.
April 6th, 2009
05:00 PM ET

Gingrich: Would have disabled North Korea’s missile

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

When it comes to North Korea's missile launch, Newt Gingrich says he would have disabled the long-range missile before it ever left the launch pad. The Former House Speaker says too many people "do not appreciate the scale of the threat that is evolving on the planet."

Gingrich says he hasn't seen the UN do anything effective with either Iran or N. Korea.

He adds that he hasn't seen the United Nations do anything effective with either Iran or North Korea. And he's right about that.

But the UN is the route that President Obama is taking. The State Department called the launch a "provocative act" in violation of a 2006 Security Council resolution; and said North Korea's action "merits a clear, strong response" in the form of another council resolution.

However, an emergency meeting of the Security Council ended yesterday without any official reaction to North Korea. And many U.N. security council resolutions in the past have proved not to be worth the paper they're written on.

Gingrich isn't the only one questioning if the Democratic administration is tough enough on national security. While the White House insists North Korea's missile launch shows the importance of President Obama's call for "a world without nuclear weapons," critics say that's an unrealistic and dangerous position.

John Bolton, former Ambassador to the UN under President Bush, describes president Obama's no nukes call as "otherworldly." Bolton says the threat of the Security Council has no real impact on countries like North Korea and Iran. Gingrich also called the president's plan for a Global Summit on Nuclear Security "a wonderful fantasy idea," saying Russia and other nations can't be trusted.

Meanwhile, the White House is pushing back against accusations of appearing weak, suggesting that the Bush administration's tough talk toward both Iran and North Korea proved ineffective.

Here’s my question to you: Newt Gingrich says he would have disabled North Korea's missile. Is that what the U.S. should have done?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Eric writes:
North Korea is a rogue nation under the control by an insane dictator. The missile launch was nothing less than Kim Jong Il flipping the bird to the world. Anyone with any sense knows this. I am not a Newt fan, but he's probably correct.

Bruce writes:
Gingrich's comments are not at all surprising and are as dangerous as they are fool-hearted. Obama's attempt to work through the UN is not the end of the process; it is an attempt to restart a process that has been off track for eight years.

Steve writes:
It's funny that now they are not in power, the GOP seems to have all the answers to what ails the world. Now that Forrest Gump and Darth Vader are no longer relevant, it seems that all the right wing pundits have the answers.

Paul from Columbia, South Carolina writes:
In the past, America has been called a 'paper tiger'. We just proved it by condemning and then doing nothing. Shameful. The cowards are in charge now.

Wendell writes:
Yes, we should have stopped it. It's too late now. We drew a line in the sand and we allowed them to cross it. It's like a child you keep threatening to spank but never do. Some day soon the world will have wished it had used a firm hand.

Rocky writes:
If old Newt would have gotten his way, all it would have done is stir up a hornet’s nest that South Korea would have to deal with. And that would have put us into another war.

JT from New York writes:
We should buy Newt a plane ticket to Pyongyang and let him do his thing. If he succeeds, we'll buy him a plane ticket back.


Filed under: Newt Gingrich • North Korea
soundoff (298 Responses)
  1. Daniel Indiana

    Starting another war is a Republican goal. I believe that they want to dominate the world and wipe out many peoples whom presently inhabit this planet. That is how peace is made. They seem to believe in the Genghis Khan technique for peace, annihilate all that disagree with their views.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
  2. Chuck in Warren Ohio

    Jack: A DUD is a DUD. Why waste a missile on it? Newt jusy needs to stay retired!

    April 6, 2009 at 3:18 pm |
  3. Jan from NJ

    So much for the idea of a Gingrich presidential run in 2012 !! The missile was a bargaining chip for N. Korea. They want to sell it so they can feed their starving people (I hope). We don't need to match their bravo with our bravo. We need to make a breakthrough with them so they dismantle and destroy what they have. Same thing we need to do with Iran. With the republican stance, we are on the brink of nuclear war. Who wants to live with that hanging over your head everyday? I am tired of it.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
  4. Alan-Buxton, Maine

    The Former House Speaker says too many people “do not appreciate the scale of the threat that is evolving on the planet.”
    He should know that very well since he is part of that threat. North Korea is not capable of effectively delivering a satellite to orbit or a warhead anywhere. Their people are starving and their leadership inept if not insane. I agree that the UN is impotent but let Obama who isn't handle it and just sit down and shut up.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
  5. odessa

    all newt knows is to start political drama for U.S. as well looking out for himself..he doesn't have the answer anyway but thinking old ideas like his grand obstructionist party members.Obama administration is doing a better job than our previous administration which they should be in jail for lying and committing war crimes.north korea are nothing but crap starters who need a life.U.N. should have better ideas to dismantle their power because they are only thinking about themselves at this moment.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
  6. LUCY - ILLINOIS

    NO. We can't police the world, it's some other country's turn to step up to the plate. Bush and company did nothing about Iran's threats. They only wanted to go to Iraq, which did nothing to us. They still tell us Iraq caused 911. I think it is time to talk with those country's, like you do a child, then go from there. We have been at war for 6 years, it is time to let our troops come home.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:25 pm |
  7. Jan Illinois

    Jack, Newt would say anything just to have his irrelevant name mentioned! The only thing he is capable of disabling is his own career. Keep on talking Newt!!!!

    April 6, 2009 at 3:27 pm |
  8. circy in New Mexico

    It's because of politicians like Gingrich that we always seem to be at war with someone around the world. People like him who would rather posture and tell everyone how tough they are, all the while knowing they are hiding behind words and won't be required to actually back up what they are saying. Gingrich is a dinosaur and has nothing to offer as far as solutions, just hot air. I still can't figure why so many Republicans always want to take the military solution to any problem. Personally, I think it's arrogance.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:30 pm |
  9. Carol c.

    The republicans only answer to situations is to bully our way through! There isn't enough nuclear power to bomb all the places they want to bomb.

    We may have no other choice, but we foiled our chance for support with other countries when Bush invaded Iraq and no weapons of mass destruction were found.

    Maybe Newt, Bolton and the other war hawks can find a playground somewhere and play bully there!!

    Knoxville, TN

    April 6, 2009 at 3:34 pm |
  10. arlene in iowa

    No..the u.s. knows it was no threat to us..if it was thought otherwise Japan would have done it first..another republican that would have started another republican war if he were in charge..

    April 6, 2009 at 3:34 pm |
  11. DON, TRAVERSE CITY, MICHIGAN

    Jack, he is Republican, isn't he? Isn't one of their mantras... more wars, more wars?

    April 6, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
  12. Annie, Atlanta

    I guess being involved with two wars isn't enough for this Republican. He must have friends that need another war in order to boost profits.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:38 pm |
  13. Pablo in Tejas

    Jack
    Oh get real. Newt Gingrich couldn't find his more than ample backside with both hands in broad daylight. His views on US policy or on any phenomenon of US History one man exercise in self deluded revisionism.
    Shoot. He makes Sarah Palin seem sophisticated by comparison. Why you media guys pay any attention to him is beyond me.

    Pablo
    Arlington Texas

    April 6, 2009 at 3:39 pm |
  14. Chryssa

    Obama's handling this the right way. Making an executive decision (likely using violent force) would have been nothing more than continuing the policies of Bush. Obama is right to involve the UN. There is safety (and strategy) in numbers.

    Boise, ID

    April 6, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
  15. Jay in Texas

    Absolutely not. Newt Gingrich is a spokesman for the warmongers that want to fuel hate in order to start more wars for his friends to make money from. We don't own space although we seem to want everyone to believe we do. Are we supposed to be the only country who can launch satellites?
    Brownwood, Texas

    April 6, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
  16. Cheryl from Destin, Florida

    I think Newt sounds like more of the same Bush policies. I am not smart enough to know what exactly needs doing, but I am smart enough to know we don't want and can't afford another war. Thanks but no thanks Mr. Gingrich.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:46 pm |
  17. ED in RI

    Jack;
    Yeah; "Listen to the "old bravado" guys like Newt, and start another war. These guys had their tenure during the Bush administration, with their illustrious Iraq war, and defense contractors hand-outs. They should not be allowed "talking points" on network media stations.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
  18. Star Auburn Ohio

    and his opinion matter's because? refresh my memory on who this man is it's not the same Newt GinGRINCH who stole christmas or is he someone who discovered gravity? why in this day and times does Newt have an opinion which matters to the american people. personally I think Newt should invest in a muzzle and keep his opinions to himself.

    let's get a reality check this man
    Eighty-four ethics charges in which stated Gingrich after he finally pled guilty in January 1997. also a tax cheat. I have no short term or long term memory loss when it comes to the GOP I have lived under there hand too many years of my life since my birth in 1957.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
  19. Richard - Knoxville TN

    Yep, and Gindrich would be prefectly happy to start WW III

    RB Kville TN

    April 6, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
  20. Tina Tx

    No and why is Newt still talking out of both sides of his mouth? Go away, far away Newtie.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
  21. Raj

    Jack, the US has no credibility when it comes to N. Korea. The US want the rest of the world to live in the stone age (nuclear technology, satellite technology), so that they can impose their will on the rest of the world(Iraq). The US categorizes it as the potential, well all humans have potential so does that mean we all need to be locked up. The US has also stated that having the knowledge is a threat, should we stop learning we you have known for the past 60 years.

    They said that the launch was a nuclear missile and terrorized the public, and from current reports they now have changed their story to say that it was indeed a satellite but still want to imposes sanctions.

    The US also stated before that they would stop them from getting a nuclear weapon but in turn gave them the blessing with Russian support to get the materials needed to develop one.

    The US also said that they would not weaponize it, but they did.

    The US also said it was in talks, and CNN showed this on their station but everything went to you know where.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:57 pm |
  22. Carl D.

    Jack,
    Newt Gingrich way of thinking would get us into another war that we don't need. It's time the United States keep our nose out of there business, unless they are attacking us, we are not the Police of the world.
    Carl in Illinois

    April 6, 2009 at 3:57 pm |
  23. Lance Schumacher

    Jack, not often that I agree with Newt, but in this case, yes, I would have stopped the launch or destroyed the missle in the first stages of the launch. Obama's solution of going the U.N. is a NON-solution. N. Korea don't give a hoot what the U.N. says or does and clearly demonstrated this time after time. Force they understand and they need to be jerked up short and soon or we will find ourselves threatened by their nuclear missile capability and that is way too late to start thinking about actually doing something.

    Lance, Ridgecrest, Ca

    April 6, 2009 at 3:58 pm |
  24. Dr. Sam

    To follow Gingrich's approach would have started World War III, evaporating all the recent gains Obama made in our relationship with China and Russia. We don't need radicals in the White House who can't fully consider the consequences of their decisions. This cancels out Gingrich.

    April 6, 2009 at 3:58 pm |
  25. Mike

    Well, A GOP leader started a war in Iraq based on his fears of WMD despite there not being any. Why not have another GOP person insist on bombing a foreign country because they believe the missile could lead to long range bombing. Isn't that called an act of war?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
  26. Cameron

    Yes, the US should have bombed the launch pad as soon as the threat became known. Now the North Koreans will think they can get away with it every time.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
  27. Liz, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

    President Obama is doing the right thing – but a VERY strong response must come forth from the UN Security Council against this launch, and other nations must also join in condemning it.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:00 pm |
  28. Kevin

    Obama says the Northe Koreans must be held accountable but will most likely do nothing, especially after the fact. If we let North Korea step on our toes it is an inviotation for them to walk overus. Newt wouldn't have let it get this far.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:01 pm |
  29. Raj

    Jack:

    We have departed from priciples of the "Land of the free and the home of the brave" to the nation of do as I say and not as I do. Might by itself will be the demise of the civilization we have. It's been sixty years of misery in middle east and might as done nothing but make it worse. Let's look at alternate solutions to this problem.

