| 10th October 2006 04:59 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Possible...
You make Joey EXCITED !!!!!
www.QWESTCENTER.com
|
| 10th October 2006 05:00 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
I have yet to order my Jones Beach show but I want it - BAD! |
| 10th October 2006 05:04 PM |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
Of course, the ultimate appeasement is ignoring the wacky little bugger for the past 6 years except for calling them names and then go back to playing in the sand. Blame Clinton all you want (again, very creepy obsession) but explain what your Dear Leader has done to prevent these guys from even being able to fake a nuke test? Anybody? |
| 10th October 2006 05:05 PM |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
Joey wrote:
 |
| 10th October 2006 05:07 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
" but I want it - BAD! "
|
| 10th October 2006 05:16 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
rasputin56 wrote:
Of course, the ultimate appeasement is ignoring the wacky little bugger for the past 6 years except for calling them names and then go back to playing in the sand. Blame Clinton all you want (again, very creepy obsession) but explain what your Dear Leader has done to prevent these guys from even being able to fake a nuke test? Anybody?
yeah...it's a creepy obsession..not history...but a creepy obsession...what W has done or has not done is a matter on record...much of what he has done is straight out of the mouths of prominent democrats (or at least it was before it became politically disadvantageous to agree with your president)...short of military action (which you and the other marxists would scream bloody murder) and cash payment (the Clinton plan), I would say all reasonable alternatives have been offered to Mr. Il...not just by us, but by many other nations as well
Now tell us...what is it that W should have or should now do?...let's get the parameters out there...and what are the dems now claiming he should have done?...and what do you think we should do?
[Edited by Fiji Joe] |
| 10th October 2006 05:22 PM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
GW- bring it on. |
| 10th October 2006 05:28 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
>?...and what do you think we should do?<
Take over the world. That way we wouldn't have to worry....as the Decider could decide everything.
|
| 10th October 2006 05:30 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
>?...and what do you think we should do?<
Take over the world. That way we wouldn't have to worry....as the Decider could decide everything.
No answer...nice job commie |
| 10th October 2006 05:31 PM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
The condemner, condemns all. |
| 10th October 2006 05:32 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
No answer...
What's yours? |
| 10th October 2006 05:33 PM |
|
|
| Dan |
Since Taiwan was already sold out, maybe we could trade Taiwan to China in exchange for North Korea? |
| 10th October 2006 05:34 PM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
quote:
Dan wrote:
Since Taiwan was already sold out, maybe we could trade Taiwan to China in exchange for North Korea?
older reference lost on younger posters. |
| 10th October 2006 05:34 PM |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
yeah...it's a creepy obsession..not history...but a creepy obsession...what W has done or has not done is a matter on record...much of what he has done is straight out of the mouths of prominent democrats (or at least it was before it became politically disadvantageous to agree with your president)...short of military action (which you and the other marxists would scream bloody murder) and cash payment (the Clinton plan), I would say all reasonable alternatives have been offered to Mr. Il...not just by us, but by many other nations as well
Now tell us...what is it that W should have or should now do?...let's get the parameters out there...and what are the dems now claiming he should have done?...and what do you think we should do?
[Edited by Fiji Joe]
Let's see, the Nazis get all excited over, well, just about everything Clinton did or didn't do without offering any ideas (now that would be funny) of what they would have done differently but when someone dares to even question their Dear Leader's lack of leadership...
I take that back, it seems he did make one diplomatic overture towards the N. Koreans. After ignoring them for 3 years he did give them an offer. Of course it was essentially identical to Clinton's (except this time, W. was going to appease him by offering fuel assistance in the guise of heavy fuel) but let's not let facts get in the way of good ol' creepy obsessive Clinton rant. |
| 10th October 2006 05:38 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
rasputin56 wrote:
Let's see, the Nazis get all excited over, well, just about everything Clinton did or didn't do without offering any ideas (now that would be funny) of what they would have done differently but when someone dares to even question their Dear Leader's lack of leadership...
I take that back, it seems he did make one diplomatic overture towards the N. Koreans. After ignoring them for 3 years he did give them an offer. Of course it was essentially identical to Clinton's (except this time, W. was going to appease him by offering fuel assistance in the guise of heavy fuel) but let's not let facts get in the way of good ol' creepy obsessive Clinton rant.
