North Korea

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,507
189
63
Bowling Green Ky
Hmm liberals here bout as silent as those on the hill? :)

Granted a lot can change but one thing is definate--Kerry/Reid-Pelosi and crew who were for unilateral talks (that failed miserably in last admin) were wrong again

We at least have China-Russia-Japan-South Korea as allies to keep them at their word.

If you been following the stratagy--it was the banking measures GW put on them that forced the issue--

Now if only the Euro's who have been "trying" to negotiate with Iran with the Kum Ba Ya approach for 3years now--can take a few hints might have same result with Iran before before 08.

if not--and Dems get in --hope they been taking notes ;)
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,507
189
63
Bowling Green Ky
Believe verifiably shutting down reactor would be an action--1st step anyway--however can't see what would keep them from starting it up again

by Jun Kwanwoo
Sun Jul 15, 9:52 AM ET



SEOUL (AFP) - North Korea confirmed Sunday that it had shut down its Yongbyon atomic reactor under UN supervision, the first step in a process designed to rid the communist state of nuclear weapons.

ADVERTISEMENT

The closure of the facility, which produces plutonium for nuclear weapons, is the first step taken by Pyongyang toward ending its atomic programme since 2002, and the first phase of a six-nation disarmament deal reached in February.

The United States, South Korea and Russia -- parties to the six-nation talks with the North along with China and Japan -- welcomed the move, but Washington said more needed to be done to speed up the disarmament process.

"We shut down the nuclear facilities at Yongbyon and allowed the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) personnel to monitor it on the 14th, when the first shipment out of 50,000 tonnes of heavy fuel oil arrived," a foreign ministry spokesman told the official Korean Central News Agency.

The agency's dispatch, sent via e-mail to AFP, was the first report of the closure from Pyongyang, which shocked the world last October with its first atomic bomb test.

It is the first time that Yongbyon has been closed as a political act since a previous disarmament deal collapsed in late 2002, but enough plutonium for several more bombs is thought to have been extracted since then.

"We have fulfilled our promises in advance... which shows our commitment to the implementation of the agreement," the spokesman told KCNA.

The North had earlier insisted on first receiving all 50,000 tonnes of fuel oil promised in compensation for the shutdown under the February accord.

The first shipment of 6,200 tonnes arrived early Saturday in the North from South Korea. A 10-strong team of inspectors from the IAEA, the UN's nuclear watchdog, landed the same day with one tonne of monitoring equipment.

The inspectors were to start verifying the closure on Sunday, Christopher Hill, US chief negotiator to the six-party talks, told reporters in Japan.

On arrival in South Korea late Sunday, Hill said he would hold a bilateral meeting with his North Korean counterpart Kim Kye-Gwan in Beijing on Tuesday, the day before six-party talks are set to resume.

Hill welcomed the shutdown but said much work lay ahead and called for speedier progress.

"That was a very important first step but there are still many more steps to go," he told reporters.

"I must say, if we don't take steps a little more quickly than we have taken the first step, we are going to fall way behind again."

The shutdown was delayed for months by a now-resolved row over US financial sanctions.

South Korea's foreign ministry described the news as "encouraging progress" while in Russia, a foreign ministry spokesman described the shutdown as "a positive factor".

The North will receive another 950,000 tons of fuel oil or equivalent aid, plus major diplomatic benefits and security guarantees, if it goes on to declare all nuclear programmes and permanently disable all nuclear facilities.

The US and its partners say "facilities" must include weapons and plutonium stockpiles even though weapons are not specifically mentioned in the February agreement.

The North's foreign ministry spokesman said the IAEA activities in Yongbyon did not constitute an inspection and would be limited to verification and monitoring the shutdown.

He also said full implementation of the February accord would depend "on what practical measures the US and Japan, in particular, will take to roll back their hostile policies" towards the North.

Washington, which envisages diplomatic relations and a formal peace pact if the North fulfils all commitments, wants to know the status of an alleged highly enriched uranium (HEU) programme separate to the plutonium operation.

