REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Act of War

POSTED BY: HERO
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 12:33
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4410
PAGE 1 of 2

Thursday, July 6, 2006 4:06 PM

HERO


There are reports tonight that the Long Range missile that North Korea fired on July 4th was aimed at Hawaii. It failed 40 seconds into its flight when the 2nd stage failed to ignite. Japanese analysis of the trajectory shows it was on a path that would have carried it to Hawaii.

If these reports and analysis is confirmed, then North Korea has committed an act of war. Perhaps had this happened before 9/11, then it could be relegated to the realm of diplomatic resolution, but it didn't and it can't.

North Korea has fired a missile at an American State, that is not forgivable, especially what amounts to a surprise attack on Pearly Harbor on our nation's birthday.

The Korean War ended with an Armistice, no peace treaty was ever signed. They have broken the armistice, game on. I suggest we try the old "bombing begins in five minutes" doctrine.

There are 3 carriers in Hawaiian waters for those exercises, remember the sonar, perhaps they were the target. It is possible that the missile carried a weapon of mass destruction. If we recover the missile, and we might, or the Japs, and it had such a weapon, then we should respond in kind and by in kind I suggest a modest 10-1 ratio of nuclear warheads, low yield clean weapons to minumize fallout on our allies.

American doctrine has been and must remain mutual assurred destruction or in cases, like this, where its some pissant little bastard nation, just assurred destruction will do. Pity about the North Korean people, but we Americans believe that power flows ultimately from the people, by failing to remove their leader and establish a reasonable government, they are ultimately responsible for their leader's mad amibitions and reckless warmongering. I know some warmongers will take that statement to make a cheap shot about the President, but President Bush didn't use the 4th of July to fire a what may have been a nuclear missile at Hawaii...that was North Korea.

I speak from anger but ultimately reason will prevail. We will not, even if this is proven to be a full blown failed nuclear attack, destroy the North Korean people. But it is probably time to liberate them and unify them with their free brothers and sisters to the south.

H




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 4:51 PM

STILLFLYIN


Several things I would like to say about going to war. We should not unleash a massive nuclear sterilization campaign on N. Korea. Such action would strip all credibility we have with the International Community. Second, ole Kim has the fabled million man army sitting on the other side of the DMZ, going into a slogging match with him would cost tens or hundreds of thousands of lives. The best option would be to enlist the aid of the Chinese in this as they are the best possible ally in this situation. If we went to war with Kim alone it would quickly turn into a meat grinder, but if both us and the PRC gang up on him he will be without allies, facing a two-front war against the two most powerful armies in the world. That would be the best course of action for us.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 5:02 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


I was wondering how long it would take before such info was made public. As I understand it, these sorts of missles , while able to carry payloads long distances ( 9000+ miles ) they do NOT have the ability to change trajectory.

Now, did the US knock the missle out of the sky, did it really fail, or was it killed in flight by the N.Koreans, just to see how we'd react?

Also, since no formal treaty has been signed, we're still technically at war w/ N.Korea. As was w/ the case w/ Iraq, an agreement to cease hostilities has existed between the 2 countries. Which is exactly why 35,000 US troops remain in S. Korea. A breech of the cease fire agreement cranks this war right back up again.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 5:22 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Since I know someone who works with the US missile defense system, I can say with near certainty the US did NOT shoot it down.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 5:26 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Since I know someone who works with the US missile defense system, I can say with near certainty the US did NOT shoot it down.



I would think such a feat to be a bit beyond our ability, yet there are folks who work at Janes Defense Weekly who are certain we COULD have.

What ever helps ya sleep better at night, I suppose.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 7:55 PM

SOUPCATCHER


Wow. Has anyone on our side officially confirmed this? I read that the missile was aimed somewhere in the vicinity of Hawaii, not necessarily at Hawaii. Although that's not much of a distinction.

What in the hell is Kim Jong Il thinking? This has got to be one of the stupidest moves he could make.

Hopefully our response is not as stupid.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 9:13 PM

STDOUBT


"The U.S. denounced the launch, but did not consider it a threat to national security, and officials vowed a diplomatic rather than a military response."

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-NKorea-Missile.html?_r=1&hp&e
x=1152072000&en=76987bd7e71541c9&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin


Grow a nutsack Hero. People in the US have turned
into little freaking girls ever since 9/11 and I'm
sick of it. N. Korea a threat? pfft. A PITA sure,
but really man -stop your quivering. And while I'm
sure the thought of carpet bombing 100s of 1000s of
starving civilians don't trouble your conscience,
let me just say this: you're scared. You
stink of fear. "Fear is the mind-killer" was a
brilliant scrap of literature.

From reading the article, it sounds like our Gov.
is on top of the situation. Not that I have a lot
of faith in our Gov., but if N. Korea is ever
successful in torching any part of our territory
it's our Gov. you should want to be carpet bombing.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 6, 2006 9:27 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


St Doubt- couldn't have said it better. Hero and Auraptor (and AJ and Finn for that matter) need to grow a pair.