    Raj

    April 6, 2009 at 4:02 pm |
  30. tigerakabj

    Jack, Gingrich needs to be quiet like the rest of his party when it comes to foreign policy. This is the party that started 2 wars, 9/11 happened on their watch, none of the terrorists who executed 9/11 have been brought to justice (Where is Osama by the way Gingrich?), Guantanamo was the biggest advertisement for terrorist recruitment making us less safe, etc., etc., etc.

    B/c of Bush's "Axis of Evil" blustering, North Korea decided to go ahead on its nuclear program.
    Gingrich, THIS CRAP STARTED UNDER YOUR BOY BUSH'S WATCH, LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE OBAMA HAS TO CLEAN UP.

    Jack, the GOP has nothing, and I mean nothing to offer this country, at least positively. Their are utterly bankrupt. They think the president along with the rest of the country is stupid and doesn't remember the last 8 years and what went down. Since alot of us are out of work or working part-time, we have plenty of time to think and contemplate how we got to this point.

    Gingrich, like the rest of his party, has no credibility, no accomplishments to back up any of their rhetoric.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:04 pm |
  31. Donna Wisconsin

    Gingrich has the same mentality as Bush: Cowboy. That's why he's gone and Obama is in.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  32. Julie

    Newt Gingrich is living in a time warp – a time that has gladly come and gone – maybe he should do the same.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  33. Paula in Albuquerque

    What Gingrich has had, is, and will say is consistent irrelevant!

    He's a smarmy, disingenuous little creature, who has neither been especially liked, nor trusted, throughout his political career..

    April 6, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  34. Venia PA

    Typical republican idealogy – attack, invade and bully the world. That is why we are in the mess we're in and the world hates us.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:05 pm |
  35. Brian Delray Beach, FL

    The North Koreans accomplished their most recent misguided stunt by firing off a rocket which failed to do much more than fall in the ocean. The US is spread too thin to do anything except cinderize these people and no one is really ready for that. A country that is willing to allow its citizens to starve to death will not blink at doing something really stupid like invading South Korea. Right now we need to get out of the mess we are in and then we can tell the North Koreans to put their toys away and behave.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:06 pm |
  36. don (in naples, florida)

    Well it's nice to hear someone speaking with some muscle with regard to North Korea. However, given the U.S.' declining superpower status, massive debt, failures in iraq and afghanistan, it is difficult to map out how we could have handled the extra burden of another Korean War, given our increased positioning in the middle east.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:06 pm |
  37. Hasani in Cleveland

    I dunno. Maybe following protocol is the way to go here. N. Korea isn't going anywhere. Once we go thru the proper channels and exhaust all other avenues, then we should seek a military option. Bush didn't rush into Iraq when he found his non-existent weapons of mass destruction. And we were attacked by who they claimed was responsible. So why is Presidet Obama being held to a different standard?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:08 pm |
  38. Bill

    I think not Jack. A strike on foreign soil requires congressional approval. It would appear Gingrich is jockying for a 2012 presidential bid by playing the tough guy on national security. In reality, Gingrich probably would have wet his pants. However, this opportunity would have made for some good target practice with our missile defense systems.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:08 pm |
  39. B in NC

    Sounds to me like another republican war-monger. So much hate and too many war-lovers in his party. It's a shame.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:08 pm |
  40. Mike - Hot Springs, Arkansas

    Gingrich is playing to the right wing of his party. Anyone who would have elected to shoot down that missile would be acting in a very dangerous manner. So far Korea has been unable to produce a viable weapon so we should proceed carefully and work with China. We need cool heads at the helm, not a hothead like Gingrich.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  41. Mona

    Jack,

    I am so tired of these people who have no access to intelligence second guessing our President.

    Where was the right-wing outrage when we started a war with a country that did not pose a threat to our country? Why are they complaining now that we have a President that actually wants to try something that hasn't been done in a long time – follow the old saying that you are stronger together than apart. President Obama is right to try all possibilities before playing cowboy. I agree with the President – we can make the world safer if more of us are on board.

    Thank you for this forum. I pray that our country is safe and I believe that our President will do all that he can to keep it that way while restoring our dignity in the world.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
  42. Linda in Arizona

    What does he actually MEAN by "disabled"? Is he saying he would have bombed it on the launch pad? Exactly how did he plan to accomplish this "disablement"? I agree the UN is useless, but I don't think a stronger response was called for. After all, it fizzled, and LittleMan lost face. Maybe he will think twice before trying it again. As for Newtie, who cares about his armchair quarterbacking? He's a loser, and he will NEVER be president.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  43. Phil Dynes

    Disable the rocket? It is brilliant idea's like this that have led the US to a mess in Iraq.

    Great–want another war on your hands, then go ahead and attack North Korea. No fan of the UN-but to bomb Korea to stop the launch (presuming this is what would happen) would give the loon's that run that country all they need to launch an insane attack against the South.

    Newt–bomb Iran while you are at it. Have we not seen that approach does not work yet?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:12 pm |
  44. Jerry

    IT would'nt have mattered who should've done what. No one had any power to do so

    April 6, 2009 at 4:13 pm |
  45. Jon M.

    Jack, preemptive strikes on nations without all the facts is what got us into the mess in Iraq! Bush's cowboy diplomacy and go-it-alone attitude is the reason that the US is now one of the most hated countries around the world. Like it or not, the Iraq War debacle tied our hands. We can't afford to respond with force every time a nut job like Kim Jong Ill rattles his sabre. Besides, even though President Obama is putting on a multi-national public face, you would have to naive to think that there aren't national defense (and offense) plans ready behind the scenes.

    Jon M. in Ohio

    April 6, 2009 at 4:13 pm |
  46. Doug from Bloomington IN

    I'm stunned. The republicans (and you picked two beauties, Jack) are resorting to fear-mongering once again.

    Gingrich gets to say whatever he wants because he doesn't have any responsibility. Neither does John Bolton. Put forth someone legitimate like Chuck Hagel or someone like him and then I'll give it it's due.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  47. Cindy in Georgia

    Sure – let's go shoot at other people's property when not a single other nation is willing to do the same... Better yet, let's nuke them! Then they'll never be disrespectful again!

    Gingrich needs to tend his family problems, not world issues. Please don't tell me this is the GOP's replacement for Palin...

    April 6, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  48. Mary Perkins

    You better believe I would have disabled it. We have a Party in now, who seems to think pandering to the enemy is what we need to do. The enemy will just use you to get their way. How stupid the Democrats are!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  49. grigore caragacianu

    Dear Jack,
    These two gentlemen – Newt Gingrich and John Bolton – are no longer in the Government and at liberty to express their opinion.
    Amateurs talking strategy without knowing it. Molieresque Characters!

    GREG from WARREN, MI

    April 6, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  50. Bob

    No. Such a move would have given the North Koreans an excuse to invade South Korea with the undoubted support of both Russia and China.

    We have too many wars going on without starting another one.

    Gingrich is a hip-shooter just like the cowboy who just left the White House.

    It is amazing how these guys who avoided combat are so eager to cost the lives and shed the blood of others.

    Bob
    Louisville, Ky

    April 6, 2009 at 4:15 pm |
  51. Keith

    Sure, Newt, let's jump into another war that has no purpose while the military is already stretched thin! Don't worry about the fact that Russia and China would likely come to the aid of N. Korea. No big deal, right? What a fool.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:15 pm |
  52. Diane Dagenais Turbide

    Hi Jack,

    No. Why would you behave more erratically then the one trying to intimidate you! The tone and agenda from this administration is clear and a Global Summit on Nuclear Security is well overdue to keep track and reduce trafficking of such dangerous weapons that can fall in the wrong hands. Are we surprise to hear from someone who was part of the Bush administration express that Russia and other nations can't be trusted...same words were probably expressed by other nations when Bush was President! I much prefer seeing a President that has an agenda that actually aims at not ignoring today's realities that exist which needs to be faced once and for all...at least he can pronounce the word nuclear...it is already a better start....!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:15 pm |
  53. Paul

    How do you disable a missile on foreign soil? Military action or espionage. So with our forces already stretched beyond breaking point, Newt wants to start a second Korean War? This is just another Republican politico trying to look tough. I'm glad we have a president who lives in the real world and not some macho fantasy land.

    Paul in Danville KY

    April 6, 2009 at 4:15 pm |
  54. Ken in NC

    If the desired results is WAR, then that is what we should have sent Newt Gingrich to do. Nothing better than practicing what he preaches.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  55. Terence

    Jack, You notice that Newt Gingrich did not say how he wouldve stopped the N Koreans from launching the missile. Just another has been politician trying to make the headlines.
    Terence,Piscataway,NJ

    April 6, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  56. TJ

    Bush had the same problem, total disregard for what the rest of the world thinks. Hmmm wonder where that got us.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  57. mike

    What else would a neo-con do? The far right is the party of war and wall street. Newt would also expect to be showered with rose petals afterward.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  58. Jim Bailey

    Yeah, I can just see the SUPER NEWT slinking through the barbed wire into North Korea a'la McGyver and ripping the controls out with a mess kit knife and dental floss...it's better to let the North Koreans fall on their faces (AGAIN!) if front of the whole world then anything else.
    Jim Bailey
    Cripple Creek
    CO

    April 6, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  59. Jane S in Ogden,Utah

    I rarely agree with Gingrich,but I think maybe I do this time.That North Korean nutcase could be a real threat to us.I doubt that a stern "talking to" is sufficient in dealing with him.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  60. Bill .............. Austin, TX

    My father served during the Korean Police Action, if I remember correctly we're still at the 38th parallel. So what's changed since then? We still have troops there and the U.N. are still pansies.
    ..This is just the latest of North Korea showing the world that we didn't stop Kim Il Sung or stem anything when North Korea that fired the first shot on June 25, 1950.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  61. Marietta

    repubs love wars you think? wars wars wars-We have to build thousands of Gitmo to hold the billions–we are only 400 million counting men woman children, when will they stop?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  62. Jane in CA

    How would you have disabled the missile, Newt? Drop a nuke on them, perhaps? Send in the Delta Force to sabotage it on the launch pad? Commit an act of war to pick a fight with a whack job who has nuclear capability? Do you really think that is a GOOD idea, Newt?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  63. Nana Ware, Philly

    Jack, it is easier for Gingrich to run his mouth when he doesn't have to implement what he says. The only thing the man was able to "disable" when he was in government was the Federal Government .....do you remember and as the con man that he is, he couldn't put his pants close and public opinion booted him out of office for pursuing 'Monica' when he was muddied in the same sin.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:17 pm |
  64. Sherri Illinois

    Yeah and thats why Gingrich & McCain are not in the White House because America has had enough of the MACHO talk!. Remember President Bush and his "BRING EM ON" statement about the Iraq insurgents back in 2003 that inflamed those same insurgents and tripled the attacks on the troops with those awful IED's. Gingrich is no exception but the good thing is that America will not fall for that MACHO crap anymore. Open communication, dialogue is the way to go in this nuclear world with just about every country having a Nuke of some kind. The Republicans remind me of the childhood bully growing up, who was always MACHO in front of other folks but by himself on a dark street he was nothing but a wimp!. Thank God we have a President in the White House who is smart, articulate, compassionate, who knows how to speak intelligently, who chooses his words carefully, and who knows it is better to bring your friends close & your enemies closer!.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
  65. Ron from SF

    Didn't we just hit ourselves on the head with a hammer for 8 years and wasn't that an unmitigated disaster? Why would we want to repeat policies that so clearly failed us and made us the enemy of the entire world? The NeoCons you mention really seem to like having a headache and being hated by the entire world.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:18 pm |
  66. Tom in Desoto Texas

    What exactly does that mean? A unilateral premptive strike with B-2's? Gingrich obviously is thinking of what he would do after January 20, 2013 as President Newt.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  67. Dr Hussey

    I just heard MR Cafferty refer to "the phoney reasons Bush invaded Iraq" when commenting on the Partison gap in Obamas approval ratings.
    Such bias media coverage is one of the main reasons why there is such a Partison Gap in this country.
    Most amercians unfortunately actually believe everytihng they hear on CNN and it tends to influence their opinions.
    Mr Cafferty should stick to the facts and leave his Anti Bush rethoric to the politicians or find a new career.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  68. jim kanous ny

    The US needs a "policy" for dealing with N Korea... not a "response" or a reaction to something they do.. that was the problem with the past two administrations... although the thought of Newt sneaking into N Korea with a nice big sledge hammer is an interesting visual... he should be thanked for the offer but told to be quiet...

