North Korea
- Thread starter DOGS THAT BARK
- Start date
The fact is Billy Bob enabled to obtain Nukes with our money--the premise that this allowed him to test them after the fact would be normal pattern AFTER obtaining them--the fact that GW didn't follow the Dems cry of unilateral and keep us in same mode Clinton got us in is the reason for success.
Kinda like BillyBob war on terror after they struck trade towers 1st time--non existant--how'd that play out.
You got Obie running now with similiar strategy on terror of waving white flags and Kumbaya--
As GW said--Commader and chiefs primary job is to protect the people.
We've seen results of both carrots and stick--
from 2002 state of the union--
[Our second goal] is to prevent regimes (terrorist) that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction. Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since September the 11th. But we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.
Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens?leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections?then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
? George W. Bush, 2002 State of Union Address
You can put an X next to Hussein (Saddam) and his regime as well as NK .
Add to that--Lybia disarmed with out a shot fired--Taliban out of rule in Afgan--pakistan now fighting terrorists as well as numerous others--
Yep- less reverse all this and put the liberals back in charge--I'm sure their retreat-rewards programs will "once again" strike fear in the hearts of terrorists.
Might want to check out this photo in link just out --
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,372563,00.html
North Korea Implodes Nuclear Reactor Cooling Tower
Last edited:
"The fact is Billy Bob"
BFE KY Wayne calling a Rhodes Scholar, Yale grad "Billy Bob" is.....priceless.
Clinton graduated from high school in 1964 and enrolled at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., where he majored in international affairs. He was elected president of his class during his freshman and sophomore years. As a junior and senior he earned money for school expenses by working as an intern for the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which was chaired by Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat. Clinton greatly admired Fulbright, who was a leading critic of United States involvement in the Vietnam War (1959-1975). Clinton was also deeply moved by African Americans? fight for equality in the 1960s. In April 1968, a few weeks before Clinton graduated, the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., set off rioting in several American cities, including Washington, D.C. Clinton volunteered to work with the Red Cross and took clothing and food to people whose homes had been burned in the riots.
During his senior year, Clinton won a Rhodes Scholarship to the University of Oxford in England, and he spent two years in Oxford?s graduate program after graduating from Georgetown. In 1970 Clinton enrolled at Yale University Law School, where he studied for a law degree. He paid his way with a scholarship and by working two or three jobs at the same time. At Yale he met fellow law student Hillary Diane Rodham, who was from the Chicago area (see Hillary Rodham Clinton).
BFE KY Wayne calling a Rhodes Scholar, Yale grad "Billy Bob" is.....priceless.
Clinton graduated from high school in 1964 and enrolled at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., where he majored in international affairs. He was elected president of his class during his freshman and sophomore years. As a junior and senior he earned money for school expenses by working as an intern for the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which was chaired by Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat. Clinton greatly admired Fulbright, who was a leading critic of United States involvement in the Vietnam War (1959-1975). Clinton was also deeply moved by African Americans? fight for equality in the 1960s. In April 1968, a few weeks before Clinton graduated, the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr., set off rioting in several American cities, including Washington, D.C. Clinton volunteered to work with the Red Cross and took clothing and food to people whose homes had been burned in the riots.
During his senior year, Clinton won a Rhodes Scholarship to the University of Oxford in England, and he spent two years in Oxford?s graduate program after graduating from Georgetown. In 1970 Clinton enrolled at Yale University Law School, where he studied for a law degree. He paid his way with a scholarship and by working two or three jobs at the same time. At Yale he met fellow law student Hillary Diane Rodham, who was from the Chicago area (see Hillary Rodham Clinton).
From the NY Post and from a frequent Post contributor, very right wing columnist, Peter Brookes.
Basically saying what I said in a post earlier. Don't get too excited.
And talking about 'success' after one day is, well...
KOREAN NUKES: DON'T GET GIDDY
WE'RE STILL FAR FROM ENDING THE THREAT
Last updated: 4:27 am
June 27, 2008
NORTH Korea gave the world some good news this week - finally handing over a declaration about its nuclear program and promising to blow up the cooling tower at its Yongbyon nuclear facility. But don't break out the best bubbly just yet.
These moves are only a first step in what is likely to be a drawn-out, slippery, pot-hole-filled road in a (possibly futile) attempt to roll back Kim Jong Il's membership in the nuclear-weapons club.
Yes, the White House got a bit light-headed over the Korean news: It's already started the process of lifting economic sanctions on the reclusive nation as a reward for good behavior. (That process could get controversial, especially in Congress: Do Kim & Co. really deserve to come off the Terrorism List, or to escape punishment under the Trading With the Enemy Act?)
And it was good news, if measured: Tumbling the cooling tower puts the Yongbyon plant out of commission - and it would take a year to rebuild. Making the nuclear declaration this week is a welcome step, too.
But a welcome initial step. Pyongyang is six months late in handing over what's supposed to be a complete and correct accounting of its nuclear programs - and you can bet we're not going to get anything close to the Full Monty.
