George W. casting Hitler in the Shade

"(Bush is) a political imbecile bereft of even elementary morality as a human being and a bad guy, much less being a politician" and said he had started wars in Iraq and elsewhere "to commit genocide as he pleases... "Bush is a tyrant that puts Hitler into the shade and his group of such tyrants is a typical gang of political gangsters," the statement said, adding that North Korea would increase its defense capabilities a "thousand times.""

I've heard as bad here, from people who consider themselves Western progressive intellectuals. It all amounts to dick, imho. If Bush and the US were what we are painted to be, we'd be invading Canada, not Iraq. People can claim that we use the evils of other nations as excuses for imperialism, but frankly the evils are there, and the rest is interpretation.

In my opinion North Korea is desperate because they have been telling their population that the war never ended for 40 years, telling them that we are the great evil of the world, and telling them that their way of life is viable and morally right. Now, with the advent of the Internet and a globalized community, they can't keep their people in the dark anymore, and the billions they have spent on "defense" in the last half-century have amounted to nothing.

They have starved their people, brainwashed them, and they are looking down the barrel of self-destruction. They have to validate their lies by either making their legendary war or extorting a noteworthy position in the world. The more they rattle their sabres, the closer they get to one of the two aims. There's a reason that English is the #1 second language in Korea. They can only be viable alongside us, or fighting us.

Yes, Thanks Baker... the fact remains though, Kim II appears to be another crazy despot - alas a Crazy Despot with a lot more weapons than Saddam had.

The international approach towards the DPRK will be very interesting - it's like he is a child, if you insult him, you will not get anywhere, so we need to isolate the nations that the administration will work with, and get them working immediately.

They are a very real threat.

BAM!!!

I think one of the main differences is that "containment" makes better sense with Korea. Invasion is a simple impossibility. It wasn't with Iraq. When Kim dies, they'll be hard pressed to find anyone as nuts as him. Hussein's sons were arguable MORE nuts than him. No one is really stepping up to overtly side with North Korea. Half of Europe was waiting for the military sanctions to drop in Iraq so they could yet again make billions arming him.

It is all arguable and subjective, but I think what has occured in Iraq could NEVER happen in Korea. They will either be decimated or victorious. The fact that regime change was possible in Iraq is the main difference. Though people always say "Why not Korea", none of them seem to know how the hell it could be done without literally millions of casualites.

Sure, Bush baited them, but perhaps that baiting was what brought it all to the forefront. I don't know if it was wise or not, but I can accept that the public is privy to probably less than 1% of the information the President and his staff has when they make those decisions. I am willing to accept it, considering North Korea is much, much worse than he painted them. Had he distorted or exagerated their threat I might feel differently.

How bad is a country who's leader spends 1/5th of his budget on Arms when over 1,000,000 of
his citizens die of starvation? That is almost 4 % of the population. Or how about where you can be sent to the coal mines as slave labor
if someone higher in the party hiearchy denounces you. Or you tell your senior spy to train a young girl to
plant a bomb on an airliner, killing in excess of 100 people? (young Kim passed the order personally)
How about trying to blow up the South Korean Foreign minister when he went to Rangoon. They detonated
the bomb early but killed a number of lower ranked functionaries.
Now tell me why I should believe the words that come from their government . Please give me one.

Now tell me why I should believe the words that come from their government . Please give me one

I have a few - they are in the form of ICBM's though, and a proven will to use them!!!

BAM!!!

have a few - they are in the form of ICBM's though, and a proven will to use them!!!

Then thank Bush for restarting the Missille defence system that is now having the first units deployed in Alaska.

Bring it on North Korea, and if you think we will not turn that country into a glass parking, think again. I even think Kerry would approve of that.

BAMM!!! With a big Boom baby..

Bring it on North Korea, and if you think we will not turn that country into a glass parking, think again. I even think Kerry would approve of that.

Yeah - Americans are so cool and morrally superior...



*sigh*

BAM!!!

I think the Bush administration is ready to deal energy/econ aid plus a temporary non-agression treaty in exchange for a freeze and inspections.

If North Korea shoots a missle at someone, the US will retaliate, even if Kerry is in the White House.

Btw, the correct term for the 6 nation talks is multi-lateral. Bi-lateral would only be talks between 2 nations.

The missle defense system is a good Idea, but it is a failure. They have allowed it to continue in development while suspending tests completley. It is absurd and a waste of tax payer money. The system has never worked, and never will work. Maybe they should have spent more time coming up with the shield rather than insisting it be ready right away. We aren't in the cold war, and nobody is going to nuke us unless they want to be turned into piles of melted human flesh and bone.

That's your expert opinion, sandy? Oddly, the missile research you allude to has spawned technologies currently at use in the military every day.

If you go back and look, people were saying the same thing about the B-2 bomber before they realized they had no idea what they were talking about. Kerry voted against it, too, oddly.

Granted, I'm sure folks sitting at home watching TV know all about what is really going on in (classified) missile defense research. Why would I ever question them?

Mugz, why is it that you always argue from the position that the US must be the one to give in?

Not Give in - lead by exaple... different things.

They will only use them once.

Once too many.

That was asinine and uncalled for Mugz...i still dont see the "change of heart" you claim to have had concerning americans

I dont have a change of heart toward some Americans because some of you welcome hostility just because you have bigger bombs. I am sick of this - "I would like to see them try it" attitude that would give Americans the thing they have been craving for so long - a reason to prove to the world how powerful they are, and if provoked, a genuine desire to use weapons of mass destruction.

No one is even worried that Kim would be happy to Nuke the USA, simply because you know you have the capability to wipe him and his nation of the face of the earth - I dont try and hide my disgust at that attitude, and some Americans make no effort to show people like me that they wouldn't be happy to wipe out an entire population - provoked or not.

You are already talking about the retaliatory strike, and the first hasn't even happened yet - why dont you work to make sure it doesn't? rather than saying - "bring that shit on."

BAM!!!

Remember Muggaz, that the australians were quite worried about Japan advancing from new Guinea
into Australia through the Coral Sea, yes that place where American and Japanese carriers duked it out,
without ever spotting each other except by aircraft. I believe the older Generation of Aussies may
have appreciated our "bigger bombs". Domo Arigato

Forget Kim Jong Il, he's all flash and no game. He spends too much time in the hands of his "pleasure brigade" (yes, that means exactly everything you think it does,) or surfing the internet. The real danger is what happens when that fat bastard's arteries finally clog shut, and the country is left up for grabs.

As for invasion, it is difficult if not completely out of the question. A few years ago, Kim Jong Il threatened to turn Seoul into a sea of fire, and they could do just that. Twenty million south koreans go to bed each night with a potential rain of artillery over their heads. Could we do something about it? Sure. But what kind of collateral damage are we talking about before we bomb the hell out of their guns? A few thousand? More? That's all well to risk in the name of defense, and might even save lives in the long run, but will the S. Korean government really let us be the aggressor in something that could potentially kill so many of it's civilians?
-a former part of the 2ID tripwire, spc. nbs.

I believe the older Generation of Aussies may have appreciated our "bigger bimbs". Domo Arigato

Oh, I appreciate them, make no mistake - just not the desire to use them so eagerly. Let me go on the record as saying I am on your side - which is more concerning for me, because obviously if the USA get caught up in a conflict, Australia does as well - I would just like to avert said conflict at all costs, and a "we can bomb them, so why dont we" attitude is something I want to distance myself from...

BAM!!!

read Spc NBS' post, he states the realist view of it.
Remember, just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Well lets face it kim is a complete nut you can't trust anything he says. Don't count out China either, I know they aren't friends but they don't like him anymore then we do. Eventually it will get ugly no matter which road we take. But I will bet that China will step in before we do, I can't believe that China will want us taking care of the problem, they don't want us in their area at all. Look they are starving their own people, if it wasn't for us in the first place they wouldn't be able to feed them.

Good point Culpy

For China, North Korea is like the Proverbial "Red Headed stepchild". They can't kill it because if they do so they risk braking faith with the "All for one Communist Society" thing that they have been telling their people since the revolution.

If the US tried to invade North Korea (or nuke first) then the Chinese would simply scream "Look at the big boy invades the poor innocent country". This would be the best way for China to get the US booted out of the Pacific, while all the time reflaming its people.
The Chinese have one big problem; they no longer have their people fired up. If they could do that, they could take control of what they don't already have of Asia (to include East Russia).

China's biggest fear should be Kim Il getting nukes and using them on anyone. That opens North Korea to invasion or at least a western imposed leadership change. Another way is to invade North Korea themselves and beat the US to the punch (if the nuked someone).

Their best bet would be to due the espionage of destroying the nukes themselves and blame the US, South Korea, and/or Japan.

Do not under estimate the Chinese. During the Clinton Administration they where able to get control of the Panama Canal, steel computer disk drives with nuke dieograms, get Clinton to sell them the Super Computers that those disk goes into, sucker private investors into pumping tons of money/tech into factories still over 51% owned by the Chinese government, and got Clinton to institute a joint US/China research program on how to launch satellites/ICBMs into space (Like we need to study that). refences on request

Muggaz, You really don't understand what a stalinist state is.
The President's statement that they are "Evil" is true by anyones definition of the word.
Go google for sites that report on NK refugees trying to escape through China. Heed their
words, and wonder why they would risk death or a lifetime on starvation rations in the gulags
to escape "The Workers Paradise".
Do 11 years of this sort of reasearch and then we can argue about the painfully obvious facts.

*bangs head against wall*

LW - for someone who is disgusted by me - you look like my biggest fan!!! jumping from thread to thread to enjoy friendly dialogue with me!!! nice!!!

I am not going to say anything of note here, except ask you to read my article again, and any comments - I am no fan of North Korea... I dont like North Korea, I am opposed to North Korea.

LW - you relally dont want me to point out the various "I would like to see them try it" or "bring it on" responses, because you will be made to look very foolish, and I dont want to do that to you... however, I will gladly do it upon further request if you sincerly beleive that attitude has not been on display.

BAM!!!

President Bush scares the hell out of me and the thought that he may be re elected is one of the most terrifying signs for the future. The Alternative may not be your perfect choice, but really, is the prospect of walking into the future with Bush such a positive idea...look at what he has done so far....do you want it to continue?

That's your expert opinion, sandy? Oddly, the missile research you allude to has spawned technologies currently at use in the military every day. If you go back and look, people were saying the same thing about the B-2 bomber before they realized they had no idea what they were talking about. Kerry voted against it, too, oddly. Granted, I'm sure folks sitting at home watching TV know all about what is really going on in (classified) missile defense research. Why would I ever question them?

The missile defense system is based on four principles. First, that there is a real threat of nuclear attack. Second, that the system will actually work. Third, that it will not cause significant deterioration of our international relations. Finally, that the costs will be reasonable.

As for the first point -

There is not a significant ICBM threat to the U.S. to warrant continuation of the program. The only real threats are China and Russia, neither of whom would, in their wildest dreams, launch at the U.S. The CIA has reported that, indeed, there is no notable threat of nuclear launches on the United States.

As for the threat from rogue states, they pose too insignificant a threat to warrant the system. The State Departent acknowledges that North Korea has not been involved in international terrorism in over 15 years, and their missile program is not sufficiently developed to strike accurately or reliably at the United States.

"As for North Korea, Iran, or Iraq, there are other methods of dealing with the threat of a ballistic missile attack from these nations that would be far less costly and far more effective than building a multibillion-dollar missile shield. But instead of picking up where the Clinton administration left off in talks with Pyongyang, Bush started his term by delaying further negotiations until his administration could conduct a comprehensive review of U.S. policy toward North Korea. As Spurgeon Keeny, president of the Arms Control Association, notes, Bush's actions (or lack thereof) are "widely perceived internationally as intended to preserve, and even enhance, the North Korean ballistic missile threat so that it can serve as the rationale for early deployment of a national missile defense." Initial Bush administration efforts to restart the talks with North Korea aroused skepticism when new demands were laid on Pyongyang in the area of conventional force reductions without indicating when or whether Washington would meet its original obligations under the framework agreement. If implemented as planned, the framework agreement could scale back and eventually eliminate Pyongyang's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs as part of an overall improvement in U.S.-North Korean economic and political relations. President Bush should fulfill America's long-overdue commitments under the nuclear framework agreement with North Korea and should continue to support South Korea's efforts at cooperation and reconciliation with North Korea."

-- Michelle Ciarrocca and William Hartung, Star Wars Revisited, Foreign Policy In Focus, Volume 6, Number 25, June 2001

I think that sums it up well.

Were, however, say Iran or North Korea to develop into real nuclear threats, the threat is to their immediate regions, and not the United States itself, thus making the missile defense system rather useless.

From 1957 to 2003 the United States spend 149 billion on the project. The costs of finishing development, deploying, and maintaining the system are expected to be between 800 billion and 1.2 trillion.

The system has simply not proven itself to work, and even the developers admit it would be easilly overwhelmed by a large number of projectiles and/or decoys.


Yay for that classified missile defense research.

According to the history channel's research on the Soviet missile forces, they came to a high level of alert on at least two occasions during the 1990's
due to their deteriorating overhead satellite surveillance system giving them either launch indicators or no data as if they were attacked bt ASAT missiles.
This brought them close to sending a retaliatory strike at the U.S. Missile defense contractors~putting it to us. The Idea of missile defense- worth
continuing the research. **NOTE** The story may have been on one of the discovery channels and not the history channel but they interviewed the head of
Russia's missile forces for it.

Stanislav Petrov was the Russian officer responsible for averting nuclear war in 1983 - The Russian equipment was reporting a strike, but Stanislav did something no soldier is ever allowed to do - trust his better judgement - he did so, and lickily we are all here living happy today. The Russian government only recently de-classified this information.

They dont look so good with faulty early warning systems, and not unlike Eswiv, I beleive the whole star wars fiasco to be a gross mis-appropriation of $150billion... even though Australia is signed in a sa benefactor, it only makes for a hostile environment...

BAM!!!