    April 6, 2009 at 4:19 pm |
  69. Chris M.

    New York, NY

    Jack; America has to be very careful with the action and words it choses when dealing with nations such as Iran and North Korea. We do not have the bite to back up our bark. Plain and simple. Brute force tactics and negotiations are the last thing we need now. Comming off a long war in Iraq and soon shifting our focus to Afghanastan has put a bad taste in the worlds mouth in regards to U.S. diplomacy or lack there of. Should any nation be aloud to run amok unchecked? Absolutly not. But until a direct attack has been made physical action should not be taken.

    If your neighbor down the street was getting really buff and working out alot then said on a megaphone "Hey neighborhood look how big and strong I am! I could take anyone of you guys on and win!" Does that make it right for you to blow up that neighbors weight room? Bush would have said "Darn tootin' it does!" but that is why we (the U.S.) are looked on more poorly than the countries who are making boastful proclimations.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
  70. Sean in California

    Newt Gingrich left his wife (who was on her deathbed in the hospital) for another woman. Why should we care what anyone with that kind of heart has to say about international issues?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  71. Michael, Liverpool, NY

    No. Disabling the weapon before left the ground would also be an open act of war. We should of course shoot it down if it threatens anyone directly but we wouldn't know that until we saw where it was headed. We should use diplomacy by letting North Korea know that we will be happy to test our missile defense systems in open waters so let us know when they want to launch strategic missiles and we can perfect our responses to potential threats in an open, cooperative wya..

    April 6, 2009 at 4:21 pm |
  72. Richard McKinney, Texas

    I don't think so. The United states is knee deep in debt to China who does not want to see North Korea fail. They have an added stake as North Korea is their neighbor and if it fails then those neighbors become their new population. They have a hard enough time feeding the current ever growin population in China. The United States has it's hands tied. They can not impose more sanctions and starve the people of North Korea because the UN would not stand for it. They can not make China mad because China holds our debt. All the U.S. have left are nouns and verbs. Boy will that be effective.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:23 pm |
  73. Lee In Minnesota

    Newt obviously believes in more Wild Wild West cowboy shoot from the hip diplomacy. Have we not learned enough from over 4000 GI's dead based on a threat of non existent WMD. It is time for 21 Century thinking and diplomacy...war only ends up killing mostly innocent civilians. Did I say DIPLOMACY?? The past week has shown what diplomacy over arrogance can accomplish and that means fewer deaths to innocent people.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:26 pm |
  74. Mea from Florida

    How would Newt accomplish this? Another war? Anyone idiot can say what they would have done after the fact, but fail to say just how they would do it. It seems that someone's always talking about what they would have done as a reaction. How about we talk about prevention. Preventing this for happen in the first place. Then again, conservatives hate talking about prevention.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  75. AndyZ Lynn, MA

    Please, no Newt Gingrich questions. His "Contract with America" was nothing more than a declaration of war on our poor and underpriviledged. I will never forget what the former speaker did, nor will I ever forgive him. He is no longer relevant, unless you keep him in the news.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  76. Christian in Miami

    I agree with Mr. Gingich and Frmr. Ambassador Bolton. UN resolutions do not work with these sort of regimes. Dictators like Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong-il wipe their rear-ends with UN resolutions and do what they want and watch as the world does nothing but talk about what it's going to do. We need to take immediate action so these people take us seriously and we don't allow imminent attacks on our soil or the soil of our allies!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  77. Roy-Chicago

    The entire time Newt had power in Washington, he never did anything sdo provocative as he talks about now. It is so easy to second guess someone else, and THIS, Jack, is the reason bi-partisanship has dissolved. Republicans saw Obama had such a high approval rating, they are obviously making a concerted effort to bring it down........even if the country come down with it.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  78. Mark

    Yes, let's bomb someone else and piss some more people off getting us into another conflict. As if we don't have enough already. Newt should stop talking, in the words of Will Ferrel, "your sounding stupid!"

    April 6, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  79. Art

    Hmmm – Gingrich is saying to attack a country that has nuclear warheads and developed long range missiles in order to do what? If there was a time to attack North Korea it was before they had any nuclear warheads. Do we need to remind Mr. Gingrich who was President then?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  80. sekanblogger

    I thought we disabled Newt & friends by popular vote?
    Why should we continue to wring our hands over things that Newt, Tom Delay, Rush Limbaugh and BillO think are correct.
    Bush stole an election and felt he had a mandate from the nation...and God.
    Obama has a mandate by popular vote. The people have spoken, let's let our elected officials make the calls, not has-beens and wannabees!
    Tracy, Kansas

    April 6, 2009 at 4:42 pm |
  81. M from NY

    NO! It will drag us into yet another war. The Republican'ts only know how to start wars and drive the economy into a ditch. They don't know how to do anything else.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:42 pm |
  82. Jimmy H, Washington D.C.

    Absolutely not. Although N. Korea blatantly violated UN resolutions, the US cannot risk igniting another conflict over a missle test, especially since N. Korea is only doing so to boost it's relevance and hopes at the international level of receiving aid. If anything, Japan would be the only country justified to shoot that missle down, due to the fact that it went over it's airspace.
    Newt's interventionist attitude is exactly what this nation does not need during these troubling times. Along with a massive recession and two wars in the Middle East, the last thing we need is to speak loudly while carrying a big stick unneccesarily.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  83. Harvey Miller

    Newt can't believe that there is a reason why he is the former speaker. However, there probably is no real reason why he was ever the speaker. His kind of thinking got us into Iraq. All we need is another war to further destroy our own troops and their families.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  84. Alice Newman Center Harbor NH

    "Newt Gingrich says he would have disabled the long-range missile before it ever left the launch pad. ..!!!"

    How?

    Now Newt is a rocket scientist?? He'd invade North Korea? Great punchline – no details = a true Republican attitude.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  85. Pete

    No offense, Newt, but please enlighten us as to just how you would have "disabled" that missile in a way that would not have plunged the US into a war with North Korea and possibly China? Such a war could easily kill millions of people in South Korea alone.

    I don't know what bothers me more. On one hand you have yet another Republican publicly itching for another war, and on the other hand you have a willing media that refuses to challenge them when they say inflammatory and idiotic pronouncements like Mr. Gingrich did on your network.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  86. Barb from Hazel Crest, IL

    Newt Gingrich is thinking with emotions and that is stupid. President Obama is using his head. We are in an economic downturn, two wars, and deeply in debt. We are not in the position to go into another war that would be spreading ourselves to thin. This brings to mind an old pharse; sometimes you must walk away and lose the battle so you can come back and win the war. There will be another opportunity.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:45 pm |
  87. Bud in Austin, TX

    NEWT is now speaking for the republicans?!? talk about pulling out all of the nostalgia stops. whats next? Digging up Reagan? This guy should hang his hat on distracting the nation with the Clinton impeachment while Phil Gramm pushed through congress the kinds of de-regulation laws that got us in this situation...haven't you done enough damage to this wonderful country?
    And no, i don't think we should have taken on another useless military campaign by unilaterally attacking ANOTHER sovereign nation

    April 6, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
  88. Jaycie, Los Angeles

    Newt "don't give a hoot" about the rest of us in this world! The neocons believe in world domination by the USA, whatever the cost. Lousey schools, no heallth care, homeless, whatever, to them it's worth it as long as we can kick ass around the world. Can you imagine how much better shape our economy would be in if Bush & Co hadn't invaded Iraq? If those billions had been spent in improving life here, in our country? Newt and his cadre of war mongers believe in eternal war; I and most Democrats don't. And how about his "conversion" to Catholicism? Just another ploy to cleam up his extremely tarnished image; how craven, how cynical!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  89. john ... marlton nj

    No, that wacko in North Korea is just looking for attention. The more we give him the more he wants. As far as Boltons comment about the Security Councils "no real impact" on Iran and North Korea, perhaps someone should remind him that Isreal is one of the biggest violators of Security Council resolutions! As a final note: ... does anyone doubt that North Korea is absolutely aware we would blow them off the planet if they ever fired a weapon at the USA..

    April 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  90. john christopher

    Newt is still back in the Bush administration mentality. This kind of attitude is what make most nations of the world dislike and even hate the U.S. As it stands the North Korean launch ended in failure. If the U.S. had shot it down...now we are dealing with an act of war...which may have been fine for the Bush gang, but not for the Obama group.

    Newt along with his brain-dead clones, is becoming more irrelevant every time he opens his mouth. Clearly, these people are interested in creating a culture of hatred and war. It is the not-so-hidden agenda advanced by greed merchants, war mongers and the corporate elite. These are the people who benefit from hatred and war.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  91. Steve K.

    Absolutely. We should have disabled the missle without hesitation.
    Obama has no guts to do anything. This administration is going to be like Jimmy Carter's administration. Everybody is going to shxx on us. I know CNN doesn't like to hear this or print this but that's where we are heading. Sorry CNN.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  92. j/NJ

    Newt Gingrich says he would have disabled North Korea’s missile. Is that what the U.S. should have done?

    The statement on face value is irresponsible although there are potential consequences either way...in any event Gingrich should know there are very few foreign policy issues that are black and white...on the other hand the media is reporting the missle launch is a virtual failure, so it seems at least for the time being that Gringrich's proposed action was/is not warranted...

    April 6, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  93. Betty, San Diego, Ca.

    Everyone has an opinion and it does not mean that the person is an authority on the subject. Newt Gingrich's military leadership acumen to launch a strike on the missile site leaves a lot to be desired.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  94. Erik from Golden, Colorado

    And exactly how would he have disabled it? Would he have sent a SEAL strike team or just simply bombed them?

    Really, we do NOT need another war on our hands, so Obama's diplomatic approach is the most culturally AND fiscally responsible option.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  95. Mark WI.

    Jack, I would love to know how Newt would have disabled the missile. Maybe he just would have walked to the launch pad, wrench in hand, and started to unbolt it! Or better yet more toward the Bush administration era, started World War III, thats the ticket, MORE POWER, MORE MONEY, MORE GREED and to hell with the rest of us!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  96. JF

    No I do not think the USA have the right to fire on a nation without
    being fired on first. If we have the right to have the many warheads
    we have, who are we to stop others from having them also. They
    have the right to protect their people from any and all just like us in
    the USA.

    Atlanta, GA.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:53 pm |
  97. Rob R Minnesota

    It's so easy to say what your WOULD'VE done...except the question is What HAVE you done Newt? We remember your Contract with America, and how THAT turned out...

    April 6, 2009 at 4:53 pm |
  98. Jackie in Dallas

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Newt can say that…he’s not got his fingers on the Red button! The truth of the matter is that the US could not go in and take out the missile without provocating another war. Kim Jong-Il has nothing to lose…his people are starving, but he has a large military force that can be used to overrun South Korea, and gain their food and industrial capabilities. Unless we are prepared to back up such a provocative action with another Korean Conflict, I think I’m GLAD that Newt does not have his fingers on the Red button!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:54 pm |
  99. Allen, Hartwell GA

    Jack, exactly what the hell would Newt have done? What would any of the critics have done? Don't these people realize that we're talking about the death of perhaps millions if we do anything preemptive towards North Korea?
    Why don't we just nuke the world and get humanity out of the way!!!

