Act of War

POSTED BY: Hero
UPDATED: Friday, May 9, 2025 18:56
VIEWED: 7198
PAGE 5 of 10

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

GEEZER

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:52 PM

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"

RUE

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:52 PM

"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.

HERO

Friday, July 7, 2006 7:58 PM

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

CITIZEN

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:02 PM

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.

GEEZER

Friday, July 7, 2006 8:47 PM

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"

SIGNYM

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:08 PM

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

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

AURAPTOR

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:29 PM

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. "

GEEZER

Friday, July 7, 2006 9:59 PM

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

So you believe North Korea wants...what?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

SIGNYM

Friday, July 7, 2006 10:13 PM

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.

RUE

Friday, July 7, 2006 10:43 PM

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?

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE