North Korea nuke thread

[I think not]

If Bush had shut his "avis-of-evil" mouth and not invaded another country as a recreational activity, not thrown out every nuclear agreement ever signed, not tossed aside the Geneva Convention on a "technicality", and not acted like a one-man nut in a Gunsmoke episode then perhaps the rest of world wouldn't be scrambling to arm themselves.

Oh yes, the "It's Bush's fault" complex. I'll remind you NK was sabre rattling they would develop nuclear weapons when Clinton was President. Clinton agreed to provide oil (FOR FREE) to NK and in return they would stop nuclear development.

So let's leave Bush out of this one, for a change. NK is a mini Soviet Union, they only difference is, they don't have any resources.

 

[Kreskin]

Oh yes, the "It's Bush's fault" complex. I'll remind you NK was sabre rattling they would develop nuclear weapons when Clinton was President. Clinton agreed to provide oil (FOR FREE) to NK and in return they would stop nuclear development.

So let's leave Bush out of this one, for a change. NK is a mini Soviet Union, they only difference is, they don't have any resources.

I forgot, it's always Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter who are at fault.

 

[Johnny Utah]

North Korea is where it's at today because the Clinton Administration treated North Korea the same way they treated the rise of Islamic Terrorism as nothing that serious. This is another mess President Bush was left to clean up..

 

[I think not]

I forgot, it's always Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter who are at fault.

I didn't say Clinton was at fault, I said NK has been rattling since then, which would mean Bush's reference to the "axis of evil" doesn't wash.

 

[Kreskin]

When does Bush become accountable for anything? The boy has been in office now for 6 years.

 

[#juan]

Maybe the North Koreans remember the two million North Korean civilians who were killed by U.S. bombs, and they want a deterrent to see that it doesn't happen again. Bush tore up 98 percent of the arms treaties, said he would build more nuclear weapons, and threatened to use nukes, now North Korea is villified by the US, and the rest of the nuclear club for building a bomb. Maybe it would be a good idea to keep G.W. Chimpanzee on a leash.

 

[feronia]

Jim wrote: The real threat is that North Korea has the chance in these modern times to sell
to well-financed individuals, or to non-nation-state groups.

Bingo and the chances of some Extremist Group getting their hands on a nuck is no joke, if there were justice this man would fall ill with Radiation Poisoning. He'd use it on his own people if he had to, he's crazy period.

I totally agree here. These people aren't stupid just greedy. (Off topic) Does anyone know how long Bush is in office for, I need a countdown? It would be nice to have something to look forward too.

 

[Johnny Utah]

North Korea isn't alone in this as China holds their leash because if a move was made without China's okay China could cut them off. China is playing both sides and can't be trusted as much if not more than North Korea..

 

[feronia]

Well isn't that the whole thing about borders nobody can trust nobody so we're all running around paranoid wondering who's going to push the button first?

 

[Colpy]

If Bush had shut his "avis-of-evil" mouth and not invaded another country as a recreational activity, not thrown out every nuclear agreement ever signed, not tossed aside the Geneva Convention on a "technicality", and not acted like a one-man nut in a Gunsmoke episode then perhaps the rest of world wouldn't be scrambling to arm themselves.

This is disingenuous in the extreme. CLINTON was trying to prevent Korea building nuclear arms with bribery, a tactic which had no effect whatsoever.

BUSH had absolutely NOTHING to do with North Korea's nuclear ambitions, or the realization of same.

It really amazes me how some folks here are so consumed with Bush-hate that they will ignore any fact, accept any stretch of reality, to blame Bush for every ill on earth. It is like a psychosis.

Seek help.

 

[Johnny Utah]

This is disingenuous in the extreme. CLINTON was trying to prevent Korea building nuclear arms with bribery, a tactic which had no effect whatsoever.

BUSH had absolutely NOTHING to do with North Korea's nuclear ambitions, or the realization of same.