    April 6, 2009 at 4:54 pm |
  100. Josh Hadas

    Of course Jack. The U.S. should have disabled North Korea's missle. The U.S. should have also solved the banking crisis. The U.S. should have fixed the auto industry. The U.S. should have ended hunger and poverty and finally brought an end to crime in all its forms. Perhaps Newt Gingrich could have solved all these problems for us if he was in power. I can just see him now, parachuting into North Korea, all dressed in black, with night vision goggles and a machine gun.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:54 pm |
  101. Brent

    Wow Jack, I didn't think you would be an outlet for unchallenged commentary from the very types of people that got us into this mess. Gingrich wants to bomb North Korea, and Bolton has wanted to bomb Iran for years. I have yet to hear either of them answer the question "then what?". Do they honestly think that will be the end of it. There will be retaliation, then escalation and on and on. These people won't be satisfied until we have WW3.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:55 pm |
  102. cnd bob

    you know this phrase comes to mind.....cause and effect....if you do something agressive then the other will retaliate.......we are aware of the repugs response......and that's the reason they are are not making decisions.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:56 pm |
  103. Florio, Signal Mountain TN

    With What would he have disabled another soverign country's missile. If they disabled one of our missiles what would we do. Talk about Sabre rattling for publicity, this coming from someone who is not in office and has not been for years.
    What a crock. Like Palin anything to be in the press.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  104. Mike in Toronto

    Why should we believe that a preemptive attack on North Korea would have worked out better than the one on Irak?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  105. Sascha

    I could not be happier that the Bush regime is out of office and yes was extremely "hopeful" re the Obama administration. Unfortunately, this idea of the U.S. "leading the way" for the world on disarmament is frightening, if for no other reason than common sense. On a smaller level for comparison...if the police decided to disarm themselves because guns were dangerous, do you think the criminals would feel obligated then to do the same? If countries with leaders that are massively aggressive want us to fall, would the smart thing to do to start laying down our protection to appease them, show them the "right" way to do things? Does anyone actually believe that if North Korea hasn't been affected by the last four warnings given them by U.N. etc. that laying our arms down will make them do the same? Of course not...only by having a bigger weapon and the ability to use it will they think twice about coming after us. It is a sad reality. You cannot usually "talk" the bully on the playground into not beating you into submission...you usually have to show them that you are capable of doing this to them and they will back off.
    Reality is not always pretty, nor is being so ethereal always safe.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  106. D - Atlanta, GA

    Absolutely not......wouldn't that just be another pre-emptive strike (as in Iraq)....The Bush administration was not effective.....We no longer intimidate anyone, we lost a lot of worldwide respect and our credibility is ruined. Because of the past administration, our armed forces are stretched so thin, we may have a difficult time defending ourselves. Mr. Gingrich is a Neocon and his rhetoric is very dangerous.

    April 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  107. B Smith

    Not only do I believe Newt Gingrich to be right about not trusting Russian, North Korea, Iran , etc., but I too agree that Obama's plan to de-nuke the world is a pipe dream that cannot be accomplished. Wish it could, but it is totally unrealistic at best.......

    April 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  108. Brian, Canada

    We shouldn't be surprised that after we punish bad players with international isolation they are isolated from the bad as well as the good.

    Gingrich is a fool. This missile launch did not warrant military action and the risks that involves when the US is bogged down in 2 wars already. It may be feasable after the US extracts itself from Iraq but not now. If North Korea retaliated what would the US have at its disposal to repond with?

    April 6, 2009 at 4:58 pm |
  109. Ruben from Oregon

    Gingrich is resurrecting the Bush Doctrine. This preemptive strike idea failed and backfired in Iraq. The definition of mental illness is to keep doing the same thing expecting a different result. Newt is as crazy as the rest of the GOP (Goofy Obstructionist Party).

    April 6, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
  110. Michael in Los Angeles

    What would we have done if someone stopped our early launches in the manner Newt is suggesting? Probably gone to war. What makes him think the N. Korea response would be any different? I personally don't want another Iraq in Asia!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
  111. Raymond

    PLEASE...Newt could not even keep his contract with America.. How can we expect for him to dismantle a rocket.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  112. erik

    What should we have done? Gotten involved in another war, built a faux coalition of 3 or 4 countries then attacked North Korea with a force made up of 99% Americans with the US picking up 99% of the cost. Our hands are pretty well tied right now with the two wars that Bush and the Repubs got us into.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  113. Don in Grand Rapids, Mi

    The world should have done something other than sitting on the thumbs. The Obama Administration isn't appearing weak....IT IS WEAK AND HAS WEAKEN THE USA FROM THE MOMENT HE WAS ELECTED! Jusst today Obama called for the USA to lead the world in getting rid of nuclar weapons! We already have open borders and will let all the illegal ailens in so that they can vote for him.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  114. Kevin in Austin

    Hmm... it seems "otherworldly" to me to have launched a direct attack on North Korean soil, thus opening up a third war on the Korean penninsula that we can neither afford or sustain militarily. So, it's easy for Mr. Gingrich to begin posturing for 2012, but were he to be in power today, he'd understand that he has very few military options left after nearly eight years of misguided wars in distant lands.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  115. atlantapril

    "Disabling" a sovereign nation's missile is an act of aggression and could possibly lead to a third war involving US troops. I cannot fathom why Mr. Gingrich or any reasonable adult would champion this country's involvement in yet another war when our resources (military & financial) are already stretched so thin.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:02 pm |
  116. Sandy in Arkansas

    Only time will tell and the irony of that is that the final chapter could be when all clocks stop just like they did in Horoshima and Nagasaki. I don't know the right answer...I just hope that our world leaders do. What was it Teddy Roosevelt said, "Speak softly but carry a big stick." I guess everyone wants a big stick but in real life we all know someone who should never have a stick!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:04 pm |
  117. Ondrya in the San Fernando Valley, CA

    What, and miss another opportunity to laugh at North Koreas' stupid rocket aces for launching yet another dud that sputters and fizzles harmlessly into the ocean? The only ones who should fear these missiles is perhaps a few Pacific bottom feeders. When it comes to producing ICBMs, North Korea has certainly proven that this ain't rocket science.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
  118. Andrea, Omaha, NE

    Absolutely not! Take a good look at the trouble we started in the middle east by attacking Iraq. You need to also take into consideration that North Korea has an army that can fight back and cause a lot damage to South Korea and it's neighbors. The neocons are nuts. Even Bush was smart enough not to pursue war with North Korea and went to the UN to impose sanctions on them.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
  119. Christian in Miami

    I agree. UN Resolutions do nothing in countries like Iran and North Korea. The dictators of these countries wipe their rear-ends with UN Resolutions and build popularity with their own people in order to plan attacks on our soil and on the soil of our allies. We need to take serios immediate action or we will just weaken ourselves and leave ourselves vulnerable to an imminent attack. These people want to create havoc and destruction and we're letting them go by with less than a slap on the wrist.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  120. Paul Bahou

    Jack,

    Oh he would have? How? Would Newt have snuck in North Korea like a GOP Ninja or just gone in gung-ho like Delta Force? Last time I checked the Republican Party had 8 years to do something with Kim Jong Ill, yet all I see is the same nut job with more toys. Talk is cheap, Talk from Gingrich is even cheaper.

    Paul Bahou, Temecula CA

    April 6, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  121. Skeeve

    Without any due respect at all "being tough" on so-called national so-called security is a sign of outward stupidity.

    Reciprocity – very simple diplomatic and political concept. If USA administration (or rather Newt) believes that USA can nuke, disable or otherwise being tough on the territory of a sovereign state then USA must be fully prepared and take is without complains, hysteria and references to "beacons on the hill" that other political entities will do the same to any objects on the territory of USA that they perceive to be a threat.
    It doesn't work both way. If people in this country believe that sovereignty is an empty sound and could be ignored in the name of "American national interests", than they should be fully prepared that acts like 9/11 will become normal, permissible political and military tool. Now, do we want it?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  122. Joshua

    I've found that since the launch, the media, including the synopsis here, has become more biased. Over the past few days, the discussion has centered around whether it was a missile test, or an actual satellite launch, as the North Korean government holds. Now, the media is calling it a 'missile' exclusively. If it was a satellite, then wasn't N. Korea completely within its rights? Who says that only major powers are allowed to have access to space? If it was a missile test, then disciplinary measures should be taken; but the onus of proof is on the accuser.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  123. Vig

    On Fox News he was upset that the Obama administration is all words and no action when it comes to this nonsense of launching rockets and threatening countries. Obama is talking a good game with his words, always lecturing, wagging his index finger at the world – telling them how to live – just shut up and get back to the Oval Office and off the stage – we need a leader now a orator.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  124. Ken - Charlotte NC

    I do believe we should've pre-emptively acted to destroy North Korea's launch. Clearly a stronger message was needed. Are we going to wait until they can reach us?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  125. Erin, Seattle, WA

    Yeah, Gingrich, you're so smart–you're out of a job.....

    You can't reason with people who don't know reality from fantasy. North Korea knows that nothing reached orbit, and there is no "music" being relayed back. The trickiest part of this is not to decide what to do to punish them, but how to send them a warning that isn't met with strong opposition with China and Russia.

    How the UN and this administration navigates this new mine field remains to be seen. But one thing is clear, North Korea has shown us what they will resort to when they aren't given the time of day....we need to tread lightly. I'm sure Obama will find a much more diplomatic way of dealing with this than what Gingrich is suggesting. Note to Gingrich: you can't put a fire out with gasoline.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  126. ARKearney

    If you want WWII, Newt is your man.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  127. Lee In Minnesota

    Newt needs to be neutralized as a toxic weapon to America. NO MORE WARS...and where was the WMD in Iraq Newt??

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  128. David ilvedson

    The US should disable New Gingritch

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  129. Brad Stark

    Good thing Nuke Gingrich isn't calling the shots!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  130. Al

    Newt is flat out goofy. To say he would have disabled – meaning attacked – the missile in North Korea means that he thinks the United States should have leaped ahead of any diplomacy whatsoever to all out war with North Korea.

    In spite of the fact that it is clear that the missle was no threat to the United States. This is pure grandstanding. Nothing more can be said about Newt's utterly stupid assertion.

    It's easy for Newt to make these absurd statements when he knows they mean nothing at all. He never has had the responsibility to make these decisions and thank God he never will.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  131. Heath

    Newt would do what any good republican would do – start a war. Better to rouse world opinion against the North Koreans and deal with threats as they arise. Obama made the right move.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  132. Joshua

    Honolulu, HI

    I've found that since the launch, the media, including the synopsis here, has become more biased. Over the past few days, the discussion has centered around whether it was a missile test, or an actual satellite launch, as the North Korean government holds. Now, the media is calling it a 'missile' exclusively. If it was a satellite, then wasn't N. Korea completely within its rights? Who says that only major powers are allowed to have satellites? If it was a missile test, then perhaps disciplinary measures should be taken; but the onus of proof is on the accuser.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  133. Rebekah Jensen

    And Gingrich would have sent troops into Iraq with no verifiable proof that there were WMD too. Oh wait a minute. . .we did that. And look where that got us. . .

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  134. Michel

    No, Jack, shooting down their rocket would only show how insecure we feel. Sabotaging it was the perfect solution. ;)

    Michel
    Takoma Park, MD

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  135. ARKearney

    If you want World War III, Newt is your man.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  136. Julian Sanchez

    "those who believe the pen is mightier than the sword, have of course never been at the receiving end of an automatic rifle"

    U.N is a group of politicians. I hate to admit it, but Bush forced North Korea to the table.
    And there is no greater threat, than the one coming from the inside, as Cicero Implied.

    Obama is a lawyer, and he believes in the U.N. A president in war times, in turbulent times, without military experience.

