December 24, 2002

North Korea Warns the U.S. to Negotiate or Risk 'Catastrophe'

By HOWARD W. FRENCH


SEOUL, South Korea, Dec. 24 "” North Korea warned today of an "uncontrollable catastrophe" unless the United States agrees to a negotiated solution to a standoff over its nuclear energy and weapons programs.

The statement came as a stiff preemptive rebuff to a conciliation-minded, newly-elected president in South Korea, and a warning to other countries that their efforts to mediate the crisis will be futile.

"There is no need for any third party to meddle in the nuclear issue on the peninsula," said North Korea's ruling-party newspaper, the Rodong Sinmun.

Using the initials for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, North Korea's official name, the newspaper continued: "The issue should be settled between the D.P.R.K. and the U.S., the parties responsible for it. If the U.S. persistently tries to internationalize the pending issue between the D.P.R.K. and the U.S. in a bid to flee from its responsibility, it will push the situation to an uncontrollable catastrophe."

Going even further, the North Korean defense minister, Kim Il Chol, warned of "merciless punishment" to the United States if it pursues a confrontational approach. "The U.S. hawks are arrogant enough to groundlessly claim that North Korea has pushed ahead with a `nuclear program,' bringing its hostile policy toward the D.P.R.K. to an extremely dangerous phase," the state-run Korean Central News Agency quoted Mr. Kim as saying.

Some analysts here saw the defense minister's statement as a defiant response to comments by his American counterpart, Donald H. Rumsfeld, who said on Monday that the United States had enough military power in reserve to prevail over North Korea in the event a conflict with the country should occur in the midst of a war with Iraq.

"We're capable of winning decisively in one and swiftly defeating in the case of the other, and let there be no doubt about it," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

The North's comments come as Pyongyang accelerates its takeover of nuclear fuel and reactors that were placed under international surveillance under a 1994 agreement with the United States following a crisis remarkably similar to the current one.

Today, South Korean officials said that North Korea had begun taking steps to reactivate a 5-megawat nuclear reactor that had been mothballed under the eight-year-old agreement, the so-called Agreed Framework. North Korea completed the removal of the last International Atomic Energy Agency seals and disabling surveillance cameras at a fuel fabrication plant in Yongbyon, South Korean officials said Tuesday.

The facility is technically known as a research reactor, but all along, Western arms control experts have said that its true purpose of the plant is to produce plutonium for the country's nuclear weapons program.

"There are varying estimates on how long it would take them to reprocess the spent fuel, but they probably have plans to do it a lot faster than outsiders imagine "” and will do so if their equipment works," said an American official who has studied North Korea's nuclear programs for years. "Here are a few of the ugly signposts we might whiz pass: asking the inspectors to leave, starting up the reprocessing line, finalizing their withdrawal from the Nonproliferation Treaty, and declaring themselves a nuclear power "” with a "Korean bomb" intended to protect the whole of the Korean people by keeping the Americans from starting a war."

Reflecting the sharp increase in distrust between the United States and South Korea amid a series of major demonstrations against the presence of 37,000 American troops in the country, the official added, "this will cause some secret shivers of pride amongst some in the South."

Both South Korea's outgoing president, Kim Dae Jung, and the man who will succeed him in February, Roh Moo Hyun, spent most of the day struggling to contain the crisis with North Korea, which threatens to nullify the engagement policies embraced by both men.

"South Korea, the United States, Japan, China, Russia and the European Union are all strongly calling on North Korea to abandon the nuclear program, but the North is not listening now," Mr. Kim said during a cabinet meeting. Amid concerns over tensions between Washington and Seoul, Mr. Kim appeared to draw closer to the American position on North, saying there could be no major cooperation between the two countries unless Pyongyang agreed to international controls on its weapons of mass destruction. "We can never join hands in the development of nuclear weapons, missiles and other weapons," Mr. Kim said.

The incoming president, Mr. Roh, meanwhile, spent much of the day meeting with ambassadors of countries that have been involved in the region's crisis. "The president-elect requested cooperation from those concerned countries to help resolve the North's nuclear issue peacefully," said Mr. Roh's spokesman, Lee Nak-hyun.

