Why the US Hasn’t Brought “Fire and Fury” to North Korea

As the world ponders the meaning of President Donald Trump’s threat of “fire and fury” on North Korea, it’s worth asking why his predecessors never took those steps to stop its nuclear program. Trump isn’t the first president to threaten North Korea. The others were all bluffing.

When Bill Clinton was confronted with the threat of North Korea’s exit from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, he considered military force. But he ended up going for negotiations in what became known as the Joint Framework Agreement. The North Koreans froze their plutonium program in exchange for fuel shipments and a light water reactor from the U.S. Neither side ever fully delivered.

Then there was George W. Bush. He didn’t like North Korea. He put the nation in the original “axis of evil.” On his watch, the U.S. discovered Pyongyang had a secret uranium enrichment program, in violation of the spirit of Clinton’s deal. Then in 2006, North Korea tested its first nuclear device. By 2007, Bush had lifted crippling sanctions on the regime’s elites and entered into new negotiations. And surprise: The North Koreans backed out of those talks at the end, too.

By the time Barack Obama came into power, the North Koreans were back to building up their program. They perfected missiles, sunk a South Korean ship and shelled a South Korean island. The current tyrant, Kim Jong Un, ascended to power and proceeded to consolidate his position, killing his uncle and later his half brother. All the while, Obama pursued a policy of “strategic patience,” aimed at not rewarding Kim’s regime for its provocations and rogue behavior.

Now Trump has inherited a mess. Not only is Kim testing ballistic missiles at an alarming rate, as the Washington Post reported this week, but also the Defense Intelligence Agency now assesses North Korea can miniaturize a nuclear warhead so that it can fit inside a missile. Game, set, match.

So why didn’t the last three presidents take out North Korea’s nuclear facilities when they had the chance? The answer is Seoul, the thriving capital of South Korea. The North has enough artillery pieces within range of this metropolis to kill hundreds of thousands of people, which could very well begin a world war and throw the global economy into a tailspin.

Past presidents have understandably feared the North would retaliate in this way. But for some today, that fear is fading. John Plumb, a former director of defense policy and strategy for Obama’s National Security Council, told the Atlantic last month: “If I were the Trump administration, I would be looking at the threat to incinerate Seoul and trying to figure out how real it is. Because to me, it’s become such a catchphrase, and it almost — it starts to lose credibility. Attacking Seoul, a civilian population center, is different from attacking a remote military outpost. It’s dicey, there’s no doubt about it.”

Intelligence officials have said in recent months that this threat remains very real. While there are steps the U.S. can take to mitigate the problem, such as dropping cluster munitions on the big guns, it’s an imperfect and high-risk strategy. An attack on North Korea would be unpredictable and could unleash far worse on U.S. forces (which have been stationed in South Korea for more than 60 years), not to mention allies like Japan.

All of this gets back to Trump’s bluster. At this point we as Americans ought to expect more careful words from the president. At the same time, nothing Trump said was that different from the implicit threat against North Korea, or any power that threatens American cities with nuclear destruction.

Don’t get me wrong: There are few people on the planet more deserving of “fire and fury” than Kim Jong Un. But would such a strike even eliminate its nuclear program? How far is Trump willing to go? Will he order an invasion of North Korea to topple the regime? And if he does, would he commit the manpower, capital and time to stabilize the country once the Kim dynasty falls?

According to retired Admiral William Perry, Clinton’s second secretary of defense, the U.S. couldn’t even take out North Korea’s nuclear infrastructure with military strikes, given how much it has expanded in the last 20 years. What’s more, the price paid by South Koreans would be unacceptable. This is what he told a group of journalists this spring at an event sponsored by the Hoover Institution.

It’s possible that Trump is counting on his reputation as an impetuous novice — one who Kim just might fear would roll the dice by attacking North Korea. But Trump’s ultimatum allows the boy-tyrant in Pyongyang to test the president’s mettle. (Already the North Korean state media has threatened Guam.) We can expect more taunts and threats in the coming days, proving Trump’s threat was hollow. As hollow as past presidents’ pledges to do the same.

Fourth of July Message

My one of my main men, Bill O’Reilly, posted this on his website, and I thought it would also be a great idea to share it with all of you too:

We Pledge to you an Honest Presentation

A new Gallup poll says just 27 percent of Americans trust newspapers and 24 percent have confidence in TV news.
Those numbers are actually up a bit from the recent past, if you can believe it.  The reason for the slight improvement is some Trump-hating Americans are satisfied that the press despises the president as well.
The distrust of the media is both good and bad.  Above all, the national media no longer seeks the truth and the folks know it.  Ideology and money now drive news coverage.  The mission to bring facts to the populace has vanished.
The fact that many Americans understand this – is a good thing.
The big downside of distrusting the press is cynicism.  No longer can we make decisions based upon information we are confident about.  Now, we have to seek out individuals for perspective.  Some of those people are honest, many are not.
As we approach Independence Day, it is a shame that the American press has fallen apart.  The Founders would be sad to see that.  They wanted an honest press to protect Americans from powerful people who might harm them.
We on this website pledge to you an honest presentation.  And we wish you a great July 4th.
I would also like to wish all of you a great, smart, fun, safe, and conservative July 4th, as we celebrate this great country that we all live in. May God bless our President and may God bless this great country.
Have a conservative day,
The Reagan Conservative 🇺🇸