    I only got one thing to say:

    April 6, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
  137. Terry Washington State

    Really? Is this the only type of answer the Republicans can fathom for a world situation. We're becoming a bit thin on solidiers. Perhaps instead of printing money, we should mass manufacturing soldiers.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  138. Barbara Drake

    I do not believe we should have distroyed the Korean missile. We must show respect to others if we expect it. Why should we escalate the role of a minor player who just wants respect and attention.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  139. Mike Smith, Decatur, Ga

    Was this Newt's position before or after his conversion to Catholicism?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  140. john

    Absolutely not. Now when trying to show we are not like George Bush's image we commit some aggressive act that may be totally uncalled for. Gingrich is a joke. Diplomacy can work.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  141. Tim

    You have got to be kidding! Another conflict on a third front with stretched forces financial crisis and withour international support again. You have to think before you act that is what got us in this mess!!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  142. John, Fort Collins, CO

    It's one thing to drop a cruise missile into a group of tents and camels in the Middle Est, but it is an altogether different matter to target a lunch pad in North Korea; a country with 700,000 troops stationed within 90 miles of the DMZ and South Korea. Considering Kim Jong II, the man with his finger on the trigger, has a number of loose screws, this is well beyond just a delicate situation. A provactive action like Newt Gingrich proposes could easily trigger a full blown war.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  143. miguel gonzales

    There is a very good reason why Newt Gingrich is not, and will never be president of the USA.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  144. P in California

    Of course not! You do not deal with a crazy person by threatening them. That action could have began WWIII! Newt is showing his age and stage. Newt is the originator of blackmailing his own party members to get them to march in lockstep. Those that do march to his tune are shunned. Newt Gingrich is posturing and full of hot air.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  145. John T.

    Newut is as smart as GW and 2times as agressive. It isn't hard to see why the republican party would follow him. At least that 61% that has their head up their ask me no questions and I won't say a word !!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  146. Bruce Moses

    Gingrich's comments are not at all surprising and are as dangerous as they are fool-hearted. Obama's attempt to work through the UN is not the end of the process, it is an attempt to restart a process that has been off track for eight years.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  147. Tony L........Oregon

    Newt, like Rush Limbaugh, is full of talk and no substance. The fact is this, when the Republicans had a chance to do something about North Korea, they balked. It's easy to tell us what they would do, yet when they had the chance they bumbled through Iraq and left Noth Korea alone...........

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  148. Peter

    No way. This is an internal affair of North Korea. Yes, it is a danger and will likely eventually lead to a war. But the US does not have the authority to simply disregard treaties and international laws whenever the government feels like it.
    Remember, the Romans never invaded any foreign nation – they just preemptively attacked those who would have attacked them...

    Peter.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  149. PJ

    While the Republicans continue to try and rile everyone up with scare tactics and rhetoric, did they ever consider the amount of information we received by letting the missile fly. The US now knows exactly what they have the capability to do. Had we gone in like idiots guns a blazing we would have missed this very pertinent intelligence. Give the President and the military some credit, they are alot smarter than Newt gives them credit for.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  150. Luv/Canada

    Stupid as it may seems,america should understand that north korea is not Iraq by any means.Am amaze how destroying one bomb would have help ur country solve north korea retaliation.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  151. rocky johnson

    If old newt would have gotten his way all it would have done is stir up a hornets nest that South Korea would have to deal with. And that would have put us into another war.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  152. Cindy

    Of course disarmament is the best solution. Maybe Newt would like to be Hillary's assistant? Since he's got all the good ideas?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  153. Dennis, Costa Rica

    I understand where Newt Gingrich is coming from but when are we going to stop being the World Police? How much more money are we going to spend and how many more lives are we supposed to sacrifice? The US cannot be the only ones who come to the rescue...where is the rest of the world on this?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  154. mister canis

    Thankfully we have allready disabled Gingrich, I think thay says a lot more than he ever could.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  155. Troy

    The U.S. did exactly what it should have, nothing. When are the other counties going to step up to the plate? Why does the United States have to do everything? Japan/South Korea should of shot it down and we back them instead of Japan/South Korea backing us.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  156. Brian

    Yes! The US needs to show that it is intent on upholding and enforcing these resolutions. If all the government does is threaten, then slap on a new resolution to cover up the old- we will be laughed at. It is disgusting what this administration calls being "tough" on our enemies.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  157. george in Florida

    The only way to disable the missile would have been to destroy it. I suppose Newt wants a third war zone for an already overstretched military to cope with. North Korea is not exactly under the leadership of anyone rational and it is not unreasonable to expect there would have been a response against South Korea. I don't know about Newt, but I am not in the mood for another war. Let Kim play his games, just as he has done for decades. Any attack would have created more problems that we do not need.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  158. kerry

    oh yeah, great idea..... we'd all be picking rice out of our teeth about now. who needs terrorists when you have the likes of gingrich advising us????

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  159. Willie From Weston, Florida

    Jack,

    Are you kidding? Think about it, if the Obama administration would've opted to engage in destroying or "disabling" the missle, we would have foregone a series of important steps all while Mr. Obama is preaching world solidarity in a world of threat. This is a a politically untenable position in light of what Mr. Obama promised. While we should set up strict measures of enforcement, we shouldn't do so by taking an instinctive and reactionary approach...thoughtfully Jack, that's how we need to do this, always. This is chess...not checkers!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  160. Bruce Wicks

    DPRK can be best described as a child acting out, akin to throwing a temper tantrum. We should react to North Korea just as we would that child. Ignore them! Boy, would that ever tick them off.

    Bruce

    April 6, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  161. jeff northern wisconsin

    sure he would have, what else is a has been going to do.
    nothing worse than washed up politician telling us what to do.
    tell him to run in 2012 win thee election and have at it.
    not too likely what a joke.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  162. lee

    N. Korea as well as all other countries should have the right to build and maintain any and all wheapons that we U.S.A. have to threatain them with. maybe then we will keep uor noes out of others bussiness.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  163. Greatchief

    This is exactly the kind of reactionary foreign policy that most Americans voted against on November 4th. Gone are the days when the United States was the world's policeman. Let Japan and South Korea deal with the North. We have more pressing issues to worry about.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  164. Sarr

    i guess to be partial to the iraqi , who have been hit years on some unexisted WMDs, i think i would be fair to adopt MR NEWT proposition ??
    am i right? North korea is showing the whole world that he got WmdS!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  165. Tom, Santa Barbara CA

    We've got two wars going at at the moment. Isn't that enough?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  166. Cory F. in Fairfield, CA

    Honestly, the last thing we need to do is start another war. As terrible as the North Korea situation is, any attempt from us to "disable" the missile would have led to situations that we couldn't afford. We're already in a war that's sucked us dry, a second and, very likely, larger war over a country trying to launch a satellite (regardless of the intention of said satellite launch) would lead to nothing good.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  167. Anne Johnson

    Jack,
    Nuke Newt. I think he is one of the most dangerous Americans in this country. It is really scary to think what would be happening to us if he were in control..Thank God,he is not.
    Anne in Kentucky

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  168. Tom in Florida

    Would that we could as easily dismantle the running mouths of Newt Gingrich, who does his most provocative flexing when not in power.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  169. Kyle Cooper

    We don't need to be the world's policeman, let China, South Korea, Japan and the rest of the Asian nations determine what needs to be done with North Korea. If their neighbors don't care enough to take action then why shoud we. It's past time we 'talked softly and carried a big stick".

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  170. darius perez

    I assume by disabling he means bombing. If that's so that could be considered an act of war. Great! Let's get mired yet another we neither have the troops to fight nor can we afford.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  171. Andrea

    Hmm. Let's see. Shoot it down and perhaps start a third armed conflict when we don't have the resources to handle the first two. Hmm. I'm going to think about that and get back to you, Jack.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  172. G Lanza

    I believe in defense, and I believe in keeping our country safe, but Newt wants to continue the failed policy of being the worlds policemen and being hated by many other countries. If we were to destroy that missle on its launch pad, it would give credit to all of the countries who already think we are bullies. We can take care of ourselves, and the world without being majorly agressive.

    G. Lanza
    Hopewell Junction NY 12533

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  173. Cody (NJ)

    No. It was doomed to fail in the first place.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  174. Dennis, Columbus, Ohio

    Given the military reports I believe the US has gathered a lot of good data while they were tracking the missile. If we had shot it down we would not know how much improved this missile is compaired to the last one they launched. Remember, knowledge is power.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
  175. Oliver

    Sure, Jack – and possibly provoked North Korea into a military retaliation against South Korea (and our servicemen stationed there). The North's ballistic missile program is not a strategic threat to the US. They're trying to seek leverage to blackmail the US and Asian nations into giving into their demands. And it won't work. Glad saner heads than Newt's prevailed.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  176. Bob Fried

    Newt is another Dick Cheney. Let's start another war, eh Dick. We have plenty of troops to handle another one.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  177. Highland Nichols

    Jack what makes you think we did"t It failed Iam sure we would not tell the whole world about it.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  178. Tim Olszewski

    Just what we need Newt, another unplanned, poorly executed war. When will the right wing ever learn from their mistakes? Try diplomacy first, get the rest of the world behind us, then send in our superior military. Knee jerk reactions are the cause of messes such as Iraq. The right wing is so wrong these days!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  179. jeff from glen cove, ny

    Of course we should have disabled it! We should have just taken over N Korea as well, and while we're at it, since, according to Mr. Gingrich we have all the fresh troops and money that's needed available, we should go for China and Russia as well (as a precautionary measure).

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  180. Norman Simon

    Although I might want to have disabled North Korea's Missile, I believe it might have preempted a war as the North Koreans might have decided to invade South Korea claiming their move as "retaliation" rather than a first strike.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  181. Dan

    Kim Jong Il is a loose cannon. Nobody disputes that. But we've already made the mistake of being pre-emptive. We should use intelligence to be prepared for attacks period... and if attacked, respond appropriately. If our Democracy "dictates" what other countries can and can't do, then what does that make us?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  182. Murray, Las Vegas, NV

    So, what does Mr. Gingrich want us to do? Newt the North????

    April 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  183. Bruce Prieser

    Shooting down the missile would have been the "Bush" thing to do. More thoughtful people might want to gain a little more "Intelligence!"

    Bruce Prieser
    Online Retailer
    Daytona Beach, FL

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  184. Michael Fennimore

    There's only one way to find out how advanced their missle technology has developed and that's letting it take off. Once we know they can reach our boarders don't let anymore get off the launch pad.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  185. rhlovely

    Disable the North Korean's missile; Well it's certainly an option from the man who's only concern is to get into the White House. Maybe, we disable Newt's platform and verbage. The Man can taste the Presidency. Sad!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  186. Lisa B in AZ

    Dismantle the missile and then what? Deal with Russia and China?Pres. Bush left us in such an already weakened position with lost credibility throughout the world. Pres. Obama is on a clear path of building and re-building friendships abroad. Maybe when that task is completed, or at the very least, has progressed, then the U.S. will be in a better position to deal with our enemies with a stronger, united world front.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  187. Fred Cook

    Definitely not! Threatening to destroy the missile on the launch pad is easy to do when you have no authority to do so and are unlikely to have any in the foreseeable future. This kind of rhetoric serves no purpose except to reinforce the World's view of America as a bully whose answer to everything is to use force.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  188. Michelle, military wife in Germany

    Really Mr. Gingrich? You....just you...would have covertly entered North Korea and "disabled" that missle? Or would you have sent in our already overworked and overstretched military?

