N Korea has 8 nukes and missles that can reach the USA

[acdninjapan]

According to S Korean sources-usually reliable as they are very watchful of their neighbours to the north. Pongyang has up to 8 nuclear warheads in its arsenal and is ready to test a new missle with a capability of reaching the continental US.

Of course the N Korean Gov't blames the US, Japan and the S Koreans for our belligerant attitude and will launch a pre-emptive first strike only in self-defense.

GWB what are you going to do about this?

[edesignuk]

GWB what are you going to do about this?Invade! INVADE! :rolleyes: :(

[Doc27]

If Clinton had done his job right and wasn't such an appeaser when he was in office N. Korea would have 0 nuclear bombs to fire at anyone right now and it wouldn't be GWB's problem. Same problem we have with Iran right now. Either we do something about them now, or later a future president will have to deal with another totalitarian dictator with nuclear powers.

[zimv20]

If Clinton had done his job right and wasn't such an appeaser when he was in office N. Korea would have 0 nuclear bombs to fire at anyone right now and it wouldn't be GWB's problem.
<snore>

bush has had nearly four years to do something about it. nice try.

OT - what do you still blame your parents for?

[takao]

Bush will do exactly _nothing_ if North Korea _really_ has nucular weapons, except of course complain about it...

[Doc27]

Bush will do exactly _nothing_ if North Korea _really_ has nucular weapons, except of course complain about it...
Why should it be Bush who has to do something? Why can't it be what is China, S. Korea, and Japan is going to do about it? Why can't it be what is the UN going to do about it? Why is it now, what is Bush going to do about it when you know that if he does you would only complain about that too. What can we do about it, except attack and risk them using their nukes on us or others?

Surely you do not think we should be blackmailed into paying them ransom to not use their nuclear weapons? Everyone knows you don't give in to blackmail, if you do they return for more, indefinitely.

[makisushi]

<snore>

bush has had nearly four years to do something about it. nice try.

OT - what do you still blame your parents for?
I can see attacking bush, but was the off topic comment really necessary?

[takao]

Why should it be Bush who has to do something? Why can't it be what is China, S. Korea, and Japan is going to do about it? Why can't it be what is the UN going to do about it? Why is it now, what is Bush going to do about it when you know that if he does you would only complain about that too. What can we do about it, except attack and risk them using their nukes on us or others?

because _even_ bush would not risk to attack a country with nuclear weapons

i never said that something should be done about it ... nobody cares about israel,india or pakistan either so ... why should north korea be different ?

the UN won't do something about it because some countries might be veto-ing it in the security council (make that china or the allied pakistan who already veto against going to sudan)

nuclear weapons are expensive to maintain..sooner or later they will have to reduce it anyways

[Taft]

I can see attacking bush, but was the off topic comment really necessary?

It depends on whether you consider this unsubstantiated comment to be flamebait:

If Clinton had done his job right and wasn't such an appeaser when he was in office N. Korea would have 0 nuclear bombs to fire at anyone right now and it wouldn't be GWB's problem.

If, like me, you consider it flamebait, then some sort of response is justified. Likening the attitude to those who blame their parents for all their own problems is a rather apt retort, if you ask me.

Taft

[mischief]

S Korea is in an odd position. Their populace is fairly hawkish, yet their government has to run the razor-edge of knowing their northern neighbor is nuts, dangerous and desperate.

[Doc27]

It depends on whether you consider this unsubstantiated comment to be flamebait:

Originally Posted by Doc27
If Clinton had done his job right and wasn't such an appeaser when he was in office N. Korea would have 0 nuclear bombs to fire at anyone right now and it wouldn't be GWB's problem.

If, like me, you consider it flamebait, then some sort of response is justified. Likening the attitude to those who blame their parents for all their own problems is a rather apt retort, if you ask me.
Taft
Clinton's "Fix" in N. Korea, allowed them to continue their nuclear program unchecked which in turn allowed them to collect the necessary materials that produced their first nuclear bomb. So unsubstatiated isn't the correct word to use here.

Also the combined posts of

Of course the N Korean Gov't blames the US, Japan and the S Koreans for our belligerant attitude
GWB what are you going to do about this?
and
Invade! INVADE! :rolleyes: :(
deserved a response in kind. Like listening to those who seem to want to blame Bush for everything bad, while ignoring actual history of events that took place prior to Bush coming to office.

[mischief]

Here's a nasty little tidbit:

The current agreement among the Nuclear Powers is that any Nuclear attack against any Nation can be seen as an attack against ALL nations and opens the door for a global response. If Kim Jong Il was insane enough to launch a Nuke he'd have about half a hour to drive to the Chinese border before seeing his country reduced to a sea of molten glass and fused girders.

The real danger is what would happen if China chose to endorse such an attack and ally with N Korea. Suddenly we'd see a Nuclear-equipped World War evolve in a matter of hours into a Global-theater battle of Missile defence and from-the-hip conventional pre-strikes. I could think the whole mess out.... there'd probably be less carnage than you'd guess... but it's still a very nasy picture.

This is one of the few instances where I feel something HAS to be done... and soon.

Best actions possible:

Western countries open their borders to N-Korean defectors and place empty troop-ships off shore to pick up those who want to swim for it.

Pressure against China to back away from KJI and allow action to be taken against him.

Covert kidnapping of KJI to transport him to Europe to be tried in the IC for Conspiracy to Commit Global Nuclear Conflagration and all the various nasty things he's done to his people.

Follow the previous with IMMEDIATE airbourne aid to N Korea's citizenry and UN occupation while the county is rebuilt.


None of this is, of course practicable as it would require unprecidented international co-operation and unheard of levels of UN Cojones.

[Shibaiman]

If S Korean sources are so reliable, then why do they know nothing about the explosion that took place in N Korea a couple of week ago?

This is fear-mongering, and I would simply doubt anyone who calls themself "acdninjapan." The Japanese right-wing love to fear-monger as much as the the current President of the US of A.

According to S Korean sources-usually reliable as they are very watchful of their neighbours to the north. Pongyang has up to 8 nuclear warheads in its arsenal and is ready to test a new missle with a capability of reaching the continental US.

Of course the N Korean Gov't blames the US, Japan and the S Koreans for our belligerant attitude and will launch a pre-emptive first strike only in self-defense.

GWB what are you going to do about this?

[mactastic]

Why can't it be what is the UN going to do about it?

Was that your attitude in the run-up to Dubya Dubya II? Did you feel we should pressure the UN to do something about Saddam, or were you arguing that we should ignore the UN and go it alone?

Surely you do not think we should be blackmailed into paying them ransom to not use their nuclear weapons? Everyone knows you don't give in to blackmail, if you do they return for more, indefinitely.

Ask Bush. He's flop-flopped once again and now adopted the Clinton stance of talking to the DPRK. At first he said he wouldn't negotiate with them, and then he did. Flop-flop.

So why did he choose to abandon his initial do-whatever-Clinton-didn't strategy and embrace negotiations? And why would you blame Clinton for appeasement, yet not Bush when he does the same thing?

[mactastic]

If S Korean sources are so reliable, then why do they know nothing about the explosion that took place in N Korea a couple of week ago?

This is fear-mongering, and I would simply doubt anyone who calls themself "acdninjapan." The Japanese right-wing love to fear-monger as much as the the current President of the US of A.

So you don't think North Korea has nukes? You think they are just pulling one over on the world?

[IJ Reilly]

Clinton's "Fix" in N. Korea, allowed them to continue their nuclear program unchecked which in turn allowed them to collect the necessary materials that produced their first nuclear bomb. So unsubstatiated isn't the correct word to use here.

Well not exactly "unchecked," but without any real alternative when the North Koreans decided to refuse further monitoring. So criticism of the Clinton program is justified. But the Bush policy -- what is that, exactly? And in what way has it halted or even slowed the progress of the North Korean nuclear program?

[Fukui]

Pressure against China to back away from KJI and allow action to be taken against him.

China wouldn't back away from NK because if the north fell, there would be no buffer between the U.S friendly SK and China, and thats something the powers in China don't want... U.S on thier doorstep. Its all a game of chess... so it all comes down to, who is more clever, Bush or KJI.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Lets just face the facts folks, Clinton screwed up big time and so has George on this issue. Wouldnt be surprised if the same thing happens in Iran. while Democrats and Republicans fight over everything Iran will continue to move forward on this and by the time both parties pull their heads out of their butts it will be to late and then we will have a Nuclear Iran. Time to put America first instead of the stupid parties. Democrats & Republicans are both to blame.( maybe we should let Israel take care of it like they did to Iraq since they seem to be the only ones with balls to do it.) Destroy the facility now is my 2 cents.

[mactastic]

DHM, you realize that decision would likely doom Seoul?

[Dont Hurt Me]

Sorry Mactastic i ment destroy the Iran facility while we can, its a little late for for N Korea.(thanks Bill & George)

[IJ Reilly]

Right. It's no use talking about striking matches in a gasoline refinery because it isn't going to happen even if it should. I thought the Bush administration took the right position when they refused North Korea's demands for direct talks with the US. The problem is regional, with China the obvious key player. But this problem takes multilateral thinking, something the Bush administration isn't exactly good at doing, which I presume is the reason why we've seen even less progress on the Korea front recently than we did during the Clinton years.

[wwworry]

If Clinton had done his job right and wasn't such an appeaser when he was in office N. Korea would have 0 nuclear bombs to fire at anyone right now and it wouldn't be GWB's problem. Same problem we have with Iran right now. Either we do something about them now, or later a future president will have to deal with another totalitarian dictator with nuclear powers.

&

Why should it be Bush who has to do something? Why can't it be what is China, S. Korea, and Japan is going to do about it? Why can't it be what is the UN going to do about it? Why is it now, what is Bush going to do about it when you know that if he does you would only complain about that too. What can we do about it, except attack and risk them using their nukes on us or others?

:eek:

[mischief]

( maybe we should let Israel take care of it like they did to Iraq since they seem to be the only ones with balls to do it.) Destroy the facility now is my 2 cents.

Maybe we should stop backing Israel unconditionally and let the region sort itself out. True, much of it would be reduced to a radioactive wasteland and likely the "Holiland" would be rendered uninhabitable but we'd at least have shown the horrifying futility of it all in a more holistic light.

Personally I think the reconciliation aspect of the creation of Israel has been lost in the atrocity of it's continued unfettered millitarist behaviour.

Israel is in a position that cannot be defended over the long term. Either it will fall to the ill-will of it's neighbors or it will be forced into a region-wide repeat of the 6 day war.

Because of the above I find that there is nothing in the example of Israel that can morally, justifiably be used by any other nation to any other purpose. They are a Nation living on borrowed time, as such they are behaving accordingly.

[yg17]

Of course the N Korean Gov't blames the US, Japan and the S Koreans for our belligerant attitude and will launch a pre-emptive first strike only in self-defense.

And this is why the Bush, UN, or any other country for that matter shouldn't do a thing about north korea. NK has nukes, there's no question about it, however, I've said all along that NK and their nukes are not a threat. As long as no one bothers them, they won't bother anyone else. So if bush is smart enough to leave them alone, then they'll leave us alone

[zimv20]

If, like me, you consider it flamebait, then some sort of response is justified. Likening the attitude to those who blame their parents for all their own problems is a rather apt retort, if you ask me.

taft got my point.

[zimv20]

This is fear-mongering, and I would simply doubt anyone who calls themself "acdninjapan."
ah... i had always read it as: ACD Ninja Pan. some kind of silent, deadly cookware.

[zimv20]

fwiw, i'll be in seoul from nov 3 through nov 8. so if those are the dates that bush decides to try some kind of military action against NK... well, nice knowin' ya guys.

[blackfox]

fwiw, i'll be in seoul from nov 3 through nov 8. so if those are the dates that bush decides to try some kind of military action against NK... well, nice knowin' ya guys.
Have a good time. Pop up to the DMZ and take some nice photos for us will ya...
Personally, I do not find this to be a concern for the US. Both increased Chinese power/hegemony in the Region and economic dynamism will prevent N. Korean aggression, and perhaps facilitate eventual reunification of Korea.
The US has much more to worry about with China, as it is on the verge of becoming a Superpower and denying US interests in the Region (E Asia) and complicating US interests elsewhere (such as the ME, with China's increased need for Oil and willingness to provide Arms, as a counter-balance to our own activities.)
Much will depend on the US realizing and accepting that it is not the only Power in the World anymore...

[Fukui]

As long as no one bothers them, they won't bother anyone else. So if bush is smart enough to leave them alone, then they'll leave us alone.
They might leave us alone, but those that buy them wont!

[Dont Hurt Me]

fwiw, i'll be in seoul from nov 3 through nov 8. so if those are the dates that bush decides to try some kind of military action against NK... well, nice knowin' ya guys.Have fun, i think most of the attention is in Iraq/Iran but :eek: then again

[zimv20]

on a side note, i'll be in japan before heading to seoul. yes, i will be out of the country for the election. mixed feelings about this, but it will be kinda neat to experience a US presidential election from overseas.

and, yes, i have applied for my absentee ballot.

[IJ Reilly]

I experienced the 2000 election from "overseas" -- in Hawaii, which is about as far overseas as you can get and still be in the US. I thought being in on the West Coast was strange. In Hawaii, the election is over before the polls even close.

[Backtothemac]

Here is reality. China would never support such action. Why? Because you have to remember that China is Santa's workshop. We fully fund their economy, and they are not going to give that away for the North Koreans.

Now, how do you handle it. What do I think will happen. After GW is re-elected in November, by May of next year, we will have used precision, strikes by B-2's, F-117A's, and F-22 Raptors to remove their nuclear threat.

As for Iran, Israel is going to solve that problem with a tactical strike as well.

[mactastic]

Here is reality. China would never support such action. Why? Because you have to remember that China is Santa's workshop. We fully fund their economy, and they are not going to give that away for the North Koreans.

Now, how do you handle it. What do I think will happen. After GW is re-elected in November, by May of next year, we will have used precision, strikes by B-2's, F-117A's, and F-22 Raptors to remove their nuclear threat.

As for Iran, Israel is going to solve that problem with a tactical strike as well.

When you say 'solve the problem' do you mean taking out the facilities, or the leadership, or both? And does that really solve the problem, or just put a bandaid on it for another decade?

[Backtothemac]

When you say 'solve the problem' do you mean taking out the facilities, or the leadership, or both? And does that really solve the problem, or just put a bandaid on it for another decade?

I would say both. Look, neither of these countries are Iraq. N. Korea is primed for revolution, and a reunification with the south. Iran, the people want change. The government will not allow it.

I think they should target both. The facilities and the leadership. But do so without warning, without speeches, without months of leading up to. That was the downfall in Iraq. Don't make that mistake again.

[mactastic]

I would say both. Look, neither of these countries are Iraq. N. Korea is primed for revolution, and a reunification with the south. Iran, the people want change. The government will not allow it.

I think they should target both. The facilities and the leadership. But do so without warning, without speeches, without months of leading up to. That was the downfall in Iraq. Don't make that mistake again.

Great plan. First where the hell do you plan on getting the troops for this effort? The AF won't be able to bomb the problem away, it will take boots on the ground and we don't have them.

Second, I suppose you don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us, but if you think they hate us now just wait till we invade and occupy another muslim nation.

Third, I don't have much faith when to government tells me that we will be greeted as liberators with flowers etc, and I sure don't have much faith when you say it. You may claim that they will welcome us, but I very much doubt it.

Fourth, neither Iran nor NK will roll over easily. It will be very bloody, and I don't think an unprepared unwarned American populace would stand for it, not to mention the rest of the world.

[Backtothemac]

Great plan. First where the hell do you plan on getting the troops for this effort? The AF won't be able to bomb the problem away, it will take boots on the ground and we don't have them.

Second, I suppose you don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us, but if you think they hate us now just wait till we invade and occupy another muslim nation.

Third, I don't have much faith when to government tells me that we will be greeted as liberators with flowers etc, and I sure don't have much faith when you say it. You may claim that they will welcome us, but I very much doubt it.

Fourth, neither Iran nor NK will roll over easily. It will be very bloody, and I don't think an unprepared unwarned American populace would stand for it, not to mention the rest of the world.

First, Israel will handle Iran. Just like they handled the nuclear reactor situation in Iraq years ago. Second. If it means keeping us safe, your right. I don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us. Third, I trust looking at a situation objectively, and from talking to the people that I know from those countries. Fourth. you think the American populace would stand for nuclear attack?

[takao]

I would say both. Look, neither of these countries are Iraq. N. Korea is primed for revolution, and a reunification with the south. Iran, the people want change. The government will not allow it.

