Good thing we invaded Iraq

[TheAnvil 0]

The tech has been around but not in their hands. They had to acquire and develop it themselves - which they did while we were delivering them all of that nice heating oil at taxpayer expense.

Enforced IAEA inspections? Appeasement? Perhaps, though doing so would leave a foul taste in my mouth until the end of time. I am against that 99.9%.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[billvon 3,116]

>Mujahadeen vs. the Russkis - again please make your comparison.

Comparison? I was not comparing the Mujahideen to North Korea, just repudiating Dave's objection that it's wrong to support evil people. We will support any sort of terrorist, apparently, as long as they kill people we don't like - as the Mujahideen did in Afghanistan.

>Uzbekistan vs. NK? Hmm...gotta disagree there. That country doesn't
> have half the repression/famine NK does . . .

Famine - agreed. Repression:

"The Government's human rights record remained very poor, and it continued to commit numerous serious abuses. Citizens cannot exercise the right to change their government peacefully; the Government does not permit the existence of opposition parties. Security force mistreatment resulted in the deaths of several citizens in custody. Police and NSS forces tortured, beat, and harassed persons. Prison conditions were poor, and pretrial detention can be prolonged. The security forces arbitrarily arrested and detained persons, on false charges, particularly Muslims suspected of extremist sympathies, frequently planting narcotics, weapons, or banned literature on them. Human rights groups estimated that the number of persons in detention for political or religious reasons and for terrorism, primarily attendees of unofficial mosques and members of Islamist political groups, but also members of the secular opposition and human rights activists, was approximately 7,500."

Compare that to North Korea's status in the same US report:

"The Government's human rights record remained poor, and it continued to commit numerous serious abuses. Citizens do not have the right peacefully to change their government. There continued to be reports of extrajudicial killings and disappearances. Citizens are detained arbitrarily, and many are held as political prisoners; prison conditions are harsh. The constitutional provisions for an independent judiciary and fair trials are not implemented in practice. The regime subjects its citizens to rigid controls. "

So our own state department classifies North Korea's record on human rights as poor, and Uzbekistan's as very poor. On what do you base your opinion that North Korea is actually worse?

[billvon 3,116]

>Enforced IAEA inspections? Appeasement? Perhaps, though doing so
> would leave a foul taste in my mouth until the end of time. I am
> against that 99.9%.

It is indeed not very palatable, but is the lesser of two evils when compared to a nuclear war.

[JayhawkJumper 0]

So don't you guys think RSL's are a huge death trap? (trying to hijack thread from war discussion(did I say that outloud))

[DJL 235]

Listen Jackass, why don't you list your canopy size and wingloading instead of trying to hide what you're jumping.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[Kris 0]

Quote

Listen Jackass, why don't you list your canopy size and wingloading instead of trying to hide what you're jumping.

You popped into this thread just to say that?! That's it?

Chill, Winston.

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

[w4p2 0]

The following is from AFP / Jul 15 / 9:54 AM ET

" My theory is the reason we do not have policy on this and we aren't negotiating, is the president himself, Perry said. I think that he has come to the conclusion that (North Korean leader) Kim Jong II is evil and loathsome and it is immoral to negotiate with him."

This was a statement of your former National Security Advisor predicting war with NK.

So what do you have: A president who attacks IRAQ because God gave him the vision.

AND

A president that refuses to talk based to moral beliefs so strong that he is willing to risk nuclear confrontation.

Honestly, get the God out of the White House. Politics and religion do not mix.

Cheers: JL

P.S. Vaporize NK weapons facilities with tactical nukes if your security calls for it, but do it for the right reasons. Not because your president feels morally too superior to negotiate.

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

Quote

Have we learned anything from our past ability to make "friends" with evil people? We should have...

N. Korea's weapon program was still running strong when Clinton was making friends with Kim Jong-il,

Don't forget, Clinton was less than 2 months away from a military strike to destroy the nuclear facilities. A peaceful solution was found, and the plants were mothballed.

Bush pissed off little Kimmy boy and he unmothballed them and began openly building his bombs again.

The previous administration contained the problem... the current one, shook up the jar of hornets and took off the lid.

[AggieDave 6]

Did you read the rest of that post you quoted?

I was saying that the only way that even if we find peace now, the problem isn't going to go away. It will come back in time, it may be 20 years, but it will be back and worst.

Mothballed is a relative term, do you truely believe that they stopped dead in their tracks? If you do, I've got some nice gulf-beach property in Oklahoma to sell...

I know that Clinton almost had the strikes done...remember what I've been saying about "taking a hard line" and that Clinton didn't? If he would have seen what was really on the page and understood what could happen in the future, just as its happened in the past, then he would have forgone the peaceful solution and ended it right then and there. Would we be having this conversation about a possible nuclear war, if would have done that? Nope.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[w4p2 0]

Negotiate as long as you can, strike is everything else fails, but due it to right reasons and after cool evaluation.

