N Korea defies US over nuclear crisis

[Graag]

he is an idealist and believes that his goal is to spread democracy

Are you kidding? He's drying up what democracy is left in his home country, let alone anywhere else.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

The US will have a missile shield by than. Way before that point. We already have a limited one protecting military valuables. It will be those who have a shield against those who don't. Pretty much like now - those who have nukes and those who don't.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Originally posted by Graag


Are you kidding? He's drying up what democracy is left in his home country, let alone anywhere else.

oh please.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, I'm not kidding. Ask anyone that is around him. Read the last Time Magazine. There is an interesting article. He believes that he has a mission to spread democracy to the Middle East, and believes that if he can get rid of Saddam, he can build a 1st World Democracy that will show the rest of the region that that is the way to go.

And how is he 'drying up democracy' at home? I haven't seen him jail Democrat leaders yet.

[Graag]

The US will have a missile shield by than. Way before that point. We already have a limited one protecting military valuables. It will be those who have a shield against those who don't. Pretty much like now -
those who have nukes and those who don't.

Please provide an iota of evidence. I really am curious!

oh please.

And how is he 'drying up democracy' at home?

I am largely refering to the Patriot act. I quote from the Guardian

a number of the Bush Administration's new laws, orders and policies are deservedly controversial: the disregard for international treaties and conventions; strict controls on media reports about the war; secret surveillance and searches of citizens* computers; widespread ethnic profiling; indefinite detention of non-citizens; offers of expedited American citizenship to those who provide evidence about terrorists; and military tribunals with the power to try enemies in secret, without application of the usual laws of evidence, without right of appeal, yet with the ability to impose the death penalty. Opportunity for legislative or other public discussion of these measures has been largely eclipsed by the rapidity with which most of them have been pushed into effect.

http://www.observer.co.uk/libertywatch/story/0,1373,610367,00.html

another reference http://www.amisuk.f9.co.uk/LMDarticles/Jan02art1.html

Best I could do at short notice, but you get the jist

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
I'm so sick of this chest thumping by Bush and his cronies. North Korea has every right to have nuclear weapons. Nobody is looking at things from their perspective. The US has been an aggressor since after WW2... North Korea, IMO, is simply scared and is looking for that Mutually Assured Destruction assurance so that the US doesn't unilaterally attack it. The US is in the wrong here. Not NK.

Sava, if you lived on the West Coast in range of the NK nukes, I think you just might have a different attitude.

I am sure that the Japanese, South Koreans, Russians and Chinese are all very concerned by developments in NK.

The NK has now become an aggressive international outlaw by breaking treaties concerning the acquistion of Nuclear Weapons. The question is not so much what the US does, but what the United Nations does. I am sure the UN will listen to the US, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan very carefully.

[Sava]

Bush is only going to start wars, not spread Democracy. He even said during the Afghan campaign, "We aren't in the nation building business."

[Graag]

Ned:

The NK has now become an aggressive international outlaw by breaking treaties

What a horrible place the world would be if other, more powerful countries did that!

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned


Sava, if you lived on the West Coast in range of the NK nukes, I think you just might have a different attitude.

I am sure that the Japanese, South Koreans, Russians and Chinese are all very concerned by developments in NK.

The NK has now become an aggressive international outlaw by breaking treaties concerning the acquistion of Nuclear Weapons. The question is not so much what the US does, but what the United Nations does. I am sure the UN will listen to the US, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan very carefully.

in range of NK nukes? okay go learn about NK missile capabilities because you obviously don't know about them at this point...

South Korea recently elected a leader that is in favor of increasing relations with NK and decreasing relations with the US. Russia and China aren't too worried because if NK does anything to anybody it will be US targets or US interests.

Oh please Ned, if you can't see that the US is the aggressor, well perhaps you need to stop watching CNN, MSNBC, and FoxNews and start getting your news from objective international sources that don't put a spin on the facts.

[Shi Huangdi]

Well since we know the reactor in question, and aware of possible nuclear silos, couldn't we just bomb possible sites suspected of being related to NK's Nuclear program?

In any case, NK isn't nearly as important as Iraq. The area NK is not particularly important to the war on terrorism, and it isn't like a new nuclear power in the region will undermine US power in the region because there are already 2(China and Russia). It would be a concern though if NK were to spread it's nuclear technology or weapons, I wouldn't put it past NK's leaders to do so. Probably the best solution to solve this would be to work through China and Russia to handle it.

"Actually he made the statement because he truely believes those countries are evil. Bush is very Wilsonian in the fact that he is an idealist and believes that his goal is to spread democracy and take care of the baddies."

Maybe. Powell is a the Sec. of State and I don't think he is an idealist. Bush has been shown willing to work with pro-US dictatorships in the region. And keep in mind any information that he releases to Time Magazine might not nessecarily be his true opinions. It's alot easy to gain popularity by saying you are an idealist then by saying you are a realist in this country.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

probably in a few short years NK will have ICBM capable of reaching a good part of the US. They have missiles now with good range but I wouldnt want to use them for a first strike. Probably miss the target.

probably in a few short years the US will have a somewhat working SDI. We have a SDI system sorta now for the Navy but I wouldnt want to rely on it for a first strike. Probably miss the target.

So... things being pretty even - I'll put my money on the US side.

[Sava]

It's just like the Cold War... the NK's are scared and are only trying to protect themselves from US aggression.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Originally posted by Sava
It's just like the Cold War... the NK's are scared and are only trying to protect themselves from US aggression.

what US aggression?! who are we beating up right now. The UN voted 15 to zip against iraq. are you saying the US really is the UN?? Are all the UN members really puppets for the US?? Come on. Everyone has a say about what's going on.

So what's this US aggression???

[Ned]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV
probably in a few short years NK will have ICBM capable of reaching a good part of the US. They have missiles now with good range but I wouldnt want to use them for a first strike. Probably miss the target.

probably in a few short years the US will have a somewhat working SDI. We have a SDI system sorta now for the Navy but I wouldnt want to rely on it for a first strike. Probably miss the target.

So... things being pretty even - I'll put my money on the US side.

I was thinking the same thought. We can protect ourselves from NK missles with an ABM defense. But we cannot protect Japan and SK, two of our allies. Don't you think it would be a tad bit immoral to betray our allies?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Graag
Ned:
What a horrible place the world would be if other, more powerful countries did that!

Well, once Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy were all like that.

I am sure the UK, France and China were glad that the US stood up with them against aggression.