Mr. Roh also spoke by telephone to the Japanese prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi. The two leaders "agreed to continue close cooperation among Japan, the United States and South Korea to bring about a peaceful solution to nuclear and other security issues regarding North Korea," the ministry said in a statement.

Recently, China, which has been North Korea's closest allies since the two countries fought the United States during the Korean War from 1950 to 1953, has also expressed concern over the country's reported pursuit of nuclear weapons, and today urged Washington and Pyongyang to negotiate a solution of the crisis that would leave the Korean peninsula free from nuclear weapons.

"We hope relevant sides can proceed in the overall interest of safeguarding peace and stability on the peninsula and reach a resolution to the issue through dialogue," the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in a statement.



Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy

Now is the time to make real the promises of Democracy.

© MBM

Original Post
And the response of the US forces and the South Korea people..........
ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZZzzz!!!!!!
This coming from an idiot who a few years ago admitted that unless they could get to Pusan in 7 days the war would be lost. Roll Eyes
If those of you in the US can not see that the language and exuberance of your leaders is pushing the world to catastrophe then you really live in cloud cuckoo land. All the USA is doing is pushing everyone to acquire nukes as quickly as possible so they do not get bullied by this evil leaders you have at the moment. To say "North Korea: Begging For An Ass Wuppin" is a definite lack of knowledge of what is going on in the world at large.

Remember no one likes bullies and the whole world sees the USA as a bully at the moment. This creates enemies and if these enemies possess the knowledge for making nukes what stops them from giving them to terrorists to terrorise you in the US. Think man
quote:
Originally posted by henry38:

To say "North Korea: Begging For An Ass Wuppin" is a definite lack of knowledge of what is going on in the world at large.



Thanks for the post. The headline was intended to be 'tongue in cheek'. Most of our members will know that I am not generally so cavalier or unilateral about such matters. Further, I certainly understand our role in initiating tension throughout the world.

That said, if North Korea does get belligerent with us, our international reputation aside, I think it's fairly clear that the U.S responds with full guns blazing! And we won't be alone; Japan, Russia, South Korea and others will be right there wth us!

Now is the time to make real the promises of Democracy.
Yep, and all these "leaders" with their "penile-extension-WMD's" are going to turn Mother Earth into Venus, Mars and Pluto, with a complete radiation ring around it, with the sun not shining again for 25,000 years. Great way to get the population under control with everybody dead as doornails.
Like I said. Things go wrong, the terrorist don't go looking for koreans, Japanese, Rusians? They come looking for the big bully.

As black people we suffer most from the white mans misadventures and we should be trying our hardest to stop these evil leaders
quote:

if these enemies possess the knowledge for making nukes what stops them from giving them to terrorists to terrorise you in the US. Think man

In a way I agree to some extent but I also disagree on some others.

What makes you think that there hasn't been an exchange of WMD's between nKorea, terrorist and others already? nKorea and Iraq have been pretty chummy in the past with Iraq sending missiles to nKorea and nKorea improving the technology of the missile before sending it back.

This area is unstable and nKorea obtaining nukes would make it worse. China and Korea still want payback on Japan for the past and part of the agreement is no one in the region is to have nukes or an escallation would occur. If nKorea goes ahead then Japan will automatically demand the right to defend herself, which in turn will force China and South Korea to do the same. And if China escallates then of course Russia will definatly feel threatened.

So the question arises do we sit back and let them do whatever they want, plan possible attacks without any sort of retaliation or watch this region really get down and dirty? Or do we act now to prevent an escallation of WMD's or possible attacks.

One thing I do agree on for sure is, that we don't need to negotiate for jack!

As far as the language being used I'm for it...
(I know that is not popular, but oh well) Smile
quote:
Originally posted by ocatchings:
[QUOTE]
_

So the question arises do we sit back and let them do whatever they want, plan possible attacks without any sort of retaliation or watch this region really get down and dirty? Or do we act now to prevent an escallation of WMD's or possible attacks.



