North Korea threatens war over sanctions

[Marklar MM]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/K/KOREAS_NUCLEAR?SITE=MIDTN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-10-11-08-10-02

North Korea threatens war over sanctions

By HANS GREIMEL
Associated Press Writer


AP Photo/GREG BAKER
AP VIDEO

North Korea: Sanctions 'Declaration of War'
World Video


SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- North Korea stoked regional tensions Wednesday, threatening more nuclear tests and saying additional sanctions imposed on it would be considered an act of war, as nervous neighbors raced to bolster defenses and punish Pyongyang.

South Korea said it was making sure its troops were prepared for atomic warfare, and Japan imposed new economic sanctions to hit the economic lifeline of the communist nation's 1 million-member military, the world's fifth-largest.

North Korea, in its first formal statement since Monday's claimed atomic bomb test, hailed the blast as a success and said attempts by the outside world to penalize North Korea with sanctions would be considered an act of war.

Further pressure will be countered with physical retaliation, the North's Foreign Ministry warned in a statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency.



"If the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures," the statement, said without specifying what those measures could be.

President Bush called for stiff sanctions on North Korea and asserted that the United States has "no intentions of attacking" the reclusive regime.

He said he remains committed to diplomacy, but also "reserves all options to defend our friends in the region."

As Bush spoke, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged Washington to hold one-on-one talks with Pyongyang, something the U.S. has refused to do.

Buy AP Photo Reprints
North Korea Oct. 9 nuclear test
Interactives
North Korea's Missile Arsenal

The Last Stalinist State
Graphics
Military Balance in Asia

Latest News
Iran blames U.S. for N. Korea nuke test

N. Korea's reported test concerns Israel

Pakistan denies N. Korea nuke test link

Top Chinese envoy to visit U.S., Russia

Report: NKorea threatens more nuke tests

Japan: No data confirming 2nd N.Korea test


Interactives
Construction of Nuclear Reactors Worldwide

Yucca Mountain
Latest Nuclear News
Top Chinese envoy to visit U.S., Russia

North Korea threatens war over sanctions

U.N. chief urges U.S.: Talk to N. Korea

Japan bans North Korean imports

N. Korean troops at DMZ said bolder



"I have always argued that we should talk to parties whose behavior we want to change, whose behavior we want to influence, and from that point of view I believe that ... (the) U.S. and North Korea should talk," Annan said.

Annan also called on the communist nation not to escalate an "extremely difficult" situation.

North Korea's No. 2 leader Kim Yong Nam threatened in an interview with a Japanese news agency that there also would be more nuclear tests if Washington continued what he called its "hostile attitude."

Kim, second to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, told Kyodo News agency that further nuclear testing would hinge on U.S. policy toward his communist government.

"The issue of future nuclear tests is linked to U.S. policy toward our country," Kim Yong Nam was quoted as saying when asked whether Pyongyang will conduct more tests.

Along the razor-wired no-man's-land separating the divided Koreas, communist troops were more boldly trying to provoke their southern counterparts: spitting across the demarcation line, making throat-slashing hand gestures, flashing their middle finger and trying to talk to the troops, said U.S. Army Maj. Jose DeVarona of Fayetteville, N.C., adding that the overall situation was calm.

On the streets of North Korea's capital, it seemed like business as usual. Video by AP Television News showed people milling about Kim II Sung square in Pyongyang and rehearsing a performance for the 80th anniversary of the "Down with Imperialism Union."

South Korean Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung said that Seoul could enlarge its conventional arsenal to deal with a potentially nuclear-armed North Korea.

Scientists and other governments have said Monday's underground test has yet to be confirmed, with some experts saying the blast was significantly smaller than even the first nuclear bombs dropped on Japan during World War II.

North Korea appeared to respond to that Wednesday, saying in its statement that it "successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions."

In rare direct criticism of the communist regime from Seoul, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said the security threat cited by North Korea "either does not exist in reality, or is very exaggerated," according to South Korea's Yonhap news agency.

He spoke even as South Korea's military was checking its readiness for nuclear attack, Yonhap said. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended improving defenses, possibly with state-of-the-art weapons to destroy nuclear missiles, the report said.

The top U.S. general in South Korea said American forces are fully capable of deterring an attack despite the North's still-unconfirmed nuclear test.

"Be assured that the alliance has the forces necessary to deter aggression, and should deterrence fail, decisively defeat any North Korean attack against" South Korea, U.S. Army Gen. B.B. Bell said in a statement to troops. "U.S. forces have been well- trained to confront nuclear, biological and chemical threats."

About 29,500 U.S. soldiers are deployed in the South, a remnant of the 1950-53 Korean War that ended in a cease-fire, not a formal peace treaty.

Bell said seismic waves detected after the claimed test were still being analyzed and it had not been yet determined if the test was successful.

Japan took steps to punish North Korea for the test, prohibiting its ships from entering Japanese ports and imposing a total ban on imports from the impoverished nation.

North Korean nationals are also prohibited from entering Japan, with limited exceptions, the Cabinet Office said in a statement released after an emergency security meeting late Wednesday.