The New Political “Unity” as a Result From the Alexandria Shooting: Far Left Progressive Democrats Are Not Your Friends, Republicans

This week’s unity-fest between Republicans and Democrats is little more than a temporary cessation of hostilities. Both sides benefit from the photo ops it provides but both sides hope they will earn more political points than the other as a result. It is like the post 9/11 period in microcosm. It lasts as long as it takes for agendas to resurface, then that guy for whom you were just expressing your undying friendship and admiration goes back to being a racist, bigoted, homophobic war-criminal who is literally trying to destroy the entire planet.

Those beliefs don’t go away after a crisis like the Alexandria shooting. There’s just some vestigial part of the leftist psyche that remembers that continuing to act like a jerk after a tragedy is bad optics. It only applies to those in the spotlight though. The run of the mill left wing activist or social media troll uses tragedy as an opportunity to ramp up his douchebaggery.There is no political unity in our ultra-polarized country, nor should there be, to be quite honest. The polarization exists because one side wants to “fundamentally transform” (or destroy) the things that make America America.

Unity is one of those concepts like compromise. Being united, like coming to a compromise, almost always means moving the country to the left. It is almost always the right who gives in to appease the left. It’s true despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth that occurs whenever Republicans attempt to implement policy. Almost any time Washington takes action it results in the federal government having more power, spending more money, or curtailing more individual liberty. There are occasional back steps but the overall trend is leftward, toward more centralized government. Elections no longer decide the direction of the country. They only determine the rate at which we are moving to the left.

If you are an elected Republican, Democrats are not friends with different opinions. That is a description that perhaps applies to average citizens, neighbors, coworkers, family members. While I still balk at the hysterics about us being involved in a literal civil war, I am not naive enough to think Democrats want anything less than transforming America into a European style welfare state. To a large extent they already have. That sort of policy will never achieve its stated goals, so in the minds of progressives, the federal government will never have enough money or power. To get it, they will lie, cheat, or defame anyone who stands in their way. Far left progressives would destroy you in a heartbeat if it could advance their agenda.

The progressive left routinely tells horrible lies about not only the policies of the right, but about the motives of those who propose them. For some reason Republicans believe that this is something that happens between friends. How long would you stay friends with someone who constantly maligned your character in public? Not long, I suspect.

Maybe I just have an unreasonably high standard for deciding who I count among my friends, but if there is real friendship—as opposed to just superficial cordiality— between, say, Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi, or Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer, then the entire political show is a farce. The hostility and character assassination are just political theater meant to fool the proles into thinking someone in Washington is on their side. Either option is enough to turns one’s stomach.

In every one of these Washington unity displays, the Democrats are the “elites” and the Republicans are the “schmucks”. The GOP thinks that maybe the Democrats are finally coming around to accepting them as human beings while the progressives get to look warm and fuzzy for a few days before going back to slinging false stereotypes and denigrating the character of their “good friends.”

Obviously there are always exceptions. Occasionally some progressives will have short term goals that coincide with conservatives and we should work with them when that’s the case. Republicans too often act to appease the left though. I’m not advocating that Republicans fly into impotent rage at Democrats like President Trump on a 3 AM Twitter bender. I just wish they would stop letting themselves get played for schmucks.

Make Your Own Anti-Trump Rant Generator

It’s been one hundred and thirty five days since Donald J. Trump was inaugurated as president and the left has gotten enraged with just about anything, so I’ve made a (rather comedic and satirical) “Make Your Own Anti-Trump Rant Generator”:


Trying to keep up with President Trump’s shenanigans is exhausting! And on top of that, then you also have to find the energy to complain about it! Who has that time? Luckily, I’m stepping up in a yuge way and streamlining the whole process to you, with my “Make  Your Own Anti-Trump Rant Generator”:

Someone tell me how a guy with a track record of ______________

  1. spreading racist conspiracy theories
  2. misusing the phrase “on fleek”
  3. texting interns the eggplant emoji
  4. receiving two scoops of ice cream
  5. leaving Melania steaming floaters in the bathroom
  6. cheating at the game “Pie Face” with Barron

is our new President– even after he ______________!

  1. talked about dating his hot daughter
  2. coughed into his hand instead of his arm
  3. stiffed that Times Square Elmo on a tip
  4. vehemently defended Nickelback
  5. snuck snacks from home into a movie theater
  6. watched This is Us completely out of order

Worse still, with absolutely ZERO facts, he still claims ______________!

  1. there was widespread voter fraud
  2. Fuller House is superior to the original
  3. that his spicy guacamole is homemade and not store bought
  4. gravity is just a theory
  5. the Gremlins movies are documentaries
  6. Obama rigged his lottery scratch-offs

And to think he appointed ______________

  1. Steve Bannon
  2. Phil Swift, The “Flex Seal” Guy
  3. Amazon’s Alexa
  4. Billy Bush
  5. The former Verizon guy, now the Sprint guy
  6. Dick Cheney’s podiatrist

to be ______________!