One of the things that the so-called conservatives have always campaigned for is a Wild West kind of justice- everyone packing a piece. Now we're approaching exactly that scenario on an international scale and it scares them sh*tless. And do you know what the N Koreans want? To sit down and talk with just the USA.

We really DO need a rolleyes emoticon!

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 1:56 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


I'm beginning to wonder if Team America:World Police didn't present a pretty accurate picture of Kim Jung Il.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 2:14 AM

RAZPUTIN


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
I'm beginning to wonder if Team America:World Police didn't present a pretty accurate picture of Kim Jung Il.



Fock yeah!

Sorry, couldn't help myself...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 2:18 AM

CAUSAL


Quote:

Originally posted by StillFlyin:
Such action would strip all credibility we have with the International Community.



We've got some left? That's amazing!

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 4:00 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
St Doubt- couldn't have said it better. Hero and Auraptor (and AJ and Finn for that matter) need to grow a pair.

One of the things that the so-called conservatives have always campaigned for is a Wild West kind of justice- everyone packing a piece. Now we're approaching exactly that scenario on an international scale and it scares them sh*tless. And do you know what the N Koreans want? To sit down and talk with just the USA.

We really DO need a rolleyes emoticon!

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.



Exactly what the hell is your issue, Sig? ( btw, my pair are quite sufficent, thank you very much ) All I did was talk about facts, and that seems to set you off. If you can show where I'm wrong, have at it, but I fail to see any legitimate need for ad hominems. All I said was that there is no formal agreement that ended the war, and that is exactly why we still have so many troops in S.Korea. My stating the facts is NOT the same as me hoping for, promoting or in any way supporting a war w/ N.Korea.

But lets be perfectly clear. N.Korea is the antagonist here, first and last. Under Clinton's administration, we DID deal w/ this little pot bellied tyrant, and it all turned out very bad. In fact, that's exactly how we got to the state we're at now! He's not going to get a 1 to 1 meeting w/ the US, and he's certainly NOT going to win friends by launching missles over Japan or Hawaii or anywhere else. It simply isn't going to happen. U.N. Ambassador John Bolton put it best, stating that launching missles isn't the way to go about getting what he wants.

So Sig, either deal w/ the facts, show me where I made errors in my comments, or go concern yourself w/ someone else's pair. Leave mine alone!

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 5:08 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
And do you know what the N Koreans want? To sit down and talk with just the USA.


Thats your first mistake. If you think that what the North Koreans want is to sit down with us, then your as big an idiot as Carter or those fools who thought Hitler could be appeased.

Sitting down with the USA for talks is a means to an end, just like this missile business. North Korea's goal is to turn American public opinion against defending South Korea. They do that by developing nuclear weapons and missiles capable of hitting the west coast. This raises the very real question of would America trade Seattle or Portland for Seoul? When that answer becomes a reasonable certain 'probably not' then North Korea will invade expecting little of no American intervention. Conquest of South Korea is North Korea's goal. Everything they are doing is a means to that end.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 5:29 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by STDOUBT:
Grow a nutsack Hero. People in the US have turnedinto little freaking girls ever since 9/11 and I'msick of it. N. Korea a threat? pfft. A PITA sure,but really man -stop your quivering. And while I'msure the thought of carpet bombing 100s of 1000s ofstarving civilians don't trouble your conscience,let me just say this: you're scared. You stink of fear. "Fear is the mind-killer" was a brilliant scrap of literature.

From reading the article, it sounds like our Gov.
is on top of the situation. Not that I have a lot
of faith in our Gov., but if N. Korea is ever
successful in torching any part of our territory
it's our Gov. you should want to be carpet bombing.


Wow, you manage to advocate a 'do nothing' strategy and then promise to blame the President if your 'do nothing' strategy fails.

Liberalism can't defend this country because of crazy notions like yours. They advocate doing as little as possible, then blame the conservatives when we get attacked. Thats why 9/11 was George Bush's fault because of this country's abuse of its position as world power and Bush's failure to act on intellegence in the few days he was in office before the attack happened...they'd prefer no mention of the terrorists, after all what have they got to do with the attack? This missile attack is the same way. Its GWB's spending too much on the missile shield, or not spending enough, or not talking, or not listening, or not giving in to the demands of the others, or giving in too much...that Little Kim pushed a red button and launched what could have been a nuclear missile at Hawaii is not relevant to the blaming of President Bush for everything they can possibly think of and a few things they just make up hoping nobody notices.

As for the starving children...how many could North Korea have fed if they'd bought some Honey Nut Cheerios instead of a long range missile, or developed deep dish pizza technology rather then a nuclear bomb? I suggest that liberating North Korea will improve the lives of North Koreans...just like it did for the Japanese, South Koreans, Phillipinos, Hong Kongers (before the became ChiCom slaves), Taiwanitites, Okinawi and all the other free peoples of the Pacific rim (I doubt any of them would now trade their freedom and prosperity for being sparred the ravages of past wars).