"We cannot tolerate North Korea's actions if we are to protect Japanese lives and property," Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said after an emergency security meeting late Wednesday. "These measures were taken to protect the peace."

A total ban on imports and ships could be disastrous for North Korea, whose produce such as clams and mushroom earns precious foreign currency on the Japanese market. Ferries also serve as a major conduit of communication between the two countries, which have no diplomatic relations.

Two dozen North Korea-registered trade ships are moored at Japanese ports, according to public broadcaster NHK. Local traders already were refusing to unload shipments to protest the alleged test, and the boats were expected to be ordered out, NHK said.

Tokyo already has halted food aid and imposed limited financial sanctions against North Korea after it test-fired seven missiles into waters between Japan and the Korean peninsula in July, including one capable of reaching the United States.

The North lashed out at the prospect of further economic sanctions.

"The enemy schemes to destroy us through economic lockout ... but that is merely a foolish illusion," said an editorial published by the state-run Rodong Sinmun, according to Radio Press.

Meanwhile, Japanese TV reports that North Korea may have conducted a second nuclear test stirred new anxieties, but one of the networks later issued a retraction and officials said it was most likely a false alarm.

NHK and Nippon Television, a commercial network, reported that "tremors" had been detected in North Korea, leading the government to begin investigating whether a second blast had taken place. The reports cited unidentified government sources. Nippon Television later apologized.

South Korean and U.S. seismic monitoring stations said they hadn't detected any indications of a second test, findings backed by White House spokesman Blair Jones.

With the United Nations debating how to respond to North Korea, China agreed to punishment but not the severe sanctions backed by the U.S.

Beijing is seen as having the greatest outside leverage on North Korea as a traditional ally and top provider of badly needed economic and energy aid.

The United States asked the U.N. Security Council to impose a partial trade embargo including strict limits on Korea's weapons exports and freezing of related financial assets.

All imports would be inspected too, to filter materials that could be made into nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

[johnsmith]

D'oh!

[rascal]

I don't understand all the concern about them having nukes. Its not like they are going to drop them on the US anytime soon.

The USA is the only country to drop the bomb on civilians and they go around making a big fuss about others having nuclear weapons for defense. the USA is out of line here.

[CubanMustGo]

NK has never created a weapon system that it didn't end up selling. It's one of the few ways they can bring in hard currency. While NK may not launch a nuke, it's much more likely that Al-Queda, if NK was able to sell them one, would stick the damned thing on a boat and try to take out NYC or DC. They (al-q) just issued a video yesterday encouraging use of nukes.

Understand now? Also remember that the time the US dropped the bomb was a way different situation, during WW2 over 60 years ago.

[johnsmith]

NK has never created a weapon system that it didn't end up selling. It's one of the few ways they can bring in hard currency. While NK may not launch a nuke, it's much more likely that Al-Queda, if NK was able to sell them one, would stick the damned thing on a boat and try to take out NYC or DC.

Understand now? Also remember that the time the US dropped the bomb was a way different situation, during WW2 over 60 years ago.


Exactly. After many years of retrospect and deep thinking, the United States knows that there should never be another Hiroshima or Nagasaki and everyone else agrees. To say that we are out of line is just ignorant. That's the same as saying we are out of line for trying to prevent a catastrophic war that would most likely result in cockroaches ruling the Earth.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

(Considering this is what we should have been taking care of first)

I'm just getting fucking tired of Kim Jong Il. Damnit, Rumsfeld, get off your ass (respectively, I remember reading that he doesn't sit) and just go beat his ass with your bare hands already.

[rascal]

You are assuming they will sell it. I doubt it. But they have the right to make nuclear bombs if they have the ability to. Who are you to say they don't?

You think they are stupid? They know AlQaeda would not be a smart group to sell it to.

Don't believe all the propaganda the US govt. throws to you. They will make you believe everything they want you to believe because you are weak minded.

[JoeChalupa]

Do you all think the US would not resort to nuclear weapons if push came to shove?

[rascal]

Also I don't care if it was 60 years ago. Thats no excuse. The US is the only country to drop the bomb on civilians.

[johnsmith]

Do you all think the US would not resort to nuclear weapons if push came to shove?


I don't think so. I have absolutely no evidence or logic behind this but I'd like to think not.

[rascal]

The US would be less likely to use nuclear weapons today because of the fear of retaliation.

[Extra Stout]

You are assuming they will sell it. I doubt it. But they have the right to make nuclear bombs if they have the ability to. Who are you to say they don't?

You think they are stupid? They know AlQaeda would not be a smart group to sell it to.

Don't believe all the propaganda the US govt. throws to you. They will make you believe everything they want you to believe because you are weak minded.
Sure, it is just the bad old U.S. telling other countries what to do. We are so evil.

Kim Jong Il is a sane, rational man with only the best interests of his nation in mind.

He would never resort to nuclear blackmail.

And Japanese arms escalation in response to a nuclear-armed North Korea is a really good idea! China will be thrilled!

I guess I'm just weak-minded.

[Extra Stout]

Also I don't care if it was 60 years ago. Thats no excuse. The US is the only country to drop the bomb on civilians.
Typical liberal moral vanity.

[JoeChalupa]

Me too. But as long as the weapons are at our disposal? scares the shit out of me.

[JoeChalupa]

Typical liberal moral vanity.

Typical conservative moral vanity. :rolleyes

think outside the box.

[Extra Stout]

Typical conservative moral vanity. :rolleyes

think outside the box.
Outside the box?

OK. With ongoing conventional warfare, Japanese civilians were dying at the rate of 100,000 per month. The military and civilian leadership in Japan were at an impasse over the question of surrender.

About 200,000 civilians were killed in the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Would the impasse have been resolved quickly enough to effect a net savings in lives lost, if nukes had not been dropped?

And that's just Japanese civilians, not even accounting for Japanese or Allied military losses.

100,000 Japanese civilians died in the Battle of Okinawa. Shall we condemn the U.S. for that one too? Shall we condemn the U.S. because we didn't sue for peace immediately after Pearl Harbor, or because our leaders didn't have the benefit of 60 years of hindsight information in making decisions on a day-to-day basis?

Moral vanity, that's all it is.

[101A]

Also I don't care if it was 60 years ago. Thats no excuse. The US is the only country to drop the bomb on civilians.


...and if we hadn't???

You keep making that point, but it was a different time, and a different world. You think Japan or Germany would have HESITATED nuking us?

Since then the United States has been in several hot wars, and not nuked anybody - so what's your point, exactly?

DO YOU want the Great Leader to have nuclear weapons? Do your really see an equivalency to his cognac-drunk ass with his finger on a hair trigger to the situation in the U.S.? OBVIOUSLY we have a high threshhold for what would cause us to use atomic/hydrogen weapons again; I don't believe North Korea would have that threshold.

Finally, NK is the closest thing we have to an enemy in the world right now. Moral equivalencies aside; I would rather they not have "the bomb". I like being in a knife fight holding a gun, frankly, as much as that may offend your, "we're all one world, equal in everything - except the United States is self-righteous and very evil" sensibilities.

[rascal]

Go ahead and try to rationalized why we are the only country to drop a nuclear bomb on civilians. The US govt has propagandasized it and you took the bait .


But had another country done the same you would not be so easy to make the same rationalizations.


We only nuked them because we knew there was no threat of a nuke retaliation. It would be less likely to happen today.


I like the American attitude that an American life is more valuable than that of another countries civilians. No country is right to attack civilians.

And I'm sure you like having a gun in a knife fightr because that is just what this is all about and proves my point why the US doesn't want certain countries to have nukes but would be ok with others. Thats not right by the way I see it, from an unbiased viewpoint.

[CubanMustGo]

Go ahead and try to rationalized why we are the only country to drop a nuclear bomb on civilians. The US govt has propagandasized it and you took the bait .

But had another country done the same you would not be so easy to make the same rationalizations.

We only nuked them because we knew there was no threat of a nuke retaliation. It would be less likely to happen today.

I like the American attitude that an American life is more valuable than that of another countries civilians. No country is right to attack civilians.

And I'm sure you like having a gun in a knife fightr because that is just what this is all about and proves my point why the US doesn't want certain countries to have nukes but would be ok with others. Thats not right by the way I see it, from an unbiased viewpoint.

Jesus, dude, I don't know what you have been smoking, but it has obviously rotted out your brain cells. You need to study your history a bit more. If the US was as evil as you seem to think it is we would have nuked the USSR back into the stone age when we were the only one with that capability. And given the number of casualties on both sides in places like Iwo Jima and Okinawa, combined with the intractibility of the Japanese government at the time, it is highly likely that a conventional invasion would have killed more people on both sides, civilian and military, not to mention ruin more of the infrastructure. And please remember that that war was started by the Germans and the Japanese. So you can sit in your ivory tower 60 years later and bitch about what happened, but you weren't there. I wasn't, either, but I'm old enough to have spent my entire life surrounded by those who were. I'm curious, how old are you? 15? You write like it, anyway.

There's enough stupidity going on in the US today without you adding your ill-advised thoughts to the mix. In case you have missed it, I don't support what we are doing in Iraq and much of what else has happened over the last six years. But, unlike you, I've done enough outside reading on the subject - that's right, actual reading, not just parroting what someone else says on TV, but actually reading sources from a number of countries - to know that the looney bin in NK has no business with the bomb. The thought processes that apply most everywhere else in the world don't apply north of the 38th parallel. Why do think they won't let the people there have cell phones, access the internet, talk to strangers; why do you think that visitation to the country is highly regulated, to the point that you can't go anywhere outside your hotel without a handler; etc. etc. etc. Pure and simple it is a cult of personality where the people are mistreated, underfed, and ill-suited to face the demands of the 21st century. The people don't know any better because EVERYTHING they know comes from the Kim Il-Sung Propaganda Company. Remember, he started this lunacy and even though he is dead he is still the "Eternal President" of NK. Yeah, GWB and company slant things their way (witness Fox "News"), but I have the freedom to see what the rest of the world is saying and make up my own mind.