US claims in 2002 of the HEU programme, denied by the North, led to the suspension of fuel oil shipments and the collapse of a bilateral deal which had kept Yongbyon shut since 1994.

US National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said Sunday the aim was "ultimately dismantling that programme, getting a full accounting of what they've been doing with any covert enrichment programme and finally getting them to turn over any nuclear materials from which nuclear weapons have or could be made."

The IAEA visit is the first by working inspectors since North Korea expelled the UN agency in December 2002 in response to the fuel cutoff and re-started Yongbyon.

The reactor has produced enough plutonium to make five to 12 bombs since it began operating in 1987, according to varying international estimates.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,914
140
63
17
L.A.
How exactly is this against what Dems were working on? Weren't they supportive of international cooperation and working through the UN?

So we have something good here and all you can do is make negative political attacks. LMAO. And tyou are the one always making claims of the other side's "pessimism" and "negativity".;)
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
So, Bush used some banking/financial sanctions/measures against North Korea that caused them to fall in line? And not attacking or occupying the country? And the dems were against the use of sanctions or non-military means to affect change of action there? Or elsewhere?

Missing the point, I guess...
 

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
I think that N. Korea is leaving

I think that N. Korea is leaving

it's country defenseless. If Saddam had the BOMB he would still be in power. Do you think that the US would give up it's nukes? N. Korea is now open for attack and could end up like Iraq.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,507
189
63
Bowling Green Ky
How exactly is this against what Dems were working on? Weren't they supportive of international cooperation and working through the UN?

So we have something good here and all you can do is make negative political attacks. LMAO. And tyou are the one always making claims of the other side's "pessimism" and "negativity".;)

Do you really have to ask? Surely you haven't forgot their whining for months after NK left the table--saying one on one was the right way--and NK licking their chops hoping for just that--fortunately GW put the screws to tight and NK couldn't hold out for wishful 08 results :)

Now UBL is diff story-he can hold out however will be disappointed he can't campaign against GW like 04;)
 

Jabberwocky

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 3, 2006
3,491
29
0
Jacksonville, FL
"Now UBL is diff story-he can hold out however will be disappointed he can't campaign against GW like 04"

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI

"...Secondly, he is not escaping us. This is a guy, who, three months ago, was in control of a county [sic]. Now he's maybe in control of a cave. He's on the run. Listen, a while ago I said to the American people, our objective is more than bin Laden. But one of the things for certain is we're going to get him running and keep him running, and bring him to justice. And that's what's happening. He's on the run, if he's running at all. So we don't know whether he's in cave with the door shut, or a cave with the door open -- we just don't know...."
- Bush, in remarks in a Press Availablity with the Press Travel Pool,
The Prairie Chapel Ranch, Crawford TX, 12/28/01, as reported on
official White House site

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

Yeah DTB, once again you nailed it. bin Laden is terrified of dubya.
 

bjfinste

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 14, 2001
5,462
18
0
AZ
Bush is Bin Laden's biggest recruiter. Thankfully, the democrats should (hopefully) win the White House in 2008. :) Bin Laden and his boys will be livid when they lose their Republican gravy train. ;)
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I guess this one fooled Bush. If you remember his group for sure Cheney didn't want to even talk. Talk can't work build up the soldiers at the border. Bush did bend some what and included the Japan ad China connection. Same deal we had before. Once the load of oil arrived N Korea shut the reactor down.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,507
189
63
Bowling Green Ky
I see--fault this admin for all out attempt against terrorism--and back party that previously did nothing--and whose current answer is retreat?--Interesting. :)

todays NK update--

North Korea Offers to Fully Declare All Nuclear Weapons Programs and Disable Them by End of Year
Wednesday, July 18, 2007



ADVERTISEMENT
BEIJING ?

North Korea has offered to fully declare all nuclear weapons programs and disable them by the end of the year, meeting U.S. hopes for quick moves following the shutdown of Pyongyang's sole operating reactor, South Korea's envoy said Wednesday.