I think they should target both. The facilities and the leadership. But do so without warning, without speeches, without months of leading up to. That was the downfall in Iraq. Don't make that mistake again.

you seriously suggest taking out the government of iran which got elected in a democratic election ?

after the open minded liberals where in charge there for a period ,the conservative strictly muslim ones took over again because of increased support from the people for a political with increased confrontation (and now guess what caused that...

i know that you don't like the iranians ..but after all it's a democracy who choose their own leaders... and not a dictatorship,military regime or a kingdom

we can talk about north korea but..iran ? you gotta be kidding... the iranian president(or however that is called) visited austria before he was voted out..there was even a 1 hour tv interview on television... (where he impressed not only with character/charisma but also knowledge,softness,diplomacy... a typical _statesman_)


north korea..dicatorship..iran...not

[mactastic]

First, Israel will handle Iran. Just like they handled the nuclear reactor situation in Iraq years ago. Second. If it means keeping us safe, your right. I don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us. Third, I trust looking at a situation objectively, and from talking to the people that I know from those countries. Fourth. you think the American populace would stand for nuclear attack?

First, that condemns Israel to perpetual conflict with the Palestinians. For your own political ends no less. And do you think the rest of the world won't figure out that we gave the Israeli's the green light? From their perspective we might as well have done it ourselves. Second, OK, but when enough of the rest of the world hates us they will be able to gang up on us. Remember the Liliputians. Third, I look at a situation objectively as well. Or are you accusing me of otherwise? Fourth, you think the American populace would stand for a preemptive strike like you describe?

[zimv20]

After GW is re-elected in November, by May of next year, we will have used precision, strikes by B-2's, F-117A's, and F-22 Raptors to remove their nuclear threat.

basically, you're writing off seoul. 11 million residents won't be happy.

[takao]

Second. If it means keeping us safe, your right. I don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us.

reverse your argument: it fits nicely to countries of the axis of evil... they don't feel safe because US threatens them regulary..so they develop weapons regardless of what the rest of the world thinks of them....

and yeah if you are fine with isolating the US ...so am i....thats not the US i like

[IJ Reilly]

basically, you're writing off seoul. 11 million residents won't be happy.

Who cares about a bunch of South Koreans, if US foreign policy objectives are furthered?

[Ugg]

First, Israel will handle Iran. Just like they handled the nuclear reactor situation in Iraq years ago. Second. If it means keeping us safe, your right. I don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us. Third, I trust looking at a situation objectively, and from talking to the people that I know from those countries. Fourth. you think the American populace would stand for nuclear attack?

As takao says, the government of Iran is legit, just because it is a conservative fundamentalist government doesn't mean we have any right to bomb them. By following that logic then the US is fair game when it comes to being bombed by another government that disagrees with US policies. As far as Israel is concerned, they reap what they sow.

[Fukui]

Who cares about a bunch of South Koreans, if US foreign policy objectives are furthered?
Wow. I hope thats sarcasm... :o

[zimv20]

Wow. I hope thats sarcasm... :o
don't worry, it was

[Timelessblur]

Well you can blame bush for the US's hands getting tied on this one.

The US easily could and practicly did take on Iraq alone but the problem comes now is to take on North Korera the US needs friends and help. Problem is the US pissed off the rest of the world. Now the US needs friends to take on North Korera but if you dont have any it kind of hard

The US approvle rating world wide has drop quite a bit.

http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=3936935 just listen to that NPR show and it will have the numbers. It is pretty shocking when you find out how bad they are. Mussulim and middle east contry are less than 15%. Westen Europoed are less than 50% and there disaprovel of the US double in less than a year. Now great then 50%

[mischief]

Add some Cell-freq relay gear to these babies and you have a viable solution to hostile, oppressive regimes: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.04/start.html?pg=4

Drop a few million over the population centers in the middle of the night with little drag streamers so nobody gets killed, then drop in a few thousand crates of food, cell phones and literature. Set up a Missile Frigate off the coast to relay the voice, Text and Wireless Internet traffic via satellite and just let the rest happen. Isolation and lack of hope is what makes these nasty places possible.

[pseudobrit]

basically, you're writing off seoul. 11 million residents won't be happy.

But they aren't voting. Of course, if Bush II is reinstated, he's got nothing to lose at home, either.