Yes we sit back. By jumping in you stir things up. Ask yourself how did the nukes come to be invented in the first place? Was it not through war and sabre rattling. Would they have been invented if we were all talking peace? When you start a war or talk about war you stir up the most primitive of human emotions that include revenge. "You kill my family with conventional weapons and I would not rest until I kill all your family in the most horrible way I can imagine." That is the emotions that come up with war and it opens up a market for weapons of mass destruction. So if you do not want to awaken the beast you stay away from war and pursue peace.
Given current events from the past few years, I think it is quite obvious what happens when you sit back. Just how many times do you want to "turn the other cheek"?
Also what are we jumping into? Self defense? Regional peace? what?
I have yet to hear anyone mention peace to nKorea as they constantly break agreements and attack the south. The news does not mention it but there is a firefight on the DMZ frequently, but as soon as we say enough, now everyone wants to talk.

Pres Bush made a statement that I felt was long over due; "you attck us, expect some hard retaliation". (Note: I did not vote for Bush nor am I a supporter). The statement has nKorea along with others second guessing future strategies and running scared.
You are grossly misinformed. You have listened to the white mans lies for too long.

Tell me when did the USA EVER, EVER turn the other cheek. When did the USA ever sit back and not throw it's weight around? Tell me this cos I can't find it anywhere.

Do you want me to list South American countries, Africa, the middle east, Vietnam, korea and everywhere else that your country visited and things have not been the same again?

Tell me where in any of these adventures was America defending itself?

If the US had learned to sit back and do nothing there would have been significant progress in many countries notably Africa.
quote:
You have listened to the white mans lies for too long.

I believe in giving everyone a fair shake so enlighten me with the truth.

quote:
Do you want me to list South American countries, Africa, the middle east, Vietnam, korea and everywhere else that your country visited and things have not been the same again?



Please do. And while you're at it please tell me what role if any did your country play in all this or are you going to sit back with the "deer in the headlight stare" and deny it.

quote:
If the US had learned to sit back and do nothing there would have been significant progress in many countries notably Africa.


Then if we did that we would have to listen to everyone whinning how we are not doing enough. So either way someone is not going to be happy.
MBM:

Korea: I wouldn't be so quick to count on South Korea to be on the US's side. From the little time I spent in South Korea, there is the feeling that the US is the reason that so many families are separated from their relatives in North Korea. Just like all people anywhere, they want to see one Korea, one people, united. Their newly elected leader will have to take that into account.

Russia: Wouldn't be too sure about this one either. The other day, it was Russia,Germany, and one other country (France maybe?) that came out and stated that the US is wrong for sayint that the evidence presented by Saddam was not credible. Not only that, but Russia has just stepped up plans for further trade and business with the middle east.


Japan: I could see the Japanese being on our side, but there is also still the memory of what our country did to Japan. True enough though, the Koreans and Japanese do NOT get along at all. So to me, Japan's a toss up that could go either way. When 9/11 happened, they interviewed a political figure in Japan and asked for his reaction. He said that the world now sees that the US is not the unflappable superpower that everyone thought, and he did have attitude when he said it.

Bush needs to quit focusing on other things and focus on the War on Terror.

Henry38:

I totally agree!
GW Bush: Begging For An Ass Wuppin!

Rather than assume the office of President of the United States with the explicit intent on world peace and diplomacy, GW Bush came into office insulting the world with his "axis of evil comments." Comments such as these no doubt placed the global community on notice that GW was ready for confrontation and had no use for diplomacy or peace negotiators.

Now the North Koreans are gearing up to challenge GW and his thirst for military confrontation. Meanwhile, while Rumsfeld boast of America's ability to handle Iraq and North Korea at the same time, he conspicuously omits the thousands of US deaths that will result from fighting two avoidable and absolutely unnecessary wars!

GW Bush must be stopped Now!!! Americans will die unnecessarily on the Korean peninsula and in Iraq with absolutely no material gain or value to Americans to speak of! And what about Osama Bin Laden? The Bush administration has made little or no progress in either stopping or capturing Bin Laden. America needs peace diplomacy not more WAR! Stop this idiot Bush administration NOW!!!
quote:
Originally posted by kraaaal:
_GW Bush: Begging For An Ass Wuppin! _

Rather than assume the office of President of the United States with the explicit intent on world peace and diplomacy, GW Bush came into office insulting the world with his "axis of evil comments." Comments such as these no doubt placed the global community on notice that GW was ready for confrontation and had no use for diplomacy or peace negotiators.

Now the North Koreans are gearing up to challenge GW and his thirst for military confrontation. Meanwhile, while Rumsfeld boast of America's ability to handle Iraq and North Korea at the same time, he conspicuously omits the thousands of US deaths that will result from fighting two avoidable and absolutely unnecessary wars!