H


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:06 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Zero, Unwrapped et al - geez folks. I screened the threads from Jan 1 2006 on. The biggest trolls are YOU TWO. Get a life.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:08 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Sitting down with the USA for talks is a means to an end, just like this missile business. North Korea's goal is to turn American public opinion against defending South Korea. They do that by developing nuclear weapons and missiles capable of hitting the west coast. This raises the very real question of would America trade Seattle or Portland for Seoul?
The only way this works is if we're scared sh*tless. You know, I've lived for a VERY long time with the thought that many people around the world really hate us and that they actually have means to do something about it. NEWS FLASH- IT'S NOT NEWS. There are research reactors up and down the West Coast in or near highly populated cities that would make great targets. Dirty bombs, anthrax (and BTW we have still not figured out who made such highly weaponized anthrax), smallpox, shoe bombs, long-range missiles, even hijacked planes... And then the San Andreas fault might just decide to rip a big one and do far more damage and kill many more people than lil' Kim ever dreamed. You can't live in fear forever. I have water and water purification equipment, dried food, and KI in my kit. I have a backpack in my car and walking clothes. If I need to hike home and get my kid, I will. I also have a shotgun, a bottle of booze and a lethal dose of tranquilizers. I'm set for whatever comes.

This is what we shoud do: Consult with the interested parties to make sure they agree with our position ahead of time. Then (assuming agreement is reached) we negotiate with the N Koreans, and sitting across the table from them (just like they want) we tell them:

You fire another long-range missile and we will starve you out. You LAND a long-range missile on anyone's territory - with a payload or not- and we will burn your nation from top to bottom and no one will defend you. OTOH- you play nice and allow instrusive inspections and we will let Kim be a movie producer in Hollywood.

All I'm saying is- negotiation can mean a lot of things.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:14 AM

EXODUS


Kim Jong-Il is just provoking the USA. He should be very fearful considering the USA can kick his country's ass in many different ways. Just because he has a couple of nukes doesn't mean he is strong. I would like to see those nukes get through NORAD.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:35 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


So anyway, to get to the topic at hand.

The Japanese say the missile was aimed at Hawaii. The US said it failed too early in flight to calculate a trajectory. Who do YOU believe ?? It's not like the administration would ever lie about something like that. OTOH, without any kind of backup info (how did the Japanese figure out the target anyway ?) it makes their claims sound like exaggerated guesses at best....

The person I know programs the missile defense targeting system. If he says it couldn't, then, as certain as one can be about anything in life, it couldn't.

Back in Clinton's day, the N Korean nuclear facilities were decommissioned, sealed, and under constant realtime TV monitoring. Bush got the US into this situation. Anyone who claims other wise is an idiot or a liar. :rollseyes:

So what are possible solutions?

On the military side, unilaterally striking N Korea would antagonize China and Russia. Does the US really need to pick a fight with a brat whose mommy and daddy each could beat it to a pulp? (US leverage over either country alone or both together is non-existent, and they have leverage over the US. China owns the US through debt, and Russia has oil plus potential control over nearby oil. They BOTH have ways around the missile defense system which has to so with actively altering the trajectory to evade targeting calculation.)

The US really has no choice but to go through the UN multilaterally (that US tries so hard to go around at all costs), or to talk with N Korea.

SignyM makes a lot of sense.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:52 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
This is what we should do: Consult with the interested parties to make sure they agree with our position ahead of time. Then (assuming agreement is reached)...



Ain't going to happen. China has to be one of the interested parties, since they share a border with North Korea. They will not agree to apply ANY sactions in the current situation, and would hardly be likely to support anything as harsh as you recommend below. I doubt Russia would, either. I'll discuss why South Korea wouldn't agree to it below.
Quote:

...we negotiate with the N Koreans, and sitting across the table from them (just like they want)

Attempting to negotiate with North Korea makes herding rabid cats look simple. Generally, they present a list of unreasonable pre-conditions which must be met before they will even consent to begin negotiations. If we refuse to honor them, they blame us for obstructing the process. If we give in, they continue to add conditions, never giving up anything themselves. Try finding anything of substance which has successfully been negotiated with North Korea.
Quote:

we tell them:

You fire another long-range missile and we will starve you out.


Aside from the fact that the North Korean government will see that its Army and party won't go hungry and don't really care if a few million peasants starve, remember that there are a lot of those North Korean peasants who have relatives in the South. The South Koreans would never approve of starving their kinsmen to death as a tactic.
Quote:

You LAND a long-range missile on anyone's territory - with a payload or not- and we will burn your nation from top to bottom and no one will defend you.

This equals war with China. You'd never get them to agree to stay out. You up for that?
Quote:

All I'm saying is- negotiation can mean a lot of things.

In this case it would mean that North Korea doesn't have to negotiate in good faith, because no one expects it of them, while we do, or everyone goes off on us again. Sort of a lose-lose for us.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:06 AM

HARDWARE


You know, we didn't go to war with Japan because they tried to bomb pearl harbor. I know, technically we are still at war with North Korea, but we were involved in a UN action against North Korea, not gung ho on our own. In order to reinstate open hostilities we'd need a UN sanction. Frankly, the continued border bull$hit along the Korean DMZ constitutes a better excuse than the North Korean stooges trying to cobble together a POS ICBM.