"North Korea expressed its intention to declare and disable (all its nuclear facilities) within the shortest possible period, even within five or six months, or by the end of the year," Chun Yung-woo said.

He said North Korean negotiator Kim Kye Gwan also told South Korea at six-nation talks his country was "willing to declare all its nuclear programs without omitting a single one."

? Monitor the nuclear showdown on the Korean Peninsula in FOXNews.com's North Korea Center.

The pledge for total disclosure is key because it implies the North will also include a mention of the uranium enrichment program that it has never publicly acknowledged. The U.S. accused Pyongyang in 2002 of embarking on such a program in violation of an earlier disarmament deal ? sparking the latest nuclear crisis.

The arms talks ? which include China, Japan, Russia, the U.S. and the two Koreas ? began Wednesday with an infusion of optimism after North Korea shut down its reactor Saturday.

The atmosphere of the talks was "as bright as Beijing's skies and was more serious and businesslike than any other time," Chun said Wednesday after a meeting of all six countries at a Chinese guesthouse as the capital was bathed in sunshine.

Japan also said it was impressed by North Korea's positive attitude.

"I had the impression that North Korea is prepared to implement the initial stage steps," Tokyo's envoy Kenichiro Sasae said, referring to the list and disablement.

Chun said the North's declaration should also include bombs the North has built.

"If North Korea has something, whether it be a nuclear weapon or a nuclear detonation device, it should declare all of them," he said.

Earlier Wednesday, the U.N. nuclear watchdog confirmed that North Korea shuttered all remaining facilities at its main nuclear complex in addition to its only working reactor.

"We have verified all the five nuclear facilities have been shut down," Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told reporters during a visit to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Some of the facilities have also been sealed by U.N. inspectors, ElBaradei said.

ElBaradei announced earlier in the week that inspectors had verified the shutdown of North Korea's only working nuclear reactor at Yongbyon, 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of Pyongyang.

His announcement Wednesday confirmed four additional facilities were also shuttered, including two long-dormant construction sites for larger reactors, and facilities for making reactor fuel and reprocessing it to harvest plutonium for bombs.

ElBaradei said having the facilities listed and dismantled by year-end could only happen if there was progress in the six-nation talks and the North remains cooperative with inspectors, who may be required to travel across the secretive nation to other sites.

"What is really important is full transparency," ElBaradei said. "The more transparency we get, the quicker we will be able to verify that everything in (North Korea) has been declared to us."

North Korea has begun receiving 50,000 tons of oil from South Korea as a reward for the reactor shutdown, and is to eventually receive the equivalent of a total 1 million tons for disabling its nuclear facilities.

But Pyongyang has also demanded the U.S. and Japan end their "hostile" policies against the regime, such as other economic sanctions and being named on a U.S. list of terrorism-sponsoring states.

The countries involved in the arms talks last met in March, although the main U.S. envoy Christopher Hill made a surprise trip to Pyongyang in June ? his first ever ? to urge the North to comply with its pledges.
 
Last edited:

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
If everything goes very smoothly with this deal, in a year or two we will be all the way back where we were in 2002.

1994-2002 - rods under seal, cameras installed at all facilities, inspectors on the ground. In return, North Korea got oil, light-water reactors (still not finished) and other concessions. Neo-cons kick and scream because it's considered 'bribery' to them when 'harsh' action is needed!

2002- Cowboy George pops off about the axis of evil.

2002-2007 - rods unsealed and processed, inspectors kicked out, cameras removed, nuke is actually tested.

2007 - tentative deal in it's fledgling stage that involves reactors being monitored, regulated and/or shut down in exchange for ummmmmm, oil. Neo-cons applaud this time. Oil for action barter a good idea now. The 'harsh' action is apparently the whopping $25 million being frozen in Chinese bank. :rolleyes:

Well, hopefully it all goes well and we get ourselves back to 2002 in regards to North Korea.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
I guess this one fooled Bush. If you remember his group for sure Cheney didn't want to even talk. Talk can't work build up the soldiers at the border. Bush did bend some what and included the Japan ad China connection. Same deal we had before. Once the load of oil arrived N Korea shut the reactor down.