GW Bush must be stopped Now!!! Americans will die unnecessarily on the Korean peninsula and in Iraq with absolutely no material gain or value to Americans to speak of! And what about Osama Bin Laden? The Bush administration has made little or no progress in either stopping or capturing Bin Laden. America needs peace diplomacy not more WAR! Stop this idiot Bush administration NOW!!!


"Ditto"
GREAT POST
As a soldier, I cringed as I read the title of this post. N. Korea and China are the worlds biggest threat. The N. Koreans mean business, plain and simple. They probably have nukes already and if they dont they can easily purchase it from the black market. They have the capapbility to strike deep right now with various missle systems. O Catchings is dead on target when he challenges the stability of the region. The N. Korean population is starving because the govt is funneling all its money to its military.

We will not go to Korea with guns a blazing because it will be messy and expensive, interms of money, equipment and human lives. We will use diplomacy at all costs to avoid a conflict on the Korean Peninsula. Make no bones about it, we do not presently have a significant enough presence in Korea to stop anything.

I agree somewhat with what Henry says because I have a lot of friends sitting over in Kuwait right now preparing to LD into Iraq. Our big mouths and our even bigger egos have caused us to write a whole lot of checks. I for one do not want to cash the check we might send to Korea.
North Korea Warns 'Sanctions Mean a War'

By Peter S. Goodman
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, January 7, 2003; 10:52 AM


SEOUL, January 7 -- North Korea today issued a warning of unrestrained war in the event that the United States and its allies impose economic sanctions to force the isolated country to halt work at a nuclear reactor capable of producing atomic weapons.

"Sanctions mean a war," North Korea declared in a statement released by its official Korean Central News Agency. "The war knows no mercy." . . .

***********************************************

Folks, sorry, but can I put on my John Wayne hat for a second? OK, there.

WHO THE FIZUCK DOES N. K0REA THINK IT'S TALKING TO? DON'T THEY KNOW THAT THE U.S. (WITH S.KOREA, JAPAN, RUSSIA, THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHERS) WILL BITCH-SLAP THEM SO HARD THOSE N. KOREAN LEADERS WILL BE WHISTLING DIXIE!

OK, I've got my hat off now. That feels much better! Smile

Now is the time to make real the promises of Democracy.
I have become a AA. org addict so since I have 4 hours of time to kill......... Smile

It is all a bluff by a leader who knows is time is running short. Everyone keeps forgetting South Korea is not the same army it was in 1950 and I for one will stand out on a ledge a state for the record South Korea could take nKorea without our help.
But if it does escallate any further we will be back at the Yalu in 4 months top!

On the arguement that South Korea may not back us b/c they want a unified country, the arguement that everyone seems to forget is this. The older generation would love to see loved ones left behind 50+ years ago but the younger generation has never known of a united Korea so they are really at odds. For those that have forgotten, when the Wall finally fell in Germany, West Germany took a beating absorbing all of the problems from East Germany. South Korea remembers this and despite all the talk they are in no hurry to untite just yet. The nKorean economy is worse than that possesed by the former East Germany, so could South Korea really survive uniting at this moment?

The plan is a gradual increase and the unitying of the road and railways is just the start. What is not mentioned in the news is the new city/town that is also being buit in the area to accept all the refugees from the north when the time comes.

Just a few bits of info to kill time.
Lovely debate!,
But to back up to a point earlier made by Henry38.
What about we blacks?, what are we doing?, whose side are we taking?, where do we stand globally?, As the lapchild of the bully or the grown up children, men and women of stolen africans, ex slaves? do we stand with our tourmentor or do we stand with the tormented?!.

North Korea is a white boys head-ache only memory is a cold weather ass kicking, a half century multi-billion dollar standoff and annexation of a land and its people(S Korea).

A growing body of global hatred looms over every horizon while the "Enemy" gains more and more sympathy and attention from meek nation states wracked with IMF credit problems or Multi-Million dollar corporate rape and robbery from US firms. The globe is lean and hungry for a change, starving for a chance, a piece a bit of their own land and dignity.