    The problem with Armchair Warriors is they are long on criticisms and ego-massaging notions... and short on actual reality or action. I, for one, am delighted that Mr. Gingrich (along with other choice members of his chosen political party) isn't in a position of power anymore. I sleep much better that way.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  189. Kas Appiah

    Newt Gingrich is out of touch with the world reality. The bulling of G. Bush did not lead the USA to anywhere better and the world is changing and most of the GOP members are not aware of that obvious reality.
    More the 1st country on the eart that should stop and eliminate nuclear weapons is the USA. More, science has never been the sole privilege of any human being. So let who ever can, do what he can, and the do what they can.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  190. flying wolf, Manchester NH

    Disabling the N. Korean pop-gun before it flew would be an over-reaction. It would be the same as cops shooting a kid for pointing a purple water pistol at them. The U.S. was correct to stand by to see if the diet-Coke-&-Mentos missile would amount to anything more than the fizzile it was, but it would really be to see what the Chinese or Russians would do if it fell over their territory.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  191. Sean

    Yes the US and/or someone else should have disabled North Korea's rocket. They violated a U.N. resolution and it's clear that talking to North Korea means nothing. If UN resolutions are to mean anything then they need to be enforced. Otherwise they, and the false sense of law they'd represent, endanger lives throughout the world.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  192. Chris - Newport, NC

    Not only should we disabled the missile, we should disable their ability to make missiles and nuclear research. You wouldn't let your child play with fire. Why let one play with missiles, which could be potential ICBM's packed with nuclear warheads.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  193. Vincent OBrien

    OMG, so he would have disabled the rocket, with what, another missile ? So what if they shot a rocket into the air? They are just just trying to get a payoff. That's the same thinking that sucked us into Iraq. Leave it to Republicans

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  194. RALPH

    Only if we can evacuate South Korea FIRST.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  195. Tom Mitchell

    How did Gingrich plan on doing that? Invade.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  196. Gary in Colorado

    And I thought Bush's policies were warped!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  197. Ed

    Does Newt think that North Korea will just stand by while the US shoot down their missle? Does he feel that they won't see that as provocation? At a time when we're fighting three wars, is Newt in favor of three? Will he be standing at Dover when the bodies arrive from the DMZ?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  198. Bob

    It's nice that Newt would have done that but he doesn't say how he would have done that. Would he have jumped on an American Airlines redeye flight to the DPRK, toolbox in tow, and simple started taking the missle apart. It's true that the UN is useless, the Security Council will never agree on any substanative action against any nation. We should have just shot it down as soon as it crossed the DPRK's border. It could have been a good test for our weapons systems as well.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  199. Joy from Coshocton, Ohio

    Ah, the old "quick on the trigger" game" eh-h? Now that hasn't proved too effective the past 8 years has it? It works on alienating the world.
    Taking out the launch pad in Korea would have given the North Korean dictator lods of fodder to convince his people that we are hostile. Preeminent strikes are not the way in this new era. Working with our allies is the correct method.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  200. mike cleveland

    we did exactly what needed to be done while north korea seperates its self from the rest of the world the usa needs to strengthen its ties with all would be alies .if history taught us anything ,when we try to go it alone the outcome is less than satisfactory.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:18 pm |
  201. Cathie

    They are finally coming out of their caves. All those neo cons that got us into Iraq are speaking loudly about those secret dangers lurking around the corner. From mushroom clouds to electronic pulses that will put us back to the stone age. The choice is clear – perpetual war or a chance for peace. I know where I stand.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  202. octopushead

    It's very easy for someone who doesn't have to make the decision and suffer the consequences of the decision to sit back and armchair quarterback. That's exactly what Newt is doing. I'd love to know how Newt would have disabled the missile and the fallout if he disabled it by means of a military strike. That's just what we need another live war in another region of the world.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  203. Egwim in Canada

    As a citizen of the world and a strong believer in diplomacy. I strongly support multilaterism, but it is clearly denial not to admit that the United Nations has become nothing more than a 20th century relic. This is clear since sanctions put foward by the UN in numerous cases have been taking with little or no concern from North Korea or Iran.The U.S should attempt numerous diplomatic routes and when that all fails which it might blow their low grade weapons programs to kingdom come!!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  204. Li Bendet

    What planet is Mr. Gingrich living on?

    Here Obama is trying to get global cooperation for his war strategy in Afghanistan while trying to get the G-20 to go along with his economic strategy in Europe this past week. Does he really imagine that all the sudden we're going to attack the missile in North Korea in the midst of these talks?

    It's easy to take pot shot from the sidellines, but I didn't see the Bush administration shoot down the last missile they tested.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  205. Ronald Holst

    That Depends On his Definition Of disable If he means shoot it down then sure why not that would put Obama In Bush's league on the other hand If he means we should be BOMB the launch site well then he is in Cheney's league But As Far as I am concerned we are already in two wars so why stat a third. But then again a world war three just might end our economic woes that is if we survive.
    Ron Holst
    San Antonio . TX.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  206. Al Mera

    NO, The United States should not have disabled that rocket.
    What we should do is build our defences to the point where no country in the world would even think of attacking us. Our defences should be such that we can destroy any enemy country in the world with the push of a button.
    We should let the rest of the world fende for themselves. WE must stop sending our children to die in foreign lands where we are not even appreciated.
    Maybe then other threatened countries would decide to band together to protect themselves and the world from terrorist administrations.
    Let the savages kill each other.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  207. marianne kehoe

    Too bad one of our "friends" didn't do the job for us and then we could of slapped their hands. You know, kinda Cheney style

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  208. gewe

    NUKE GINRICH should go back to sleep and let the younger generation takecontrol thinks the old way of thinking does not work

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  209. Li Bendet

    What planet is Mr. Gingrich living on?

    Here Obama is trying to get global cooperation for his war strategy in Afghanistan while trying to get the G-20 to go along with his economic strategy in Europe this past week. Does he really imagine that all the sudden we're going to attack the missile in North Korea in the midst of these talks?

    It's easy to take pot shot from the sidelines, but I didn't see the Bush administration shoot down the last missile they tested.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  210. Tom in CA

    Have we forgotten the last eights years in less than 3 months?
    We can't promote Cowboy diplomacy as the only way to do things in this world.

    Had we done followed the Cowboy and shot down the missle, then the North Koreans would be occupying Seoul at this moment.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  211. Mike in Canada

    Yes Jack, pour gasoline on a fire, there's a plan. Newt is simply running for 2012 and fear mongering is a staple amongst the base. Gotta get that base away from the Palinator, ya know? The facts are that the stewardship over our planet the last 8 years has created a tidal wave of hate. President Obama is winning minds and winning hearts. The people will speak much louder than any action taken by an overextended group of men and women, already fighting because of actions that were never forward processed by Police Chief Ohara and The Penguin, Or George and Dick if you will. You have an intelligent president. I know it feels uncomfortable right now, but you'll get used to it. Its a good thing.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  212. Sam Trent

    For once I agree with Newt!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  213. Jean

    Newt is disabled, he's just trying to get some clout with whom ever will listen to him. President Obama and his team made the right decision, we are capable of striking down these missiles when it is deamed necessary.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  214. Dianne Mazorol

    No. I believe there was an opportunity for monitoring the missile.
    Thanks to my son and the boys and girls in Blue there is a dot of an Island very aware of the situation. I'd trust their judgement over Newt any day of the week!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  215. AL - VA

    What exactly does he mean by "disabled"? Is he insisting we should've taken "preemptive" action against an "existential" threat? Boy that sure sounds familiar. Also, speaking of a "wonderful fantasy idea", wouldn’t it be naive for America to entertain the idea of potentially going to war for the third time in less than 10 years? Thanks but no thanks Mr.Gingrich. We've lived through 8 years of barren hawkishness consequence of which is still being repaired by our new administration. So I'd rather try something new this time, possibly diplomacy.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  216. Mike

    It's obvious that Newt has been reading from the book of Bush. Sounds like he has all of the answers. I assume that by disable he means bomb the North Koreans and ask questions later. How thoughtful and creative . What about regional impacts and world opinons? Isn't this how we got into Iraq? Thanks but no Thanks Newt. Go back to sleep and we will wake you when we need someone with violent tendencies.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  217. John in Washington

    As an American who has worn our countries uniform, I'd like to see politicians who have not give prudent pause before saber-rattling and thrusting the men and women in the military into harms way.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  218. Anita Ford

    I was looking forward to a world where we didn't have to hear from the likes of Newt Gringich- he's a dope. And speaking of dopes lets not forget Bush, Cheney and their ilk, I don't want to hear from them either.

    I believe Barack Obama is the real deal and would like to give him the support to respond to this in whatever way he feels is going to bring about the best result.

    Lets hope we can start to erase the past eight years of US leadership, which has taken us to places I never thought this country would go. It has been a traumatizing eight years. For every one across the globe.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  219. Bruce Rogers

    We cannot solve all the world's problems with aggressive military action. Since 1950 we have learned over and over again that it is much easier to start a war than to end it. I question the motives of those who are so eager to spill our precious blood and treasure on nothing more than macho ego. We have had one successful war since 1950. That was Gulf War 1.

    We are stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan for many years to come. Why can we always find a way to fund a war, yet never have enough money to solve our domestic issues?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  220. keith from New Jersey

    We can all remeber the last time administration spoke of weapons of mass destructions and we know where that got us.............................

    April 6, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  221. Max Blumenthal

    Destroying the North Korean missile would have been the greatest mistake we could have made. North Korean missiles have a very bad track record and tend to blow up on the launch pad. We would have been incredibly lucky if this happened or if pieces of the rocket had landed in Japan, South Korea, or China. If it had landed in one of these nations, we would have a casus bellum against North Korea, or at least a reason to destroy the DPRK's nuclear missile program.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  222. barbara Smith

    It's simple Jack. The real question is How many wars can America get it's self in? Is Gingrich going to put his life on the line?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  223. Rudy Haugeneder

    Why didn't the U.S. just send a ship of grain to N. Korea and laugh at the at that nation's leaders who don't know how to feed its own people.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  224. Denis Oudard

    No! We should not have destroyed this rocket on the launch pad. We had one gun slinger in the White House, we've seen where that got us. Sure it feels good to be the bully and kick the idiot in the nuts. But the good feeling is short lived. The idiot will come back to haunt you, and even if he doesn't, you now have ruined your reputation all over the world. You have to be trusted around the world as an even headed country. The North Korean launch failed anyway. So now they are the one that look stupid. Not you.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  225. david

    This is the beginning of the legacy of pre-emptive strike. Be warned.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  226. Ralph Grove

    OBama is doing exactly the right thing with regards to North Korea. Effective diplomacy is the only option for solving an international problem like this. Knee-jerk violence such as that espoused by Newt Gingrich will accomplish nothing but more violence. We don't need another Iraq.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  227. mike

    John,
    How would Mr. Gingritch have "disabled" the missile before it was launched? He fails to identify HOW he would do this... It the same political vaguespeak that they all are guilty of. Critcize with no realistic explaination for how they intend to get from A to B. A kinetic (cruise missile) strike into the PRK could precipitate a response against South Korea. KJI is not a direct immediate threat to us so why should we risk an ally's safety for a missile that is the Yugo of missiles?
    The "going it alone, America knows best" did not work for the last 8 years and other options must be explored. China is the key to dealing with North Korea and, whether we like it or not , they are the premier power in the region and MUST be leveraged to handle North Korea.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  228. Lance, West Hartford,CT

    Yes, Gingrich is correct. Russia and China will not support sanctions against North Korea. The UN is a joke and to have ANY diplomacy have to be sanctioned, initiated or observed is a bigger joke. President Obama must take his rose colored glasses of and get real. We are looking extremely weak in the international community and will suffer greatly for it. The Obama administration slams down on GM yet whimpers when it comes to international sanctions. What country(ies) is he working for???

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  229. Joe in Missouri

    Somebody needs to disable Gingrich.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  230. Mandy, TX

    If I have this right, N.K went against UN rules by launching the missile, so Gingrich thinks the best way to react to go against UN rules by launching a missile to disable the NK missile. What if China responded and called in our trillion dollar debt?