Not to mention the fact that we are committed up to our ass in Iraq and Afghanistan and have NO resources with which to fight another military action against NK.

I vote we get together a battalion of sabre-rattling chairborne rangers led by Hero and Auraptor and drop them in North Korea if they're so eager to start another war.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:08 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Quote:

Try finding anything of substance which has successfully been negotiated with North Korea.
So how did that horrible Jimmy Carter (pansy-assed Democratic heritage) manage to get the N Koreans to shutter their nuclear facilites and put them under 24 hour surveillance?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:12 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"I vote we get together a battalion of sabre-rattling chairborne rangers led by Hero and Auraptor and drop them in North Korea ..."

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha .... LMAOROTF

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:32 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Zero, Unwrapped et al - geez folks. I screened the threads from Jan 1 2006 on. The biggest trolls are YOU TWO. Get a life.


Life without Heroes:
You- "I hate Bush."
You #2- "I hate Bush too."
You #3- "Heah guys guess what? I hate Bush."
You- "You do, me too, what do you hate most about him?"
You #3- "Bush."
You- "Oh yes, I agree, your so smart."
You #2- "We know that we don't like Bush...why don't we like him...specifically?"
You #3- "Bush? I hate him thats why."
You- "Yeah, shut up troll, we hate Bush and if you don't say exactly what we say then your not allowed to speak. And quit asking for reaonable disucssion by people of diverse political, social, and economic backgrounds bringing a variety of ideas and ideals to be debated in an open forum...thats for trolls. Didn't you see the sign...'no ideas allowed."

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:37 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Then (assuming agreement is reached) we negotiate with the N Koreans, and sitting across the table from them (just like they want) we tell them:

You fire another long-range missile and we will starve you out. You LAND a long-range missile on anyone's territory - with a payload or not- and we will burn your nation from top to bottom and no one will defend you. OTOH- you play nice and allow instrusive inspections and we will let Kim be a movie producer in Hollywood.


Thats not much of a negotiation. We had a similar problem some years back and an otherwise unremarkable American President came up with the best solution. No negotiation, just a very public and direct message:

'It shall be the policy of this nation that any missile launched from North Korea against any target on land or water, whether test or not, shall be deemed a nuclear attack by North Korea against the United States and this nation will respond accordingly.'

You don't even need to spring for the fancy table and place settings...

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:37 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Oh I don't know Zero, what COULD the benefits of you two going away be ???

A real discussion of the weapons capability of N Korea. A real discussion of the capability of the US missile defense system. Intelligent postings about the 'geopolitical' realites of N Korea, China, Russia and the US. Intelligent discussion.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:40 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Zero,

I have the same question to you - So how did that horrible Jimmy Carter (pansy-assed Democratic heritage) manage to get the N Koreans to shutter their nuclear facilites and put them under 24 hour surveillance?

No threats, no war ... how DID he do that ?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:46 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
So how did that horrible Jimmy Carter (pansy-assed Democratic heritage) manage to get the N Koreans to shutter their nuclear facilites and put them under 24 hour surveillance?


He said "please" and offered lots of cash, they agreed and he went home...very effective. They misunderstood the agreement though. They shut down their reactors and allowed the surveillance for 24 hours...then they were back at it.

Reagan would have been a better choice. His policy with the Commies was "trust then verify" meaning they get nothing unless we see everything...we, the United States, not some UN inspector moonlighting from his WWE referee job (those guys never see bad things going on) falling for tricks like "look over there, is that Alec Baldwin" and "pay no attention to the Weapons of Mass Destruction Behind the Curtain".

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:56 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Oh I don't know Zero, what COULD the benefits of you two going away be ???

A real discussion of the weapons capability of N Korea. A real discussion of the capability of the US missile defense system. Intelligent postings about the 'geopolitical' realites of N Korea, China, Russia and the US. Intelligent discussion.


Your contribution to the discussion is already a bit lacking in substance...case in point:
Quote:


"I vote we get together a battalion of sabre-rattling chairborne rangers led by Hero and Auraptor and drop them in North Korea ..."

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha .... LMAOROTF


Perhaps I am misunderstanding your style of "intellegent discussion". Could you clarify your "HA HA HA" remark in the context of our discussion or maybe show us the proof of your further and intriging "ha ha ha" contention as regards to global sociopolictal dynamics.

Or maybe your just a dumbass (again using that term in its legal context meaning that you are in fact so stupid that scientists are at this moment studying monkeys with both a greater grasp on the Korean crisis then you seem to have as well as the ability to smoke and throw crap).

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:58 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Oh I don't know Zero, what COULD the benefits of you two going away be ???

A real discussion of the weapons capability of N Korea. A real discussion of the capability of the US missile defense system. Intelligent postings about the 'geopolitical' realites of N Korea, China, Russia and the US. Intelligent discussion.

