COL Gene COL Gene

BUSH Iraq War produses nuclear backfire

▼

BUSH Iraq War produses nuclear backfire

from JoeUser Forums




An unintended consequence of George W. Bush’s Iraq war policy is for rogue states, who fear a U S invasion, to move quickly and acquire nuclear weapons. That was the conclusion of a Republican strategist who appeared on the Chris Matthews show this evening.

His contention was very simple. If you’re the dictator of a rogue state who wants protection against an Iraq like invasion obtain a handful of nuclear weapons. Although this was not the initial rationale for countries like North Korea and Iran to seek these weapons it does make sense, given the Bush preemptive attack policy, to secure a small number of nuclear weapons to deter any such attack in the future by the United States. Great going Mr.Bush!
politics
18,027 views 65 replies
Reply #26 from PolMach Forums Top
What sped up North Korea's Nuke program faster?

1. Appeasement for years, by giving North Korea parts for a nuke reactor and free oil and food. The food and oil helped free up mass amounts of labor to assist in the production of military and Nuke material. Brain power alone don't build nukes, it take mass amounts of labor and resources too. Just look at how massive our Manhattan project really was.

2. Pressure to attend talks, making North Korea speed up their brain power. ie. Having scientist killed by the Government for not thinking faster. Without the material to build the bombs, how fast can they speed up their program? Now that they must build their own parts and use labor that was previously used in weapons production to be shifted to producing food and energy, how will that affect the time schedule?

Anyway it is all for nothing, because IMO China will never let it happen. They want the US to invade or strike North Korea before the completion of the bomb, so we look like the bad guys. If that nut called Kim gets a bomb, he is most likely to use it. Giving the US a perfect pretext to take out North Korea, with out looking like the bad guy and giving China one less ally in Asia. Expect that if North Korea sets off a bomb that a very bad accident will soon follow destroying the program. Then China could blame on the US or Japan for the accident too if they pulled it off right.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
Unless North Korea were to attack South Korea, I cannot envision the United States taking action against the North. From a very practical standpoint with our debacle in Iraq we simply do and have the resource to mount another major combat operation. In an earlier blog, I talked about the difficulty the Army and Marine Corps are having recruiting young men and women into the military. Last night the chief of the Army recruiting command admitted we have never tried an all volunteer military during a period of sustained war. More and more discussion is turning to the question of whether or not the U S will need to relook at the Draft!
SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #28 from PolMach Forums Top
Reply #24 By: stutefish - 5/10/2005 1:53:33 PM


--Interesting

Draft!


--Hell NO!

--I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop...thats when the world will go to hell [well, at least worse than it is now...]
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
If United States becomes engaged in another major conflict while still in Iraq, we won't have a choice as we simply don't have the required troops from the volunteer military of today. Without the extensive use of it reserve and guard forces, the Army and Marine Corps can not even sustain its existing commitments much less any other major engagement. in addition cloths of recruiting is rising significantly. In the past year the army has had to increase its enlistment bonuses three times and it is still not producing the numbers required. Over 17,000 recruiters are currently attempting to convince young men and women join the military. The policies we have been following committing our forces beyond their capability is creating a major problem with the future of volunteer military concept. this is one you could lay at the feet of George W. Bush.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Middle East is more stable


Tell that to the 300+ peoples' families who have died in the past 12 days. Or to the thousands who were maimed from the continual bombings.

amazing things have been happening in that part of the world.


Errrrrr...........
new poppy fields in Afghanistan
nuclear proliferation in Iran
puppet governments whom the people had no idea who they were voting for
Wow! All kinds of amazing shit.


real progress that has happened in Iraq

errrrrr............
population reduction
demolished cities
No water
sporadic electricity

You're right. I don't see the amazingly wonderful things you're seeing. But then again, I don't watch FAUX FOX News or listen to druggy limbaugh.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
More and more discussion is turning to the question of whether or not the U S will need to relook at the Draft!