War is, but one of the political means. Resorting to it means though, that the policy and political leadership has failed.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

War is, but one of the political means. Resorting to it means though, that the policy and political leadership has failed

That's a quote...or a close paraphrase of one...who is it that said that (the name has absolutely slipped my mind).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[TheAnvil 0]

Your quote fails to mention the forced starvation of non-military personnel in North Korea, the rape of women prisoners reported by Japanese newspapers, and etc. Those, among other things, are my reasons. I've been to South Korea several times and I've also been to China (Beijing, Tsingtao, and Hong Kong both pre and post '97) and met some North Koreans who had fled to China, so some of my reasoning comes from first hand accounts.

Can't say as I've ever met any Uzbeks though. I could be wrong, but doubt it. I've seen tour companies running tours through Uzbekistan. If it were as bad as NK, that wouldn't happen.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

I'm not saying that a military strike is a bad thing. I think that is what it is actually going to come down to. However lets place blame where it is due. It was not the previous admin. Clinton was nice and everyone was happy. It was the new guy (Bush) that moved in an pissed off the neighbors by spitting in their faces without due provocation.

In addition to this. Clinton did not have the post 9/11 support that Bush has. A pre-emptive strike on a country would be received more positively now that it would have 8 years ago.

[Jib 0]

Quote

A peaceful solution was found, and the plants were mothballed.

Bush pissed off little Kimmy boy and he unmothballed them and began openly building his bombs again.

The previous administration contained the problem... the current one, shook up the jar of hornets and took off the lid.

It didn't have anything to do with Bush confronting Kim with evidence that he decided to start another program?

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Clinton was nice and everyone was happy

Sure, but did it solve the problem? Nope, the long term problems that are quite severe still exsisted. That's what I would call a band-aid fix. It looks good, it feels good and it'll work for a little bit, but its not truely fixed.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

You don't need to "FIX" a problem that can be placated until the admin is ousted or dies.

A good example of this is Cuba. Castro only has a few years left, and no one to replace him.

[Jib 0]

Clinton was spineless and patched things up. He dropped the ball on NK and bin laden by running around in front of popular opinion. (Assuming the American people would have cared.) If Clinton'd bombed a specific nuclear-related target instead of tried to build countries, we wouldn't be where we are today.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

Quote

It didn't have anything to do with Bush confronting Kim with evidence that he decided to start another program?

Jib you have your timeline mixed up. That happened last year. Bush pissed Kim and China off by starting the name calling in the first week of office.

[AggieDave 6]

Well, it continued when Kim Il-sung died, so what makes you think it won't continue when Kim Jong-il dies?

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Jib 0]

Quote

You don't need to "FIX" a problem that can be placated until the admin is ousted or dies.

A good example of this is Cuba. Castro only has a few years left, and no one to replace him.

I don't know where you think Kim's gonna go. He throws everyone AND their families in prison to be tortured if they might oppose him. Even if he dies, the regime will continue.

Castro doesn't have a nuclear weapons program and the only country in the world that really cares about him is the US and in large part, that's driven by the exile population in Florida.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[Jib 0]

How you looked into the treatment of North Koreans by the government? It's sick! So, we should stick our heads in the sand and ignore it?

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

Quote

Clinton was spineless and patched things up. He dropped the ball on NK and bin laden by running around in front of popular opinion. (Assuming the American people would have cared.) If Clinton'd bombed a specific nuclear-related target instead of tried to build countries, we wouldn't be where we are today.

Ummm.. Clinton was the first to try to kill Bin Laden.. THe first opportunity he had, he fired 60 cruise missiles over and onto the sovereign territory of other countries... technically an act of war. Yes he missed. But the Bush admin botched their chance by stalling the arming of the preditors.

Edit to add: Oh, and lets not forget to thank the Reagan admin for supplying Binladen and his bunch of merry men with training, weapons, and money.

Bombing the one plant that they could see in North Korea would not have done shit. They have other facilities buried in mountains... probably nuclear blast proof. Then there would be hell to pay, when Seol was wiped off the face of the earth by a conventional bombardment never seen before.

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

Quote

How you looked into the treatment of North Koreans by the government? It's sick! So, we should stick our heads in the sand and ignore it?

We do it all the time (look the other way) because we don't care.

[w4p2 0]

But whatever happens will it be due to cool reasoning or because of extraterrestrial or divine message.

[BlueEyedMonster 0]

Quote

But whatever happens will it be due to cool reasoning or because of extraterrestrial or divine message.

If the cabinet makes the decision (including Powell) and Bush rubber stamps it... I go for option 1.

If GW makes the decision... it will be option 2 or 3, your guess is as good as mine.