And the bonus of Hero staying is:
"I'm well hard me cause I'm a Conservative so I could kick your arse! Yeah I've never actually had a fight but I could pay someone to kick your arse you pansy arse worthless Liberal! Why the hell do they let you people live anyway, I've decided you all deserve to die, if I were in charge 'democracy' would be a lot better because I'd always get my own way."

Or

"It would be better if we used American inspectors only that way when they are bribed to ignore things I get my cut, and we can also make up any results we want to suit my desires for total world domination, erm I mean peace."



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:06 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Zero,

Please note the source of this info on what Carter did to gain N Korea's cooperation - the US embassay. Now, maybe you think no on else can look these things up. If you do, you're dumber than I thought. (Dumber used in the legal sense.)

http://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/IB91141.pdf

In May 1994, North Korea refused to allow the IAEA to inspect the 8,000 fuel rods, which it had removed from the five megawatt reactor. In June 1994, North Korea’s President Kim Il-sung reactivated a longstanding invitation to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter to visit Pyongyang. Kim offered Carter a freeze of North Korea’s nuclear facilities and operations. Kim took this initiative after China reportedly informed him that it would not veto a first round of economic sanctions, which the Clinton Administration had proposed to members of the U.N. Security Council.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:09 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Your contribution to the discussion is already a bit lacking in substance...case in point:

where as yours:
Quote:

You- "Yeah, shut up troll, we hate Bush and if you don't say exactly what we say then your not allowed to speak. And quit asking for reaonable disucssion by people of diverse political, social, and economic backgrounds bringing a variety of ideas and ideals to be debated in an open forum...thats for trolls. Didn't you see the sign...'no ideas allowed."
Is all kinds of pertinent (especially since this sentance is much closer to YOUR continued remarks than anyone elses).

Maybe you can explain how the "Liberals shouldn't have a voice in true democracy" supposition singles you out as having a greater grasp of the North Korean situation, or indeed your abillity to cheer at the TV while watching other people fight for your undoubtably 'brave' self?



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:12 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
if I were in charge 'democracy' would be a lot better because I'd always get my own way."


I guess we can agree on that.

Running things may way, hmmm: Imagine a world were people are judged by what they do, not where they are born or who they are born to. A world where people are free to live and worship and believe what they will. A world of educated and enlightened persons debating the issues of the day and coming to democratic consensus for solutions. A world where the Browns hosted and won the next super bowl and stadium dog were $1 each and the halftime salute to Firefly's 6th Season premiring right after the game and my wife Jessica Alba getting along great with my girlfriend Kelly Monaco, and puppies for everyone...good puppies labs, not those crappy little toy dogs, and free doughnuts that don't make you fat, and High Definition...now tell me I wouldn't have your vote!

Hero in 2008!

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:12 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I looked into this. The Chinese and the Russians are not as enamored of N Korea as your post suggests. I know from previous reading the Chinese are already dealing with a refugee problem and Russia has similar concerns should N Korea utterly disintegrate. They're a wee bit pissed with N Korea but don't like the idea of sanctions because of resulting refugees. Their approach is economic reform and engagement. Since they're living far closer to the problem than we are (I'm sure N Korean missiles could already hit China and Russia no matter HOW defective they are!) perhaps we should follow their lead. Nonetheless, it costs us nothing to enter into bilateral talks, provided that we're all on the same page. (Parents- you know what I'm talking about.)

As far as not bargaining in good faith, have you - good conservative that you are- never heard of "trust but verify"? Reasonable negotiators should always include steps by which BOTH parties can verify that the other is keeping their end of a bargain. In any case, it's not as if the US is negotiating with a "herd" of anyhting. From what I understand of N Korea, whoever negotiates with N Korea is actually just negotiating with ONE person, really. And that person has more than one weakness and would prolly be more than happy to be a producer in Hollywood!

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:15 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


ZERO

These were my contributions to intelligent discussion:
Quote:

Since I know someone who works with the US missile defense system, I can say with near certainty the US did NOT shoot it down.
Quote:

So anyway, to get to the topic at hand.

The Japanese say the missile was aimed at Hawaii. The US said it failed too early in flight to calculate a trajectory. Who do YOU believe ?? It's not like the administration would ever lie about something like that. OTOH, without any kind of backup info (how did the Japanese figure out the target anyway ?) it makes their claims sound like exaggerated guesses at best....

The person I know programs the missile defense targeting system. If he says it couldn't, then, as certain as one can be about anything in life, it couldn't.

Back in Clinton's day, the N Korean nuclear facilities were decommissioned, sealed, and under constant realtime TV monitoring. Bush got the US into this situation. Anyone who claims other wise is an idiot or a liar. :rollseyes:

So what are possible solutions?

On the military side, unilaterally striking N Korea would antagonize China and Russia. Does the US really need to pick a fight with a brat whose mommy and daddy each could beat it to a pulp? (US leverage over either country alone or both together is non-existent, and they have leverage over the US. China owns the US through debt, and Russia has oil plus potential control over nearby oil. They BOTH have ways around the missile defense system which has to so with actively altering the trajectory to evade targeting calculation.)

