CNN is reporting that North Korea has tested a Nuke

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Without being apoligetic to the Bush aministration, how could ANY president have stopped this? 3 previous administrations werent able to, so short of invading NK, this was unavoidable.

And as far as invading NK, get real. All we know about China's contept for NK is what we read in the news. I wouldnt be so sure China wouldnt jump in to their defense should we land troops there. And I dont think there is anyone in any party affiliation or administration that thinks we have a fighting chance with a ground war with China.

It isnt really ANYONE's fault. It just was unavoidable. Whether it's the wackos on the right assigning blame to Clinton or you freakin bleeding heart liberals on the left assigning blame to Bush, grow up and think like an adult. Whining babies, all of you.

I think Iraq certainly accelerated the situation.

Bush labelled 3 countries as being the "axis of evil," and then proceeds to invade one country unilaterally and unprovoked. so how does North Korea prevent the same thing from happening to them? by building a nuke. the same thing Iran, the third country on the axis, is trying to do.

meanwhile, both countries know that we can't respond militarily because we've already got our army locked up losing two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. we'll never launch military action against NK now that they've got the bomb unless they were to do something completely rediculous like sell a nuke to a foreign country / terrorist organization.

So you honestly believe NK would have tested their nukes later had we not gone into Iraq? lol I guess we all have our opinions And whether or not we are engaged in Iraq or not, for the reasons I stated I honestly dont believe we would put troops on the ground for a land war with NK.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Jetster
did anyone read this post form nytimes? it has some excellent reasons why we are here today:

Jason Jarvis (Seoul, Korea):

What should we do now? This is easy: bilateral negotiations. It is what Bush should have done from the beginning, and what they still should do.

The Bush administration has totally miscalculated on North Korea. A hawkish stance is doomed to fail for a variety of reasons:

1) Koreans (culturally) NEVER respond positively to being verbally abused in public, much less physically or financially assaulted. Such behavior always meets with a more over-the-top response so that the Korean can maintain face. By failing to understand Korean culture and Confucian tradition, Bush?s policies have no hope of success. Everything the North does is predictable, and it isnt because I am Nostradamus! Contrary to suggestions that the North is irrational, they are just acting like Koreans. Of course, in the Boltonized world of US foreign policy, such analysis is seen as irrelevant and useless.

2) No one else in the region (except Japan) has any interest in regime collapse or change. China, Russia and South Korea fear the flood of refugees, and South Korea in particular is deathly afraid of quick or unplanned reunification for financial reasons (Germany didnt really paint a rosy picture of such a future). Young South Koreans are quick to say unification is a great idea, but the reality of the sacrifices that would have to be made would set in quickly and it would strain a society already undergoing a mammoth amount of cultural and generational change.

3) The US/South Korea alliance is shaky to say the least. Most South Koreans (particularly younger/college students) fear/blame the US more than the North for the current problem, despite the hawkish stance of some South Korean conservative leaders. This is going to be more true in the long run (regardless of who wins the next election?most likely a SK conservative/hawk) as the younger generations increasingly move into positions of power. South Korea and China are also increasingly tied by business and have long standing historical ties that are growing in conjunction with China?s regional rise in power. It is obvious now that South Korea and China are on one side and Japan and the US are on the other. The nuclear test could alter this, but the missile test firing had marginal effects, so it remains to be seen how much movement there is in public opinion.

3.5) The alliance between Japan and the US is hopelessly unpopular in China and South Korea, meaning that 6 party talks may never really work. No one in these countries trusts Japan due to (a) their failure to apologize for WWII atrocities and continued visits to Yasukuni, (b) ongoing territorial disputes with all neighbors (Russia included)-this is a particularly sensitive issue for South Koreans-, (c) the whitewashing of WW2 atrocities in Japanese history textbooks.

4) Iraq taught everyone (Iran included) that its better to actually have nukes than to be suspected of it and not have them. There was little chance of US military action before due to the proximity of Northern artillery to Seoul (Clinton era estimates suggest over 1 million casualties from 1 day of North Korean shelling). There is even less chance of escalation now that Japan is a legitimate nuclear target for the North.

In the end, war isnt an option. To win is to lose as millions of South Koreans would have to be sacrificed for a victory (making it the definition of pyrrich). The six party talks have officially failed, and 6 years of isolation has gotten us nowhere. George really hates to admit defeat, but I hope for the sake of myself and my many friends here in the South and in Japan that he swallows his pride and comes to the table. It is time to make a change.

Jason Jarvis
Assistant Dean and Lecturer
Korea Development Institute Graduate School of Public Policy and Management
Seoul, Korea

That's a well thought out analysis...
one I actually agree with.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: alien42
closed door policy at work.

You mean, communism at work. Propaganda, war, and the cult of personality are the only products that a powerful authoritarian government is capable of producing effectively.


As to this find-a-President-to-blame game for the partisans, that's just ridiculous. We are not, cannot, and should not be the world's nursemaid.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: jrenz
Korean news headlines... "NUCLEAR LAUNCH DETECTED"

Looks like N Korea rushed.

Yeah, NK teched up a lot faster than we expected

Not really, there was a former General / Military Analyist on CNN last night that said we thought NK has had nukes for as many as a few years, this just confirmation.

He also pointed out that they have nukes, but they are still a few years from having weaponized versions.

I guess you didn't get the reference.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: alien42
closed door policy at work.

You mean, communism at work.

not really.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: alien42
closed door policy at work.

You mean, communism at work.

not really.

NK is not communist?

No, seriously. The very underlying principals of marxist-leninist communism are force, aggression, and the cult of personality. To force and spread a singular opinion of a "perfect world" through violent revolution.

 

[pkme2]

When a certain mentality decides that only its needs are important, we got a serious problem.......
Talking will never solve this problem, history has shown that. First NK, next Iran, next who else.

Handling a crazy person means action. Remember Kadaffi? Need I say more?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Vic
No, seriously. The very underlying principals of marxist-leninist communism are force, aggression, and the cult of personality. To force and spread a singular opinion of a "perfect world" through violent revolution.

no, not really.

north korea is more facist than anything else.

 

[blackangst1]

The thing that is interesting, is no one seems to mention the fact that Bush actually halted what Clinton put in place as far as NK nuclear capabilities. So if anything, Bush slowed the process. Here's a few excerpts:

This negotiation (between Kim and Clinton) led to the Agreed Framework of October 21, 1994

The Agreed Framework:
Provisions, Implementation, Costs, Future Issues
The heart of the Agreed Framework was a U.S. commitment to provide North Korea
with a package of nuclear, energy, economic, and diplomatic benefits; in return North Korea would halt the operations and infrastructure development of its nuclear program.12 The Agreed Framework committed North Korea to ?freeze its graphite-moderated reactors and related facilities? with the freeze monitored by the IAEA. Ambassador Robert Gallucci, who negotiated for the United States, stated that ?related facilities? include the plutonium reprocessing plant and 8,000 stored fuel rods. Clinton Administration officials reportedly said that a secret ?confidential minute? to the Agreed Framework prohibits North Korea from construction of new nuclear facilities elsewhere in North Korea.
Gallucci and other officials emphasized that the key policy objective of the Clinton
Administration was to secure a freeze of North Korea?s nuclear program in order to prevent North Korea from producing large quantities of nuclear weapons grade plutonium through the operations of the 50 and 200 megawatt reactors and the plutonium reprocessing plant at Yongbyon. Gallucci referred to the prospect of North Korea producing enough plutonium annually for nearly 30 nuclear weapons if the 50 and 200 megawatt reactors went into operation.

Benefits to North Korea
Light Water Nuclear Reactors. North Korea was to receive two light water
reactors (LWRs) with a generating capacity of approximately 2,000 megawatts. The Agreed Framework set a ?target date? of 2003. The United States was obligated to organize an international consortium arrangement for the acquisition and financing of the reactors. The Clinton Administration and the governments of South Korea, Japan, and other countries
established in March 1995 the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) to coordinate the provision of the LWRs. After the groundbreaking at the reactor site in August 1997, KEDO officials changed the estimated completion date from 2003 to 2007; other experts predicted a much later date. The laying of the foundation for the LWRs ocurred in August 2002 just before the Kelly mission to North Korea and the Bush
Administration?s subsequent suspension of construction.

