To say NK is simple rearming as a response to America worldwide actions is mindless. NK has been arming itself for years, way before Bush’s time. Clinton tried to buy them off in the 90’s with black mail money an aid package but that only worked for a while. As I stated before we should pressure China, NK’s true master and NK is only a threat to SK. I just had to respond to this idea that NK had simple started to rearm due to Bush’s actions, another wonderful quote from the America bad everyone else good club.
Terry
Posts by jelly
-
44How would you tackle the North Korean problem?
by JH inif you were the president of the us, would you confront north korea or would you try to make a deal with them to reduce tensions.. north korea warns us: we can produce six atom bombsby rupert cornwell in washington.
16 july 2003 .
the crisis over north korea's nuclear weapons programme deepened yesterday as the north claimed it had made enough plutonium for six atomic bombs, and a former us defence secretary warned that the two countries could be at war by the end of the year.. the latest claim from pyongyang was communicated to the bush administration last week, three months after north korea said it was beginning to reprocess 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods that were under united nations seal until the un inspectors were ejected from the country at the end of 2002.. us intelligence agencies are now trying to determine whether the boast is true or merely another bluff by the reclusive stalinist regime.. either way, the declaration has pushed the us president a step nearer deciding whether to accede to north korea's demand for direct negotiations - and thus drop his previous insistence that he would never bow to "nuclear blackmail" - or to accelerate plans for a military strike against the north's nuclear installations.. that spectre was raised yesterday by william perry, defence secretary under president clinton, when he told the washington post that the bush administration was "losing control" of the situation.. mr perry is a specialist on korea who helped prepare the military action which mr clinton came close to launching against yongbyon and other key north korean sites in 1994. he now fears that the north is not only close to a nuclear test to show the world it is a nuclear power, but also that it could sell a weapon to a terrorist group for use against the us.. "the nuclear programme now under way in north korea poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in american cities," mr perry said, adding that he had reached that conclusion after talks with bush officials in washington, and with senior figures in china and south korea.. china, reckoned to have the greatest leverage over of kim jong il's renegade state, launched a new effort this week to draw the north into regional talks to defuse the crisis, but mr perry told the washington post that as far as he could see, the "diplomatic track is inconsequential" and going nowhere.. the korean crisis has been largely ignored as washington has focused almost exclusively on iraq.
-
-
jelly
-
44
How would you tackle the North Korean problem?
by JH inif you were the president of the us, would you confront north korea or would you try to make a deal with them to reduce tensions.. north korea warns us: we can produce six atom bombsby rupert cornwell in washington.
16 july 2003 .
the crisis over north korea's nuclear weapons programme deepened yesterday as the north claimed it had made enough plutonium for six atomic bombs, and a former us defence secretary warned that the two countries could be at war by the end of the year.. the latest claim from pyongyang was communicated to the bush administration last week, three months after north korea said it was beginning to reprocess 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods that were under united nations seal until the un inspectors were ejected from the country at the end of 2002.. us intelligence agencies are now trying to determine whether the boast is true or merely another bluff by the reclusive stalinist regime.. either way, the declaration has pushed the us president a step nearer deciding whether to accede to north korea's demand for direct negotiations - and thus drop his previous insistence that he would never bow to "nuclear blackmail" - or to accelerate plans for a military strike against the north's nuclear installations.. that spectre was raised yesterday by william perry, defence secretary under president clinton, when he told the washington post that the bush administration was "losing control" of the situation.. mr perry is a specialist on korea who helped prepare the military action which mr clinton came close to launching against yongbyon and other key north korean sites in 1994. he now fears that the north is not only close to a nuclear test to show the world it is a nuclear power, but also that it could sell a weapon to a terrorist group for use against the us.. "the nuclear programme now under way in north korea poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in american cities," mr perry said, adding that he had reached that conclusion after talks with bush officials in washington, and with senior figures in china and south korea.. china, reckoned to have the greatest leverage over of kim jong il's renegade state, launched a new effort this week to draw the north into regional talks to defuse the crisis, but mr perry told the washington post that as far as he could see, the "diplomatic track is inconsequential" and going nowhere.. the korean crisis has been largely ignored as washington has focused almost exclusively on iraq.