* It won't have anything about the regime's clandestine, uranium-based nuclear-weapons program.
Washington insists Pyongyang has such a program, which parallels the plutonium program at Yongbyon. But the North Koreans have been evasive - at best - about its existence.
* The declaration also won't have any info on the regime's nuclear-proliferation activities, such as its work with Damascus on a nuclear reactor at al Kibar in northern Syria (the one targeted in last September's Israeli air raid).
Proliferation-watchers also have a sinking sense that North Korea may be involved with Iran. After all, the two have robust ties on ballistic missiles - Iran's Shahab missile is based on North Korea's No Dong.
* Finally, it won't have the scoop on the size of the North Korean nuclear-weapons arsenal.
Pyongyang sees its nukes as a critical ace-in-the-hole against American pressure or aggression. But getting a handle on the arsenal's size is key, if (and that's a big if) we're ever going to make progress on pulling Pyongyang's nuclear fangs.
Other challenges are ahead, too. In a speech at the Heritage Foundation just a week ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted the United States would demand tough verification of Kim's declaration, including access to nuclear facilities and other data.
That's the right approach - verification is a critical element of any current or future agreement. But good luck getting anywhere on that one.
The idea of a gaggle of US inspectors freely running around the ultra-secretive North Korean police state poking their noses into labs and the like boggles the mind.
In fact, recent North Korean whispers suggest Pyongyang will reject out of hand any verification regime that would the pass the laugh test.
Rejecting verification outright would call into question Kim's willingness to disarm in the long run - after all, the regime has a solid record of breaking its word on nukes, most notably the 1994 Geneva Agreed Framework. Overall, a solid verification regime is probably the proverbial "long pole in the tent" - the toughest test in getting from this week's first steps to the final goal of disarmament.
In the end, all US moves must support a verifiable process that ultimately uncovers all of Pyongyang's programs, neuters its nukes and puts an end to its problematic proliferation.
Basically saying what I said in a post earlier. Don't get too excited.
And talking about 'success' after one day is, well...
KOREAN NUKES: DON'T GET GIDDY
WE'RE STILL FAR FROM ENDING THE THREAT
Last updated: 4:27 am
June 27, 2008
NORTH Korea gave the world some good news this week - finally handing over a declaration about its nuclear program and promising to blow up the cooling tower at its Yongbyon nuclear facility. But don't break out the best bubbly just yet.
These moves are only a first step in what is likely to be a drawn-out, slippery, pot-hole-filled road in a (possibly futile) attempt to roll back Kim Jong Il's membership in the nuclear-weapons club.
Yes, the White House got a bit light-headed over the Korean news: It's already started the process of lifting economic sanctions on the reclusive nation as a reward for good behavior. (That process could get controversial, especially in Congress: Do Kim & Co. really deserve to come off the Terrorism List, or to escape punishment under the Trading With the Enemy Act?)
And it was good news, if measured: Tumbling the cooling tower puts the Yongbyon plant out of commission - and it would take a year to rebuild. Making the nuclear declaration this week is a welcome step, too.
But a welcome initial step. Pyongyang is six months late in handing over what's supposed to be a complete and correct accounting of its nuclear programs - and you can bet we're not going to get anything close to the Full Monty.
* It won't have anything about the regime's clandestine, uranium-based nuclear-weapons program.
Washington insists Pyongyang has such a program, which parallels the plutonium program at Yongbyon. But the North Koreans have been evasive - at best - about its existence.
* The declaration also won't have any info on the regime's nuclear-proliferation activities, such as its work with Damascus on a nuclear reactor at al Kibar in northern Syria (the one targeted in last September's Israeli air raid).
Proliferation-watchers also have a sinking sense that North Korea may be involved with Iran. After all, the two have robust ties on ballistic missiles - Iran's Shahab missile is based on North Korea's No Dong.
* Finally, it won't have the scoop on the size of the North Korean nuclear-weapons arsenal.
Pyongyang sees its nukes as a critical ace-in-the-hole against American pressure or aggression. But getting a handle on the arsenal's size is key, if (and that's a big if) we're ever going to make progress on pulling Pyongyang's nuclear fangs.
Other challenges are ahead, too. In a speech at the Heritage Foundation just a week ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted the United States would demand tough verification of Kim's declaration, including access to nuclear facilities and other data.
That's the right approach - verification is a critical element of any current or future agreement. But good luck getting anywhere on that one.
The idea of a gaggle of US inspectors freely running around the ultra-secretive North Korean police state poking their noses into labs and the like boggles the mind.
In fact, recent North Korean whispers suggest Pyongyang will reject out of hand any verification regime that would the pass the laugh test.
Rejecting verification outright would call into question Kim's willingness to disarm in the long run - after all, the regime has a solid record of breaking its word on nukes, most notably the 1994 Geneva Agreed Framework. Overall, a solid verification regime is probably the proverbial "long pole in the tent" - the toughest test in getting from this week's first steps to the final goal of disarmament.