    Geez, do the people get the US being a big bully is why we were so hated in foreign countries? Your next poll should be, are you happy you have a President who doesn't think fighting and killing is always the way to go?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  231. jpg midwest

    Newt says it how it is.... The U.N. is useless... By not reacting quick and decisively (we had weeks to prepare) we have shown a weakness. Why would N. Korea or anyone else listen to our "requests" to not do something? How do our allies feel when we leave them out in the cold? We did not support S. Korea or Japan on this issue and instead "forced" them to step down and follow our lead. That is the joke in itself. Follow our lead. I have served in our Armed Forces as has the last 3 generations of my family and all of us (still alive) see our leadership for what it is. A JOKE!!

    There are many ways to "disable" a non-advanced weapon. It would not have caused lost life nor would it have cost a war... Of course that is what the lefties want to hang their hat on. The only benefit we have gained was to see that N. Korea can now reach Japan effectively and is now only 2 years away at most of reaching the US. We have failed at all other possible benefits to this situation... Our country, and its leadership is as weak as the US dollar now :( I am saddened for friends and family who have given the ultimate cost for a country that will now lay down in order to gain friends that will turn their backs as soon as the going gets tough (I forgot they all ready have.. No one has given BO anything he has asked for on his trip across the world) Funny that has not made headlines..

    Go Newt!! You have my vote in the next election

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  232. Ralph in IL

    Is this the "compassionate conservatism" that Gingrich was taking about last century? No thanks Newt. Engaging North Korea militarily right now is not good policy and you know it. Why don't you let the elected President and the Secretary of Defense worry about it and you go back to your boring lectures.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  233. Joe

    Gingrich is wrong. Why are we still trying to be the worlds police? His statement shows that some of our politicians still do not know what Americans want. We do not want to bankrupt ourselves trying to police the world and dictating what other countries should and should not do.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  234. Micah, Woodland, California

    I'll repeat what I said to another person who happened to ask me a similar question, Jack:

    Regimes such as Kim Jong-il's rely on outside attention to maintain their rulership on the people they preside over. North Korea needs the attention of the world in order to keep his unwilling citizens in place. The last thing we need is disabling a N. Korean rocket. That's just the attention he's looking for. Such a provocative action from the U.S. would only be fodder for this verbal cannon. Ignoring him is the best policy. Kim needs our attention because frankly, without it he has nothing with which to continue his disastrous "military first" policy. Over time, under such a policy, the N. Korean people will grow weary of his leadership. At least, that's what we hope for, right?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  235. Jeff in Minnesota

    He and Dick Cheney should get together and reminisce about the 'good old days'.

    Times have changed. People finally realize that you can attract more bees with honey than with vinegar. I never understood how isolation ever works if the population of a country does not have the where with all to stand up to a tyrant. The only thing that ever works is communication. A lot of the reason why Russia came apart was that people in Russia finally realized that the government was feeding them BS about the West and the Western lifestyle.

    We have a similar policy with Cuba and look at where that's gotten us, no where. If we had continued communicating with Cuba and allowing people to go there, Castro would have been gone in five to ten years. Instead, he's still around and his brother has taken over.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  236. Sam in Richmond

    No! No!! No!!! that will only give North Korea a platform to justify their insane agendum. Besides we are trying to prevent a war not to start it.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  237. Kenneth in Austin, Tx

    Can someone please tell me why we give these guys air time? Gingrich and his gang of neocon friends are who got us mired in this seemingly endless pit of hog slop. The results of their great philosophy and ideologically conservative driven policies are clear: Disastrous. Those premises and ideologies have not changed so why does anyone think they will work now? Seriously, this kind of bullying cowboy crap as a solution to everything is looking more like cultist behavior.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  238. Horace from Tyler, Texas

    Newt and the rest of the his Republican cronies are a bunch of militant and mean- spirited, "old South" politicians, whose Bush initiated doctrine of premptive military action has antagonized the rest of the world and has killed America's image and made the world a more dangerous place. Even the great Ronald Reagan didn't dare use the doctrine of preemptive strikes. As a matter of fact, his Mutually Assured Destruction [MAD] "promise" to the USSR actually kept the peace. Instead of attacking, how 'bout we promise to level every city in their little country if they dare attack the U.S. with nukes. Wouldn't Reagan have done this?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  239. Ken

    Hey Newt,
    Are you sayinig that you would have disarmed the missle, the same way the pilgrims disarmed the Indians of their land or the plantation owners disarmed the Africans of their freedom when they invited them for a joy ride on the boat.
    America has to stop being the bully. What happened to the kinder, gentler america. By the way, Newt – Do you hold an office – If not, get a radio show, Like Rush

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  240. steve

    NK said that they were launching a satellite, that didn't make orbit. yet they say it was a success. I think that the world saw a lie told about a missile. In any case it was a failure and the U.S. did the right thing.

    Steve
    Los Angeles

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  241. Gary Osburn

    No. The US should not have attacked the missile while on the ground. This would have been an act of war. It is against everything the US stands for to attack another country. The days of the George W. Bush anticipatory repraisal is over. Thank God.

    In the event that the missle neared any US or ally territory, then the missle should have been shot out of the sky. This would have been a defensive act.

    Does Newt understand the difference?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  242. Kevin

    Lets start WW III while were at it. N. Korea and China are allies.

    It was only a test for heavens sake. We spend more on our military than every country combined!!! The US should be the one facing UN sanctions because our Iraq occupation violated every international law.

    N. Korea is harmless!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  243. Sandy S. (NYC)

    Jack:
    We have enough strife in the world, the worst of which we got into compliments of the Republicans; it's time we try to live in peace with the rest of the humans walking this earth. Does Gingrich respect the lives of our young people? Yes, just like Bush did...Where were his daughters? Why not volunteer work in the awful Veterans' Hospitals? The royal family members serve in the armed forces, why not the twins? Sandy S. NYC

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  244. ron

    And within a few hours we would have ten to twenty thousand dead American and South Korean soldiers and civilians. But Gingrich doesn't care as long as he can make a political point. Remember, he is the one who divorced his wife when he found out she had cancer.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  245. Latricia Rochester, Section, Alabama

    Yes, I think we should have stopped the launch and if President Obama had a backbone he would have done that very thing.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  246. Marcia from Hawaii

    Maybe because I live relatively closer to N. Korea, than many on the mainland, and currently have experience multi-deployments as a Military Wife, we do not need more miliary agreesion.
    Our military is stretched thin, and our guys and families are tired of back to back to back deployments.
    Newt Gingrich sounds like a elephant eating ice cream!!! Yes, the image of an elephant eating ice creamy is crazy, and so is like Newt Gingrich. We are already involved in two wars that were started with no contingency plan and no real end in sight. Another agressive action is crazy. I wish the party of crazy elephants would stop thinking that we must shoot now and ask questions later.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  247. Vernis Robertson

    That's why we don't need Gingrich in the Whitehouse . That's all the Republican want to do is keep the U.S at war and the american people poor and broke. The same Cowboy mentality of George Bush . They Republican party is all about war , to keep their cronies rich , by having open contract in war the same why as George W. Bush.Newt Gingrich needs to go someone where and Sat down . Our Goverment is doing the right thing by getting other countries involve in North Korea . We have 2 wars we are engage in we don't need 3. Sorry Republicans war cost money lots of money . The republican won't give you education asstance but will start a war in a heartbeat.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  248. Gary Turner

    Each time North Korea coughs threats the whole world hyperventilates.. What is wrong with our thinking that allows this little speck of a nation to continue to harrass our planet for over 60 years? We should have shot down their missle and any others they send up as well as ignore any future arrogance. They want to be alone, lets let them be alone. That can't happen of course because we somehow have to get into every other countries affairs.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  249. Erik

    Jack, I think the Obama administration is weak regarding foreign policy issues. First he had his 'John Lennon' moment and imagined a world without Nukes (as if the knowledge to build them could somehow be uninvented). Regarding those pesky North Koreans, we have from our President another worthless appeal to that great world body of appeasement – the United Nations. Our policy towards North Korea should be made clear: Launch another missile, threaten our allies, and we start dropping Warheads on Foreheads, thereby ending the cult like abomination that is the regime of North Korea.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  250. Anthony Zenkus

    Where was Mr. Gingrich's outrage while this missile was being built? Pres. Obama has been in office less than 2 months, North Korea has been building, and testing missiles, throughout the Bush years, and Gingrich only chimes in now becuase his name is being floated as a possible presidential candidate in 012. No, we should not have struck the missile down. Diplomacy must continue, and will work.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  251. Jim

    I agree with the president, when he says we can't wag our finger expecting other countries do take orders from a country that isn't practicing what they preach. I think I hear what Gingrich is saying and it's important to really take the time to look at the intent behind his message. What he's saying is: I'm going to run against Obama in 2012. We're going to get ourselves blown up if we keep handling hostile countries in the same bossy-bully fashion we've done so the last eight years.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:23 pm |
  252. Potter

    Saying things like "we should disarm the world" is not only useless,
    it's embarrassing. Obama sounds like a fool, and people like
    Medvedyev smile for the camera and call him "comrade". The
    Chinese smile into their sleeves, the Russians try to keep a straight
    face, all the heads of States nod solemnly. It's not Europe's nickle –
    they only care that WE carry the burden of their defense. As long as
    we don't do anything they might find too aggressive.

    We probably should have nailed that rocket. But what good is
    coulda-woulda-shoulda? So far, Obama is a really big embarrassment. Let us hope he is not a DEADLY one.

    Potter
    Morgan County
    Indiana

    April 6, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  253. RH, Midlothian, VA

    The problem is the woefully outdated veto structure in the Security Council. If the five vetoes rotated, there would far less stonewalling.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  254. bob from minnnesota

    No. Disabling the North Korean missle before launch would have meant blowing it up with a United States missle. There is still no evidence the missle was not being used to launch a satellite and if there is no proof North Korea is launching an attack against us or our close friends our nation is sworn to protect, we have no business interfering in the rights of other nations. We seem to be an arrogant nation that enjoys holding other natiions accountable to the huge egos in Washington. The rest of the world is getting fed up with America's smug attitude, rightfully so. When China, Japan and the other Eastern Nations agree that North Korea is going too far and needs to be stopped, then it would be appropriate to work with those nations to stop North Korea, with force if necessary. But we have no business taking the lead. The righteous republicans like Gingrich need to show respect for other nations, and they could start by keeping their foolish ideas to themselves. Look where Bush's "dead or alive" approach has gotten us.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  255. Emmanuel Ochi, New York

    Jack, attacking North Korea militarily isn't an option. We don't know where all of it's nuclear installations and material are located. A military strike would also likely start a war in a region that is home to three of the world's 12 largest economies and approximately 80,000- 90,000 U.S. troops. It would further rupture vital alliances. The only viable option is a meaningful engagement to end and ultimately reverse it's nuclear program.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:24 pm |
  256. Lourene Medlow

    Absolutely No. That kind of thinking has led this country into big hole. When old men start fighting wars instead of the young, maybe, we won't have so many of them. Aggression and violent is not the answer.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:25 pm |
  257. Cheryl in KC

    The idea of pre-emptive war is un-American. Newt has studied (and taught) enough history that he should understand this. This is the same neoconservative philosophy that embroiled us in Iraq.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:25 pm |
  258. Carm J. Grande

    The trigger finger approach, espoused by the likes of Gingrich and friends, is what caused the loss of the USA's historical world leadership position over the past eight years

    April 6, 2009 at 5:25 pm |
  259. Lynn - Mooresville, NC

    Yes. It would have been better than Obama's groveling to other countries who have no intention of helping and are secretly enjoying America's weakness now.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  260. Dee in Palm Coast FL

    What exactly is Mr. Gingrich's plan to disarm Korea, or ANY other sovereign nation in the world?

    While I am not happy that so many countries seem to have nuclear weapons I do not see how the United States can force other countries to disarm. Sanctions do not work in other issues and we are already in two wars that may be unwinnable.

    Maybe opening dialog with other nations, and telling the TRUTH for a change and dealing with other countries as we would like to have them deal with us, would be a step in the right direction.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  261. Tim in Texas

    All I can say is, "Thank God the republican party has been disabled."

