If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Citing that North Korea has gone too far, UN to change font on "Strongly Worded Letter" from Comic Sans to Times New Roman   (cnn.com) divider line 111
    More: Obvious, Times New Roman, North Koreans, Too Far, nuclear reactors, Yongbyon, uranium enrichment, National University of Ireland  
•       •       •

6116 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Apr 2013 at 1:02 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



111 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-02 12:31:02 PM
Is military rank designated by the silliness of one's hat?

i2.cdn.turner.com
 
2013-04-02 01:04:34 PM
Again????

We're in DEEP DOO DOO!!!!!
 
2013-04-02 01:05:26 PM
So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?
 
2013-04-02 01:07:07 PM
Forced Perspective


So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right? And the US is South Korea's ally. Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal? If so, then why haven't we already done so?

China
 
2013-04-02 01:08:58 PM
COMIC SANNSSSSSSSSSS
 
2013-04-02 01:10:07 PM

Forced Perspective: So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?


Bad PR move. Need a nice false flag like The Gulf of Tonkin.

Give it a week.
 
2013-04-02 01:10:07 PM
i2.cdn.turner.com

The back rows look shopped. Either that or there is some pretty strange lightning at work.
 
2013-04-02 01:10:54 PM

Sybarite: Is military rank designated by the silliness of one's hat?

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]


What a good looking military hat looks like:

img823.imageshack.us
 
2013-04-02 01:13:43 PM
Under what conditions could we strike them?
 
2013-04-02 01:14:18 PM

Forced Perspective: So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?


sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
Did I do that right?
 
2013-04-02 01:14:33 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Sybarite: Is military rank designated by the silliness of one's hat?

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

What a good looking military hat looks like:

[img823.imageshack.us image 426x640]


There's a hat?
 
2013-04-02 01:16:02 PM
What is the North Korean end game here?

They know they don't have the capabilities they claim.  Is this all a big build up so they can enter eventual negotiations and get aid for the masses so they don't get burned in the streets when they finally realize they're starving?
 
2013-04-02 01:16:43 PM
Someone should tell the U.S. military that the Fark message boards have indicated that North Korea is completely harmless.
 
2013-04-02 01:17:36 PM

ChipNASA: Again????

We're in DEEP DOO DOO!!!!!


This time it's for realzies!
 
2013-04-02 01:19:11 PM

The Haberdasher: Someone should tell the U.S. military that the Fark message boards have indicated that North Korea is completely harmless.


I would not be surprised if our brass got half of our intel and analysis from these threads, given our typical boondoggle handling of every military situation since Fark's inception.
 
2013-04-02 01:21:43 PM
Can't we just make him do the Truffle Shuffle and get on with our lives?
 
2013-04-02 01:23:57 PM
God forbid they go all the way up to Times New Roman BOLD
 
2013-04-02 01:24:22 PM

AFKobel: What is the North Korean end game here?

They know they don't have the capabilities they claim.  Is this all a big build up so they can enter eventual negotiations and get aid for the masses so they don't get burned in the streets when they finally realize they're starving?


This is the end game for them. It's the only strategy they know. Rattle saber, collect food. Only this time the food's not coming, so they are rattling harder. When they finally get desperate, they will either overthrow the regime or attack S. Korea. If they do that, they will be out of their element and while they will mess up Seoul, their military will mass surrender when our bombs start falling and we will have a humanitarian disaster on our hands cleaning up the mess.
 
2013-04-02 01:24:29 PM
24.media.tumblr.com

Approve.
 
2013-04-02 01:25:30 PM
I don't see the problem with the UN being just a talking society. We need one of those in this world.
 
2013-04-02 01:26:04 PM

xxmedium: Forced Perspective: So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?

Bad PR move. Need a nice false flag like The Gulf of Tonkin.

Give it a week.


well, fark.
 
2013-04-02 01:26:32 PM

The Haberdasher: Someone should tell the U.S. military that the Fark message boards have indicated that North Korea is completely harmless.


It'll be fierce, but quick. Lots of casualties.... on both sides, sadly. Seoul is a stone's throw away, and not a very hard target for NK.

Notice how that now Lil' Kim is making headlines Ahmadinnahjacket has been quiet? It's like those two take turns in media whoring.
 
2013-04-02 01:26:40 PM
I think Best Korea has nothing to lose at this point.  Something is happening soon before they lose it all to political unrest.
 
2013-04-02 01:27:10 PM
The Unites States, China, South Korea, Russia, and anyone else involved is already committing the atrocity of ignoring the fact that millions of innocent "political prisoners" (North Korean citizens) are sick, starving, and dying as a result of the country's leadership. Is that an accurate statement? If so, then how the hell could making the first strike against them possibly be any worse.

US: "Okay, so ... we're go liberate the hell out of these people and prevent further suffering among North Korea's innocent populace. For real, this time. Not like Iraq."
China: "How much will that cost us?"
US: "We're open to donations, but they're not necessary"
China: "Wreck their shiat. Save us some minerals."
 
2013-04-02 01:27:37 PM
I may be out of the loop, but last I remember hearing their attempt to fire a test long range missle went comically awry.
My, admittedly uneducated, thinking would be that the people of North Korea are more in danger of being hit by North Korean long range missles than anyone else.
 
2013-04-02 01:28:26 PM

leonel: God forbid they go all the way up to Times New Roman BOLD


Italics. Written to really put an urgent slant on it.
 
2013-04-02 01:29:14 PM

JPSimonetti: The Unites States, China, South Korea, Russia, and anyone else involved is already committing the atrocity of ignoring the fact that millions of innocent "political prisoners" (North Korean citizens) are sick, starving, and dying as a result of the country's leadership. Is that an accurate statement? If so, then how the hell could making the first strike against them possibly be any worse.

US: "Okay, so ... we're go liberate the hell out of these people and prevent further suffering among North Korea's innocent populace. For real, this time. Not like Iraq."
China: "How much will that cost us?"
US: "We're open to donations, but they're not necessary"
China: "Wreck their shiat. Save us some minerals."


China: "Be sure to use your most up-to-date technology, we like watching you work."
 
2013-04-02 01:30:52 PM

Forced Perspective: So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?


Because it's expensive, unpopular, a diplomatic nightmare, and costs people's lives?  Who gives a shiat if it's legal?
 
2013-04-02 01:31:40 PM

cgraves67: AFKobel: What is the North Korean end game here?

They know they don't have the capabilities they claim.  Is this all a big build up so they can enter eventual negotiations and get aid for the masses so they don't get burned in the streets when they finally realize they're starving?

This is the end game for them. It's the only strategy they know. Rattle saber, collect food. Only this time the food's not coming, so they are rattling harder. When they finally get desperate, they will either overthrow the regime or attack S. Korea. If they do that, they will be out of their element and while they will mess up Seoul, their military will mass surrender when our bombs start falling and we will have a humanitarian disaster on our hands cleaning up the mess.


Just keep the border closed,  and the masses will go North.
 
2013-04-02 01:32:26 PM

Khellendros: Because it's expensive, unpopular, a diplomatic nightmare, and costs people's lives?  Who gives a shiat if it's legal?


You may be addressing a lawyer, so that might be inconsequential to him.
 
2013-04-02 01:32:48 PM

Big Man On Campus: JPSimonetti: The Unites States, China, South Korea, Russia, and anyone else involved is already committing the atrocity of ignoring the fact that millions of innocent "political prisoners" (North Korean citizens) are sick, starving, and dying as a result of the country's leadership. Is that an accurate statement? If so, then how the hell could making the first strike against them possibly be any worse.

US: "Okay, so ... we're go liberate the hell out of these people and prevent further suffering among North Korea's innocent populace. For real, this time. Not like Iraq."
China: "How much will that cost us?"
US: "We're open to donations, but they're not necessary"
China: "Wreck their shiat. Save us some minerals."

China: "Be sure to use your most up-to-date technology, we like watching you work."


Sounds about right from top to bottom. +1
 
2013-04-02 01:34:08 PM
What is wrong with the UN matching derp with derp?

You chickenhawks have no sense of scale.
 
2013-04-02 01:34:23 PM

Sybarite: Is military rank designated by the silliness of one's hat?

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]


Came here to mention silly hats.  North Korea, I mean seriously.
 
2013-04-02 01:34:35 PM
I'd prefer stern letters to another trillion dollar war. If Iraq taught me anything, it's that diplomacy isn't something that should be mocked.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-04-02 01:34:35 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Sybarite: Is military rank designated by the silliness of one's hat?

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]

What a good looking military hat looks like:

[img823.imageshack.us image 426x640]


I'm saluting
/from both ends
 
2013-04-02 01:34:43 PM
It's interesting that the UN is one of the parties to the conflict (the South side of the Korean War was a UN operation) and not just an observer.  One of the few instances of the UN working as intended.
 