You're not all there today...you didn't answer a single question I asked...yet I answered all of yours...but you did manage to imply I'm a nazi...how very flea of you...
your intellectual inferiority has been shown...for all to see...thanks for playing...next!
[Edited by Fiji Joe] |
| 10th October 2006 05:39 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
>older reference lost on younger posters.<
Not if they've been doing their homework.
|
| 10th October 2006 05:39 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
Look, fish or cut piss, lets ignore our decision to ignore North Korea's newkuler bomb development for the last 6 years and go back to ignoring Iran's development. That one is way more fun to ignore, we can all agree on that. |
| 10th October 2006 05:42 PM |
|
|
| Some Guy |
I played Tattoo You in its entirety as I was stuck in traffic today, them cats rock! |
| 10th October 2006 05:43 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
Look, fish or cut piss, lets ignore our decision to ignore North Korea's newkuler bomb development for the last 6 years and go back to ignoring Iran's development. That one is way more fun to ignore, we can all agree on that.
I don't think it was ignored..and neither do you...careful, lest I prove that the tact taken was democrat approved ...the question is...what are you hankering for?...you wanna fight them?...well then why the hell do you expect our boys to fight them if you can't even bring yourself to utter the words?...goddamn warmongerers! |
| 10th October 2006 05:44 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
What's yours?
I gave it already...pay attention |
| 10th October 2006 05:58 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
I don't know the answer but it might be a good first step to actually listen to the people who actually know something about this shit.
_________________________________________________________
October 7, 2006
Bush's DPRK Follies
by Gordon Prather
Everyone now knows that the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Bush ordered prepared in the summer of 2002 to "justify" the preemptive invasion and occupation of Iraq was to put it politely a crock [pdf]. It relied heavily on disinformation some of it provided by the neocrazies, themselves and virtually ignored a decade of authoritative "null" reports on Iraqi nuclear programs by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Back in 1998 IAEA Director-General ElBaradei had told the Security Council [.pdf] that
"There were no indications to suggest that Iraq had produced more than a few grams of weapons-grade nuclear material through its indigenous processes.
"There were no indications that Iraq otherwise clandestinely acquired weapons-usable material.
"There were no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable nuclear material of any practical significance."
Furthermore, ElBaradei had reported to the Security Council as recently as January of 2002, that IAEA inspectors had entered Iraq and had verified that there had been no attempts at reconstruction.
But not everyone knew, until Sy Hersh revealed it in a January 2003 New Yorker article, that a few months before producing the fatally flawed Iraq NIE, the intelligence community had also hurriedly produced for Bush a NIE on North Korea's nuclear programs.
Why?
In 1992, a dispute had arisen between the Koreans and the IAEA, which was attempting to verify that the DPRK had accurately declared and made subject to a just negotiated Safeguards Agreement (required of DPRK by the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) all NPT proscribed materials.
The IAEA threatened to involve the UN Security Council in the dispute, whereupon the DPRK gave notice it was withdrawing from the NPT.
Eventually, after many carrot-stick negotiations, the DPRK agreed under the so-called Agreed Framework [.pdf] to remain a NPT signatory and to freeze all its nuclear programs, subject to IAEA verification. In return, an international consortium led by South Korea would construct in the DPRK two free conventional nuclear power plants.
So, as Bush entered office, according to the IAEA, there were no nuclear programs peaceful or otherwise underway in Iraq or North Korea.
Well, that would never do. Bush intended to invade Iraq and disarm Saddam Hussein. The IAEA had to be discredited.
Hence, the Bush NIE of 2002 for Iraq. And for North Korea.
According to Hersh, North Koreas NIE "made the case" that they had violated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by obtaining unbeknownst to the IAEA prototypes of high-speed gas centrifuges from Pakistan and that by 2001, DPRK engineers were producing unbeknownst to the IAEA enriched uranium in significant quantities.
To this day, DPRK officials have vigorously denied the enriched-uranium charge, even after withdrawing from the NPT on the eve of Bushs war of aggression against Iraq, after expelling the IAEA monitors of the Agreed Framework, after restarting their plutonium-producing reactor and after recovering enough weapons-grade plutonium to make a dozen or so nuclear weapons.
And no one has provided any evidence to the contrary.
