NKorea unlikely to meet reactor deadline

Walter

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
1,899
Location
Heart of Europe
North Korea appeared increasingly unlikely to meet a weekend deadline to shut down its nuclear reactor, staying silent Thursday about whether it was satisfied with a U.S. solution to a financial dispute that has stalled the disarmament process.

Read full story here.
 
Werbung:

chad750

Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2007
Messages
13
What else is new when have they ever complied with anything we have asked them to do. This is just another ploy, another lie, to get financial aid from the world community because their country is bankrupt and starving to death except for those in power. As soon as they get aid they will go right back to exploring Nuclear possibilities.
 

drippinhun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
224
I never believed in purchasing friends. I guess we should just religate their nuclear power to just another little pissant country like Israel who have those weapons. We should keep a couple of dozen nukes trained on those nations, just in case we need to turn them into glass.
 

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
Its a shame really that our boneheaded President has so many military resourses committed to Iraq, when we have a real threat even closer. I wouldnt bat an eye of unhappiness if there were some surgical airstrikes at the nuclear facilities there. KJI is a hopeless despot that has isolated himself from the world community and is literally starving his citizens. The state department needs to tell the Chinese that either they support us or trade will drop signifigantly and then we call in the B-2s and use them for what they were designed to do.
 

drippinhun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
224
Its a shame really that our boneheaded President has so many military resourses committed to Iraq, when we have a real threat even closer. I wouldnt bat an eye of unhappiness if there were some surgical airstrikes at the nuclear facilities there. KJI is a hopeless despot that has isolated himself from the world community and is literally starving his citizens. The state department needs to tell the Chinese that either they support us or trade will drop signifigantly and then we call in the B-2s and use them for what they were designed to do.

The surgical airstrikes are going to take place on Iran before Christmas. I got that info on the qt from a Pentagon mole.
 

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
The surgical airstrikes are going to take place on Iran before Christmas. I got that info on the qt from a Pentagon mole.

If that is true, I hope the idiot who told you that loses thier job and faces criminal charges as that violates many OpSec rules put in place. Also I would keep ones mouth shut about such things on the internet. Dont lull yourself into believing you have anonymity on the net. You dont and be careful as you may have agents of some sort wanting to talk to you.
 

drippinhun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
224
If that is true, I hope the idiot who told you that loses thier job and faces criminal charges as that violates many OpSec rules put in place. Also I would keep ones mouth shut about such things on the internet. Dont lull yourself into believing you have anonymity on the net. You dont and be careful as you may have agents of some sort wanting to talk to you.

I will handle whatever is thrown at me. Always have. As far as the person violating OpSec, I admire people who are going to extremes to stop the insanity of our regime.

I just had a friend who is a CEO of a major manufacturing firm who was disturbed at how much everyone at his business's industry convention overseas hated George W. and our administration. Even under the auspices of business meeting comportment, these worldwide captains expressed a real deep hatred to this gentleman while making it clear it was not for our people or institutions.

Bush and his neocon agenda are ruining our present and future. I may be wrong but it sounds like you respect the need to help their Machiavellian Plans succeed. I hope all their attempts blow up in their face. The time has come to retake our nation from these selfserving gits.
 

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
I will agree with you in my distaste of Bush, please dont think for a minute I care for him. But it is the lives of pilots at stake, they follow orders and arent involved in the politics. I learned this lesson while speaking with a family member who was the back seater in an F-4 during Vietnam among several other military command jobs. I was just pointing it out to you. I agree with most of the things you say Hun.
 

USMC the Almighty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,070
Its a shame really that our boneheaded President has so many military resourses committed to Iraq, when we have a real threat even closer.

It's even more of a shame that our previous boneheaded President cut military capabilities by 40% when we had a real threat in Osama bin Laden.
 

drippinhun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
224
It's even more of a shame that our previous boneheaded President cut military capabilities by 40% when we had a real threat in Osama bin Laden.

