bjfinste said:
Yes to my knowledge this is true. The one cluster of lights in N Korea that you can see in the 1st image is Pyongyang.
N. Korea Announces they Have Nukes and Will Not Disarm
- Thread starter smurphy
- Start date
Yes to my knowledge this is true. The one cluster of lights in N Korea that you can see in the 1st image is Pyongyang.
Raymond is right...you all can thank Bill Clinton for giving North Korea food and medicine and cash as well as valuable nuclear technology while he was in office. All North Korea had to do was stick to their treaties....(no nuke missles)....yeah right!!!..... Thanks Bill you jackass....Clinton trusted a rogue psycho communist drunk dictator and look where we are now?
Nice job Clinton you dip shit.................................................make sure all you libs all blame Bush for this one. I dare you.
Nice job Clinton you dip shit.................................................make sure all you libs all blame Bush for this one. I dare you.
Last edited:
Is this an example of Bias??? From a CNN story...CNN Story
"McClellan noted that North Korea violated the 1994 Agreed Framework, a bilateral pact negotiated with the United States that froze Pyongyang's nuclear facilities in return for energy aid. That deal collapsed in late 2002 when U.S. officials accused the North of violating the accord by pursuing a secret nuclear program. The North denied the charge, withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and restarted its frozen nuclear facilities."
This makes it sound like they didn't do a thing from 1994 untill they were "accused" in 2002. :cursin: Is this bias or not?
"McClellan noted that North Korea violated the 1994 Agreed Framework, a bilateral pact negotiated with the United States that froze Pyongyang's nuclear facilities in return for energy aid. That deal collapsed in late 2002 when U.S. officials accused the North of violating the accord by pursuing a secret nuclear program. The North denied the charge, withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and restarted its frozen nuclear facilities."
This makes it sound like they didn't do a thing from 1994 untill they were "accused" in 2002. :cursin: Is this bias or not?
Turfgrass said:
How would you know either way? There were inspectors there until 2002 when they were kicked out after the cowboy had to throw out his version of 'the axis of evil.' There was no evidence that NK was reprocessing the spent fuel rods as verified by the inspectors. The rods were sealed and inspected until 2002.
Unlike in Iran, we know exactly where the nuclear facilities are in NK.
That regime is 10x as evil and nutty as saddam ever was, but let's try to take a look at this from a different perspective.
The cowboy lumps NK in with Iraq and Iran. We attack Iraq. Major rumblings about us attacking Iran. WTF do you think is gonna cross that psychopaths mind? Who is next?
That's why throwing out BS comments like 'axis of evil' and 'bring it on' are dangerous. Maybe it makes him/us feel tough, but all it does is cause problems down the road, as we've seen and we're seeing.
You guys can blame Clinton for not following up on *our* promise to build light-water reactors, but to blame him for trying to solve that crisis with diplomacy and aid and inspections is ignorant.
Turfgrass said:
I liken it to the Iraq situation, in a way. They were much further along than Iraq (not difficult since Iraq had no active program), but similar in that they were both treading water until they got the opportunity to move forward from whatever point they were at.
As far as 'doing anything', well, all of their fuel rods were under seal, under the inspectors watch, under cameras watch. We didn't build the alternative reactors like we promised, so yes, they continued operating their reactors for energy, but also leaving open the option of dual use if/when the time came that they thought they needed to.
That time came when Dubya opened his big mouth. They were far enough along in their program that they were a very short jump away from possibly being able to produce a missle or two fairly quickly. So I really don't think it's unreasonable to think that they were at the same point (far along) in 1994 as they were in 2002.
So at that point, there are two viable options. 1. Let things continue as they were, with inspectors keeping them where they were, albeit very close. 2. Pre-emptively strike their facilities.
One option that is/was NOT viable is to lump them in with countries that you plan on attacking in the very near future and just let it hang out there.
remember that iraq had their own little reactor ready to go hot when the israeli`s stepped in.....thank the lord....somebody got it right...
n.k. may sell the technology....and that`s worrisome....i still think that china is the big dog in the region and it serves no purpose for them to let kim go crazy...
the really sad part is that we didn`t verify squat......nothing...we whiffed.....even the humanitarian food aid we sent to n. korea was reportedly diverted to their military...lol,...american-korean speaking monitors were supposed to have unscheduled,unsupervised visits to check on things....never happened...
floods and famine emaciated n. koreans,but,by most accounts,the money went toward armaments,not butter.....
now,it seems,that n korea has made threats of nuclear conflagration its only functional export industry, besides the weapons themselves.....
this will happen in the middle east unless it`s stopped....why the europeans don`t get it,i`ll never understand...they never were able to see the big picture...the future...just short term profits...
this why we must learn from the n.korean appeasement boondoggle...
had saddam had the bomb,he`d still be in kuwait..and could have possible grabbed some saudi oil fields to boot....or israel would be a memory...as well as much of the world`s oil supply...
we can argue about who`s to blame...the important thing is to put a plug in it if humanly possible....it`s that important...
n.k. may sell the technology....and that`s worrisome....i still think that china is the big dog in the region and it serves no purpose for them to let kim go crazy...
the really sad part is that we didn`t verify squat......nothing...we whiffed.....even the humanitarian food aid we sent to n. korea was reportedly diverted to their military...lol,...american-korean speaking monitors were supposed to have unscheduled,unsupervised visits to check on things....never happened...
floods and famine emaciated n. koreans,but,by most accounts,the money went toward armaments,not butter.....
now,it seems,that n korea has made threats of nuclear conflagration its only functional export industry, besides the weapons themselves.....
this will happen in the middle east unless it`s stopped....why the europeans don`t get it,i`ll never understand...they never were able to see the big picture...the future...just short term profits...
this why we must learn from the n.korean appeasement boondoggle...
had saddam had the bomb,he`d still be in kuwait..and could have possible grabbed some saudi oil fields to boot....or israel would be a memory...as well as much of the world`s oil supply...
we can argue about who`s to blame...the important thing is to put a plug in it if humanly possible....it`s that important...
I agree it is Clinton's fault as well, but what I don't understand is that Bush's Axis of Evil contains N Korea. We attack a country that has no WMD's or nuclear power, but yet we have a country coming out and saying we have them, basically taunting us and making us look like idiots in my opinion.
We didn't now for sure till 2002. And then we didn't believe them just called them names. Clinton was gone late 2000. Since we will not talk to them last three years it is believed they moved form a possible one nuke in 2001 to 4 to 6 now . I would say someone did a very poor job last 3 years. It is funny how they say we have them for last three years and we look for them in Iraq.
I just throw this out as a "what if" or could it be possible that Iran and N. Korea are just bluffing. I think the world is seeing what has happened in Iraq with the general peoples flocking to the voting booths and enjoying a taste of freedom and this has scared countries that have no freedom, or the ones that control their peoples. Could it be they don't want their own peoples to get any ideas about freedom and start a revolt of some sort. Could these dictatorships just be trying to squeeze their grips on their countries? While saying they have nukes brings attention on themselves, they could be setting themselves up to have a bargaining chip to keep the US or any freedom loving country away from their people in exchange for not using any possible nukes they have. Maybe they could get other things through a bluff of something they don't even have, like poker. They know the US military is spread a little thin to actually do a whole lot right now banking they would blow out of Iraq to start something else. The middle east peoples must see the potential for true freedom in their neighboring country of Iraq and start dreaming about the potential for this in their own country. Iran in particular must be concerned about this sort of thing spreading into their borders and their people. This all might be a desperate attempt to maintain control of their country. As I said, this is just an idea. I'd be interested in others thoughts if everyone thinks I'm just nuts. I just think freedom is infectious and real change starts from the grass roots levels. I think these dictatorships may be a littles scared of losing control.
If Iraq was all smiles and sunshine, then maybe. If Iraq becomes prosperous, less violent, and really shows some Western qualities, then I would think those leaders (especially in Iran) would be fearful of losing control of their people. ...But I don't know how having nukes would allow them to control their own people any greater. It's not like Iran would nuke Tehran because people started expressing themselves more.
I think these countries really do want nukes - not to use them - but to be part of the "prestigious" nations of the world. It's all about pride and bragging rights. They want respect - like someone with a gun gets on the street.