Oil at No Cost. The Agreed Framework committed the United States to provide
500,000 metric tons of heavy oil to North Korea annually until the first of the two light water eactors became operational. The oil shipments continued until KEDO?s decision in
November 2002 to cancel future shipments..

Lifting the U.S. Economic Embargo. The Agreed Framework specifies that within
three months from October 21, 1994, the two sides would reduce barriers to trade and
investment, including restrictions on telecommunications services and financial transactions. This required the Clinton Administration to relax the U.S. economic embargo on North Korea, which the Truman Administration and Congress put in place during the Korean War.
On January 20, 1995, the Administration announced initial, limited measures. North Korea complained loudly that these measures failed to meet the commitment stated in the Agreed Framework. In U.S.-North Korean talks in September 1999, the United States agreed to end a broader range of economic sanctions in exchange for a North Korean moratorium on future missile testing. President Clinton ordered the end of most economic sanctions in June 2000. Since then, North Korea has not met with any American firms to talk about trade and/or investment opportunities and has rejected an offer from the American Chamber of Commerce in Seoul to send a business delegation to Pyongyang.

Disposition of Fuel Rods from the Five Megawatt Reactor. The Agreed
Framework provided for the storage of the rods in North Korea under IAEA monitoring and a North Korean promise not to reprocess plutonium from the rods. ( :roll: ) also provided for subsequent talks on the ?ultimate disposition? of the rods.

-------------------- SNIP -------------------------

So basically Clinton provided aid, food, oil, and light water reactors in exchange for a "promise" from Kim he wouldnt use rods from said reactors for evil intentions. Uh huh. President Bush dismantled these provisions.

As I've previously stated I dont think today's test could have been prevented; however, people saying Bush accelerated it is bogus. Clinton gave him the technology, and Bush tried to dismantle it.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/IB91141.pdf

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
The thing that is interesting, is no one seems to mention the fact that Bush actually halted what Clinton put in place as far as NK nuclear capabilities.

So if anything, Bush slowed the process. Here's a few excerpts:

This negotiation between Kim and Clinton) led to the Agreed Framework of October 21, 1994

OMFGBBQ :shocked:

Are you another Republicans saying it's not all Clinton's fault???

 

[Lemon law]

The question in my mind is not the NY Times take which is well thought out---the question is how this will effect the American sheeple who quite clearly who are not informed and don't think deeply about complex problems----Mr.&Mrs. John Q. Public are still the plastic silly putty that will drive the mid-term elections unless diabolt has the fix in already.

Here we are---some 12 hours after the fact---and all GWB has done so far is call the test a threat--although I ackowledge a prior post when the crisis was hours old to the effect the knee jerk blame the dems was already starting up.

But the question is how will the white house spin it in public---and since practical military options are almost non-existant---what private diplomatic efforts will be started up now that the GWB administration is forced to act---and how will the white house spin it diplomatically in public to try to force the larger world community to see it GWB's way?

But my assertion is that its much easier to get a concensus by behind the scenes diplomatic negotiations---but when diplomacy is done in the press---the concensus building becomes much harder to acheive.

And the other question is will the dems finally become better at spinning this their way---which might have the effect of forcing GWB into reverting to bozo the clown diplomacy?---which would have the effect of just opening up the worm can with unpredictable results.

But in some ways---this North&South Korea split is one of the last unresolved Yalta partitioning legacies of ww2 yet to be resolved by subsequent events---the VietNams are now united,
so are the two Germanies---the Soviet Union has lost its entire Eastern blok---the Tito Yugoslavia has broken up with bloody results--but now seems semi-stable--Iran under the Shah is no more---Iraq is being tested----------yet the two Koreas are frozen in time---with still no official peace from the Korean war fought over a half century ago---and now N. Koria has
raised the ante---while Washington slept---and instead of debating for endless years on the shape of the conference table---we have a debate frozen in time---if Washington will even talk to N. Korea directly---or needs four or five extra parties to gang up with it?