In 2004, Siegfried Hecker former director of Los Alamos National Laboratory was invited to come check out their "nuclear deterrent." They proudly showed Sig all their plutonium stuff. But when Sig asked to see the alleged highly enriched-uranium program, Vice Minister Kim Gye Gwan immediately responded that the DPRK had no HEU program; nor any facilities, equipment or scientists dedicated to it.
So, why did Bushs DPRK-NIE of 2002 make the HEU charge? To further discredit the IAEA so Bush could preemptively attack Iraq which the IAEA had given a "clean bill of health" in 2003? So Bush could preemptively attack Iran which the IAEA has given a "clean bill of health" in 2006?
But, wait a minute.
The Bush DPRK-NIE also alleged Pakistan helped North Korea conduct a series of "cold tests" explosive tests, using non-fissile materials, necessary for determining whether an implosion device design functions properly.
Now, all of the devices that Pakistan claimed to have successfully tested in 1998 were implosion nukes, some reportedly utilizing almost-pure Plutonium-239.
There is no evidence that the DPRK ever had or sought weapons-grade enriched uranium. But at the time of the Bush DPRK-NIE, the DPRK was known to have enough weapons-grade plutonium to make several implosion-type nukes. All of it contained in spent fuel elements "frozen" under IAEA lock and seal.
Bottom line?
When Bush became President, Iran, Iraq and North Korea were all certified by the IAEA to be nuke free. Iran and Iraq still are. But, thanks to Bush, the North Koreans are threatening to actually test one of the nukes everyone including the IAEA agrees they probably now have.
|
| 10th October 2006 05:59 PM |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
I don't think it was ignored..and neither do you...careful, lest I prove that the tact taken was democrat approved ...the question is...what are you hankering for?...you wanna fight them?...well then why the hell do you expect our boys to fight them if you can't even bring yourself to utter the words?...goddamn warmongerers!
I think they have both been ignored (and so do you), and could care less whether the Democrats agreed with George Walker Bush III's ignoreasment policy or not.
Lets bomb them. Those facilities take years to construct, as we know from watching them do it. Lets bomb them. |
| 10th October 2006 06:06 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
I think they have both been ignored (and so do you), and could care less whether the Democrats agreed with George Walker Bush III's ignoreasment policy or not.
Lets bomb them. Those facilities take years to construct, as we know from watching them do it. Lets bomb them.
Well...if by ignoring them you mean failing to take military action...agreed...he has done what all those people you claim are smarter than him have themselves advocated...but you have broken ranks with your deniac compatriots who would rather say that W should have bombed them, and then jump his ass if he does and say he should have tried diplomacy...but let's face it...you love to bash W...but seriously...name me another viable candidate that is more likely to implement "our plan" than he is...he's our best bet...ain't no Trumans in the wings
[Edited by Fiji Joe] |
| 10th October 2006 06:07 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
" ...ain't no Trumans in the wings "
|
| 10th October 2006 06:10 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
But I think you fail to give credit to the clandestine pressure W is putting on Japan to militarize...you know this is happening...just look at what they're discussing in that country...a total re-writing of their constitution...I would assist both them and India in militarizing at a rate as equally fast as China...which I believe W has laid the groundwork for with some of his policies...he just, for obvious reason, ain't boasting about it...but it is something that is past due
|
| 10th October 2006 06:58 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html
The two faces of Rumsfeld
2000: director of a company which wins $200m contract to sell nuclear reactors to North Korea
2002: declares North Korea a terrorist state, part of the axis of evil and a target for regime change
Randeep Ramesh
Friday May 9, 2003
The Guardian
Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea - a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts to build nuclear weapons.
Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering giant based in Zurich, when it won a $200m (£125m) contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors. The current defence secretary sat on the board from 1990 to 2001, earning $190,000 a year. He left to join the Bush administration.
The reactor deal was part of President Bill Clinton's policy of persuading the North Korean regime to positively engage with the west.
The sale of the nuclear technology was a high-profile contract. ABB's then chief executive, Goran Lindahl, visited North Korea in November 1999 to announce ABB's "wide-ranging, long-term cooperation agreement" with the communist government.
The company also opened an office in the country's capital, Pyongyang, and the deal was signed a year later in 2000. Despite this, Mr Rumsfeld's office said that the de fence secretary did not "recall it being brought before the board at any time".
In a statement to the American magazine Newsweek, his spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said that there "was no vote on this". A spokesman for ABB told the Guardian yesterday that "board members were informed about the project which would deliver systems and equipment for light water reactors".