And I wonder how could we possibly keep anyone from building or aquiring nukes forever? It seems impossible. Pakistan is every bit as dangerous as Iran or N Korea IMO. If anyone is vulnerable to leaking nukes to terrorists - they are as at risk as anyone. We haven't seen the end of the world come from them ...yet. It's not like Iran or N. Korea would be any worse of a threat to us IMO.
I think these countries really do want nukes - not to use them - but to be part of the "prestigious" nations of the world. It's all about pride and bragging rights. They want respect - like someone with a gun gets on the street.
And I wonder how could we possibly keep anyone from building or aquiring nukes forever? It seems impossible. Pakistan is every bit as dangerous as Iran or N Korea IMO. If anyone is vulnerable to leaking nukes to terrorists - they are as at risk as anyone. We haven't seen the end of the world come from them ...yet. It's not like Iran or N. Korea would be any worse of a threat to us IMO.
The Iran/Syria new found alliance could be detrimental to both--
my concern is Russia coming out of no where and saying they will ship missiles to Syria after almost 15 years of not shipping arms to them--payback for our involvement in Ukraine elections methinks.
my concern is Russia coming out of no where and saying they will ship missiles to Syria after almost 15 years of not shipping arms to them--payback for our involvement in Ukraine elections methinks.
Pakistan is every bit as dangerous as Iran or N Korea IMO
That's the thing I've been arguing here for a while now, smurphy.
India and Pakistan have come closer than anyone else in history to all out nuclear war, yet we didn't see western forces rush in to disarm/destroy their reactors.
Why was that?
That's the thing I've been arguing here for a while now, smurphy.
India and Pakistan have come closer than anyone else in history to all out nuclear war, yet we didn't see western forces rush in to disarm/destroy their reactors.
Why was that?
BECAUSE CHRISTO, NOBODY GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THOSE WORTHLESS PIECES OF CRAP. LET THEM BLOW EACH OTHER UP. THEY ARE LIKE THE MEXICANS OF THE MIDDLE EAST.
Mr Christo,
Do you actually think India and Pakistan were close to a nuke war? They both "playball" with the USA. It sure looked to me like that whole nuke standoff situation was a beautiful "setup" to keep all those muslims pre-occupied while we took on Afghanistan. Mushariff played his role so well that he was brought to the US later and received praise from the whitehouse. (not to mention the notorious Pakistani ISI setting up the taliban in the first place in Afghanistan). After that "nuke standoff"...I read where we later put "advisors" in Pakistan to help with their nuke safe-guards.
TT
Do you actually think India and Pakistan were close to a nuke war? They both "playball" with the USA. It sure looked to me like that whole nuke standoff situation was a beautiful "setup" to keep all those muslims pre-occupied while we took on Afghanistan. Mushariff played his role so well that he was brought to the US later and received praise from the whitehouse. (not to mention the notorious Pakistani ISI setting up the taliban in the first place in Afghanistan). After that "nuke standoff"...I read where we later put "advisors" in Pakistan to help with their nuke safe-guards.
TT
Though India has not made any official statements about the size of it nuclear arsenal, the NRDC estimates that India has a stockpile of approximately 30-35 nuclear warheads
.........................................................................................
I am sure Pakistan has at least that many nukes also. We don't ever have to worry about these two countrys exchanging nukes. They are neighbors and even though they hate each other they know that to release the big ones means the end of their countrys. It also would probably mean Nuclear winter and doomsday for most of the world depending on how the wind was blowing. If there is one thing to be said about India and Pakistan is they are not that stupid. They use theirs for posturing and getting what they want. Sounds like what N Korea is doing.
.........................................................................................
I am sure Pakistan has at least that many nukes also. We don't ever have to worry about these two countrys exchanging nukes. They are neighbors and even though they hate each other they know that to release the big ones means the end of their countrys. It also would probably mean Nuclear winter and doomsday for most of the world depending on how the wind was blowing. If there is one thing to be said about India and Pakistan is they are not that stupid. They use theirs for posturing and getting what they want. Sounds like what N Korea is doing.