Were this not real---it would be an interesting soap opera to watch---but sadly its a real crisis that changes the shape of the world---and the stakes are very high--it scares the hell out of me--------my only question is---which is the nuttier---Kim of Korea or GWB.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Vic
No, seriously. The very underlying principals of marxist-leninist communism are force, aggression, and the cult of personality. To force and spread a singular opinion of a "perfect world" through violent revolution.

no, not really.

north korea is more facist than anything else.

Right.... :roll:

For all its horrors, fascism is at least well-known for being able to spark an economy. If NK was fascist, it might actually have some kind of industry besides military, and the people might actually have food on their plates and electrical power in their homes.
Educate yourself.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blackangst1
The thing that is interesting, is no one seems to mention the fact that Bush actually halted what Clinton put in place as far as NK nuclear capabilities.

So if anything, Bush slowed the process. Here's a few excerpts:

This negotiation between Kim and Clinton) led to the Agreed Framework of October 21, 1994

OMFGBBQ :shocked:

Are you another Republicans saying it's not all Clinton's fault???

No, if you actually read what I posted, I AM blaming Clinton moreso than GWB.

And Im a Democrat for the record.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blackangst1
The thing that is interesting, is no one seems to mention the fact that Bush actually halted what Clinton put in place as far as NK nuclear capabilities.

So if anything, Bush slowed the process. Here's a few excerpts:

This negotiation between Kim and Clinton) led to the Agreed Framework of October 21, 1994

OMFGBBQ :shocked:

Are you another Republicans saying it's not all Clinton's fault???

No, if you actually read what I posted, I AM blaming Clinton moreso than GWB.

And Im a Democrat for the record.

To Dave, a "Republican" is anyone who questions his lies and his trolling.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Vic
No, seriously. The very underlying principals of marxist-leninist communism are force, aggression, and the cult of personality. To force and spread a singular opinion of a "perfect world" through violent revolution.

no, not really.

north korea is more facist than anything else.

Right.... :roll:

For all its horrors, fascism is at least well-known for being able to spark an economy. If NK was fascist, it might actually have some kind of industry besides military, and the people might actually have food on their plates and electrical power in their homes.
Educate yourself.

I majored in sociology in college... granted, it's been a few years, but I thought I remembered Marx believing that communism was something that would occur inevitably, not something that required a violent revolution.

and isn't the very idea of a leader (as in, the leader of a country) completely antithetical to the base beliefs of communism?

 

[TheSlamma]

I hope no one is suprised they have these... before we went into the country that had ZERO they came out and said they were making them.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
So much for the UN putting there foot down!! lol

Bush forces NK to do it and then the UN has to fix it? This is another Bush blunder. AXISS OF EEEEVEEEEELLLL..... THE U.S. WILL ATTACK YOU!
North Korea: Well, we'd better get hot on completing a bomb or the U.S. is gonna attack us too.
How could they not get that message? How would you have interpreted Bush's threats? As olive branches?

YES! I KNEW I could find it!

Someone tarding up the "Blame Bush! Blame Bush!"

Thanks, you didnt disappoint!

Borrowed from the other thread ....

Originally posted by: ayabe
Well FNC and the gang are certainly trying their hardest to pin this on Clinton, but the fact is, W labeled them part of the Axis of Evil, refuses to talk with them, and generally made them feel as if we could attack them at any time.

This is why they went ahead with their nuclear program.

Despite what some are saying, we have no military option, NK has over 10,000 artillery pieces buried in the mountains, pointed at Seoul. We could never hope take them out in a timely fashion before the city was leveled. If there was action, 1 million NK troops coming over the border would not be in a 'killing zone', they would steamroll the DMZ and our 40,000+/- troops there would be dead.

Here's a timeline for the "It's Clinton's fault" crowd.