If you think your viewpoint is unbiased, you need to re-acquaint yourself with the term.

[Yonivore]

You are assuming they will sell it.
They have sold every other weapons system they've ever developed and they were fairly indiscriminate about who were the customers.


I doubt it.
You'll forgive me if I don't trust your intuition on North Korean intentions.


But they have the right to make nuclear bombs if they have the ability to.
Not if you buy the whole international sentiment on the proliferation of nuclear weapons.


Who are you to say they don't?
A country with vastly superior resources and weapons. South Korea may take a hit before we completely annihilate Kim Jong Mentally-Ill but, some are beginning to think that is a risk we may have to take in order to avoid a much more devastating scenario further down the road.


You think they are stupid?
Yes.


They know AlQaeda would not be a smart group to sell it to.
They don't care.


Don't believe all the propaganda the US govt. throws to you. They will make you believe everything they want you to believe because you are weak minded.
Well, considering China's reaction to this week's events, I'd say the U.S. Government has been more on the money with their assessment of North Korea than just about anyone else.

[Yonivore]

Go ahead and try to rationalized why we are the only country to drop a nuclear bomb on civilians. The US govt has propagandasized it and you took the bait.
What was the desirable alternative?


But had another country done the same you would not be so easy to make the same rationalizations.
But, another country didn't.



We only nuked them because we knew there was no threat of a nuke retaliation. It would be less likely to happen today.
We "nuked" them because it was the most effective way of bringing the fanatical Imperialist regime of Japan to it's knees -- or, more precisely, to the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri -- without expending any more U.S. lives.

Tell me, do you have any idea how much in human costs we would have had to incur in an invasion of Japan?


I like the American attitude that an American life is more valuable than that of another countries civilians.
Only when that country has demonstrated a complete disregard of any human life and they leave no feasible alternative to complete destruction.

Japan was a special circumstance requiring a special weapon. After all, we didn't nuke Berlin.


No country is right to attack civilians.
You're right. And, in a perfect world, we would have smart bombs that only killed militarily strategic targets -- even when they are embedded in civilian population centers.

But, guess what, the United States of America is the only country on the face of the planet that is actually actively pursuing such weapons. Maybe someday, no innocent civilian will have to die for the agressive acts of it's government or their proxies.


And I'm sure you like having a gun in a knife fightr because that is just what this is all about and proves my point why the US doesn't want certain countries to have nukes but would be ok with others. Thats not right by the way I see it, from an unbiased viewpoint.
If you had the chance, wouldn't you bring a gun to a knife fight? Who ever said warmaking was intended to be a exercise in fairness?

And, yes, I believe that until we are able to detect and eliminate the threat of nuclear weapons being used against us, it is in our national security interests to prevent such weapons becoming part of the arsenal of certain countries.

If Afghanistan had had a nuclear weapon when the Taliban took over, is there any doubt al Qaeda would have packed on over instead of their hijacking attack? I have no doubt they would have.

[clambake]

You can thank our president and his actions for other leaders search for the nuclear equasion.

Much like you, Yoni, they don't want to find themselves holding only a knife in an american gunfight.

[velik_m]

The sanctions will only encourage NK to sell this technology to "rogue" states and groups.

[Yonivore]

The sanctions will only encourage NK to sell this technology to "rogue" states and groups.
What technology? By all accounts it didn't work and, indeed, may not have even been a nuclear device.

[Yonivore]

You can thank our president and his actions for other leaders search for the nuclear equasion.
Yeah, right. I believe we can personally thank William Jefferson Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Madelaine Albright and their "agreed framework" nonsense for the current state of North Koreas nuclear ambitions.

You act like Kim Jong Mentally-Ill didn't start working on the bomb until President Bush declared them part of the Axis of Evil.


Much like you, Yoni, they don't want to find themselves holding only a knife in an american gunfight.
I have this visual of that stereotypical scene from a thousand cops and robbers movies where the bad guy is inching toward a gun laying on the floor, just out of reach, and the good guy is drawn down on him. In his stupidity, he tries to grab the gun, aim it, and fire it before Dirty Harry can paint the wall with his brain.

Has it ever succeeded?

[clambake]

All of those presidents invaded Iraq for no reason?

Celebrity hating Yoni finds a way to embrace Hollywood.

[Yonivore]

All of those presidents invaded Iraq for no reason?
When was Madelaine Albright president?


Celebrity hating Yoni finds a way to embrace Hollywood.
Who said I hated celebrities?

[jman3000]

do they even have a way to properly deliver it? i'm going on the assumption that detonating a nuke underground in a controlled setting is a lot different than actually using one in a strategic sense.

[Yonivore]

do they even have a way to properly deliver it? i'm going on the assumption that detonating a nuke underground in a controlled setting is a lot different than actually using one in a strategic sense.
There's still no consensus over whether or not the detonation was actually nuclear.