Yes, it's the same deal as before, but it's better than what we have now.

Building up soldiers at the border would not work in the least in any sort of positive way. 85% of our troops over there are already within 30 miles of the DMZ anyways. Staging more even closer to the border would be seen as being extremely provocative and could very well trigger a 'pre-emptive' invasion.

Our guys are not there as a military deterrent, in itself, to begin with. In a mass invasion like in 1950,we would be run over and NK would be in Seoul in about a day or two. Then the South Koreans would have to go to work. They have a large and well trained army, but we would be of almost no help until we could get some (a ton) of troops redeployed from Iraq. :rolleyes:

We are there to convey our commitment to bring in however many troops needed to fight a war there. There is absolutely no military solution for America over there, especially now, and to unecessarily provoke by staging more troops at the border would be extremely unwise.
 

WhatsHisNuts

Woke
Forum Member
Aug 29, 2006
28,227
1,470
113
50
Earth
www.ffrf.org
I see--fault this admin for all out attempt against terrorism--and back party that previously did nothing--and whose current answer is retreat?--Interesting. :)

I wonder how Richard Clarke would respond? He might disagree with your "party that previously did nothing" statement. Which party/administration did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING when the previous administration warned them of the of Al Queda and Bin Laden?

Unlike the previous administration, this one doesn't do their homework.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
I see--fault this admin for all out attempt against terrorism

With all due respect, this comment alone renders your point - and anything after it - meaningless. The day Bush, or whoever is making the decisions up there, decided to pull back our personnel and firepower from where the leader of the terrorists was and go into Iraq, the administration stopped an all out attempt against terrorism. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Although it has remained the battle cry throughout, it is simply not the truth. Not that the truth is at issue here, right?
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,507
189
63
Bowling Green Ky
"If everything goes very smoothly with this deal, in a year or two we will be all the way back where we were in 2002."

Absolutely incorrect--we have China-Russia-SK-Japan all tied in agreement.

Now Matt -had you said we we the Dems route on the one on one--then we been in same boat.

However agree they still can fire them back up in minutes notice--but they got 5 countries to answer to this time.

Also don't believe we are footing the bill like last time--have not seen what concessions we are making yet--other than backing off sanctions--will be curious to see.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
"If everything goes very smoothly with this deal, in a year or two we will be all the way back where we were in 2002."

Absolutely incorrect--we have China-Russia-SK-Japan all tied in agreement.

Practically speaking, if things go perfectly, we will be exactly where we were from 1994-2002. Just because those 4 countries that you cite are parenthetically involved, don't kid yourself. This is our baby.


Now Matt -had you said we we the Dems route on the one on one--then we been in same boat.

Whether it's one on one or not, if the security measures and concessions are the same, isn't it the same? :shrug:

However agree they still can fire them back up in minutes notice--but they got 5 countries to answer to this time.

Yes, like they did when W popped off and stopped all aid and they started processing plutonium rods immediately and tested a nuke within a couple years. As far as 'answering' to anybody? Please. They *listen* to China somewhat, but they sure didn't give a shit when China warned them against testing that nuke. And it would probably take an act of war against China by NK for China to stop supporting them because of the enormous humanitarian refugee crisis China would have if this NK regime collapses.

Also don't believe we are footing the bill like last time--have not seen what concessions we are making yet--other than backing off sanctions--will be curious to see.

I believe we're footing a large part of it, which is fine. It's better than what we have right now and exactly what we had from 1994-2002.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
It's better then a 30 day war( i believe we learned a lesson in 50's) that may killed million or more. Of that number up to 40000 could be Americans. Soldiers and Business folks working and station there. The Bush way of stop and call names was never a option.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top