The US economies books are cooked and the dollars lost cant continue to bank-roll S.Korea, Turkey, Israel, S.Africa, Jordan, Qatar etc. we're to broke to pay the coming gas price hyke, we're to broke to pay the heating fuel costs, to broke to hit the McDonalds dollar value menu!.

Bush has a Texas size ASS Kickin comin for him, remember he had that cherry on his eye and split lip by that heavey weight pretzel?!, Imagine the pretzel beat down he'll choke down when the money vail draws up and Cheney, Lay, Rumsfield, James BakerIII, Daddy GB, and the lots a$$e$ are exposed?!, bush is the front man for a lot of individuals and corporations, HUH?

If N Korea convinces the S Korean peoples sympathy to depart US quarters and the S korean government stops spending that 1.5 Billion a year with boeing, ratheon (The Carlyle Group) heads are going to roll.

damn!, great topic such a wealth of interaction we are at the epicenter of the great American waterloo and Alamo per donald "The Sitting Duck" Rumsfeld's statement of handling Saddam(The Mid East) and N Korea (Asia Propper)

Long live those of US waking the masses debating to find our voices, Long live those who carry and deliver our voices to the world.

Peace Love Light
Khem Saqa
The title of this Thread is straight ridiculous, and illustrates our 'collective' lack of knowledge about global affairs and our play in it.

It appears that Amerikkka is starting to reap the fruits of their unethical labors of many decades of seed planting.

Korea is actually using the situation to their advantage. They see what is happening with the Bush Administration PUSHING hard for a war with Iraq. Clearly this war is unjustified at this time. And we should all be very concerned about this. Perhaps they view the developments as another chapter in America's global conquest. We seek to divide and destroy our 'enemies' economically and militarily.

Right to bear Arms:
I find it alarming that we don't want our non-allied countries to have "weapons of mass destruction". We have the worlds largest stockpile of WOMD. Why should other countries be asked to strip themselves of any credible defense? Yes, I belive that countries that prove they are a threat to World peace (not Amerikkkan interests) should be disarmed, but only at the hands of an established, globally recognized enforcment agency (The United Nations). What do you think would happen if every country except us disarmed? Is that fair to other nations, cultures, and governments?

Practice What we Preach:
Our Constitution, founding fathers, and government ideals are supposed to be about Freedom, Human Rights, Peace, Christianity and Democracy. As a country, our implementation of foreign policy is not consistent with these beliefs. And the global community is starting to see the wolfs tail under our sheeps clothing.

Propaganda:
Ever since 911, we have seen an unparalleled amount of lies and deceipt from our Govt to blind us from what is really going on. Our Government wants us to believe that we are so great and pure, that other nations are jealous, possessed with utter hatred for no reason at all; that we are being picked on because we represent what is good. A lie. Kind of reminds me of the bully in high school; never at fault, and only picks on who he can with ease. If we keep listening to the lies, without the demand for the truth, the we will be involved in more military conflicts (as we have in the past...Vietnam)for years to come.

IraQ and Korea:
Remember when we were taught by our parents that 1)mean what you say 2)stand up for what's right 3)Don't play favorites?
Remember when this campain against IRaq started? Bush's most convincing argument was IRAQs intent and actual movement to acquire and develop nuclear weapons? Well, if that's true, then yeah, this is a war worth fighting. Clearly Saddam should not have nuclear weapons. But after Bush's words, NO EVIDENCE followed. Bush wants the american people to sacrifice lives for a cause, but doesn't feel obligated to PROVE his case to the people. The UN still doesn't have A SINGLE PIECE of evidence from the Bush Administration. Cause there is none. And then comes Korea, openly admitting their renewed commitment to a nuclear program, and rapidly moving forward. Bush's respons....LAME and weak. But his words for IRAQ are strong, and confrontational. This has got to be the biggest contradiction. After all, shouldn't we have shifted our focus to Korea?
Perhaps Bush should refresh his memory on the Kennedy's handling of the Cuban Missle Crisis. The blockade was a direct military response to a clear and present danger (well near future). Iraq represents none of the sort. What threat are they? Korea on the other hand IS a clear and present danger.