It really amazes me how some folks here are so consumed with Bush-hate that they will ignore any fact, accept any stretch of reality, to blame Bush for every ill on earth. It is like a psychosis.

Seek help.

What they would do if they didn't have Bush to blame?

 

[feronia]

There's plenty to legitimately blame Mr. Bush for believe me. We're just on a roll.

 

[jimmoyer]

Everyone is focused on if North Korea can deliver a nuclear punch.

Obviously that is NOT the threat.



The real threat is that North Korea has the chance in these modern times to sell
to well-financed individuals, or to non-nation-state groups.

The real threat was that North Korea is using this knowledge as an export product, recently
involved with Pakistan's nuclear godfather and with Libya (which got discovered) and Iran.

That's the threat.

And the additional threat is further nuclear proliferation, something where liberals used
to agree with conservatives. In fact liberals used to lead the vanguard on the matter.

Why is nuclear proliferation bad ?

This question never had to be asked in the old days.

But today you gotta go through the mechanics of it: one matter being that the more nations
and more particularly if individuals have the more chance for Murphy's Law to kick in sooner.

Let everyone have it.

Don't draw the line.

 

[MattUK]

Whilst I dont think that we can blame Bush for everything here - I do think he is a large problem on the world scene today.

He has no time for anyone outside of his own country, and his foreign policy does not taste all that sweet to people in other countries. I do think that he goes about a lot of things the wrong way, but that does not mean that everything is his fault.

He also has hoardes of advisors for just about everything, do they have any accountability in this conversation?

I dont think he is good for the world at all. That does not mean that I will sit here and blame everything on him. Tony Blair is as much to blame for the lying and deceit over Iraq, his foreign policy is becoming more Bush like all the time.

I do think that if we keep trying to supress the rest of the world by might and force, we will get our payback.

 

[feronia]

I don't know much about nuclear weapons but I'm a fair judge of character and all the characters in play scare the daylights out of me without big toys let alone with them.

 

[jimmoyer]

It's not Bush. It's not Tony Blair.

It's not the fashionable du jour Anglo white leader monster of the moment.

The real threat is how the world focuses on Bush and Blair
and not on the guys proliferating nuclear weapon know how ---- especially selling
it to individuals rather than nation-states.

That's a lot more scarier than the fashionable zeitgeist of hate Bush Amerika.

What a convenient excuse for rushing on doomsday, eh ?

Great cover to hide behind.

 

[Curiosity]

JimMoyer

It gets worse ever year - Canadians have come to this.

I find it humbling and very sad. I am inclined to believe they would prefer Kim have his way and throw the U.S. into
yet another conflict and more chaos.

 

[feronia]

It's not Bush. It's not Tony Blair.

It's not the fashionable du jour Anglo white leader monster of the moment.

The real threat is how the world focuses on Bush and Blair
and not on the guys proliferating nuclear weapon know how ---- especially selling
it to individuals rather than nation-states.

That's a lot more scarier than the fashionable zeitgeist of hate Bush Amerika.

What a convenient excuse for rushing on doomsday, eh ?

Great cover to hide behind.

I am sorry but people have a reason to not be happy with that man. I'll agree that the world is hyper focused on the wrong priorities but that man's ignorance is just plain dangerous.

 

[MikeyDB]

I'm not sure I understand that last contribution Curiosity maybe you could expand/clarify what you're getting at....?

When the United States gave/sold Sdaddam Hussein Sarin and other chemical weapons to kill Iranians, was that what you're talking about?

When people remark that the only people to have used nuclear weapons is the United States and that these same people still have enough nuclear fire to scorch this planet bare of life....is that what you're talking about....?

When everything from huge artillery pieces to suitcase nukes are available to anyone with enough money from American or Russian or Chinese arms dealers and Kim the psychopath grows his own....is that what you're talking about...?

 

[MattUK]

The thing here is that we all seem to be assuming that Kim will sell these Nukes. Who says thats what he is going to do?

Bin Laden has the money to develop these weapons if he wants, who says he is not already?