But, I would imagine Kim Jong Mentally-Ill plans to duct tape the damn thing to the top of one of those Missiles that blew to pieces, during the boost phase last July, and irradiate much of the Korean Penisula as well as the Sea of Japan.

[Yonivore]

Here, clambake, let the Director of Airplane and Scary Movie educate you.

Agreed Framework in Action (http://hotair.com/archives/2006/10/10/video-the-zucker-ad/)

[JoeChalupa]

Ain't gonna happen

[CubanMustGo]

do they even have a way to properly deliver it? i'm going on the assumption that detonating a nuke underground in a controlled setting is a lot different than actually using one in a strategic sense.

(1) If they don't have a way to deliver it now, they will before long.
(2) You don't have to have a missile to really ruin the day of a lot of people. Smuggle it out, put it on a boat or an aircraft, and destroy whatever port you like.

Remember that "Little Boy," the first US nuke used in action was humongous (10' long, 9000 lbs) and only resulted in a 15 kiloton explosion. Once you get the basic concepts down miniaturization is only a matter of time. The NKs may not be there yet but it seems they are on the road.

[01Snake]

Love her or hate her, the chick's writing style is awesome.


CLINTON'S LATEST GLOW JOB
October 11, 2006


With the Democrats' full-throated moralizing of late, I'm almost tempted to vote for them — although perhaps "full-throated" is the wrong phrase to use with regard to Democrats and sex scandals. The sudden emergence of the Swift Butt Veterans for Truth demonstrates that the Democrats would prefer to talk about anything other than national security.

Unfortunately for them, the psychotic Kim Jong Il seems to be setting off nukes, raising the embarrassing issue of the Clinton administration's 1994 "peace" deal with North Korea.

At least with former Rep. Mark Foley, you could say the Democrats' hypocritical grandstanding was just politics. But in the case of North Korea, Democrats are resorting to bald-faced lies.

Current New Mexico governor and former Clinton administration official Bill Richardson has been on tour, bragging about the groundbreaking Clinton administration negotiations with North Korea — keeping his fingers crossed that no one has access to news from 1994.

In 1994, the Clinton administration got a call from Jimmy Carter — probably collect — who was with the then-leader of North Korea, saying: "Hey, Kim Il Sung is a total stud, and I've worked out a terrific deal. I'll give you the details later."

Clinton promptly signed the deal, so he could forget about North Korea and get back to cheating on Hillary. Mission accomplished.

Under the terms of the "agreed framework," we gave North Korea all sorts of bribes — more than $5 billion worth of oil, two nuclear reactors and lots of high technology. In return, they took the bribes and kept building nukes. This wasn't difficult, inasmuch as the 1994 deal permitted the North Koreans to evade weapons inspectors for the next five years.

Yes, you read that right: North Korea promised not to develop nukes, and we showed how much we trusted them by agreeing to no weapons inspections for five years.

The famed "allies," whom liberals claim they are so interested in pleasing, went ballistic at this cave-in to North Korea. Japan and South Korea — actual allies, unlike France and Germany — were furious. Even Hans Blix thought we were being patsies.

If you need any more evidence that it was a rotten deal, The New York Times hailed it as "a resounding triumph."

At the time, people like William Safire were screaming from the rooftops that allowing North Korea to escape weapons inspections for five years would "preclude a pre-emptive strike by us if North Korea, in the next U.S. president's administration, breaks its agreement to freeze additional bomb-making."

And then on Oct. 17, 2002 — under a new administration, you'll note — The New York Times reported on the front page, so you couldn't have missed it: "Confronted by new American intelligence, North Korea has admitted that it has been conducting a major clandestine nuclear weapons development program for the past several years."

So when it comes to North Korea, I believe the Democrats might want to maintain a discreet silence, lest anyone ask, "Hey, did you guys do anything with North Korea?"

But by Richardson's lights, the only reason Kim Jong Il is testing nukes is because Bush called him evil. He said, "When you call him axis of evil or a tyrant, you know, he just goes crazy." This is the sort of idiocy you expect to hear from an illiterate like Keith Olbermann, not someone who might know people who read newspapers.

Richardson also blames the war in Iraq, bleating that the poor North Koreans feel "that there's too much attention on the Middle East, on Iraq. So it's a cry for attention." If Kim just wanted our attention, he could have started dating Lindsay Lohan. But Richardson says Kim "psychologically feels he's been dissed, that he's not treated with respect."

Damn that Bush! If only he had ignored the crazy Muslims and dedicated himself into sending flowers (and more nuclear reactors!) to North Korea, we could be actively helping Kim develop his nukes like the Clinton administration did.

As Richardson said, Kim "wants us to negotiate with him directly, as we did in the Clinton administration."

To go on TV and propose negotiating with North Korea like Clinton did without ever mentioning that North Korea cheated on that agreement before the ink was dry would be like denouncing American aggression against Japan in 1942 and neglecting to mention Pearl Harbor. Anyone who is either that stupid or that disingenuous should not be allowed on TV.

When pressed by CNN's Anderson Cooper about the failed deal, Richardson lied, claiming the 1994 deal prevented the North Koreans from building nukes "for eight years" — i.e., right up until the day The New York Times reported the North Koreans had been developing nukes "for the past several years."

Kim is crazier than any leader even South America has been able to produce. In fact, he's so crazy, we might be able to get the Democrats to take action. Someone tell Nancy Pelosi that the "Dear Leader" is an actual pederast. Then we'll at least be able to read his instant messages.


http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

[MannyIsGod]

Typical liberal moral vanity.Fuck that. That is an atypical statement.

[mavs>spurs2]

I can feel World War 3 coming on. Something along the lines of US, Britain, and Japan vs China, North Korea, and Russia. Hopefully all hell doesn't break loose. Someone brought up the point that North Korea could potentially sell nukes to enemies such as Al Queda. Something really should be done for the sake of the U.S. and the North Korean people, i'm just not exactly sure what to do.

[PixelPusher]

Here, clambake, let the Director of Airplane and Scary Movie educate you.

Agreed Framework in Action (http://hotair.com/archives/2006/10/10/video-the-zucker-ad/)

You want to change his mind using the tired, simplistic comedy of an over the hill director?


...Shirley, you can't be serious!

[Drachen]

ann doesnt writes as if we gave them anything. Smart woman.

[ChumpDumper]

Love her or hate her, the chick's writing style is awesome.His style isn't very noteworthy.
ann doesnt writes as if we gave them anything. Smart woman.Actually, he writes as if we gave them "more than $5 billion worth of oil, two nuclear reactors and lots of high technology," which would be true had we followed through with our part of the deal. The truth is something different and something he doesn't want to make clear, which is typical of him when a blowjob joke is available.

[smeagol]

rascal has good basketball takes and good political takes :rolleyes

[Ozzman]

Well....I say the U.S. doesn't take anything NK says seriously, until they can prove ANYTHING.

[Hook Dem]

Well....I say the U.S. doesn't take anything NK says seriously, until they can prove ANYTHING.
How very true!!!!! The problem with understanding the problem that NK presents, is that many on here are too young to know the complete history of the situation.

[johnsmith]

How very true!!!!! The problem with understanding the problem that NK presents, is that many on here are too young to know the complete history of the situation.


You don't have to be of a certain age to know the complete history of the Korean situation. They're called books, they have information in them, some are read for leisure.

[Drachen]

His style isn't very noteworthy.Actually, he writes as if we gave them "more than $5 billion worth of oil, two nuclear reactors and lots of high technology," which would be true had we followed through with our part of the deal. The truth is something different and something he doesn't want to make clear, which is typical of him when a blowjob joke is available.

Thats what Im saying, we didnt give them anything, so lo and behold, they didnt live up to their side either... what a concept.

[Hook Dem]

You don't have to be of a certain age to know the complete history of the Korean situation. They're called books, they have information in them, some are read for leisure.
Thats the problem!!! There are some who don't read and just form opinions from talking points!

[Phenomanul]

Outside the box?

OK. With ongoing conventional warfare, Japanese civilians were dying at the rate of 100,000 per month. The military and civilian leadership in Japan were at an impasse over the question of surrender.

About 200,000 civilians were killed in the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Would the impasse have been resolved quickly enough to effect a net savings in lives lost, if nukes had not been dropped?

And that's just Japanese civilians, not even accounting for Japanese or Allied military losses.

100,000 Japanese civilians died in the Battle of Okinawa. Shall we condemn the U.S. for that one too? Shall we condemn the U.S. because we didn't sue for peace immediately after Pearl Harbor, or because our leaders didn't have the benefit of 60 years of hindsight information in making decisions on a day-to-day basis?

Moral vanity, that's all it is.


Not to mention that the US strategically chose its targets as those that would be least detrimental to Japanese society....

The US could have dropped the bomb on Tokyo or Yokohama... if they had wanted to. But killing the maximum amount of civilians and causing a massive amount of destruction was not the goal. Ironic as it may seem, the goal of the Enola Gay's mission was to end the war... not to 'end' Japanese society.

Imagine if the bomb had been dropped on Tokyo.... 3-4 million dead... instant decimation of countless of precious artifacts, monuments, and culture, loss of an entire history, everything gone. The U.S. knew better, and was as civilized in their use of the atom-bomb as they could be in such a trying time.

Do you think that Japan would be on such buddy-buddy terms with the U.S. if it had been any different?

[Yonivore]

Wanna know what we're up against?


http://static.flickr.com/106/267815190_9300fec638.jpg
A satellite image from the U.S. Department of Defense of the Korean Peninsula at night, showing the lights of South Korea and the relative darkness of North Korea (TOP), is shown at a news briefing by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon in Washington, October 11, 2006.

[ChumpDumper]

What was the point of that?

[clambake]

The point is we should attack at night when they are all asleep.

[Ocotillo]

Let's see, if you follow the Republican talking points you have (from Josh Marshall):


"Failure" =1994-2002 -- Era of Clinton 'Agreed Framework': No plutonium production. All existing plutonium under international inspection. No bomb.

"Success" = 2002-2006 -- Bush Policy Era: Active plutonium production. No international inspections of plutonium stocks. Nuclear warhead detonated.

Clinton had direct negotiations with Kim. Those who oppose this say he cannot be trusted to keep his word in treaties. What puzzles me is Bush insists on the six party talks. If Kim will lie to us individually, why would he not lie to 5 parties in the six party talks?

By saying negotiation will not work because Kim is untrustworthy means you only have limited options:

1. Talk everyone else into sanctions against North Korea. (Kind of tried that with Iraq)

2. Do nothing. (That is really the Bush plan)

3. Attack militarily.

So what do you right wingers propose?

[Nbadan]

What was the point of that?

Cool photos don't need no stinking point!

:hat


:lol

[clambake]

Well, my alter ego Bakedclam is a right winger and I propose that we wait until the weekend to make our move. (NK says they are going to test another weapon this weekend)

The instant they test another nuke, we giv'em the real thing. Bush can claim their test must have backfired and serves them right for being blown up by their own weapons.

[Drachen]

Wanna know what we're up against?


http://static.flickr.com/106/267815190_9300fec638.jpg
A satellite image from the U.S. Department of Defense of the Korean Peninsula at night, showing the lights of South Korea and the relative darkness of North Korea (TOP), is shown at a news briefing by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon in Washington, October 11, 2006.


well at least they are nice enough to outline their country with lights. That way we can know if we are over land when dropping bombs.

[Nbadan]

north korea is going to attack south korea in the next 2 weeks.....take that to the bank.......then all you gangsta punks are gonna get drafted...hahahahaahahaha!

Ok, where's my check?

What resources is N. Korea gonna use to attack the South? Where is it gonna get its ammo and gas to drive this 'war machine south'? China? Russia? Don't bet on it.

[Nbadan]

U.S. contigency plans for war with N. Korea are all horrific...


PLANS previously drafted by the Pentagon predict 52,000 US military casualties and one million civilian dead in the first 90 days of conflict if America attacked Pyongyang.

The US leadership is looking at international economic and diplomatic sanctions against North Korea as its primary response to Monday's nuclear test.

But military contingencies are considered as a matter of course and analysts paint a horrific picture for even the most targeted of US strikes.

A report this week by US-based security and military analyst Stratfor predicts North Korea could return fire on Seoul with "several hundred thousand high-explosive rounds per hour" -- with up to 25 per cent of shells filled with nerve gas.

Other estimates say the US would need at least 500,000 ground troops to secure against a North invasion of the South.

Link (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20565819-661,00.html)

The U.S. should have started a draft 2 years ago, now it seems like it maybe inevitable.

[FromWayDowntown]

http://static.flickr.com/106/267815190_9300fec638.jpg


So much for this nation's commitment to liberating oppressed people by regime change.

Policy driven by economic realities much?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

The USA is the only country to drop the bomb on civilians and they go around making a big fuss about others having nuclear weapons for defense. the USA is out of line here.

Nice reach, Gumby.

[01Snake]

http://static.flickr.com/106/267815190_9300fec638.jpg

Looks like someone left a light on up North.
:spin

[ChumpDumper]

That's the set of Kim's latest movie.

[Nbadan]

Slam dunk?

Source: U.S. has evidence of radioactivity from N. Korea
From Jamie McIntyre
CNN Washington Bureau


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States has evidence of radioactivity from a site where North Korea was suspected of conducting a nuclear weapons test, a U.S. official said Friday.

The official said the evidence is preliminary, but if it is confirmed, the United States will be in a position to confirm North Korea's claim on Monday that it successfully set off a nuclear blast for the first time.

The report appeared to contradict a CNN report earlier Friday from two U.S. government officials with access to classified information that an initial air sampling over North Korea showed no indication of radioactive debris.

CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/13/nkorea.test.sample/index.html)

[Nbadan]

Somebody please take the pieoty away from the General...


WASHINGTON — The U.S. military's top officer said Thursday that the Pentagon would have sufficient forces to win if called on to fight a war in North Korea, but the conflict would be more difficult without the intelligence and guidance systems devoted to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that about 200,000 U.S. troops were deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving more than 2 million troops available for a war in Asia.

Pace said a conflict with North Korea, which both he and President Bush have said is highly unlikely, would rely heavily on the Navy and Air Force because of the significant deployment of land forces in Iraq. In addition, such an attack would not be "as clean as we would like," he said, because guidance systems used to aim bombs were in use in the Middle East.

"You wouldn't have the precision in combat going to a second theater of war that you would if you were only going to the first theater of war," Pace told a group of military reporters. "You end up dropping more bombs potentially to get the job done, and it would mean more brute force."

LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pace13oct13,1,7265599.story?coll=la-headlines-world)

Yeah, he'd have 2 million troops if he drafted every eligible draft-age boys between 18 and 49.