2013-04-02 01:35:37 PM
I really need clarification here. And so I ask of the tin foil hatters, what's REALLY going on with this North Korea thing? What are we meant to be looking away from?
 
2013-04-02 01:35:43 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: I'd prefer stern letters to another trillion dollar war. If Iraq taught me anything, it's that diplomacy isn't something that should be mocked.


Trillion is the new billion.  Nobody knows why, what we're paying for or where it goes, but.. TRILLIONS!  Sounds sort of hinky, dunnit?
 
2013-04-02 01:35:46 PM

cgraves67: This is the end game for them. It's the only strategy they know. Rattle saber, collect food. Only this time the food's not coming, so they are rattling harder.


I'm sure the other angle too is that the regime would much rather go out in a blaze of glory than accept a slow, whittling collapse. The global economic factors are such that their days are numbered regardless, and all the aid in the world isn't going to change that.
 
2013-04-02 01:35:59 PM

awalkingecho: leonel: God forbid they go all the way up to Times New Roman BOLD

Italics. Written to really put an urgent slant on it.


God forbid they find the Font Size button. We may not make it out alive.
 
2013-04-02 01:38:17 PM
www.onamercyship.com
This whole "the UN only send strongly worded message" meme is stupid. It's not the case at all and often the same people who repeat this meme are also the same people who also whine and cry when the UN does things.
 
2013-04-02 01:38:20 PM

Forced Perspective: So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?


The border is militarized and built up to the point where any full-on military action, no matter how inept or crazy, would result in a flying shiatstorm of needless death.
 
2013-04-02 01:39:14 PM
21-7-b

Under what conditions could we strike them?

They strike at US forces with so much as a single rifle round.

Right now, military commanders on both sides are on the intercoms to their men, slowly repeating the words "wait for it....waaaaiiiit for it......."
 
2013-04-02 01:39:30 PM

Pontious Pilates: I really need clarification here. And so I ask of the tin foil hatters, what's REALLY going on with this North Korea thing? What are we meant to be looking away from?


The whole NWO thing is going to come into sharp focus in the next 40 years and without a seat at the table, they're fu*ked.  This is a tantrum.  They'll get spanked, rebuilt and a fork and something to use it for.
 
2013-04-02 01:39:37 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Forced Perspective: So, help me out here: South Korea and Best Korea are still at war, right?  And the US is South Korea's ally.  Does that mean the US can just start bombing strategic targets in Best Korea and it's all perfectly legal?  If so, then why haven't we already done so?

[sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net image 480x480]
Did I do that right?


Good point why does CONGRESS fund all those things? You know the president isn't the one that appropriates money to the executive branch to spend it's CONGRESS and by law he must spend all the money congress appropriates.
 
2013-04-02 01:40:12 PM

gja: I'm saluting
/from both ends


Another good hat

img132.imageshack.us


Surprisingly few attractive women modeling military headwear
 
2013-04-02 01:42:00 PM

cgraves67: AFKobel: What is the North Korean end game here?

They know they don't have the capabilities they claim.  Is this all a big build up so they can enter eventual negotiations and get aid for the masses so they don't get burned in the streets when they finally realize they're starving?

This is the end game for them. It's the only strategy they know. Rattle saber, collect food. Only this time the food's not coming, so they are rattling harder. When they finally get desperate, they will either overthrow the regime or attack S. Korea. If they do that, they will be out of their element and while they will mess up Seoul, their military will mass surrender when our bombs start falling and we will have a humanitarian disaster on our hands cleaning up the mess.


www.getyourfilmfix.com
 
2013-04-02 01:42:10 PM

studebaker hoch: 21-7-b

Under what conditions could we strike them?

They strike at US forces with so much as a single rifle round.

Right now, military commanders on both sides are on the intercoms to their men, slowly repeating the words "wait for it....waaaaiiiit for it......."


But how will they know when to stop holding fire if they can't see the whites of their eyes?! This could get ugly.
 
2013-04-02 01:42:27 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: I'd prefer stern letters to another trillion dollar war. If Iraq taught me anything, it's that diplomacy isn't something that should be mocked.


There are too many people in our government that unfortunately disagree.
 
2013-04-02 01:45:08 PM

21-7-b: Under what conditions could we strike them?


If they attack South Korea or US bases or Japan...

/Sorta a silly question
 
Displayed 50 of 111 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report