In the end, all US moves must support a verifiable process that ultimately uncovers all of Pyongyang's programs, neuters its nukes and puts an end to its problematic proliferation.
If we can at least get back to where we were in 2000, I would consider it a success, such that it would be.
Long way to go.
Long way to go.
the deal with north korea is a sham...this regime has proven that they cannot be trusted...
Last edited:
- Sep 27, 2005
- 1,171
- 14
- 0
What country leaves themselves defenseless? Any country that has nukes the US will not invade. Do you think that the US will someday get rid of it's nukes in the name of peace? Hitler tried to do collect all the weapons for a easy takeover. NK has got something, let's just hope America's not dumb enough to try something and found out.
You left out part of disfuntional family--having to pardon family members for sell drugs along with top 10 wanted criminals and terrorist-for cash
what about only pres to commit multiple felonies in office--disbarred-impeached--serial molester and liar:nono:
Yep didn't gradute from Yale but you bet your ass I was earning more than $35,000 slick earned before entering politics-
and speaking of disfunctional families- take both Obama and his wife with both their degrees from ivy league schools (duel incomes) renting and paying off credit card loans in their mid forties until book deals.
--apparently his own finances similiar to his views with tax payors money now--spend it now--worry about paying for it later.
Both families with law degrees from ivy league schools--both classic under achievers before entering the realms of grifters (politicians)
Bushed. man good thing he got this done before Obama had to do it. If Obama did it they would have called him a coward.
AR I will admitt I don't believe i will vote Obama. But for sure I will not vote for a 72 year old that sounds like Bush. I will vote because I don't want to waist my right. I have 5 months to see who everyoe takes for VP. I will say it looks like john is lucky were not voting in next week. It looks bad for him now.
Mc Cain takes Mitt and turns economy over to him and he gets my vote. WE need lots of help there. Bush has just about killed us.
virtually same deal Clinton made:scared
You have been out drinking with Smurph.
How is carrot same as stick?
How is enabling them to aquire nukes the same as disarming them?
How is unilateral negotiations the same bilateral?
The only thing that virtually the same road Billy Bob took --is Dems road they wanted to take vs Gw's past 8 years.
Hmm I must assume Matt if you liked Billy Bobs approach--you would love liberals back in office to try same method with Iran?
We'll pay you if you promise to be good :SIB
It's not that I necessarily liked Clintons deal. That's not even the point. And yes, it's the same deal. Bribe them to pretend to halt their program. As i've said, don't get so excited as I know I don't have to tell you that NK might not be the most trustworthy nation.
It's true that the one difference is that it's multi-lateral this time. With that and a token, you can get on the subway.
You talk about Clinton 'enabling' them to 'aquire nukes.'
You know what? It's not even close to proven that they have nukes. Experts disagree on whether that test was even a nuke and of course there is no proof whatsoever of anything else that they have. If it was a nuke that was tested, all experts agreed that it was so weak that it wouldn't affect anybody within a 3 foot radius.
But let's say it was and they do have a few others. (something which can't be assumed whatsoever-btw)
Tell me who, exactly, caused the nutty dictator to kick out the inspectors, remove the cameras and unseal and re-process the fuel rods. Hint-the answer is not Billy Bob. The nukes, if there are any, were produced under whose watch?
Also, tell me under whose watch they tested this supposed nuke.
Now, I really would like to hear about this 'stick' that you speak of.
No, the only 'stick' is the threat to take away the carrot. Nothing else and nothing different than before.
The party line is that they have 4 or 5 nukes. We gonna get our hands on those somehow? They probably don't exist, but I know you believe whatever this admin tells you, so let's say they do.
What happens with those?
It's been three days. Let's give it a little time to see how these inspections and the 'disarming' goes.
We did the best we could-again- with this deal, but it's the incredible hypocrisy that's annoying.
I know you probably have a picture of that cooling tower blowing up as your screen-saver, but I wouldn't get too far ahead of yourself.
Hopefully this works out perfectly and we get back to where we were with NK 8 years ago.
It wasn't, and never will be perfect with NK, but it was a hell of a lot better than it is now.
"
"No, the only 'stick' is the threat to take away the carrot. Nothing else and nothing different than before."
Really???
Lets make it simple--
The carrots--
Would you like to compare the aid clinton sent them vs aid GW has sent?
The Sticks
--and then compare sanctions GW put on them vs sanctions Clinton put on them?
I didn't think so--
"No, the only 'stick' is the threat to take away the carrot. Nothing else and nothing different than before."
Really???
Lets make it simple--
The carrots--
Would you like to compare the aid clinton sent them vs aid GW has sent?
The Sticks
--and then compare sanctions GW put on them vs sanctions Clinton put on them?
I didn't think so--
..........................................................
for a minute there I thought you were going to throw that 90% thing in on us again :scared
