http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/07/15/nkorea.nu...ukes/index.html
So now we have troops in Iraq, at a cost of 3 billon a month, let me see how many hands say this is a more pressing issue?

I thought Bubba had appeased them? Guess not.

Here's your food, please dont build that nuke, ok i trust you...

Actually, i thought you were against the war in iraq? so now you are in favor of going to war with N Korea? If that is not the case, then you should be in favor of the way it's being handled now, unless of course you wanna bush bash, then go ahead...

I was against the war, in that IMO if the need was so pressing we should have been able to convince more nations to join us, or given inspectors more time. My position has been that North Korea is the clear and present danger, not Iraq.
I did not start this to bash Bush, I would be saying the same thing if it was Bush, Gore or George Washington in the White House!
I do think we have over extended our selfs and now have to face up to an all out war with North Korea, and maybe the Chiness to prevent nuc's from being available on the black market.

The reason we can't just go after North Korea is because they already have nukes that could at worst hit Alaska or Hawaii and at best hit Japan or South Korea. If we had blown NK off the face of the map back in the 90s, as opposed to making a "pact" with them, begging them please, please don't be mean, we wouldn't have this problem.

That's why it was so important to get rid of Saddam Hussein now. I don't think anybody honestly doubts he was at least gearing up, (if not already well on the way) to make very, extremely, horribly deadly weapons. If we had just waited around, made a pact with him, took him at his word, had a little tea party with him, invited him to the White House for a fundraiser, whatever the Clinton doctrine involved, in a few years (if not much, much sooner) Saddam would be where NK is now - able to counter threats of attack with a threat to not just hurt but annihilate our allies in the region, or us.

North Korea is proof that Bush did the right thing in preemptively striking Iraq, rather than trying appeasement. Had we stopped NK sooner, they wouldn't have the resources they have now.

[ July 15, 2003, 12:41 PM: Message edited by: William1865 ]

Are you too young to remember the Korean War?

Too bad the Administration does not share your view - they were so busy going after Saddam that they have not even gotten around to thinking about the N. Korea problem until now. And didn't N. Korea announce a restart of their nuclear program right about the time they were labeled as part of the "axis of evil"?

Oh, and I am one of the doubters that Saddam Hussein had a weapons program when we attacked, or that he could have created one quickly if we did not attack - no evidence of either has been found.

North Korea has nukes... well we better go to war with Iran then.

"Bring em on"

[ July 15, 2003, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: RazorbackTX ]

What would going after Iraq have to do with N. Korea? N. Korea has atomic capability, we have to make nice with them. Or should we just storm the country like Iraq and take our chances that they don't get a nuke off? That's why I'm having a hard time with this whole Irag thing. Nothing has been tied to the other. Nothing has been found. It's like they threw darts at a map and said let's play a game. Another thing if the Dems were doing this, I'd feel the same way.

Going to war with Iran is not so urgent now - they are being somewhat more cooperative now that they know they will get their asses kicked if they f$&% with us. Plus, there is greater momentum for internal revolt there, though that won't be easy. So I think we should just focus on North Korea. But nice to see you giving war a chance, Raze. Bring em on.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by William1865:
[QB] The reason we can't just go after North Korea is because they already have nukes that could at worst hit Alaska or Hawaii and at best hit Japan or South Korea. If we had blown NK off the face of the map back in the 90s, as opposed to making a "pact" with them, begging them please, please don't be mean, we wouldn't have this problem.
William, So you are saying that we were right to go after Sadam, who might or might not have or be making WMD, but we are powerless to go after North Korea? I thought the whole point of a pre emptive war was to prevent a mushroom cloud over an American city?
Are you saying with the troops in Iraq we are better prepared to deal with North Korea? IMO we have raised the stakes by making them part of axies of evil, invading Iraq without international support and threatening Iran. IF they think they are next, what do they have to lose? so lets say they use a nuc, dod we pull our troops from Iraq? Leave that void for OBL to fill?

BRING ON APPEASEMENT!

Dear North Korea,

Please dont build anymore nukes. Right now i'm too busy to deal with you, you see i'd rather sign this doma law and get a bj. By attacking you, that would make the stock market go down before the bubble burst, but by that time... i'll be out of office and i wont give a shit.

So, here is your bag of rice, just please please please dont build a nuke becuase i have ZERO intrest in foreign policy.

All My Best,

William Jefferson Clinton

PS is there anyway we can move 9/11 back a few years, so that i can put that in my hat to be the best damn president this country has ever seen? I've soooo longed something to be attached to my name rather than monica's lips.

North Korea

North Korea

North Korea

North Korea, Anyone?

You Guessed It!!! North Korea!!!!

[ July 15, 2003, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: William1865 ]

Well, first off, our military should be large and powerful enough to fight wars on at least two different fronts. Not sure if that is still possible after the Clinton Era defense cuts. I'm saying the stakes are higher with NK because they already have nukes. Saddam was getting there. Better to have one place with nukes than two.

[ July 15, 2003, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: William1865 ]

You really need professional help getting over your Clinton obsession. You might be moving in the right direction though, you didnt mention DOMA in this posting.

are you sure about that Raze?

William Yes Clinton did cut the defense budget, since the cold war was over I expect that was prudent. Under Clinton ( At least according to what I have read, and I think Gen Clark agreed) the forces were set up to fight one major war and block/ fight a defensive war on another front.
How ever with Afgan, ( I fully supported) and Iraq I do not know if we could project enough forces to hold off North Korea. IMO we would have been better off dealing with the north, and hope ( I know HOPE) that our actions, plus the UN inspectors would have keep Iraq out of the WMD game.
I'm sorry did you say something (relevant) Phillyfan

I continue to be amazed that people actually feel it is morally okay to say things like, "we should have blown North Korea off the map in the 90s before they got this far". Do you have absolutely no sense of morality or integrity?

It is just your kind of crazy ass thinking that has caused all the problems in this administration. I used to think that people were crazy for supporting the administration so vehemently. Now I have figured out some of them are just plain crazy.

No, I sold both of those senses on Ebay. I needed money to buy an SUV.

Thats not true, he told me he needed the money to buy new Dixie Chicks CDs.

Yes, so I could run over them with my SUV.

I just checked the dixi chic section of Ebay, all the pork chops have been sold out, for months... ever since they returned from Europe and shut their mouths.

William, i'll pay for gas on your special "speed bump" trip.