Nobody is looking at a draft. The only mention of a draft was a stupid idea that was brought up by a democrat to scare people.

Tell that to the 300+ peoples' families who have died in the past 12 days. Or to the thousands who were maimed from the continual bombings.


Stop acting like you care so much. When where you protesting Saddam murdered people and putting them in mass graves? When was the last anti-Saddam protest you attended? Do you know about the good things that are going on in Iraq, or do you just watch the first 30 seconds of CNN and that's it?

new poppy fields in Afghanistan
nuclear proliferation in Iran
puppet governments whom the people had no idea who they were voting for
Wow! All kinds of amazing shit.


This is the typical lefist wacko line. If it isn't perfect than it's just not worth it. Aside from your other bs, your "puppet" government theory is just false. Millions of people came out to vote, and they knew who they voted for.
errrrrr............
population reduction
demolished cities
No water
sporadic electricity


It's obvious you don't know half of what is going on in Iraq. Your exaggerations are far from reality. I will ask again, do you ever take the time to read about the good things that are going on? I doubt it.

You're right. I don't see the amazingly wonderful things you're seeing. But then again, I don't watch FAUX FOX News or listen to druggy limbaugh.


You don't see it because you don't look for it. You know dabe, you are the typical wacko. Blame Fox News, oil wars, and insulting Limbaugh. Is there a factory that you nuts come from?
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
Time will tell, dog. Today, another series of bombs went off in Iraq. Sixty plus more dead Iraqis. Hundreds more injured. I love your definition of success. If this was happening to your family, I don't think you'd be happy.

Fact is, Saddam was a sadistic dictator. I won't disagree with you there. But, bringing on this massive deadly chaos to eradicate him was/is criminal. It didn't have to be this way. Bush and company are war criminals, and history will not judge them kindly. Or any of his followers, including you, either.
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
More people have died in Iraq since the war started than Saddam is reported to have killed. I do not see the control element getting better. If anyhting it is getting worse. We have now committed $300 Billion and over 1,600 American lives as well as 35,000 injured military members to this war. How much more will it take? It is NOT WORTH THE PRICE!
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
More people have died in Iraq since the war started than Saddam is reported to have killed. I do not see the control element getting better. If anyhting it is getting worse. We have now committed $300 Billion and over 1,600 American lives as well as 35,000 injured military members to this war. How much more will it take? It is NOT WORTH THE PRICE!


Knock off the BS *col*. Saddam is "reported" to have killed 50,000 people per year!
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Bush and company are war criminals, and history will not judge them kindly. Or any of his followers, including you, either.


Actually not. History will show that Iraq was liberated and democracy will begin in the Middle East. History will judge people like you who would rather have Saddam in power and people in tyranny.


More people have died in Iraq since the war started than Saddam is reported to have killed.


That is just false.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
Whether or not we see a democracy in Iraq will take time to determine. I can remember that in Vietnam we were told if the South Vietnam fell to the Communists it would be a domino effect on the whole Southeast Asian region. We paid dearly for that idea 58,000 dead and hundreds of thousands injured. South Vietnam fell and the region not not go to hell in a hand basket.

We need to learn that we are not the world's policeman. It is not our responsibility to remove all the evil dictators in this world. We attacked Iraq and it posed no threat to the United States to satisfy President Bush and his neocons. We were told a line of crap about how easy it was going to be, how well received we were going to be, how the oil revenue was going to pay the cost, and how clean and neat it was going to be. In fact Bush told the Pope when he objected to our going into Iraq not to worry this is going to be quick and clean war. We'll Mr. Bush isn't quick isn't clean it's far from over. I believe history is going to judge our actions very harshly just the way it has in Vietnam.
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
We need to learn that we are not the world's policeman. It is not our responsibility to remove all the evil dictators in this world. We attacked Iraq and it posed no threat to the United States to satisfy President Bush and his neocons.


Then who is going to be? France maybe?

You just cannot ignore dictators and terrorists and hope they "go away". The U.N. is not capable of taking care of the world, and in some cases like Saddam, actually help them.
Reply #38 from PolMach Forums Top
It is not our responsibility to remove all the evil dictators in this world.


--COL, then who will, if we as americans, "the land of the free", then why shouldn't we, along with democracy loving nations around the world, free those countries that are controlled by evil dictators who slaughter opposition [free thinking] or their own citizens just cause their ethnicity....hmmm? WHO? Or would you have us be snub, and ignore them, like a majority of other nations when people where killed[and someplaces they're still being killed] by mass genocide...WTF?


South Vietnam fell and the region not not go to hell in a hand basket.


--Things didn't get exactly better....
Reply #39 from PolMach Forums Top
d'oh, didn't see ID's response......
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
I found the transcript from Monday Night's episode of "Hardball" folks.
NOTE: THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. - from the MSNBC website

John Fund is a reporter for the Wall Street Journal. This is what i think the COL is referring to (again, correct me if i'm wrong)

MATTHEWS: John Fund, let me ask you about North Korea.

SHRUM: That came out rather well.

FUND: I agree.

MATTHEWS: North Korea, what do you think? What are we going to be able to do over there, now that they‘re apparently setting up grandstands to hold a test of a nuclear device over there and they want the world to see it?

FUND: Chris, I‘m the first to admit that there are some unintended consequences of something like the Iraq war.

I think what the Iraq war and the collapse of Saddam Hussein—he is now going to be in the dock at a trial—told all of the rogue states, if you don‘t want a U.S. invasion, you better get some nuclear weapons. And I don‘t think we were about to invade other countries, but I think they might have thought we were. So, the North Koreans have moved forward. They want their insurance policy, so they can blackmail the Western nations.

And the Chinese are not cooperating. We asked the Chinese to shut off oil shipments to North Korea last week. They said no. The Chinese have apparently decided—I think this is a big mistake on their part—that a nuclear North Korea is acceptable in the region.

MATTHEWS: Oh, that‘s frightening.

FUND: I don‘t think they‘re going to like the Japanese reaction.

MATTHEWS: That‘s very frightening for everybody.
Reply #41 from PolMach Forums Top
Reply #40 By: thatoneguyinslc - 5/11/2005 9:33:29 AM


--Interesting, a Nuclear NK, it could lead to some interesting happenings, and about japan's response, they're probably going to go ballistic...
Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thank you Thatoneguyinsic

That was the exchange that I was talking about in my blog. There have been others that have held the same idea.
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't base my opinions on what a reporter thinks.
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
Like i have said. We have to convince, or force China via economic sanctions and or other econimic means to throw a rope around NK.
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
John Fund is a reporter for the Wall Street Journal.


I thought it was a Repbulican strategest. Anyways, I see the "opinoins" of journalists everywhere, doesn't make them an authority on anything.
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
I agree with you for the most part Dog, but i think there's a lot of truth in what he said.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
We have a better shot with NK via China then Iran. I see almost NO hope with Iran. If Bush had saved his powder in Iraq, we might have been in a better position in Iran. Another indication of how we are not wanted is the demonstrations today in Afghanistan against the United States. We delude ourselves if we think the Moslems in any way support what we're doing.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
Another indication of how we are not wanted is the demonstrations today in Afghanistan against the United States. We delude ourselves if we think the Moslems in any way support what we're doing.


As usual Col you never tell the full story. The "demostrations" were about a report that someone put a copy of their "book" in the trash or something. Their religion is the problem col, not what we are doing.
Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top
you are correct that is the specific issue. It shows the level of dissatisfaction in the Moslem world for the United States presence in their turf.
Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top
So, was it a Republican strategist, or a WSJ reporter? The Col. seems to be lauding a turncoat Republican above. Was this 1970's document written in Word?