North Korea

[vpkozel]

Will someone please tell me how this countries actions are any different from the old mob racket of paying protection money. I just do not get how people (e.g., The New York Times Editorial Board) can say that we should just pay Kim off with food, fuel oil, hookers, and nice party hats. Haven't we been down this road before? Did it work? Has it ever worked?

[slydevl]

Depends on just how nice those party hats are.

[gridfaniker]

Good article here by Ann Coulter (http://www.anncoulter.org/) about North Korea's true intentions.

In the mid-1990s Bill Clinton, with assistance from Jimmy Carter, made a deal with North Korea by which the US would provide shitloads of fuel oil and nuclear reactors (to produce electricity) in exchange for North Korea shutting down its nuclear weapons program.

Bill and Jimmy of course puffed out their chests and declared their foreign policy genius. Turns out North Korea, as soon as they got their oil and reactors, actually began ratcheting up their nuke weapons program. Smooth move Bill.

[hasbeen99]

Originally posted by vpkozel
Haven't we been down this road before? Did it work? Has it ever worked?

Not on a permanent basis, no. But it could work temporarily until we settle our front-burner issue in Iraq. Fighting a two-front war with a strong possibility of China being involved does not give me warm fuzzies. Taking care of Iraq first would probably be the wiser move, even if we had to buy off North Korea for a while. JMHO.

[lj4three]

Originally posted by gridfaniker
Good article here by Ann Coulter (http://www.anncoulter.org/) about North Korea's true intentions.

In the mid-1990s Bill Clinton, with assistance from Jimmy Carter, made a deal with North Korea by which the US would provide shitloads of fuel oil and nuclear reactors (to produce electricity) in exchange for North Korea shutting down its nuclear weapons program.

Bill and Jimmy of course puffed out their chests and declared their foreign policy genius. Turns out North Korea, as soon as they got their oil and reactors, actually began ratcheting up their nuke weapons program. Smooth move Bill.

actually, NK ratcheted up their nuke program when they recieved only 5% of what was agreed upon.

[gridfaniker]

Originally posted by lj4three


actually, NK ratcheted up their nuke program when they recieved only 5% of what was agreed upon.

That's five-percent too much in my opinion. You can deny it all you want, but North Korea got all it needed to accelerate its nuke weapons program from Slick Willie. You think if they got everything they had coming from this agreement that they wouldn't have kept their nuke program going? if you do, you're a fool, because the North Korea has already admitted that they never stopped developing nuclear weapons.

[kshead]

Just curious here, but does anyone have a solution aside from blaming Bill? I mean, the administration has pretty much backed itself into a corner by using a strategy - as they have done on some other issues where it has backfired - of "simply not doing what Bill Clinton did". In this case they had their bluff called. Now what?

In other words, even though Bill got us into this mess. How do we get out?

[gridfaniker]

Originally posted by kshead
Just curious here, but does anyone have a solution aside from blaming Bill? I mean, the administration has pretty much backed itself into a corner by using a strategy - as they have done on some other issues where it has backfired - of "simply not doing what Bill Clinton did". In this case they had their bluff called. Now what?

In other words, even though Bill got us into this mess. How do we get out?

Sure part of the solution is to not give into their demands, which amount to blackmail, step up sanctions against them. Another part is to build a missile defense system to protect our country from these and like-minded wackos.

[Piper]

missle defense = pipe dream. Until something can be shown that can actually work, we'd better start thinking about dealing with folks like North Korea as if they got it and can use it.

They'd be pretty stupid to fire any missles at us seeing as we can turn them into parking lot space. There's a start.

[lj4three]

Originally posted by gridfaniker


Sure part of the solution is to not give into their demands, which amount to blackmail, step up sanctions against them. Another part is to build a missile defense system to protect our country from these and like-minded wackos.

grid- if a country A promises another country B that it will provide XYZ if they stop their nuclear program, country B expects XYZ. if XYZ is not provided, then the nuclear missile program will be reimplemented. Its pretty easy logic. Then, after Country A talks non-stop shit about country B, and verbally threatens the sovereignty of country B- dont you think country b might be a little pissed off??

Once again, our downfall will be fucked up foreign policy. this shit is wreckless, and was wreckless...

[meatpile]

All these fucking brown people keep messing with us.

LJ - can't you talk to them?

[vpkozel]

Originally posted by lj4three


grid- if a country A promises another country B that it will provide XYZ if they stop their nuclear program, country B expects XYZ. if XYZ is not provided, then the nuclear missile program will be reimplemented. Its pretty easy logic. Then, after Country A talks non-stop shit about country B, and verbally threatens the sovereignty of country B- dont you think country b might be a little pissed off??

Once again, our downfall will be fucked up foreign policy. this shit is wreckless, and was wreckless...

LJ are you somehow implying that the Bush adminsitration caused this to happen? NK has already admitted that it NEVER stopped working on its nuclear program! They started back the day after they hoodwinked us in '94. Also, you mentioned that they started back because we only delivered 5% of what we promised, yet imply that the Bush admin. is somehow to blame - he has only been in office 2 years and the agreement is 9 years old. That math doesn't work. Regardless, what I want to know is how is this different from the mob racket of paying protection? And in this case paying it to someone who you know is not to be trusted.

[kshead]

Originally posted by vpkozel


LJ are you somehow implying that the Bush adminsitration caused this to happen? NK has already admitted that it NEVER stopped working on its nuclear program! They started back the day after they hoodwinked us in '94. Also, you mentioned that they started back because we only delivered 5% of what we promised, yet imply that the Bush admin. is somehow to blame - he has only been in office 2 years and the agreement is 9 years old. That math doesn't work. Regardless, what I want to know is how is this different from the mob racket of paying protection? And in this case paying it to someone who you know is not to be trusted.

It's not different. Except that it's not the mob. When it's two countries, it's "negotiating". :rolleyes: I don't blame Bush for giving away reactors by the way. I do blame Bush for being beligerent and threatening while apparently not being prepared for the possibility that North Korea might laugh us off when threatened. And I'm not saying I have all the answers either - just that I wonder how much the administration thought this through past their "not Clinton" policy.

I'm with Piper on missile defense. It doesn't work.

[gridfaniker]

Originally posted by lj4three


grid- if a country A promises another country B that it will provide XYZ if they stop their nuclear program, country B expects XYZ. if XYZ is not provided, then the nuclear missile program will be reimplemented. Its pretty easy logic. Then, after Country A talks non-stop shit about country B, and verbally threatens the sovereignty of country B- dont you think country b might be a little pissed off??

Once again, our downfall will be fucked up foreign policy. this shit is wreckless, and was wreckless...

Country B, as you refer to those little yellow bastards, never stopped their nuclear weapons program, even as they were getting XYZ...even as they were using XYZ to build nukes. They've said as much. What don't you understand about that?

[gridfaniker]

Originally posted by Piper
missle defense = pipe dream. Until something can be shown that can actually work, we'd better start thinking about dealing with folks like North Korea as if they got it and can use it.

They'd be pretty stupid to fire any missles at us seeing as we can turn them into parking lot space. There's a start.

I guess you have to first develop a missile defense program before you can show someone whether or not it works. You know, like flying to the moon was a pipe dream until NASA developed a space program and showed people it could actually work. But that's just my screwed up logic.

[vpkozel]

Originally posted by kshead


It's not different. Except that it's not the mob. When it's two countries, it's "negotiating". :rolleyes: I don't blame Bush for giving away reactors by the way. I do blame Bush for being beligerent and threatening while apparently not being prepared for the possibility that North Korea might laugh us off when threatened. And I'm not saying I have all the answers either - just that I wonder how much the administration thought this through past their "not Clinton" policy.

I'm with Piper on missile defense. It doesn't work.

Umm, Clinton was the guy to give them all the freebies, not Bush. In the end, I follow Reagan's philosophy of "trust, but verify."

[kshead]

Originally posted by vpkozel


Umm, Clinton was the guy to give them all the freebies, not Bush.

Umm...I acknowlegded that. (See quote: "I don't blame Bush for giving the reactors away") :) It doesn't change what I said about Bush though. Being threatening and not having an answer when our threats our challenged makes us look stupid. It also gives other countries reason to challenge us if they think we are just blustering and bullshitting. Merely pointing out that Bush appears to have no answer for this - regardless of what may have transpired before Bush was elected.

[Piper]

Originally posted by gridfaniker


I guess you have to first develop a missile defense program before you can show someone whether or not it works. You know, like flying to the moon was a pipe dream until NASA developed a space program and showed people it could actually work. But that's just my screwed up logic.

It's not like we haven't spent the money, grid. We have. It doesn't work. Now and then we can intercept a very simple missle, much less target the real one over the dummy warheads.

They ain't close, grid. And even when they do, it's just another technology race that doesn't really guarantee us anything.

[kshead]

I think the last missile defense test went 2 for 5 (3 for 5 max). And that was with cheating. We labeled the targets and provided no decoys so the labeled targets could be hit without interference. Not encouraging.

[gridfaniker]

Originally posted by kshead
I think the last missile defense test went 2 for 5 (3 for 5 max). And that was with cheating. We labeled the targets and provided no decoys so the labeled targets could be hit without interference. Not encouraging.

see there. it needs work.

[kshead]

:D

Better make that tons of work. As in, when it comes to hitting the targets, you'd have a better chance of finding your kids if you lost them at Myrtle Beach this summer, went home without them, and then tried to find them after getting back home to NY.

[gridfaniker]

Myrtle's really that crowded in June huh? Maybe we'll just go down to Cheat Lake. It's only a five and a half hour drive. Then swing up through Wheeling on the way home.

[T_Schroll]

Missile Defense isn't working now because we're just now beginning to impliment it. We were limited as to what we could even build much less test under the SALT Treaties. That's why Bush wanted out of them. It's a feasible concept and it can be accomplished using several methods. Airborne lasers are one, the kill vehicles (intereceptors) another, and the Brilliant Pebbles system is a third.

[kshead]

Originally posted by gridfaniker
Myrtle's really that crowded in June huh? Maybe we'll just go down to Cheat Lake. It's only a five and a half hour drive. Then swing up through Wheeling on the way home.

Best analogy I could think of spur of the moment - plus we were talking about that yesterday. :) But yeah, it's pretty bad. We quit going in June and July because the lodging rates are much higher and there are tons of families. Plus, the first or second week of June is Beach Week for most of the heathen high school graduates across the South and Mid-Atlantic. That might get on your nerves. I don't know how you like to do dinner with your family (eating in or out), but during peak summer months you have to be ready and arrived at most restaurants by no later than 4:30-5 or the lines are out of the door. We started going the last week of August because I just could not stomach that hurrying-to-eat shit. Oh, and I can pretty much get on any golf course I want to play in late August.

Cheat is nice. Might be a little chilly in early June to swim a lot, but if you are used to cold water swimming you should be ok. It also backs up against Coopers Rock state forest which is great if you are into the outdoors. My bro married his first wife there. It's beautiful.

Sorry for the interruption folks. :D