn't mean we're eternally sucking the US' diz. The failed g-20 summit talks is an example of how SK is forging its own independence and standing up to US demands, at least economically.

B) South Koreans don't want war with NK. I don't know why anyone would think this. We have so much more to lose than NK. Um hello have you seen the Louis Vuitton store in Apgujeong? The average South Korean just wants NK to leave us alone.

C) We don't want to take over NK either. Why would South Korea want to be reunited with a country where most of the people are either malnourished, undereducated, brainwashed, or all of the above?

I was discussing this with Peter and told him it would be like the US and Mexico uniting. He said, yeah well then Koreans wouldn't have to import South Asians to do all the dirty work, you can make the North Koreans do the construction and dishwashing jobs. LOL, maybe he has a point there.

D) As much as I am against war and I wish we lived in a world where we all sing kumbaya together, I acknowledge the fact that bad people exist in this world. Kim Jong Il is one of them.

I was against the Iraqi war because Bush was framing Saddam with the WMD thing but was I against taking Saddam out? Not really. Did we forget that Saddam killed an estimated 50-100 thousand Kurds? He committed genocide. It is unfortunate that America only plays the world's police when we have oil to compensate us. Sadly we didn't care about Sudan because there was no incentive for us. I don't agree with how Bush framed the war, but Saddam was an asshole and honestly I'm glad we took him out.

People argue that it is not the US' job to be the world's police. Do you suggest that the UN be the world's police? Because anyone with a pulse knows that the UN is a joke.

I would love for anyone to take NK out. Human rights are violated everyday and as a fellow human being, someone should help them. It is unfortunate that we find too many logistics problems with this. Politics as usual.

E) Also, to people who are ALWAYS against war, as a South Korean, I am thankful that America stepped in against the Chinese in the Korean War. Yes. we were a pawn in their dumb ideologically battle but turns out that idealogical battle was a big deal. When North Korea invaded South Korea, the SK president made so many fatal mistakes (i.e. resisting America's idea to kill Kim Il Sung during the war because he wanted a 'united' korean, dude he just invaded your country, like why do you think you guys will be friends?) its a wonder we are not a part of China right now. I shudder to think what would have happened if the US did not fight on our side. We would have been demolished by the Chinese (not because they are better than us, but because hello, they have a billion people to send to fight).

So to all those 'against' war, sometimes war is necessary because otherwise there are some crazy bad guys out there.

F) Also, as I end this one more note.

I want to end this rant with a big fuck you to the Chinese government. It is because of your support of the North Korean government that they continue to have a leg to stand on. You deport North Korean defectors back to North Korea to be killed. You support NK because you are too prideful to admit that this whole communism thing isn't working out. You baffle me because you gain nothing by supporting the North Koreans and yet you do just to annoy every other country.

If all else fails, just blame the Chinese. Speaking like a true American.

Tucson

So I've been keeping up with all the Tucson news.

I saw the Gawker post where Sarah Palin's employees scrub her page of negative comments. Apparently they don't do it fast enough because when I checked there were a ton of negative comments. She has 2 million Fb fans, Obama has 17 million. Phew, goodness prevails...on FB at least

I watched the memorial speech today at work. Teared at my desk (I really need to stop crying at work watching youtube videos).

Obama just won himself another reelection methinks.

My thoughts on Christine O'Donnell

So as everyone has heard, a man has come forward to Gawker and announced that he had a one night stand with Christine O'Donnell

Read the Story here

Ok so clearly this guy is a douche and a raging tool.

A douche because any person (Tiger Wood's numerous hoes, David Arquette, Jesse' James' Nazi girlfriend etc) who would name drop who they have slept with publicly is a certifiable douchebag.

A raging tool because he says, "When her underwear came off, I immediately noticed that the waxing trend had completely passed her by. Obviously, that was a big turnoff, and I quickly lost interest." A) You are describing a woman's public hair B)Women have public hair naturally FYI

As much as this guy is a slime for coming out with this story either true or untrue, I can't take Christine O'Donnell's side either.

O'Donnell's response was "This story is just another example of the sexism and slander that female candidates are forced to deal with....It operates as public sexual harassment. And like all sexual harassment, it targets not only O'Donnell, but all women contemplating stepping into the public sphere."

Bitch please!! I dislike when women play the women card to get sympathy. I agree that a woman's good name can be ruined by a guy claiming she is a slut however don't pretend male politicians are somehow immune.

Sex and politics have gone together hand in hand since the beginning of time. And yes, she is single so it is not as much of the public's interest as say Bill Clinton or Eliot Spitzer who both had commitments to people. The reason why it IS relevant to the public is that she has a holier than thou attitude which makes this supposed one night stand relevant.

She has described herself as chaste, anti-masturbation, pro-abstinence-only sex ed, anti-condoms and anti-porn. If you bring sex into the political debate and think you can legislate people's sex lives by being pro abstinence and anti abortion then your sexual history is fair game.

Her wiki states:
"She dropped her acting aspirations, began thinking about moral issues, and became an evangelical Christian, liking the moral certainty of that religion. She chose to live a chaste life, began espousing sexual abstinence, and joined the College Republicans.

O'Donnell has been described as a former Catholic turned evangelical Christian."

If you tell other people how to live their sex lives in a chaste manner and you are in fact not so chaste, then yes it i in the public's interest.

It is when people act high and mighty that the public loves to hear about their indiscretions.

Men are not immune:

Mark Foley:
Foremost opponent of child pornography--->sent sexual IMs to teenage boys

Ted Haggard
preached homosexual is an abomination--->did meth with male prostitutes

Eliot Spitzer:
Fought prostitution---> turns out he loved them hos

Larry Craig
voted against gay marriage---> tried to get a BJ from an undercover cop in a bathroom

Now we can add Christine O'Donnell
advocated abstinence---> huge slut just like the rest of us

While I do not put one-night stands in the same rank of smoking meth with prostitutes, hypocrisy is hypocrisy no?