Myth: War makes money:
It is my opionion that Bush wants this war for the OilFields. Negotiations are already underway with Russia and other nations in regards to resources in Iraq. And no matter what develompments occur, the White House's attitude, rhetoric, and actions show nothing else than the desire to move to war. Regardless of what the UN inspectors find, I believe that we are heading for a war. Only American public opinion can stop this. I don't think this war will help us economically, even with the oil fields. This is not the industrial revolution. Modern times like today are extremely different.

Our Media, Who's side are they on?
The media is in the best position to ask questions, and disclose that to the people they serve-The American Public. Here's a quick llist of items I can think of?
1. What happened to the 911 investigations? How can no one be of fault? Someone or a group of people made errors somewhere?
2. What REALLY happened to the third plane that "crashed as a result of an onboard struggle"
3. What is it costing Americans to have all these troups deployed whan a move to go to war has not even been approved by the UN?
4. why are we diplomatic towards Korea, and confrontational towards IRAQ?
5. Why are we going to occupy Iraq? Is this in violation of Internation Laws on warfare? Geneva Convention, etc...?
This list can go on and on, but point is that the media is an accomplice in all this mis-information.

We will not attack Korea, because they have the capability to 'deter' us. Yes, we can win, no doubt, but the threat and capability of weapons of mass destruction is far too great. If we hold all the cards, nothing stops us from global conquest. And that would make us no different than the Nazis or the Soviets.
Welcome! Thanks for registering and I hope we see lots of you here! I have a few thoughts about your post.

First, as I said earlier in the thread, the title is "tongue in cheek". It was meant to parody our approach to matters like this. That said, do you really think that if North Korea continues in the direction it is, that an "ass wuppin'" would not be forthcoming? Smile

In general, your post illustrates the complexity of our current foreign policy landscape. On the one hand you note that the North Korean situation is much more appropriate in terms of presenting a set of causal factors to initiate American military response. You make this point contrasting it with our situation with Iraq. At the same time, in the end, you still seem to reject any potential military response against North Korea.



quote:
Originally posted by 0dysseus:

We seek to divide and destroy our 'enemies' economically and militarily.


The first point about your comments is that while I tend to agree with your over-all sentiment about U.S. foreign policy being chronically self-centered and myopic, I'd ask you the following question. The United States is operating directly in how it perceives its interests. We can debate tactics and philosphy all day long, but strategically, are you surprised at what the U.S. is doing? The United States is protecting its national security and economic interests. Period. While I think we should have a more advanced/evolved view of foreign policy, don't you think we should look to minimize the threats from our enemies?

quote:
Right to bear Arms:
I find it alarming that we don't want our non-allied countries to have "weapons of mass destruction".


We're not playing a game that requires a set of rules be applied evenly to all players. The world is a classic zero-sum game. There are finite resources in the world. Our economy is based upon consumption. The degree to which we control resources defines the success that our economy and country is able to enjoy.

We're just playing defense. We're trying to both stay on offense and deny our opponents the ball and thus limit their opportunity to harm us. Aside from what you think of U.S. foreign policy, do you really want every country that wants one to have nuclear weapons? It might not seem "fair", but I'll tell you I don't.

quote:
Yes, I belive that countries that prove they are a threat to World peace (not Amerikkkan interests) should be disarmed, but only at the hands of an established, globally recognized enforcment agency (The United Nations).


Hey, the United Nations has blessed everything that the United States is doing vis-a-vis Iraq. Colin Powell has done a great job of coalition building. Similarly, regarding North Korea; South Korea, Japan, and Russia are certainly with us. I won't be surprised if China eventually gets on board against North Korea either.

quote:
What do you think would happen if every country except us disarmed? Is that fair to other nations, cultures, and governments?


Again, "fairness" is irrelevant.

quote:
Practice What we Preach:
Our Constitution, founding fathers, and government ideals are supposed to be about Freedom, Human Rights, Peace, Christianity and Democracy. As a country, our implementation of foreign policy is not consistent with these beliefs.


Our immediate national interests certainly trump any philosophical or political principles that we might apply (to varying degrees) internally. We see this with how Ashcroft has suspended a number of the tenets of the Bill of Rights in the 'War Against Terrorism'. But then again our founding principles have always been applied only when and where convenient.