The US really has no choice but to go through the UN multilaterally (that US tries so hard to go around at all costs), or to talk with N Korea.

SignyM makes a lot of sense.

Weird how you skipped right over that.
Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Oh I don't know Zero, what COULD the benefits of you two going away be ???

A real discussion of the weapons capability of N Korea. A real discussion of the capability of the US missile defense system. Intelligent postings about the 'geopolitical' realites of N Korea, China, Russia and the US. Intelligent discussion.


Your contribution to the discussion is already a bit lacking in substance...case in point:
Quote:


"I vote we get together a battalion of sabre-rattling chairborne rangers led by Hero and Auraptor and drop them in North Korea ..."

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha .... LMAOROTF


Perhaps I am misunderstanding your style of "intellegent discussion". Could you clarify your "HA HA HA" remark in the context of our discussion or maybe show us the proof of your further and intriging "ha ha ha" contention as regards to global sociopolictal dynamics.

Or maybe your just a dumbass (again using that term in its legal context meaning that you are in fact so stupid that scientists are at this moment studying monkeys with both a greater grasp on the Korean crisis then you seem to have as well as the ability to smoke and throw crap).

H


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:21 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Rue- your contributions were too complicated for Hero. His eyes glazed over 'cause you didn't have your saber rattling. Remember- for him everything reduces to the level of the playground, so keep it stoopid.

---------------------------------
Can't resist the occasional ad hominem.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:27 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
where as yours:


You- "Yeah, shut up troll, we hate Bush and if you don't say exactly what we say then your not allowed to speak. And quit asking for reaonable disucssion by people of diverse political, social, and economic backgrounds bringing a variety of ideas and ideals to be debated in an open forum...thats for trolls. Didn't you see the sign...'no ideas allowed."



By God your right...thats the only thing I've posted. Better tell the guy who started this discussion...he's gonna be pissed at me for not contributing...

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:29 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
I guess we can agree on that.

Running things may way, hmmm: Imagine a world were people are judged by what they do, not where they are born or who they are born to. A world where people are free to live and worship and believe what they will. A world of educated and enlightened persons debating the issues of the day and coming to democratic consensus for solutions. A world where the Browns hosted and won the next super bowl and stadium dog were $1 each and the halftime salute to Firefly's 6th Season premiring right after the game and my wife Jessica Alba getting along great with my girlfriend Kelly Monaco, and puppies for everyone...good puppies labs, not those crappy little toy dogs, and free doughnuts that don't make you fat, and High Definition...now tell me I wouldn't have your vote!

Now Imagine a world run by Hero.

'Liberalism' a crime, disagreeing with Hero is a crime, being poor a crime punishable by 'working off your debts' in one of Hero's Slave Camps Happy Camps.

Hundreds of Women enslaved as Hero's personal prostitutes, but prostitution is of course a crime punishable by death. So infact they aren't prositutes at all, they also have a choice, they can sleep with Hero or they can be shot.

A State Security Committee headed by Hero himself, who do what's needed to get things done (like secretly tapping any phone, bugging any house, dragging any person of the street).



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:34 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
So how did that horrible Jimmy Carter (pansy-assed Democratic heritage) manage to get the N Koreans to shutter their nuclear facilites and put them under 24 hour surveillance?



Oh. So since they're still shuttered and under 24 hour surveillance, I guess we don't have anything to worry about.

Except the fact that they had a secret program going and claimed in April 2003 to have processed 8000 fuel rods into plutonium and created nuclear weapons. Not to mention that they publicly started up their nuclear program again and refused any inspection.

Reading this Congressional Research Service paper, it would seem that North Korea violated almost all the terms of the treaty, while receiving many trade and energy benefits.
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/IB91141.pdf

I guess maybe this was a successful negotiation from the North Korean perspective, but not from ours.

Also, that's no way to talk about Pres. Carter. His failing as a politician was that he believed that everyone had some good inside. This is a fine attribute for a humanitarian, but not so much for a leader of the free world.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:36 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Now ZERO, let's discuss your contributions to intelligent debate:

And yours?


.... North Korea has fired a missile at an American State
Rhetoric, the US says the trajectory was indeterminable

The Korean War ended with an Armistice, no peace treaty was ever signed. They have broken the armistice, game on. I suggest we try the old "bombing begins in five minutes" doctrine.
Rhetoric

It is possible that the missile carried a weapon of mass destruction.
Unproven

American doctrine has been and must remain mutual assurred (sic)destruction
False

If you think that what the North Koreans want is to sit down with us, then your (sic) as big an idiot as Carter or those fools who thought Hitler could be appeased.
False analogy, ad hominem

North Korea's goal is to turn American public opinion against defending South Korea.
Unproven

Liberalism can't defend this country because of crazy notions like yours.
Ad hominem