    April 6, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
  262. Faith

    Are there no Republicans who can provide commentary or critiques for your show besides has-beens like Bolton and Gingrich? Are there any Republicans out there who don't want to rush into another war? Surely, there are responsible individuals in the party who can be interviewed for your show

    Newt in 2012? How about Rush for VP? What a bunch of idiots!

    I've been watching Obama during his trip and feel so happy to see our President–a man with intelligence, confidence, insight, and a strong sense of fairness and responsibility–representing the U.S.!!.

    Faith in NC

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  263. al moniz

    hi jack where was mr gingrich talking about n korea when bush was president the new president has only been in office for 70days or so newt has eye for 2012 and fox noise lets him spew off

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  264. Edward

    So, Mr Gingrich would have us emboiled in another pre-emtive war, because the last one went so well for us. hasn't he heard we don't have the money to fight another war?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  265. Allen, Hartwell GA

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    Jack, exactly what the hell would Newt have done? What would any of the critics have done? Don’t these people realize that we’re talking about the death of perhaps millions if we do anything preemptive towards North Korea?
    Why don’t we just nuke the world and get humanity out of the way!!!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  266. Chris

    Why do we continue to push a defense shield that has proven ineffective over 2 decades? Not only are we placing billions of dollars into this technology, but we're pretending that this is an effective weapon against rogue nations (and a false sense of security to our allies).

    Even when we know exactly what type of weapon is launched, it's speed and direction, the shield is only effective 10% of the time. How can we ever expect to take out one missile (let alone multiple) from NK?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  267. Louise in Alabama

    The only Newt I have ever known who had any survival instincts was the little girl in the movie "Aliens". And her doll's head kept coming off. It was Ripley who saved the day. Somehow Gingrich reminds me of "The Grinch Who Stole Christmas" and "Richy Rich and Veronica". Who is he, anyway?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  268. Chris

    Absent Ranger or Delta Force or Navy Seal training, Newt would have to put our best and bravest in harms way to carry out this folly. It sure sounds alot like what we've heard for the past 8 years. It appears that it is much better to take a 'wait and see' approach. Let the N. Koreans launch and then rally the international community together behind a common cause. Then the U.S. taking unilateral action, but rather all those who oppose N. Korea's actions working together. I sure am glad the progressives are setting foreign policy rather than the regressives.

    Chris
    Lathrup Village, MI

    April 6, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  269. Rob

    America is currently fighting protracted battles on two fronts, both of which severely hamstring America's military influence worldwide. Yet Newt Gingrich would welcome escalating animosity with North Korea. Such a response would only serve as a platform for their nationalist causes. The Obama administration opted for diplomacy and the North Koreans test missile blew up of its own accord. North Korea loses face anyway, and now will have to face consequences from a global consensus. Hawks have to remember the big stick we carry isn't as big if we have to break it up into twigs.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  270. Bud, Columbia, Mo..

    The Republican response of cowboy diplomacy, fear tactics and brute force ie "you're either with us or against us" is over. Newt and Bolton are old news has beens. They should go live in their paranoid states somewhere else. The rest of the world likes our possible nuke free fantasy land. We're hopeful UN cooperation works. Obama "you be the man, you be the man".

    April 6, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  271. Ron

    Well it looks like Newt Gingrich has just announced his candidacy for President of the United States. Now we get to look forward to 3 and half years of arm chair quarterbacking from this clown.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  272. Jon R. Wallace

    Given the fragility of global relationships and the strains that have been put on them by Afghanistan, Iraq and the U.S. caused financial crisis there is no way that we should have shot down that missile. By allowing North Korea to launch, those countries who are much closer have a higher interest in resolving if it all possible the many problems with North Korea.

    As Lewis Black says, we know North Korea's evil, because only black and white film footage comes out of there . . . .and you're right Jack, U.N. resolutions don't accomplish anything but wasted time, ink and paper.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  273. Daniel (Central PA)

    If they wanted to travel the same road that the Texas Village Idiot led them down, and maintain a much earned reputation as an antagonistic bully nation, YES Jack... they should have shot the missile down.

    If we could use the United Nations for what it was intended for instead of continuing our "Texas Cowboy" legacy we would have a lot less enemies... but who am I to say, I just live here...

    April 6, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  274. Toumi Mondésir, Quebec, Canada

    Gingrich is only electorizing. Republicans have neither morality nor shame.They would say or do anything to be able to give the country back to the rich. TM

    April 6, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  275. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    Been there, done that with George W. Bush and look where that's gotten us. Newt Gingrich needs to find another political platform if he intends to run for president in 2012 because that dog doesn't hunt anymore.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:29 pm |
  276. Michael

    That's exaxtly what the little derelict wanted. Our media is fanning a tiny flame in history, into a nuclear explosion by Korea or Iran. What's the Defense Industry going to do after Iran and Afganistan? Another Cold War?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  277. Jason

    North Korea proved that they can launch a rocket at will, disguised as a satellite. They were given a chance to prove it was not a missile test. I guess my concern is why North Korea does see it as a success? Who are we to say it was not? Does anybody know where they wanted it to land?
    I think the Obama administration gave them a chance and won't allow that again. I just don't see Japan allowing this to happen again as well.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  278. Lee, Annapolis, MD

    After reading some comments it's interesting to note that there is a lack of understanding that we're dealing with a country that still lives in the 1950s and we have to deal with it as such. We should disable Kim Jong, period. Put him on the launch pad and light the match.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  279. Mary

    Re New Gingrich:

    What can we do to persuade this publicity hound to go away? Too many downright lazy "news and opinion" celebrities bring Newt in to help them do their jobs. He's not a newsmaker, just a smarty-pants who likes to prattle and for whatever reason, his views are broadcast. The air waves and viewers deserve better material.

    Mary
    Cloverdale, California

    April 6, 2009 at 5:32 pm |
  280. el-tee from the lower right hand corner of ND

    Jack - Wasn't it Theodore Roosevelt who said speak softly but carry a big stick? Obviously New-ton Gingrich is not of that philosophy. Furthermore Teddy Roosevelt may have become aware how futile war is after his experience in the Spanish-American War. - El-Tee

    April 6, 2009 at 5:32 pm |
  281. Krishna

    Absolutely not, Jack. Mr. Gingrich is in a fantasy land and like all other neo-cons, like John Bolton, does not understand the web of implications. These are the very people who have pushed us in the debt-pool controlled by communist China and these are the very people who were NOT "SOFT" on communism! Mr. Gingrich should know that President Reagan almost proposed to Mr. Gorbachev the same "world without nuclear weapons". Mr. Gingrich should focus quietly on rectifying his personal ethics and moral stature and leave the defense of America to the President.

    KK,
    CA

    April 6, 2009 at 5:33 pm |
  282. Norm from NC

    Nice talk but this action would have provoked reaction and retaliation from China and Russia. What is being done to line up UN security council is the politically correct method. Please note that George H.W. Bush lined up the UN before doing anything about 'Desert Storm' and invading Irag. Bush had the entire world with him. Obama is doing a similar process with this North Korea missile launch. Without that full world support, our actions will start a war.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:33 pm |
  283. Jeff in Ligonier PA.

    He's right. It is honorable for him to volunteer. Put him on the next plane to Nort Korea. Tell him to pack plenty of blankets, it's cold there. Let him lay in wait for their next provocative act.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:35 pm |
  284. Chris

    Newt go play golf or go fishing. If the Koreans want to play games then fine. I would let them know they get NOTHING from the USA, ever. Stop trying to make money off of the USA by building WMD.
    Build rockets, enrich uranium, do whatever you like. Also let them know, the minute they attack our allies or sell their technology or equipment to our enemies NK will be at war with a multinational force and they will be crushed. No further saber rattling needed.....done.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:36 pm |
  285. Ken in NC

    If North Korea had disabled some of our early attempts to launch short and long range missiles we would have been at war with them. No one has the right to tell or make us not launch a missile if we choose to do so.

    OH YOU ASKED if it is what we should have done to stop the North Koreans from launching their missile. That is different. According to Newt, we can do it but no one else can do it to us without going to war.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:36 pm |
  286. Gail

    Another war? Just what we need right? North Korea has done exactly what the United States did. Ignored the international community and did exactly what they wanted just as we did when we invaded Iraq and built the atomic bomb. Japan should have shot down the missile, it was in their airspace if it had to be shot down.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:36 pm |
  287. nelson

    Jack, Damn man, are we the world's "policemen" We can't control
    whats going on here(USA) correctly.. and those countries living closer
    should be more concerned than (U.S.). Time for someone else to step to the plate and take over. Maybe we could send S.Palin as mediator!!! ya think?

    April 6, 2009 at 5:37 pm |
  288. Bernie

    Let's see, attcking the missle while still on the ground...sounds like an act of war to me. North Korea's response would be to send it's army into South Korea, an ally who we are sworn to protect. Newt and his kind are very quick to send American boys to war...where were Newt, Bolton, Cheney and the rest of the War Hawks when it was their time to serve? Let's see how quick they are to start a war if their children and grand children are first on the firing line.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:40 pm |
  289. Doug Price

    Jack,
    As bad as I hate to admit it, Newt is right. If for no other reason, it would have shown the world that the USA still has the means and the will to uphold what is right in this world, regardless of the UN's or their inability or unwillingness to act! And as a sidebar, it would have been an excellent chance to validate our ability to prove our technology. Something to think about.
    Doc

    April 6, 2009 at 5:44 pm |
  290. Blitz Carthey

    Let me get this straight, Newt wants to directly confront and antagonize a nation with the world's 3rd largest military force that has the backing of the world's largest military force (China) and possibly the world's 4th largest military force (Russia) while our forces are stretched to the breaking point?? Newt, a word of advice...get out of your chair and give your brains some air.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:44 pm |
  291. coninpa

    NO!!
    period.

    Just what we need now....Newt.
    A Cheney wanna be!

    April 6, 2009 at 5:46 pm |
  292. Terry, TX

    Newt was absolutely right....frankly .....UN resolutions hah! Nuclear capabilities cannot be allowed to North Korea or Iran.... and all the American bashing that Obama did in Europe is not going to change anything. He will continue to not handle anything....rhetoric is all he's got. That's what we get for electing a two year inexperienced senator for president....no credentials...just cute.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:48 pm |
  293. Tom in Durham, NC

    Gingrich's comments are a clear and compelling reason why he should never be considered presidential material.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:51 pm |
  294. Drake

    Gingrich and Bolton represent the Republican foreign policy of the last 8 years, the elevation of the big stick over dialogue, soft or otherwise. The Obama administration recognizes that when one leads by example and with real strength, a bully's threats are not needed. Gingrich's assertion is nothing more than a bad joke.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:52 pm |
  295. Chuck Norris

    I would have helped Newt take out the missle.....

    April 6, 2009 at 5:54 pm |
  296. Krishna

    Mr. Gingrich should know that the President knows well all his options. I believe he opted to disable the third stage of the rocket. Oops, he did not tell Newt!

    KK
    CA

    April 6, 2009 at 5:56 pm |
  297. Ben in Maryland

    It's a sad commentary on the state of leaders of the Republican party that they continue to make comments such as these. Gingrich, Cheney and others whose motto seems to be shoot, ready, aim continue to make irresponsible comments trying to show how tough they are, but instead displaying weakness of thought. That is why the United States was seen so negatively throughout the world until the 2008 election. It was not feared nor was it respected. The best description, even among those we'd think of as allies, was disdain.

    April 6, 2009 at 5:57 pm |
  298. Val

    If Newt Gingrich can do what he says he would do, then why didn't he do it? It's like John McCain saying he knows where to find Osama bin Laden and defeat him while on the campaign trail. We're still waiting John....

    Val, Los Angeles

    April 6, 2009 at 5:58 pm |