  1. his top advisor
  2. People‘s Sexiest Man Alive
  3. Daniel Craig’s replacement as James Bond
  4. the new spokesperson for the Dollar Shave Club
  5. the Clooneys’ birthing coach
  6. James Corden’s new bandleader

If we don’t do something, we can say goodbye to ______________

  1. basic human rights
  2. quality Amish work
  3. any hope of reading a Game of Thrones book anytime soon
  4. those little wooden spoons you get with Italian ices or chocolate malt cups
  5. any chance of a Westworld parody happening
  6. Paul Blart Broadway musical

and prepare for four years of ______________!

  1. praying Mike Pence doesn’t become President
  2. lingering Olympic fever
  3. lackluster Kevin Hart vehicles
  4. jokes involving word “bigly” or “covfefe”
  5. disdain for cargo shorts
  6. increasingly confusing Oreo variations

I’m definitely going to protest at ______________ and

  1. Trump Tower
  2. the last remaining Radio Shack
  3. a Redbox kiosk
  4. participating Red Lobster locations
  5. the site of the Bowling Green massacre
  6. the Comedy Central roast of Mel Gibson

everyone there is going to ______________!

  1. wear a pink vagina hat
  2. eat cronuts and drink Unicorn Frappuccinos like they’re going out of style
  3. massage each others’ feet
  4. receive a participation award
  5. talk like a pirate
  6. quietly mourn the death of Vine

The French Presidential Election and the Press

If you thought the American press was unfair, unbiased, and stupid in the way it covers our political system, wait until you see how it’s handling the French elections. The reporters are not even pretending any more, consider this quote from the Associated Press from a story about the French presidential run off election (which is scheduled for this Sunday):

“France is about to have a president like no other: either Marine Le Pen, a far-right populist or Emmanuel Macron, a brainy upstart who’s daring the French to gamble on a startup-style new political construction.”

In other words, it’s a contest between a fascist and an innovative, fresh voice of change. Keep in mind, the AP isn’t taking sides, they’re just bashing one candidate and celebrating the other.

And it’s not just the AP, every American news outlet does the same. On television and in print, Le Pen is always in everywhere described as “far-right”, her name rarely appears without that term attached; but it is never defined in any way. That’s because “far-right” is not a description, but instead an attack or slur meant to invoke images of goose-stepping soldiers and violence. It’s a way to make someone unacceptable in a single phrase; it’s an attempt to shut down the conversation, rather than starting one. 

But is Le Pen actually “far-right”? Well not in economics or social policy either. She wants to keep religion out of public life in France. In America, she might be called center-left, except for one thing: Le Pen is skeptical of France’s current immigration and refugee policies. For that one thing, she’s attacked as a dangerous fascist, where none of her critics actually debate the topic with her. It would take facts and preparation, and they very well might lose that argument. Instead they call her names and hope that’s enough to kill her candidacy. 

And with the help of a mindless and compliant press (here and there), it might be enough this time, but not forever because at some point voters in France will demand a voice in the matter as they will here too someday. Sooner rather than later. 

May Day Protests in Portland Turned Into Riots

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

This was a monologue from Greg Gutfeld on the FoxNewsChannel’s “The Five”:

May Day protests ended with violent rioting in Portland, Oregon. You know Portland, the city that last week canceled a local parade because of violent threats made by leftists. So as speeches and parades disappear because the left promises violence, days later leftists still violently run rampant.

The lesson: once when the threat of violence suppresses speech, actual violence can replace it. There were twenty five arrests of the anarchists; that started fires, property damage, and throwing home-made bombs at police officers.

Anarchists? Is that what we call them? What a fake word. It’s just shorthand for wannabe terrorists; they’re ISIS, but without the goats.

Continue reading “May Day Protests in Portland Turned Into Riots”

The Scary Anti-Free Speech Movement 

So let’s play a game called “Who’s the fascist?”, because now anyone can play. In Portland, Oregon their annual rose parade was canceled after leftists promised to violently attack the local Republicans (if they showed up). If organizers didn’t cave, hundreds of rioters would swarm. So they caved, and canceled the whole event, with the excuse that they could not guarantee the participants’ safety; which is now the go to excuse to enable the mob. 

Now this is nuts. We’re America, people have fought and died for the right of free speech and assembly, and we let mobs of pointless weasels take that away? As lawless rioters brag about how they own the city, you prove them right by giving in. So where’s the media or the heroic actors and musicians that fight for tolerance? 

So who’s fault is it? Do you blame the spoiled brats for being spoiled brats? What about their enablers, like the academics who claim to defend free speech (unless you’re a conservative), the liberal bureaucrats in college towns (that are now cowering under their desk), or the meek tweeters in Hollywood who “bravely” zing right wingers who remain silent? 

What we’re seeing is the first anti-free speech movement. And it’s from the progressive, punitive mob; coddled for decades by the media, entertainment industry, and government. 

On college campuses and towns, the American flag is slowly being replaced by a white one. First speeches, now parades. 

What’s next? That’s a really good, but also very scary question.