They advocate doing as little as possible, then blame the conservatives when we get attacked.
Straw man

Life without Heroes:
You- "I hate Bush."
You #2- "I hate Bush too."
You #3- "Heah guys guess what? I hate Bush."
You- "You do, me too, what do you hate most about him?"
You #3- "Bush."
You- "Oh yes, I agree, your so smart."
You #2- "We know that we don't like Bush...why don't we like him...specifically?"
You #3- "Bush? I hate him thats why."
You- "Yeah, shut up troll, we hate Bush and if you don't say exactly what we say then your not allowed to speak. And quit asking for reaonable disucssion by people of diverse political, social, and economic backgrounds bringing a variety of ideas and ideals to be debated in an open forum...thats for trolls. Didn't you see the sign...'no ideas allowed."
Ad hominem, straw man
Quote:

'It shall be the policy of this nation that any missile launched from North Korea against any target on land or water, whether test or not, shall be deemed a nuclear attack by North Korea against the United States and this nation will respond accordingly.'
Was this a quote as you imply? No such quote or significant portion shows up on google. Or are you now just making things up?

He said "please" and offered lots of cash, they agreed and he went home...very effective.
False

Or maybe your just a dumbass (again using that term in its legal context meaning that you are in fact so stupid that scientists are at this moment studying monkeys with both a greater grasp on the Korean crisis then you seem to have as well as the ability to smoke and throw crap).
Ad hominem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:52 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


funky connection

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:52 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
I looked into this. The Chinese and the Russians are not as enamored of N Korea as your post suggests. I know from previous reading the Chinese are already dealing with a refugee problem and Russia has similar concerns should N Korea utterly disintegrate. They're a wee bit pissed with N Korea but don't like the idea of sanctions because of resulting refugees. Their approach is economic reform and engagement.


So you're pretty much saying what I did, that Russia and China won't support sanctions. We should find out in a few days for sure, when the US, Japan, and most of Europe try to get a sanctions package through the UN.
Quote:

Nonetheless, it costs us nothing to enter into bilateral talks, provided that we're all on the same page. (Parents- you know what I'm talking about.)

But we're not on the same page. As you noted above, Russia and China won't support sanctions. There's not much to negotiate about except what kind of a bribe we'll offer North Korea to make nice this time. In 1994 we offered them free oil, trade benefits, and two light water nuke plants to shut down their breeder reactors and not process plutonium. They got the goodies (except the reactors), but they still made the plutonium, and have their plants back on line.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:52 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"in April 2003"
What does that have to do with Clinton and Carter?

"In May 1994, North Korea shut down the reactor and removed about 8,000 fuel rods, which could be reprocessed into enough plutonium for 4-6 nuclear weapons. North Korea started operating the reactor again in February 2003."

"U.S. intelligence reportedly detected North Korean preparations to restart the plutonium reprocessing plant in February and March 2003."

"The Clinton Administration reportedly learned of it in 1998 or 1999, and a Department of Energy report of 1999 cited evidence of the program. In March 2000, President Clinton notified Congress that he was waiving certification that “North Korea is not seeking to develop or acquire the capability to enrich uranium.”

In other words, Clinton/ Carter were successful containing N Korea by leveraging sanctions - and Bush was not.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:58 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
'Liberalism' a crime


Aren't we already there?
Quote:


Hundreds of Women enslaved as Hero's personal prostitutes


Dozens...at most. And if you don't pay them...they're not prostitutes.
Quote:


(dragging any person of the street).


No, just the ones with 'Pirate' in their name. And they already feel persecuted, so I doubt it'll have any real impact (except on the assorted 'Pirates' whom I imagine enslaving in Gitmo as extras on a never ending series of Pirates of the Carabean sequels with proceeds going to Conservative Charity Groups...like the NRA).

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 10:02 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Aren't we already there?

Please don't confuse your fantasies of a Hero Dictatorship with reality.
Quote:

Dozens...at most. And if you don't pay them...they're not prostitutes.

I think we're on the same page here:
So infact they aren't prositutes at all, they also have a choice, they can sleep with Hero or they can be shot.
Quote:

No, just the ones with 'Pirate' in their name. And they already feel persecuted, so I doubt it'll have any real impact (except on the assorted 'Pirates' whom I imagine enslaving in Gitmo as extras on a never ending series of Pirates of the Carabean sequels with proceeds going to Conservative Charity Groups...like the NRA).
So in other words anyone you consider 'un-hero' like.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 10:47 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
In other words, Clinton/ Carter were successful containing N Korea by leveraging sanctions - and Bush was not.



"North Korea’s secret uranium enrichment program appears to date from at least 1996.
Hwang Jang-yop, a Communist Party secretary who defected in 1997, has testified that North
Korea and Pakistan agreed in the summer of 1996 to trade North Korean long-range missile
technology for Pakistani uranium enrichment technology. The Clinton Administration
reportedly learned of it in 1998 or 1999..."

So Clinton/Carter contained North Korea from 1994 to 1996, assuming there wasn't something else we didn't know about going on to violate the treaty before then.