**Got to run. I'll finish my post later.**

Now is the time to make real the promises of Democracy.
North Korea has no oil. Therefore, they cannot pay for war if we attack them and try to recoup the money we spend prosecuting a war against them. Iraq has a whole lot of oil. We attack them, we get to take their oil to recoup the money we spend to prosecute a war against them.Now, let's see. Which country will we chose to be attacked first?
Yes 0dysseus your theory is correct, but with all you have discussed there is still Osama, what about him? And I agree, the Koreans want war! And yes, the President knows full well Korea will not be an easy victory like Iraq, many Americans and South Koreans will die!!! I always new GW was a dummy, now he has to eat his "axis of evil" words or commit young American lives to war on the peninsula, - what a stupid idiot!
Odysseus - sorry its taken me this long to finish my reply to you. In any event, summarizing my thoughts:

1) The United States should take a broader, longer-term view of its foreign policy. It seems that we generally make decisions only considering the moment, leaving future administrations (and Americans) to deal with the fall-out. As I've suggested in earlier posts, I think the U.S. should use its "super power" status to also tackle some of the more serious problems facing our world like poverty, access to healthcare, eradicating aids, third world economic development, etc.

2) The U.S. operates strictly out of what it perceives to be its self-interest. Obviously national security and economic concerns will drive this. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Threats can be defined as those that threaten both our security (in literal terms) as well as those that threaten our access to natural (or other) resources that we need to maintain our economy and way of life. Iraw and Korea represent examples of each of these threats

3) While there are sopme superficial similarities, I think that the situations in Korea and Iraq are completely different. Hence, comparisons between our approach to the two don't make a lot of sense to me. While our over-all approach to any nation should probably be more like it is with North Korea currently (with respect to relying on diplomatic tools first), the fact remains that we are in a position to exert more force currently in Iraq to achieve our objectives, and we're doing so.


4) In my opinion, while I do not believe that our approach against Iraq is the wisest and most principled, I do believe that it is in our national interest to secure our country's access to oil. Let's be real here: the entire industrialized world runs on oil. Our way of life and economy would be severely compromised if we lost access to future oil capacity. Many have suggested that Saddam's end game in developing WOMD is not to threaten the Western world militarily, but to consolidate power in the Gulf and control access to the region's oil. IMO, that's the threat that he poses and why we're going after him.

Great post. I hope to see more of you around! Smile

Now is the time to make real the promises of Democracy.
AS for the media, today I noted 7 separate exposes on the 'staging' of these ridiculous peace demonstrations. Mind you, the demonstrations have not even occurred yet, and as such are not really news yet. But the media itself is ensuring and trying to bolster attendence by priting the wheres and times.

Funny, you never would see 7 exposes in the same day on the tax reform or anti abortion, or excessive government spending, or issues of a conservative interest. The 'bias' is quite obvious.

The strange part of all of this is that while these nitwits are protesting america, they should be protesting the United Nations. Its the United Nations that has declared Hussein must comply in 19 separate resolutions. The world community has spoken. Why do peace-niks never get their facts straight?
quote:
Right to bear Arms:
I find it alarming that we don't want our non-allied countries to have "weapons of mass destruction".


Funny, but I would bet that some of those who are anti-gun for america, suddenly think its ok for someone like a murderous tyrant such as a Hussein, 'should' have them?

Anyways, the problem has never been the US not allowing nations to not have WMD's. India and Pakistan are proof of that. The problem is that Iraq has ALWAYS denied trying to develope them, and been secretive about them, and THAT distinguishes Iraq from all the other nations who have openly "declared" they have them.

There is only ONE reason to keep the possession of nuclear weapons and WMD's "secret", such as Hussein does. And that cause he plans to 'use' them. Other nations declare they have nukes in order to deter nations from messing with them. North Korea declares they have nukes as a bargaining chip, in order to gain diplomatic leverage in their quest for world handouts. But keeping the entire ordeal 'secret', such as Iraq does???

Come now, god gave you that brain, start using it.
great point, Dwill. If we attack Iraq and topple Saddam's regime, the problem of black market CBW/WMDs will still exist. Our same allies are the ones responsible for supplying countries like India, Pakistan and Iraq with nuke and CBW equipment. France unsuccessfully tried to sell Iraq a nuclear reactor. Russia admits that it sells its former war stock on the black market and that it has not fully accounted for all its Cold War stocks. The sad thing is that we provide aid to these countries to resolve these problems yet they continue to screw it up. The problem of supply and demand will still be there when we march on Bagdad. I just hope that none of my fellow Army comrades have to die because of this mess. Korea has WMDs and has the will to use them which makes them strategicallly a bigger threat.
How do you feel now that we know that North Korea has nuclear missiles capable of reaching the United States?
So Dwill, you're saying that just because other countries don't conceal it, they wont use it? Why is it that the U.S. gets to decide who should and who shouldn't?