If I recall launching dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles into a couple of targets trying to take Osama out was not only expensive, but futile, since again we relied on the bloated and piss poor inept U.S. intelligence we've thrown incredible tons of money at. How much more money should we waste? We now spend more than the world combined on military capabilities and Obama still roams the planet. So much for throwing more money at problems, eh?
 

Napoleon

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
61
Location
Columbus, OH
What else is new when have they ever complied with anything we have asked them to do.

North Korea complied with the Agreed Framework until the international community ducked out of it's part of the bargain i.e. to build two light water reactor power plants with a completion date of 2003. The foundation for the first wasn't even poured until 2002. Perhaps if the United States would actually live up to the treaties and agreements it signs the North Korean threat would have faded into history.
 

drippinhun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
224
North Korea complied with the Agreed Framework until the international community ducked out of it's part of the bargain i.e. to build two light water reactor power plants with a completion date of 2003. The foundation for the first wasn't even poured until 2002. Perhaps if the United States would actually live up to the treaties and agreements it signs the North Korean threat would have faded into history.

But I thought that when you're the biggest and baddest, you get to make up the rules as you go along and ignore what you want. At least that's the lesson our leaders are teaching the people of our nation now.

(and we haven't a clue as to what is going down. I thought it was all because we can't have the Ten Commandments posted in the classroom. :rolleyes: )
 

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/06/22/koreas.nuclear1.ap/index.html

Well well, so it appears they are going to shut it down after all, over a period of three weeks it seems. This comes with political concessions and energy aide of 1million tons of heavy fuel oil in exchange. So we can stop slamming Clinton for his appeasement strategy as preference to Bush's plan, as it turns out, they are basically the same.
That all being said, I wonder how long it will be before they have it operational again.
 

Castle

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
225
Location
Former US of A
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/06/22/koreas.nuclear1.ap/index.html

Well well, so it appears they are going to shut it down after all, over a period of three weeks it seems. This comes with political concessions and energy aide of 1million tons of heavy fuel oil in exchange. So we can stop slamming Clinton for his appeasement strategy as preference to Bush's plan, as it turns out, they are basically the same.
That all being said, I wonder how long it will be before they have it operational again.
Sorry but I WILL continue to slam Clinton for his @sskiss approach to NK and will do the same with Bush if he is attempting to do the same. Is anyone new to the tactics of Kim Jong-Il? Should we expect him to respond any differently than he has in the past with the same offerings?

I say we should let the UN earn it's pay and handle the unending diplomatic posturing they are so well known for. Lets see how much progress they make with the likes of NK and Iran. There is no reason we should be making concessions while wasting time and money with these and other liabilities. Just put them on notice that they are in charge of policing their own countries and responsible for their own decisions with respect to nuclear power and terrorism. If they choose to handle these issues appropriately, all will be well. If an American city goes up in a mushroom cloud, then they should expect that they will continue to exist from that point on only in the history books. Allow them to make their own choices free from American influence and if they so choose, dig their own graves.

-Castle
 
Werbung:

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
Castle, I think the idea of diplomacy is to prevent an American city, or any city for that matter from going up in a mushroom cloud as you put it.
As for Bush, read the article, he did do the same thing, he agreed to a millions tons of heavy fuel oil, to shut down the reactor. If I am not mistaken, under the Clinton plan they also gave humanitarian aide of food as well, and although planned for the civilian population much of it was consumed by the military. I think JG Ill is a nasty despot who would be best off on the receiving end of a JDAM, or bunker buster the NK people are starving under this regime. But Bush did very much a similar thing to Clinton and it wont make a difference in the long run. Ultimately what we are trying to avoid in a nuclear exchange and threats dont really prevent that. Remember, wars are usually started by people who are afraid, to a lesser extent they are afraid of being involved in a war, but to a greater one, they are more afraid of not starting one.
 
Top