-
-
jelly
It is really a two-fold problem. The first issue is the fear that NK may produce nukes to give them to terrorist to ship and then detonate here. As far as giving nukes to terrorist organizations, this could eventually be a real threat, America is going to have to figure out some way to guard against this, through 100% container checks or whatever it takes, we need to solve this before it becomes a legitimate problem. We might be able to stop new countries from developing nukes but we will never be able to stop countries from making WMD. Chemical weapons are produced almost exactly like farming pesticides, and Biological weapons can be produced in a small lab with dual use technology. Basically, the key is to develop a defense now. Back to NK, the key to controlling NK and their nuke program is China. China owns these guys and China does not want a bunch of nukes floating around anymore than we do, remember we buy the stuff they make. Lean on China through economic means, the pressure will flow into NK.
The second problem is NK expansionism. This really isn’t as big as a problem as some might think. The only country threatened by NK is SK. They will not attack China, and China will not let them attack Taiwan; they are saving that apple for themselves. The minute NK begins to show expansionist tendencies Japan will have more nukes than you can shake a stick at; even that crazy NK dictator does not want a piece of that. I think American troops should phase out of SK though for two reasons. One, many SKs don’t seem to want us their and two, SK economy is 26 times the size of NK. SK can and should defend itself.
Terry -
44
Who has the best chance of defeating Bush in '04?
by badwillie ini will be backing former vermont gov howard dean to run in '04.
my reason: clinton was quoted recently as saying that "strong and wrong always beats weak and right".
i remember during the run up to election in 2000 watching the bush vs. gore debates and thinking..i know gore is smarter but he comes across as weaker in debate.
-
-
jelly
The idiots on the left have for the last 50 years attempted to show most republican leaders as poorly educated, unwise men. In my life time they did it to Bush Jr., Regan, Ford, and historically they also did it to Lincoln. A higher SAT score (which is used for a measure of an individual’s knowledge base in this country) is indicative that Bush is at least as smart as Gore if not smarter. My point was not murky you just chose not to see it; simply saying Bush is stupid is a childlike argument at best.
Terry -
44
Who has the best chance of defeating Bush in '04?
by badwillie ini will be backing former vermont gov howard dean to run in '04.
my reason: clinton was quoted recently as saying that "strong and wrong always beats weak and right".
i remember during the run up to election in 2000 watching the bush vs. gore debates and thinking..i know gore is smarter but he comes across as weaker in debate.
-
-
jelly
Lieberman (sp?) is the only dem with a snowballs chance in hell. Of course I doubt he will get the nomination because he is considered to centrist by the party core; he was booed out here in the peoples republic of California by the Dems. Of course by 2004 California will probably be in a state of complete anarchy. Thank you gray davis you worthless pile of cat dung; 20 billion surplus to 30 billion in the red, thats got to be a record.
BTW, Bush's SAT scores where higher than Gores. Just for all you that believe the hype that bush is dumb.
Terry
-
11
Do you really think ? EARTH could be blown up ??? is there enough bombs ???
by run dont walk ini remember reading many watchtower/awake magazines that stated "there is enough bombs on this planet to blow it up 7 times over.
" (wish i had copies of the quotes/and pictures).. and after watching the scenes in terminator 3 of the earth being desolated by machines.. and after watching the war in afghanistan and iraq and seeing how many bombs the us used in these "small countries" with unreal precision.
i really doubt if it possible to destroy the whole planet, even if they wanted to.
-
-
jelly
If there was a world wide massive exchange of nukes between all players most probably every human in the northern hemisphere would be dead, dying or sitting in a shelter waiting to starve to death. Its possible some people might survive in areas that are not targeted, like the amazon or places in africa. But of course the global climate changes mean these people would need to quickly adapted to a new life style. It would basically be like 6000 BC all over again.