But the point here isn't what Clinton, or Carter, or Bush did or didn't do. It's that North Korea can't be trusted to hold up their end of any deal.

I suspect that this is their goal:

"Some U.S. experts, however, believe that the non-aggression pact proposal
is a “smokescreen” for North Korea’s long-standing proposal (since 1974) of a U.S.-North
Korean bilateral peace treaty. As stated, both proposed pacts would replace the 1953 Korean
armistice, and neither would include South Korea as a participant. North Korea has long
stated that a negotiation of a bilateral peace treaty would include provisions for the
withdrawal of U.S. military forces from South Korea."

Like Hero said above, they want South Korea.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 11:08 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


"Some experts believe... Your results may vary"

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 11:29 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
St Doubt- couldn't have said it better. Hero and Auraptor (and AJ and Finn for that matter) need to grow a pair.

One of the things that the so-called conservatives have always campaigned for is a Wild West kind of justice- everyone packing a piece. Now we're approaching exactly that scenario on an international scale and it scares them sh*tless. And do you know what the N Koreans want? To sit down and talk with just the USA.

We really DO need a rolleyes emoticon!

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.



Exactly what the hell is your issue, Sig? ( btw, my pair are quite sufficent, thank you very much ) All I did was talk about facts, and that seems to set you off. If you can show where I'm wrong, have at it, but I fail to see any legitimate need for ad hominems. All I said was that there is no formal agreement that ended the war, and that is exactly why we still have so many troops in S.Korea. My stating the facts is NOT the same as me hoping for, promoting or in any way supporting a war w/ N.Korea.

But lets be perfectly clear. N.Korea is the antagonist here, first and last. Under Clinton's administration, we DID deal w/ this little pot bellied tyrant, and it all turned out very bad. In fact, that's exactly how we got to the state we're at now! He's not going to get a 1 to 1 meeting w/ the US, and he's certainly NOT going to win friends by launching missles over Japan or Hawaii or anywhere else. It simply isn't going to happen. U.N. Ambassador John Bolton put it best, stating that launching missles isn't the way to go about getting what he wants.

So Sig, either deal w/ the facts, show me where I made errors in my comments, or go concern yourself w/ someone else's pair. Leave mine alone!

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "



Sig, since you failed to reply, I'll take your silence toward my post as an apology on your part. About as close to one as I'd expect.



People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 11:59 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
"Some experts believe... Your results may vary"



So you believe North Korea wants...what?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 12:13 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I really don't know. Kim has got more than one screw loose. After all, he DID kidnap a famous S Korean movie star and her husband to kick-start the N Korean film industry. And since he's the beloved leader who runs the whole show (no Politburo there!) we should pay serious attention to this guy's mental state. Maybe he's just looking for attention. Maybe he needs a stint with Supernanny. Maybe he really wants to be a Hollywood producer.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 7, 2006 12:43 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Last point first, while 'some' experts conclude N Korea wants S Korea (: arms-out kissy-lips "I want you" text :), others experts do not. Whenever there is a failure to portray the debate, I suspect the conclusion. (That statement is just like reports of Iraq's aluminum tubes, uranium purchase, biolabs etc. Don't people learn?)

-----------------

Without going into extensive searching, I want to point out that Hwang Jang-yop's claims weren't verified. Even given that, Clinton was moving to assert sanctions at a time when Russia and China did agree to them. Whether or not they would have been effective is speculation (though with support from both those countries my guess is 'yes'.)

The thing you keep sliding over is that:
"In May 1994, North Korea shut down the reactor and removed about 8,000 fuel rods, which could be reprocessed into enough plutonium for 4-6 nuclear weapons. North Korea started operating the reactor again in February 2003."

"U.S. intelligence reportedly detected North Korean preparations to restart the plutonium reprocessing plant in February and March 2003."

I point the finger at Bush. His policies have obviously, blatantly failed. Pakistan was trading enrichment technology and Bush made it his friend and ally as punishment. He lost Russia and China's support. And N Korea has reactivated its nuclear facilites. Sounds like 'three strikes' to me.

---------------------------------

No one ever said just let's just trust the N Koreans and go along with whatever. SignyM argued for muscular multilateral action. I said sanctions are a vital tool.

------------------------------

But getting beyond finger pointing, Bush has reduced US options to the point where the only realistic ones are few and weak. Unilaterally attacking N Korea as Zero suggests is not one of them, as even Bush admits.

So, what do you suggest?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 28, 2024 17:10 - 4778 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:32 - 1163 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:10 - 45 posts
Salon: How to gather with grace after that election
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:04 - 1 posts
End of the world Peter Zeihan
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:59 - 215 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:58 - 1540 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:46 - 650 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:41 - 4847 posts
Dubai goes bankrupt, kosher Rothschilds win the spoils
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:31 - 5 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:29 - 7515 posts
Jean-Luc Brunel, fashion mogul Peter Nygard linked to Epstein
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:27 - 14 posts
All things Space
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:17 - 270 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL