ChasingBlueSky 0 #26 September 12, 2004 QuoteOh geez...it never ends. Chris No, that was my first thought as well. On top of that aren't we pulling troops back from that part of the world? There is a clear and present danger in N Korea. We were told there was one in Iraq then we were told, um, never mind....look over there - something shinny! Oh yea, and while you are at it, forget that top priority to capture OBL._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #27 September 12, 2004 QuotePretty smart considering our troops would have been vaporized?? Ah, someone who actually thinks outside the box. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #28 September 12, 2004 Quote Look at the political structure of modern east Asia, also look at the history of Korea ancient currents and the modern history you probably know fairly well. Now wouldn't it have been nice to put that much thought into what impact a preemptive strike into Iraq would have on the region? They may be political relatives in the NE - but they are religious relatives in the Mid East - which is a stronger bond. The administration has admitted failure on an exit plan because they never thought out what would really happen. Now we have troops from all of the ME pouring into the Iraqi battlegrounds. Both Iraq and Afghan are in turmoil because of what we have done. Yes, there may be quite a few things better now that a madman and a group of madmen are gone -but how long will that last. Religious and nationalistic pride will far outlast any defense budget we can come up with. Quote Side note, what gets me about the WMD hunt in Iraq that liberals call a failure is that sure we didn't find "smoking gun." However we found all the parts to the gun laying on the table unassembled with bullets. Translation: we found all the right pieces hidden away in secure seperate locations and all the means for delievery once they were made, the quick and final step of tossing it all together hadn't been crossed. Maybe you should call Karl Rove with this - he is looking for a spin for the campaign on how to make 1000+ dead troops into a victory for four more years. I've read almost every story on the war since before it started - somehow I missed out on the story that said we had all these fragmented pieces that pointed towards a cohesive bigger picture. If that was there Kerry would have nothing to say about the Iraq war and Bush could claim mission accomplished. That would secure a win for Bush in a heartbeat. We haven't and won't invade N Korea because it would affect us on the bottom line. There is too much we import from the East. If we went in there the sanctions other countries bring against us would devestate this country for decades. This is why we choose to invade two countries that wouldn't affect us negatively financially in the end run. We would be able to put in a pipeline in Afghan and get a seat on OPEC by taking over Iraq. Also, the war machine makes money here at home as well - even the parachute industry is doing OK in a down period for aviation due to military contracts._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #29 September 12, 2004 QuoteQuotePretty smart considering our troops would have been vaporized?? Ah, someone who actually thinks outside the box. And sending troops into a conflict where they could be gassed with just about anything was a better option? And don't forget we thought he had a "nuclar" program. Oh yea, we got to control the oil after that._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #30 September 12, 2004 QuoteQuote Look at the political structure of modern east Asia, also look at the history of Korea ancient currents and the modern history you probably know fairly well. Now wouldn't it have been nice to put that much thought into what impact a preemptive strike into Iraq would have on the region? I think Dave was referring to big communist brother, China. There's no one like that in the ME to be worried about. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #31 September 12, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote Look at the political structure of modern east Asia, also look at the history of Korea ancient currents and the modern history you probably know fairly well. Now wouldn't it have been nice to put that much thought into what impact a preemptive strike into Iraq would have on the region? I think Dave was referring to big communist brother, China. There's no one like that in the ME to be worried about. There was a good chance that our attack on Iraq could have united all of the ME against us. Well, all but Israel. In fact, that is currently happening. Long term threat over immediate. Which is worse? We have made consistent mistakes in the mid east going back decades and the problems we are dealing with now we helped create. What problems are we creating for our children?_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #32 September 12, 2004 QuoteThere was a good chance that our attack on Iraq could have Ah, the could have would have should have debate. Those are always fun. I could have been a millionaire if I would have hit all 6 numbers in the lottery. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #33 September 12, 2004 QuoteQuoteThere was a good chance that our attack on Iraq could have Ah, the could have would have should have debate. Those are always fun. I could be a millionaire if I would have hit all 6 numbers in the lottery. No - just going off the "facts" the Bush admin told us before the attack. They had chemicals, they had a nuke program. They were a threat and SH was going to use them on us. Do you not remember all the stories about what our troops may be hit with? Do you remember all the "breaking news" from the embeded reporters having to put on gas masks due to a possible threat? Do you remember the troops complaining about going into battle with the improper gear to protect them from chemical attacks? We sent troops into a war with the wrong gear into an environment we "knew" where there were WMD. BTW - the "it could, it might" argument is what everyone is using to avoid a conflict in NK. Don't get me wrong - I don't like war and don't support it...I don't want to see more troops dead. I'm hoping there is a way around another invasion. Besides I don't think we would have enough troops to go around. I just interviewed a Marine on Friday. He was four years away from military retirement. He quit after he came back from Iraq (he just got back after being there from the start). He and his fellow officers have quit because they all feel that we shouldn't be there. He also mentioned that they are not talking about the large amount of suicides that are happening over there as well. He gave me over two hours of horror stories from the last year, and nearly made me cry twice. He feels that the amount of soldiers that will be quitting service as soon as possible will make it hard to keep this war going._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #34 September 13, 2004 Calm down everybody. Quotehttp://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/nm/20040912/ts_nm/korea_north_dc U.S. Says N.Korea Blast Probably Not Nuclear Sun Sep 12,11:25 AM ET By Martin Nesirky and Vicki Allen SEOUL, South Korea/Washington (Reuters) - A huge explosion rocked North Korea last week but U.S. and South Korean officials said Sunday it was unlikely to have been a nuclear weapons test despite the appearance of a "peculiar cloud" over the area. Those of you who think we should be acting unilaterally to disarm PRNK need to put your Bush hating aside for a second and realize China and Russia might just have a little something to say about NK testing nukes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,096 #35 September 13, 2004 >Going after a madman with nukes might be a good way to ensure >he starts lobbing them around. Agreed. Much easier to go after someone with no WMD program. Interesting lesson we are teaching the madmen of the world, though. "If you want to protect yourself from the US, do whatever it takes to get nukes!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #36 September 13, 2004 UK news this morning - The North Korean Gvnmt say to British Ambassador that the explosion was a non-nuclear planned demolition of a mountain as part of a hydro electric programme... Edit: oh - they're allowing the British ambassador to check out the site as well. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3650702.stm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #37 September 13, 2004 Yup, nothing to worry about - if the warnings listed below come from the same source that said Iraq had a WMD program. North Korea May Test Nukes, U.S. Warned By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - The United States has received indications North Korea (news - web sites) might be trying to test a nuclear weapon, a senior Bush administration official said Sunday. The official said there is no evidence that a large mushroom cloud that reportedly billowed up from North Korea was linked to the communist nation's suspected nuclear weapons program. "We're watching the indicators to see whether this is normal activity or whether something else is under way," the official said on condition of anonymity. The White House periodically receives reports that North Korea is seeking to test a nuclear weapon, the official said. Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) said that just the idea that the United States was thinking North Korea might test a nuclear weapon highlights a national security failure by Bush. Under Bush's watch, North Korea has advanced its nuclear program, he said. "North Korea's nuclear program is well ahead of what Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was even suspected of doing — yet the president took his eye off the ball, wrongly ignoring this growing danger," Kerry said in a statement. "What is unfolding in North Korea is exactly the kind of disaster that it is an American president's solemn duty to prevent." In a telephone call Sunday evening to The New York Times, Kerry accused the administration of letting "a nuclear nightmare" develop by refusing to deal with North Korea when it first came to office, the paper reported on its Internet site. President Bush (news - web sites)'s senior foreign policy advisers said publicly Sunday that they did not think the reported explosion Thursday near North Korea's border with China was related to North Korea's nuclear aspirations. "We have no indication that it was a nuclear event of any kind," Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) told ABC's "This Week." "Exactly what it was, we're not sure." He said the administration was closely watching activities taking place at some sites in North Korea, but that "it is not conclusive that they are moving toward a test." National security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) said on CNN's "Late Edition" that it would not be "smart" for the North Koreans to test because it would further isolate them. Rice also said the explosion was not likely a test. "We don't think, at this point, it was a nuclear event, but we're looking at it and will get further analysis," she said. "There are all kinds of reports and all kinds of assessments that are going on. Maybe it was a fire — some kind of forest fire." Asked whether a U.S. military option is on the table concerning North Korea, Rice said, "The president never takes any option off the table, but we believe the way to resolve this is diplomatically." The United States, Russia, Japan, China and the two Koreas have held talks on North Korea's suspected nuclear weapons development, and they agreed to hold another round of negotiations in Beijing this month. No date has been set. The United States has pushed for North Korea to fully disclose all of its nuclear activities and allow outside monitoring before it receives any assistance. North Korea wants energy aid, lifting of economic sanctions and removal from its inclusion on Washington's list of state sponsors of terrorism. "North Korea is looking for assurances that we're not going to invade it, we have no hostile intent; they're looking for benefits for giving up their nuclear capability and their nuclear infrastructure. And what we're debating is what will it take to give them the assurances they need and what benefits would they expect over the long haul," Powell said. But, he said, the United States will not "reward them for doing something they should've have been doing in the first place. So we're into a very intense period of negotiations."_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #38 September 13, 2004 I hope they're planning on building a _really_ big dam there.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #39 September 13, 2004 QuoteI hope they're planning on building a _really_ big dam there. Edit cos I totally missed the point of Toms post... DOH! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #40 September 13, 2004 QuoteI hope they're planning on building a _really_ big dam there. I have no personal clue about what they did in NK... BUT large mining blast can be mistaken for nuclear blasts, even by seismographs. Loas Alamos was doing loads of test in the New Powder River Bassin in WY a few years ago to charecterize the wave signatures of the large mining explosions there to help filter these out for the Non-Proliferation Treaty governance.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #41 September 13, 2004 Well, if not a dam, then a nice tall tower would do. Or perhaps a giant skyscraper? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #42 September 13, 2004 Would a nice man made cliff work? Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #43 September 13, 2004 QuoteDemocrat John Kerry (news - web sites) said that just the idea that the United States was thinking North Korea might test a nuclear weapon highlights a national security failure by Bush. Under Bush's watch, North Korea has advanced its nuclear program, he said. I guess Kerry missed those meetings in the Senate. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #44 September 13, 2004 Yep, all Bush's fault. Those stupid unenforced treaties Clinton signed in 1994 had nothing to do with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #45 September 13, 2004 QuoteYep, all Bush's fault. Those stupid unenforced treaties Clinton signed in 1994 had nothing to do with it. Ok, so Clinton screwed up. And then GW never followed up. Well, he did label them "axis of evil" which was pretty effective._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #46 September 13, 2004 QuoteOk, so Clinton screwed up. And then GW never followed up. Well, he did label them "axis of evil" which was pretty effective. Yeah...that's all we've done over the past three years. "Label them axis of evil" I guess I can tell that to my buddy who's missing a leg and part of his nose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #47 September 13, 2004 QuoteQuoteOk, so Clinton screwed up. And then GW never followed up. Well, he did label them "axis of evil" which was pretty effective. Yeah...that's all we've done over the past three years. "Label them axis of evil" I guess I can tell that to my buddy who's missing a leg and part of his nose. I never said anything about the troops still sitting on the DMZ. Policy is what I was refering to._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,131 #48 September 13, 2004 QuoteQuoteOk, so Clinton screwed up. And then GW never followed up. Well, he did label them "axis of evil" which was pretty effective. Yeah...that's all we've done over the past three years. "Label them axis of evil" I guess I can tell that to my buddy who's missing a leg and part of his nose. That's not all we've done. We've withdrawn a large number of US troops from the DMZ so they could fight Bush's vendetta war in Iraq. For instance:www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/2id-2bde.htm... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #49 September 13, 2004 QuoteQuoteYep, all Bush's fault. Those stupid unenforced treaties Clinton signed in 1994 had nothing to do with it. Ok, so Clinton screwed up. And then GW never followed up. Well, he did label them "axis of evil" which was pretty effective. Have you considered that Bush is trying to build a coalition with China and Russia involved? Explain what steps you think Bush could have taken, or is this just a hand-wringing, "he needs to do something" rant? I'm pretty sure that when China decides enough is enough, it will cease. I suspect their complacency so far has more to do with the coming conflict over Taiwan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #50 September 13, 2004 Last I checked GW said that if it is a threat to our contry he will go it alone, much like he did in Iraq. Why should NK be any different?_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