[mavs>spurs2]

All I have to say is Bush/Clinton are both idiots for not doing something about it before it comes to war. And if there is a draft my ass is heading north(Canada) because this shit isn't worth fighting for. I'd rather not lose my life due to Bush's mistakes. It's one thing to defend your country if we were under attack like say Pearl Harbor,I would have no problem joining the military if that was the case. But you have to learn to pick and choose your battles.

[mavs>spurs2]

north korea is going to attack south korea in the next 2 weeks.....take that to the bank.......then all you gangsta punks are gonna get drafted...hahahahaahahaha!

You think that shit's funny? Loss of thousands of innocent lives is funny to you?(Actually probably millions of lives if you count both Korean and U.S. casualties.)

[01Snake]

All I have to say is Bush/Clinton are both idiots for not doing something about it before it comes to war. And if there is a draft my ass is heading north(Canada) because this shit isn't worth fighting for. I'd rather not lose my life due to Bush's mistakes. It's one thing to defend your country if we were under attack like say Pearl Harbor,I would have no problem joining the military if that was the case. But you have to learn to pick and choose your battles.

:donkey

[boutons_]

Pace misspoke or was misquoted.

Beginning of 2004, there were 500K Army and 700K Army Reserve. The Army is just now fighting the mind-numbingly incompetent con man Rummy to get just 30K more troops. There were only 780K at the end of the Cold War.

There's no way the US has 2M troops.

[CommanderMcBragg]

The sanctions, watered down, have just passed.

[Ozzman]

Pace misspoke or was misquoted.

Beginning of 2004, there were 500K Army and 700K Army Reserve. The Army is just now fighting the mind-numbingly incompetent con man Rummy to get just 30K more troops. There were only 780K at the end of the Cold War.

There's no way the US has 2M troops.

Agreed.the only way you folks could even think of a ground invasion or at least a ground operation would be with the MASSIVE help of China. The only way you guys can keep on invadin', is with the help of china and/or India. they are the only ones who could make that sort of effort.

I think I already posted this, but roughly one quarter to three sixteenths of the Chinese population is eligible for military conflict, which equals out to roughly
anywhere from 318,750,000 to 425,000,000. That is a HELL of a lot of people. Think about that, three sixteenths (approximates) of the Chinese population is about equal to that of the U.S.
THAT is scary.

[turambar85]

Yeah, no doubt about it, if there is a draft I am moving. For good.

Death for Bush or being forced to find a new place to live, and get to learn a new language. This scale is tipped to 12:00.

[Yonivore]

I'll be damned, seems we go their attention. Guess who wants to come back to the table (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061015/wl_asia_afp/nkoreanuclearweaponsrussia)?


North Korea wants six-party talks on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula to continue, Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev said Sunday following talks with his North Korean counterpart, Russia's Interfax news agency reported.

"The North Korean side repeatedly insisted that the six-sided process should continue, that it is not rejecting six-sided negotiations, and that the aim of the full denuclearization of the Korean peninsula remains," Alexeyev said.

He made the comments in Beijing en route to Seoul from Pyongyang, where he held talks with his North Korean counterpart Kim Ky-kwan, the news agency said.

"My North Korean colleagues said several times that Pyongyang would not under any circumstances pass on its nuclear capabilities to another country, or use them against anyone," Alexeyev said.
Is Kim Jong Mentally-Ill running short on that French brandy already?

[Yonivore]

Yeah, no doubt about it, if there is a draft I am moving. For good.

Death for Bush or being forced to find a new place to live, and get to learn a new language. This scale is tipped to 12:00.
Why don't you go ahead and move now? Undoubtedly, there's going to be a future conflict over which you'll be unwilling to serve your country...so, really, go.

I hear Venezuela is nice this time of year.

[Good 'N Plenty]

I'll be damned, seems we go their attention. Guess who wants to come back to the table (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061015/wl_asia_afp/nkoreanuclearweaponsrussia)?


Is Kim Jong Mentally-Ill running short on that French brandy already?

I'll be damned, aren't sanctions what the UN wanted for Iraq?

[Yonivore]

I'll be damned, aren't sanctions what the UN wanted for Iraq?
Yep, and 17 UNSC Resolutions and 12 years later, it had to come to regime change. Let's Hope Kim Jong Mentally-Ill is a little smarter.

[boutons_]

"it had to come to regime change."

no, it didn't. But keeping defending your murderous WH liars and their bullshit phony war. It's so successful, and so popular, it's the war NO REPUG wants to mention in the current election.

[JohnnyMarzetti]

Yep, and 17 UNSC Resolutions and 12 years later, it had to come to regime change. Let's Hope Kim Jong Mentally-Ill is a little smarter.

Well, there isn't any hope that Dumbya gets any smarter.

[01Snake]

Well, there isn't any hope that Dumbya gets any smarter.

Just as there ins't any hope that you could get any dumber. :dizzy

[PixelPusher]

:donkey

...eMule?

[Ocotillo]

Nice, but long read (http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/10/do_you_feel_saf.html)

[RandomGuy]

Nice, but long read (http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/10/do_you_feel_saf.html)

:reading
Good read indeed. Well written and well reasoned.

Conservatives will hate it.