"Because they are so arrogant." Nelson Mandela said once upon a time.

I think we should change the title of this post to America: Beggin' for an ass whuppin'!
-----------------------

"This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. " Quran 5:3

"Lord Grant Me The SERENITY To Accept The Things I Cannot Change, The COURAGE To Change The Things I Can, And The WISDOM To Know The Difference." Serenity Prayer

"Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. That's a good religion."
Malcolm X 1965 on Islam

If you had it your way anybody and everybody could build Nukes of all shapes and sizes and all kinds of WMD, right?

The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.
If everyone had a nuke then everyone would be nicer to each other...

Just a simple thought...

If I had it my way, nuclear weapons would not exist, war would not exist. I would be with Janet Jackson or Jada Pinkett. Everyone would be happy. But this is the real world.
If I had it my way ... George Bush would be pushed through a grinder, followed by Tony Blair, the independence of Palestine, Jews returning to Europe or wherever the hell they came from, except those there prior to the their mass immigration after the World Wars. Hey since America loves them so much, why don't they move to Nevada? Heard there's a lot of space there.

O.k. ... getting real ... why is it USA and Israel are allowed nukes? And not Arab/Muslim countries? And why does America choose? I hate repeating this but hasn't September 11th taught them anything?
Pakistan has Nukes, it is a Muslim Country.

Yes, Sept 11th taught us that some people will use WMD.

Iraq is a rogue Country ran by a tyrant. I think the world should take the kid gloves of Isreal and let them defend themselves as they please. War brings PEACE in a situation for those who are so backward that they are incapable of peace, the Palestinians, they don't want peace, so give them war because it is the only thing they can understand. As I said, I have absolutely no sympathy for them.

The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.
As long as he didn't touch those mesmerizing eyes.............(those are your eyes aren't they?)
WOW, that is the one thing I remember about Saudi Arabia...the eyes behind the mask, very erotic and sensual. Sorry to get off track and off subject Big Grin
but you keep blaming America for every damn thing wrong in the world, often you post on other topics that are converted to this Palestinian issue, like this one Smile. And I say, here's AQ pushing these damn heathens again. It's very very difficult for me to feel sympathy for a people who raise their own children to murder\suicide innocent men, women and children and exploit their religious beliefs to convince their own to do it. And among all the other backward shiyt they do to women, like the honor killing women by family members, that is backward and ignant to say the least. ("ignant", is how we say it, AQ, Smile)

When you go there you are own your own.

But if you seek peace and make serious efforts to make peace and put down the people who don't want peace then I with you all the way. But going into Pizza parlors and market places and buses and killing innocent people, then I will never see your point cuz I can't get pass the savage mentality of the Palestinians.

We Black people been through a lot of shiyt but I can proudly say we never stooped to what the Palestinians are doing and in the name of God. Only a fool would negotiate with such a people.

The bottom line is Palestinians do not want peace as long they are led by groups who promote and execute suicide killings of innocent people.

Defeat, is the only way that peace can come about in that region.

AQ, I appreciate you because your posts gives me insight into your world but just because we share this board does not mean I am going to automatically hop on your bandwagon.

I do like you but I do not share your Palestinians sentiments in the least.

The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.
Let's be honest. The only reason US backed down from North Korea b/c it already has WMDs and also NO natural resources. Whereas Iraq, who doesn't have any known WMDs, has a least a slingshot full of mustard gas and anthrax...not to mention, sitting in a desert filled with oil.

America will never send troops en masse unless the place they're going to has serious resources: oil in the Middle East, diamonds in Somalia, etc.

Korea, north or south, doesn't have the natural resources that the US craves for.

It would an unforgivable and maybe an impeachable act if Bush Jr. did start something in Korea, and putting the world on the brink of global destruction for the sake of control of all the Daewoo speakers, Hyundais, and microwave ovens to shake a stick at.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×