[quote author=“TheChampion”]One thing you can put down in your book, Clinton danced around and you never quite knew where he stood at times. But Bush will tell you what means and mean what he says. He’s so refreshing! I just love him. He’s certainly not the standard politician.
Clinton kept North Korea in check.
No, Bush is certainly not the standard politician. But GOD likes him.
The Clinton administration convinced the DPRK to maintain their commitment to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty through an incentive program. The Agreed Framework was signed and the N. Koreans shut down their reactor and agreed to IAEA inspections.
Bush, on the other hand, snoozed through his first nine presidential months until the attack of September 11th let him know that something was a bit off…the “Axis of Evil” was not quite so important as his Crawford golf game until then…
[quote author=“Josie”]Bush, on the other hand, snoozed through his first nine presidential months until the attack of September 11th let him know that something was a bit off…the “Axis of Evil” was not quite so important as his Crawford golf game until then…
Well now Josie, that’s what Michael Moore insidiously advocated in Farenhight 9-11, but no pundit outside of the extreme left wing believed a word of it. Course he also said some other things as well, like for example that Bush spent an enormous amount of time on vacation and stuff like he couldn’t get his judges passed (as if it were incompetence or something).
BUT…of course, it was all poppycock. LIKE…for example, he never mentioned the unprecendented obstruction behavior of the dems in getting his judges passed. Never mentioned that ALLLLL presidents have working vacations away from the white house.
Oh well, at least now you know and are now officially familiarized with the situation.
[quote author=“TheChampion”]Oh well, at least now you know and are now officially familiarized with the situation.
I knew all of that before you said it, Champ. You did nothing to enlighten me but you DID come off as really smug, so well done.
Lessee now. What do you have to be smug about? Judges passed, judges not passed…who really cares? We were talking about North Korea, and how the Clinton administration successfully negotiated a bilateral understanding between the US and North Korea. They even came close to persuading DPRK to abandon its missile program entirely. Whilst, on the other hand, the Bush administration made no issue of North Korea, its nuclear program, OR its incendiary political stance until after 9/11. They then attacked another nation for supposedly having weapons of mass destruction—all the while almost ignoring nations that actually did have that capability. Oh, they did throw some political rhetoric their way.
Digression: that reminds me of when they captured Saddam Hussein and gave him that medical examination. They had the tongue depressor down his throat when my little boy, who was six at the time and watching along with me, asked, “What, do they think he swallowed the weapons of mass destruction?”
God, that was late-night-tv funny. I laughed and laughed. From the mouths of babes, Champ. Hey, maybe Saddam really did swallow those WMD. :wink: That’s where they went! It’s always the last place you look.
Point is, unlike Saddam (and Monica Lewinsky) Kim Jong-il doesn’t swallow. :D
[quote author=“Josie”]We were talking about North Korea, and how the Clinton administration successfully negotiated a bilateral understanding between the US and North Korea. They even came close to persuading DPRK to abandon its missile program entirely. Whilst
North Korea maintained its development of nuclear weapons for much of the time during which it had agreed not to do so. The agreement with the Clinton administration enriched North Korea while providing time for them to continue their activities unimpeded. The agreement was bad for US interests.
Just answer me this: if North Korea were such a problem, why didn’t Bush make it his #1 priority? I mean, it was expecting too much for him to even mention it pre-9/11 :wink: , but why not after? Why Iraq instead? Iraq had no nuclear program. Time has now proven what MI-6 reports could only claim—and claim they did—prior to the Iraq war—that Iraq had no mass destruction weapon capability.
The Bush administration has only seen an escalation of North Korean aggression.
Josie, Have you seen North Korea test a nuclear weapon? I don’t believe they have. They say they do and our intelligence say they do, as does other intelligence agencies and now you are more than willing to believe them because you think that it will stain Bushes Presidency. Why so willing to believe now? The Democrats have worked daily to discredit all of our intelligence agencies, why now do you believe?
I do believe they have them and to answer your first question about why did Bush not do anything at first? The North Koreans have tens of thousands of artillery pieces and missles pointed at Seoul. Any provacation from us or the South Koreans and Kim Jong Il can kill a couple of million people in short order. But the fact remains, Bill Clinton gave them the reactors supposedly to help them. All he was actually doing was kicking the can (the nuclear threat) down to future administrations.
[quote author=“Humble Servant”]Josie, Have you seen North Korea test a nuclear weapon? I don’t believe they have.
No, no, I haven’t. But they did have that small reactor in Yongbyon. It was acknowledged as a rising security threat by the Clinton administration. They engaged in bilateral talks with DPRK after finding that militaristic unilateralism only provokes them.
-In response to the growing nuclear threat, Clinton orders military exersizes in South Korea, called “Team Spirit”.
-NK then threatens to pull out of the non-proliferation treaty. (i.e. NK is now pissed off at the military aggression.)
-after negotiations, NK backs down from this threat.
-IAEA concludes that NK had nuclear weapons capability.
-The Agreed Framework was signed in 1994. In it, NK agreed to the shutdown of their old reactor and submit to IAEA inspections. In return, the US agreed to fund the building of two light-water reactors, allegedly for civilian power usage.
At which point, the Bush administration takes over.
-Bush makes his famous “axis of evil” statement.
-DPRK takes offense to this. It provokes them. They claim they have an active nuclear program, possibly posturing—who’s to know for certain?
-Bush adopts a multilateral approach to NK, involving Japan and S. Korea.
-Bush halts the shipment of oil to NK, as well as the construction of the light reactors, in direct violation of the Agreed Framework, in an attempt to punish them economically.
-This provokes N. Korea.
-Bush postures and threatens, and then attacks a different country.
-This provokes N. Korea
-North Korea is provoked.
And on and on. It seems to me that the Bush style of dealing with North Korea does nothing but provoke them. Hey, I’m no expert. There is a clear duplicity or inconsistency engaged in by the Bush administration with regards to its policy of aggressive/diplomatic action toward supposed threats of WMD.
now you are more than willing to believe them because you think that it will stain Bushes Presidency.
I’m sorry; you’ve made a sweeping assumption there. I am no fan of the Bush administration, that’s true. I lived in Europe at the time before the Iraq war and watched the BBC’s confusion over what their own MI-6 reports stated vs. the US claims.
Why so willing to believe now? The Democrats have worked daily to discredit all of our intelligence agencies, why now do you believe?
North Korea actually had and has a nuclear reactor. Iraq, as far as I know, never had one. THAT is why I believe that North Korea has WMD capability.
But the fact remains, Bill Clinton gave them the reactors supposedly to help them. All he was actually doing was kicking the can (the nuclear threat) down to future administrations.
I’m no fan of Clinton, either, believe it or not. I just think that administration had a smarter way of dealing with the bullying tactics that NK engages in. They were less provoking than the current administration.
Countries deserve the right to provide power to their citizens with nuclear power. In a rogue regime this becomes a sticky point because of the abuse of that capability into the construction of WMD. Thus the need for the IAEA. Clinton kicked the can? Yes, probably. Point is, Bush let the can lay there for a good long while.
duhhhh…corn bread? If this is a list of the weapons SH had access to, I think you ought to remove nuclear weapons until actual proof of them has been found. STILL WAITING for that.
As far as I am aware, only the CDC and whatever corresponding agency in Russia that deals with infectious disease are in possession of the only viable samples of the smallpox (one word, not two) virus. If you are intimating that Saddam had access to this you are quite mistaken.
During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam used mustard gas, tabun, sarin and GF. It is widely whispered that he procured these nerve agents from the USA, whose best intrests at the time were served in bringing Iran to its knees. When attempting to produce the nerve gases tabun and sarin itself, Iraq was only able to produce gas of extremely poor quality with a very short shelf life.
Anthrax production did indeed occur in Iraq. They obtained eight strains of anthrax by mail order from a US company in 1985, and then set about weaponizing it.
Dirty bombs? Is there proof of any weapons containing depleted uranium having been found? Anything spiked with plutonium? This is not a sarcastic question; I am honestly wondering. Please provide a link with this information? I missed that story, apparently.
duhhhh…corn bread? If this is a list of the weapons SH had access to, I think you ought to remove nuclear weapons until actual proof of them has been found. STILL WAITING for that
I never had nuclear on the list that Saddam had. You stated that you believe that North Korea has WMD’s because it has a nuclear reactor. As you know you don’t need a nuclear reactor for chemical and biological weapons.
Thank you for correcting me on smallpox, if you pay attention you will find typos or mispellings everywhere.
Wikepedia has served you well, unfortunately it has not given you any common sense. The leader in North Korea is a madman and cannot be trusted, his country borders one our our allies, that would be South Korea, and we do not want to imperil the 30 or 40 million inhabitants. Unfortunately nuclear weapons get you instant respect in the world. Whenever a country has the potential of killing millions of people in a instant you have to treat them a little differently than you would a rogue regime. North Korea has no power at the bargaining table other than his military might. His country is starving because of his reign and the only thing he can do is make threats in hopes of being quieted by concessions.
So Josie, you are going on and on complaining about the way Bush handles things, how would you deal with North Korea? If you give them anything they will take it and continue working on their weapons. What would you do?