Just months after Mr Rumsfeld took office, President George Bush ended the policy of engagement and negotiation pursued by Mr Clinton, saying he did not trust North Korea, and pulled the plug on diplomacy. Pyongyang warned that it would respond by building nuclear missiles. A review of American policy was announced and the bilateral confidence building steps, key to Mr Clinton's policy of detente, halted.
By January 2002, the Bush administration had placed North Korea in the "axis of evil" alongside Iraq and Iran. If there was any doubt about how the White House felt about North Korea this was dispelled by Mr Bush, who told the Washington Post last year: "I loathe [North Korea's leader] Kim Jong-il."
The success of campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq have enhanced the status of Mr Rumsfeld in Washington. Two years after leaving ABB, Mr Rumsfeld now considers North Korea a "terrorist regime _ teetering on the verge of collapse" and which is on the verge of becoming a proliferator of nuclear weapons. During a bout of diplomatic activity over Christmas he warned that the US could fight two wars at once - a reference to the forthcoming conflict with Iraq. After Baghdad fell, Mr Rumsfeld said Pyongyang should draw the "appropriate lesson".
Critics of the administration's bellicose language on North Korea say that the problem was not that Mr Rumsfeld supported the Clinton-inspired diplomacy and the ABB deal but that he did not "speak up against it". "One could draw the conclusion that economic and personal interests took precedent over non-proliferation," said Steve LaMontagne, an analyst with the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington.
Many members of the Bush administration are on record as opposing Mr Clinton's plans, saying that weapons-grade nuclear material could be extracted from the type of light water reactors that ABB sold. Mr Rumsfeld's deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, and the state department's number two diplomat, Richard Armitage, both opposed the deal as did the Republican presidential candidate, Bob Dole, whose campaign Mr Rumsfeld ran and where he also acted as defence adviser.
One unnamed ABB board director told Fortune magazine that Mr Rumsfeld was involved in lobbying his hawkish friends on behalf of ABB.
The Clinton package sought to defuse tensions on the Ko rean peninsula by offering supplies of oil and new light water nuclear reactors in return for access by inspectors to Pyongyang's atomic facilities and a dismantling of its heavy water reactors which produce weapons grade plutonium. Light water reactors are known as "proliferation-resistant" but, in the words of one expert, they are not "proliferation-proof".
The type of reactors involved in the ABB deal produce plutonium which needs refining before it can be weaponised. One US congressman and critic of the North Korean regime described the reactors as "nuclear bomb factories".
North Korea expelled the inspectors last year and withdrew from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in January at about the same time that the Bush administration authorised $3.5m to keep ABB's reactor project going.
North Korea is thought to have offered to scrap its nuclear facilities and missile pro gramme and to allow international nuclear inspectors into the country. But Pyongyang demanded that security guarantees and aid from the US must come first.
Mr Bush now insists that he will only negotiate a new deal with Pyongyang after the nuclear programme is scrapped. Washington believes that offering inducements would reward Pyongyang's "blackmail" and encourage other "rogue" states to develop weapons of mass destruction.
|
| 10th October 2006 07:08 PM |
|
|
| mojoman |
the chinese would love it if we bombed north korea. maybe we should get japan to do it or even isreal everyone hates them already. what about the huge army the north has? what if they do something rash? if china is a player them let them deal with it its their backyard. if they won't prod the north we could put a fifty percent tariff on all goods made in china. |
| 10th October 2006 07:16 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
Check out this vidio that Hollywood producer David Zucker made about NK,and the Clintoon/Madeline Notsobright affair! Good stuff.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashma.htm
Riffy |
| 10th October 2006 07:19 PM |
|
|
| monkey_man |
Me thinks the next military engagement is about to begin. . . and it's not going to be North Korea. Are you listening Iran?
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,116005,00.html?ESRC=navynews.RSS
|
| 10th October 2006 07:25 PM |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
monkey_man wrote:
Me thinks the next military engagement is about to begin. . . and it's not going to be North Korea. Are you listening Iran?
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,116005,00.html?ESRC=navynews.RSS
Two months ago the US conducted the largest naval operations since WWII
in the Pacific
In addition, Bush months ago transferred 6 additional submarines with 900
"Deep Strike" cruise missles off the coast of NK
They are sitting there now and have been for some time
|