PRESIDENT REAGAN

Mid-1980s: First signs of North Korea nuclear program detected by US intelligence.

1986: North Korea produces plutonium in reactor.
PRESIDENT GEORGE H. W. BUSH

1991: US begins talks with North Korea to end to nuclear program.

1992: North Korea has separated an estimated 0-10kg of weapons-grade plutonium, enough for 1 to 2 bombs.
PRESIDENT CLINTON

1993: North Korea announces it will leave nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; US prepares to attack nuclear sites.

1994: Clinton Administration reaches Agreed Framework, North Korea freezes nuclear production for the next eight years.

August 1998: North Korea tests medium-range ?Taep?o-dong-1? missile.

December 1998: North Korea warns they will test another missile, but pressure from US dissuades them.

September 1999: Pyongyang agrees to long-range missile moratorium.

October 2000: Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is highest ranking US official to ever meet with Kim Jong Il.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

March 6, 2001: Secretary of State Colin Powell says the administration will ?pick up where President Clinton left off.?

March 7, 2001: President Bush undercuts Powell, declares negotiations will take on a different tone.

January 2002: Bush labels North Korea a member of the ?Axis of Evil.?

March 2003: United States invades Iraq.

April 2003: North Korea withdraws from the Non-Proliferation Treaty; soon thereafter, they restart their reactor.

April 2005: North Korea appears to unload nuclear reactor with up to another 15 kg of weapons-grade plutonium.

September 19, 2005: In six-party talks North Korea agrees to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for incentives package.

September 19, 2005: US places sanctions on bank that provides financial support for North Korean Government Agencies; causes collapse of September 2005 agreement.

June 2006: North Korea is believed to have now produced enough plutonium for 4 to 13 nuclear bombs.

July 2006: North Korea tests missiles: one medium-range and five short-range. Medium-range ?Taep?o-dong-2 fails.

October 3, 2006: Kim Jong Il announces North Korea plans to test nuclear weapons.

October 4, 2006: North Korea asserts that nuclear test is a measure to ?bolstering its nuclear deterrent as a self-defense measure.?

Mid-2008: If North Korea unloads another batch of fuel, it may have enough nuclear material for 8 to 17 nuclear bombs.Linkage.

Heh, FOX and the Bush talking head will always blame Clinton, even though this is the middle of SECOND Bush term now. Everybody except those blinded by their bias can see that at least Clinton engaged in some diplomacy with NK, and all Bush did was focusing on Iraq and talk trash at NK without taking any action, diplomatically or otherwise.

Make no mistake, NK tested a Nuke is a very serious matter. Maybe it won't cause immediate damage like 911, but it is very possible that it can cause much more damage than 911 in the very near futrue. NK don't even have to do the damage themselves. I am sure there are some people, yeah including that one guy what's his name Bush haven't capture, with the money willing to buy one or two miniturized nuclear bomb from NK. It doesn't have to be very powerful, the radio-active material can kill enough people and cause big enough panic already.

This is just one of many failure by the Bush Admin, and like the war in Iraq, this failure will plague the US for generations after his Admin is gone.

Yep, Clinton went the diplomatic route....And gave NK reactors.

Helluva smooth move, lemme tell you. And what ultimately did it accompluish, aside from setting his nuclear program ahead 15 years?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Vic
No, seriously. The very underlying principals of marxist-leninist communism are force, aggression, and the cult of personality. To force and spread a singular opinion of a "perfect world" through violent revolution.

no, not really.

north korea is more facist than anything else.

Right.... :roll:

For all its horrors, fascism is at least well-known for being able to spark an economy. If NK was fascist, it might actually have some kind of industry besides military, and the people might actually have food on their plates and electrical power in their homes.
Educate yourself.

I majored in sociology in college... granted, it's been a few years, but I thought I remembered Marx believing that communism was something that would occur inevitably, not something that required a violent revolution.

and isn't the very idea of a leader (as in, the leader of a country) completely antithetical to the base beliefs of communism?

I guess it has been a few years. Yes, Marx said that communism would occur inevitably... through a violent revolution of the proletariat.

The so-called classless, stateless idea of communism (aka the workers paradise) is a myth. Akin to the Second Coming of Christ in the Bible. Be a good little communist, obey your leaders, blah blah blah. However, if one is to interpret the communist manifesto scripture in the "accepted" way, NK is currently in the phase known as the "dictatorship of the proletariat."

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Vic
No, seriously. The very underlying principals of marxist-leninist communism are force, aggression, and the cult of personality. To force and spread a singular opinion of a "perfect world" through violent revolution.

no, not really.

north korea is more facist than anything else.

Yeah? Lots of private ownership corporations being fed public dollars in old N Korea?
Sure seems like quite the opposite to me, but what do I know.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: jman19

Originally posted by: jrenz
Korean news headlines... "NUCLEAR LAUNCH DETECTED"

Looks like N Korea rushed.

Yeah, NK teched up a lot faster than we expected

Not really, there was a former General / Military Analyist on CNN last night that said we thought NK has had nukes for as many as a few years, this just confirmation.

He also pointed out that they have nukes, but they are still a few years from having weaponized versions.

I guess you didn't get the reference.

Hey, I haven't played Starcraft in years

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
So much for the UN putting there foot down!! lol

Bush forces NK to do it and then the UN has to fix it? This is another Bush blunder. AXISS OF EEEEVEEEEELLLL..... THE U.S. WILL ATTACK YOU!
North Korea: Well, we'd better get hot on completing a bomb or the U.S. is gonna attack us too.
How could they not get that message? How would you have interpreted Bush's threats? As olive branches?

YES! I KNEW I could find it!

Someone tarding up the "Blame Bush! Blame Bush!"

Thanks, you didnt disappoint!

Borrowed from the other thread ....

Originally posted by: ayabe
Well FNC and the gang are certainly trying their hardest to pin this on Clinton, but the fact is, W labeled them part of the Axis of Evil, refuses to talk with them, and generally made them feel as if we could attack them at any time.

This is why they went ahead with their nuclear program.

Despite what some are saying, we have no military option, NK has over 10,000 artillery pieces buried in the mountains, pointed at Seoul. We could never hope take them out in a timely fashion before the city was leveled. If there was action, 1 million NK troops coming over the border would not be in a 'killing zone', they would steamroll the DMZ and our 40,000+/- troops there would be dead.

Here's a timeline for the "It's Clinton's fault" crowd.

PRESIDENT REAGAN

Mid-1980s: First signs of North Korea nuclear program detected by US intelligence.

1986: North Korea produces plutonium in reactor.
PRESIDENT GEORGE H. W. BUSH

1991: US begins talks with North Korea to end to nuclear program.

1992: North Korea has separated an estimated 0-10kg of weapons-grade plutonium, enough for 1 to 2 bombs.
PRESIDENT CLINTON

1993: North Korea announces it will leave nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; US prepares to attack nuclear sites.

1994: Clinton Administration reaches Agreed Framework, North Korea freezes nuclear production for the next eight years.

August 1998: North Korea tests medium-range ?Taep?o-dong-1? missile.

December 1998: North Korea warns they will test another missile, but pressure from US dissuades them.

September 1999: Pyongyang agrees to long-range missile moratorium.

October 2000: Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is highest ranking US official to ever meet with Kim Jong Il.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

March 6, 2001: Secretary of State Colin Powell says the administration will ?pick up where President Clinton left off.?

March 7, 2001: President Bush undercuts Powell, declares negotiations will take on a different tone.

January 2002: Bush labels North Korea a member of the ?Axis of Evil.?

March 2003: United States invades Iraq.

April 2003: North Korea withdraws from the Non-Proliferation Treaty; soon thereafter, they restart their reactor.

April 2005: North Korea appears to unload nuclear reactor with up to another 15 kg of weapons-grade plutonium.

September 19, 2005: In six-party talks North Korea agrees to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for incentives package.

September 19, 2005: US places sanctions on bank that provides financial support for North Korean Government Agencies; causes collapse of September 2005 agreement.

June 2006: North Korea is believed to have now produced enough plutonium for 4 to 13 nuclear bombs.

July 2006: North Korea tests missiles: one medium-range and five short-range. Medium-range ?Taep?o-dong-2 fails.

October 3, 2006: Kim Jong Il announces North Korea plans to test nuclear weapons.

October 4, 2006: North Korea asserts that nuclear test is a measure to ?bolstering its nuclear deterrent as a self-defense measure.?

Mid-2008: If North Korea unloads another batch of fuel, it may have enough nuclear material for 8 to 17 nuclear bombs.Linkage.

Heh, FOX and the Bush talking head will always blame Clinton, even though this is the middle of SECOND Bush term now. Everybody except those blinded by their bias can see that at least Clinton engaged in some diplomacy with NK, and all Bush did was focusing on Iraq and talk trash at NK without taking any action, diplomatically or otherwise.

Make no mistake, NK tested a Nuke is a very serious matter. Maybe it won't cause immediate damage like 911, but it is very possible that it can cause much more damage than 911 in the very near futrue. NK don't even have to do the damage themselves. I am sure there are some people, yeah including that one guy what's his name Bush haven't capture, with the money willing to buy one or two miniturized nuclear bomb from NK. It doesn't have to be very powerful, the radio-active material can kill enough people and cause big enough panic already.

This is just one of many failure by the Bush Admin, and like the war in Iraq, this failure will plague the US for generations after his Admin is gone.

Yep, Clinton went the diplomatic route....And gave NK reactors.

Helluva smooth move, lemme tell you. And what ultimately did it accompluish, aside from setting his nuclear program ahead 15 years?

And those reactors still haven't been built, do a quick google search. One of the most recent articles (2005) states a Haliburton Subsidiary has the no bid contract to build them. Though I bet that deal is off now. if you bothered to look into it, the light water reactors are meant to replce the reactors they currently have that do produce weapons grade material, unlike the light water reactors.

 

[BrownTown]

light water reactors still produce plutonium, you just have to work a little harder to get the isotope you want extracted out.

 

[blackangst1]

---------SNIP---------------

Yep, Clinton went the diplomatic route....And gave NK reactors.

Helluva smooth move, lemme tell you. And what ultimately did it accompluish, aside from setting his nuclear program ahead 15 years?

And those reactors still haven't been built, do a quick google search. One of the most recent articles (2005) states a Haliburton Subsidiary has the no bid contract to build them. Though I bet that deal is off now. if you bothered to look into it, the light water reactors are meant to replce the reactors they currently have that do produce weapons grade material, unlike the light water reactors.
[/quote]

You are wrong sir. Light water reactors produce rods that *CAN* be used for weapons. If you read the actual "Agreed Framework" that I have posted here, it clearly states N Korea's (ahem) promise to not use those rods for weapons. Now, why would such a thing be agreed upon, if it wasnt possible?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
The thing that is interesting, is no one seems to mention the fact that Bush actually halted what Clinton put in place as far as NK nuclear capabilities. So if anything, Bush slowed the process. Here's a few excerpts:

This negotiation (between Kim and Clinton) led to the Agreed Framework of October 21, 1994

The Agreed Framework:
Provisions, Implementation, Costs, Future Issues
The heart of the Agreed Framework was a U.S. commitment to provide North Korea
with a package of nuclear, energy, economic, and diplomatic benefits; in return North Korea would halt the operations and infrastructure development of its nuclear program.12 The Agreed Framework committed North Korea to ?freeze its graphite-moderated reactors and related facilities? with the freeze monitored by the IAEA. Ambassador Robert Gallucci, who negotiated for the United States, stated that ?related facilities? include the plutonium reprocessing plant and 8,000 stored fuel rods. Clinton Administration officials reportedly said that a secret ?confidential minute? to the Agreed Framework prohibits North Korea from construction of new nuclear facilities elsewhere in North Korea.
Gallucci and other officials emphasized that the key policy objective of the Clinton
Administration was to secure a freeze of North Korea?s nuclear program in order to prevent North Korea from producing large quantities of nuclear weapons grade plutonium through the operations of the 50 and 200 megawatt reactors and the plutonium reprocessing plant at Yongbyon. Gallucci referred to the prospect of North Korea producing enough plutonium annually for nearly 30 nuclear weapons if the 50 and 200 megawatt reactors went into operation.

Benefits to North Korea
Light Water Nuclear Reactors. North Korea was to receive two light water
reactors (LWRs) with a generating capacity of approximately 2,000 megawatts. The Agreed Framework set a ?target date? of 2003. The United States was obligated to organize an international consortium arrangement for the acquisition and financing of the reactors. The Clinton Administration and the governments of South Korea, Japan, and other countries
established in March 1995 the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO) to coordinate the provision of the LWRs. After the groundbreaking at the reactor site in August 1997, KEDO officials changed the estimated completion date from 2003 to 2007; other experts predicted a much later date. The laying of the foundation for the LWRs ocurred in August 2002 just before the Kelly mission to North Korea and the Bush
Administration?s subsequent suspension of construction.

Oil at No Cost. The Agreed Framework committed the United States to provide
500,000 metric tons of heavy oil to North Korea annually until the first of the two light water eactors became operational. The oil shipments continued until KEDO?s decision in
November 2002 to cancel future shipments..

Lifting the U.S. Economic Embargo. The Agreed Framework specifies that within
three months from October 21, 1994, the two sides would reduce barriers to trade and
investment, including restrictions on telecommunications services and financial transactions. This required the Clinton Administration to relax the U.S. economic embargo on North Korea, which the Truman Administration and Congress put in place during the Korean War.
On January 20, 1995, the Administration announced initial, limited measures. North Korea complained loudly that these measures failed to meet the commitment stated in the Agreed Framework. In U.S.-North Korean talks in September 1999, the United States agreed to end a broader range of economic sanctions in exchange for a North Korean moratorium on future missile testing. President Clinton ordered the end of most economic sanctions in June 2000. Since then, North Korea has not met with any American firms to talk about trade and/or investment opportunities and has rejected an offer from the American Chamber of Commerce in Seoul to send a business delegation to Pyongyang.

Disposition of Fuel Rods from the Five Megawatt Reactor. The Agreed
Framework provided for the storage of the rods in North Korea under IAEA monitoring and a North Korean promise not to reprocess plutonium from the rods. ( :roll: ) also provided for subsequent talks on the ?ultimate disposition? of the rods.

-------------------- SNIP -------------------------

So basically Clinton provided aid, food, oil, and light water reactors in exchange for a "promise" from Kim he wouldnt use rods from said reactors for evil intentions. Uh huh. President Bush dismantled these provisions.

As I've previously stated I dont think today's test could have been prevented; however, people saying Bush accelerated it is bogus. Clinton gave him the technology, and Bush tried to dismantle it.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/IB91141.pdf

Heh, do you even know how light water nuclear plant works? Unlike Heavy-water reactors, Light-water reactors only need enriched uranium to 3.5 percent. But a nuclear weapon requires enriched uranium to 90-plus percent. Together with IAEA monitoring program, there is little NK can do with those LWR.

Under Clinton, there were diplomatic dialogs. There were diplmoatic exchanges. There were gonna be international weapon monitoring. US was helping NK to improve its economy, and maybe one day richer and more educated NK people will kick Kim out of the office themselves.

But no, Bush wants none of that. NK (Kim and every north korean) was one of the Axis of evil and the good old US can't have talks with the bad guys. Yeap, that certain accomplishd alot!

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: catnap1972

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Please enlighten me on the issue. I not to familure with what N. Korea has been doing for the last couple of years. Why is the United States so concerned when another country test a nuclear missle. I mean as long as it's done in a controlled fashion and there are safetys in place what is wrong exactly????

Because the world doesn't need any more terrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrists--there's more than enough in the WH to tide the world over.

So we build 2 nuclear missles use them on japan and test them beforehand extensiveley in the U.S. and we then finish and call the shots to other counteries on not to develop attomic missles for themselves........