Terry
-
145
So, what REALLY happened on September 11, a.k.a. the unknowns...???
by reporter init's getting on to almost two years since the events of september 11, and it is striking how little we know about what happened: .
we don't know the real names of any of the hijackers.. we don't know what countries they came from.. we don't know who planned and organized the terrorism.. we don't know who financed it.. we have no idea what actually happened at the pentagon (but i know a boeing 757 didn't go through this hole).
normal video tapes of and from the pentagon building, which should have shown what happened, have never been released (except for one, which poses more questions than it answers).
-
-
jelly
Honestly, I have been around this board in one form or another since the beginning. I can tell you at this point this board is the worst it has ever been. If this DBS sucked anymore, we would have to make up a new word for its suck like qualities. The phrase completely sucks just does not cover the depth this board has sunk.
- Mindless innuendo
- Cut and paste from idiot sources
- 95% of the decent posters with something to say an the ability to argue it gone
Terry -
10
The Sun never sets on the American Empire !
by Amazing intalking with critics recently revealed a concern of theirs that if the usa is going to go after saddam because he is a bad guy ... then, they ask: "what about the rest of the world?
" ... mmmm ... well ... yes ... what about the rest of the world?.
to date, america has removed noriega of panama, tried to kill castro of cuba, assisted with the removal of marcos, former president and dictator for life of the philipines, took back grenada, beat the crap out of qadaffy of lybia, removed the taliban from afghanistan, and then removed saddam hussein of iraq from power ... in the past we helped remove hitler, mussilini, and a few other crumudgeons.
-
-
jelly
Here is what most foreigners just do not seem to get. A sizeable portion of the American people would love to pull our troops out of everywhere, except the countries we are currently engaged in (Iraq, Afghanistan). This same sizeable portion of the American population would love to cut all aid to all these little dictators throughout the world. The only reason we have troops all these places, and give money to all these dictators is we are attempting to keep the world somewhat stable. The vast majority of Americans have no desire for an empire or any of the other crap that people accuse us of doing.
I for one think we should pull out of everything, UN, NATO, everything. Let france and germany solve the worlds problems. The entertainment value of their actions should prove to be priceless.
BTW, the soviet union did not fall without a bullet, Korea, Viet Nam, Afghanistan just to name a few. The two major players never fought directly but the Soviet Union did not fall with out fighting. South Africa is a good point, I have always felt than when economic pressure can be used instead of bullets it should be. I am a bit surprised to hear someone from Europe make this claim however, since you guys screamed non-stop about how cruel our economic sanctions were against Iraq.
Terry -
65
Man gets life in prison for spitting
by happyout inman gets life in prison for spitting
wednesday, july 2, 2003 posted: 3:16 pm edt (1916 gmt).
story tools
-
-
jelly
The punishment is definitely incongruent with the crime. I am seeing more and more stupid sentences like this; usually the reason is a flawed three-strike law or mandatory minimums. Both, good in principle but often lack a sense of justice in their execution. Oh, and for some of our foreign friends that may be confused, the jury only determines guilt, the judge sets the sentence.
Terry -
35
Voting Bush out
by Jayson inwhat is the best campaign stratagy to win against him?
be serious this is to win the minds of american voters not to polerize them against you.
otherwise it's a plug for him.. i think that the one real weakness is unemployment in america.
-
-
jelly
Lieberman (sp?) is the closest the democrats have towards a legitimate candidate. However, I think Lieberman’s centrist ideas and support for the Iraq war will prevent him from gaining the nomination. I remember a few months ago he was booed by Democrats out her in California. If no WMD’s are found by the election, it will still be a non-issue. With all the mass graves and such being found in Iraq most Americans see Hussein himself as a weapon of mass destruction. Most, Americans are glad he is gone. Even if the economy tanks and unemployment is high if the Democrats do not begin to come up with some ideas it will not matter, for them the next election will be just like the last.
Terry -
13
Walk Away or Fight?
by Bendrr ini've posted in the past about some tension with some coworkers.
i'm sure some of it is my fault.
i've got a quick temper and the stress at work really brings it out in me.
-
-
jelly
First you did the right thing, not fighting. Second you manager is an idiot and should be fired immediatly for letting this situation occur. Terry