Back when the Bush admin was (now admittedly) "over-emphasizing" the WMD threat from Iraq, a lot of pro-war types here used to like saying, "Well, maybe you wanna be attacked by anthrax at a baseball game, but I DON'T!" It was a nice emotional appeal, especially after 9/11 which, as I've said, is a nice convenient excuse for supporting anything the Bush admin wants to do and backing it up with stupid emotional 9/11 driven appeals. So meantime, while we're all hearing about the boogey man of WMD in Iraq which could supposedly attack at anytime (even though they couldn't -- even though there was never any evidence they had a missile that could reach us), North Korea -- who have demonstrated they CAN reach us with NUKES -- was attacking us and the US was keeping it quiet and calling it a diplomatic situation. Apparently we have to go to war in Iraq in order to deal with the admittedly exaggerated immediate threat of WMD's we've now virtually given up finding, while a country who we actually now for a fact has nukes (those are more dangerous WMD's for those obsessed with the popular term), who we know can reach us with those nukes and who is shooting lasers at our pilots is deemed a "diplomatic" situation. We're all glad Saddam's gone. Now let's admit the truth about why it happened. It wasn't because he was an immediate threat. That was a LIE. And all of you who argued here about how immediate that threat was were SUCKERED. It was because he was easy to beat and this admin needed a victory to, in their words, set an example. Here's a real threat who's not easy to beat (most precisely because they're actually a real threat). Incidentally, this is from Washington's conservative newspaper, but I'll still expect the usual Republican asslicking to follow. http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030513-47005.htm N. Korea fired laser at troops By Bill Gertz THE WASHINGTON TIMES Two Apache attack helicopters were illuminated by lasers in early March by a weapon that had the characteristics of a Chinese laser gun, an indication that North Korea has deployed a new and potentially lethal weapon. Lasers focus concentrated beams of light on a target and are used in some guidance systems. The Chinese laser gun, however, is a weapon that can cause eye damage at ranges up to three miles. The incident was kept secret until defense officials disclosed it to The Times. It could not be learned whether the laser incident was discussed in periodic meetings between U.S., South Korean and North Korean military officials at the Panmunjom truce village. The March laser illumination of the Apache helicopters occurred around the time that four North Korean jets intercepted a U.S. spy plane. The jets, MiG-29s and MiG-23s, attempted to force the unarmed U.S. RC-135, flying 150 miles from the coast of the Korean Peninsula, to land in North Korea. The jets also threatened the plane with heat-seeking air-to-air missiles. Both incidents occurred around the time the Pentagon announced it was sending 21 B-1 and B-52 bombers to Guam in response to the growing threat of North Korea and the latest crisis over Pyongyang's nuclear arms program. Army Col. Samuel T. Taylor, a spokesman for U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), said the helicopter incident occurred during a routine training mission. "Two USFK pilots were alerted by onboard laser-detecting equipment that laser systems may have illuminated their aircraft," Col. Taylor said in a statement. "Neither pilot was injured, and no equipment was damaged." Col. Taylor said laser detections occur occasionally along the DMZ. "North Korea's military employs both laser range-finding equipment and laser-designating equipment throughout its force," he said. However, U.S. intelligence officials said an internal analysis of the incident suggests North Korea has acquired Chinese-made ZM-87 antipersonnel lasers. "These are blinding laser weapons," said one official. According to the officials, the two Apache attack helicopters were airborne about two miles south of the milewide DMZ when laser sensors on both aircraft went off. The ZM-87 is the world's only laser device designed for use against troops. It can cause injuries to human eyes at a range of just under two miles, and with a special magnification device it can damage eyes at distances of up to three miles, military specialists say. By contrast, lasers used to guide weapons and in range-finding equipment work at shorter distances than the Chinese laser weapon. One intelligence official also said the North Koreans may have manufactured their own version of the Chinese laser gun. North Korean defectors have identified the Mangyo Jewel Processing Factory, near the capital of Pyongyang, as a facility that produces lasers for precision-guided weapons, this official said. The Apache pilots and crew were not wearing laser eye protection when the incident occurred. Since the incident, air crews patrolling the DMZ have been required to wear eye protection intended to thwart any laser attacks. Disclosure of the military incident comes as South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun is set to meet President Bush tomorrow. The two leaders are expected to discuss the repositioning of some U.S. forces further south from the DMZ. North Korea's official radio last week accused the United States of using laser weapons in Iraq, including arms that "blind the enemies' eyes and incapacitate weapons' sights." U.S. military personnel have been injured in the past by laser attacks. In April 1997, a U.S. Navy intelligence officer, Lt. Jack Daly, and Canadian helicopter pilot Capt. Pat Barnes, suffered permanent eye damage from a laser fired by a Russian merchant ship that had been spying on U.S. nuclear submarines in Washington state's Strait of Juan de Fuca, north of Puget Sound. Also, two Army helicopter crewmen suffered eye injuries from a laser while they were flying over Bosnia-Herzegovina in October 1998. A classified report by the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center produced in 1999 warned that Serbia's armed forces might resort to laser warfare against U.S. pilots during the air war over Kosovo. "The greatest potential threat of lasers being used as range finders, target designators, or even blinding weapons would come from the [Serbian] Special Operations Corps [63rd and 72nd brigades]," the report said. The report noted that lasers weapons or lasers with weapons capabilities can be purchased from Russia, China and Armenia. Lasers also can be effective in crippling air operations, the report stated. "The psychological effect of lasers on operational forces represents one of the most unpredictable aspects of the threat to air operations," it said. In June, the Navy deployed new antilaser goggles that can be worn by pilots and air crew. Adm. Thomas Fargo, the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, told reporters last month that the bomber deployment to Guam is to make sure "we have the proper deterrent posture in place." On the North Korean aerial intercept, Adm. Fargo said: "We're taking what I would call prudent measures to ensure that those planes can complete their missions safely." He did not elaborate. "We've seen some MiG activity over water, but I couldn't characterize it as being directed at our surveillance flights," Adm. Fargo said when asked about increased jet activity by the North Koreans. Adm. Fargo said U.S. military capabilities to deal with North Korea have vastly improved over the past 15 years. As a result, the military is considering an adjustment in the positioning of U.S. forces on the peninsula.
Not sure what to say about this...... You're oblivious to any apparent threat before the war, and after the war is done successfully, you find other places that are better to attack?!? The N. Koreans have laser's that will blind you! Don't look towards the light! C'mon, man! You are grabbing at straws, and your previous posts prove this. At first you say "This is NOT something we should do!", and now you're saying "Yeah, BUT" Your a nice guy BJ, but your political views are getting seriously out of wack. Ask yourself this. (honestly) Would you try and research as fervently as you did to decry this war if Clinton (or Gore) had done this? Batman, we know how you feel towards conservatism, it is obviously an incredible evil to you. That being said, you are being hypocritical. And in the voices of all liberal's all throughout the land, YOU need to remember your mantra.... Can't we all just get along? recently, I've seen none of y'all follow this.
When has NK ever demonstrated they have the ability to strike the U.S.? They have not...if you are going off of that report of a NK missile in Alaska then you need to remember that it was a false report and did not happen. Do you even know why it is deemed a "diplomatic" situation? It is deemed a diplomatic situation because NK has not attacked anyone in the past 50 years, and Saddam has. Yes they like to threaten and talk tough, but that is generally to get a better bargain in talks with America, not because they are actually going to do something. We understand that and there is a history of it from the Clinton Admin (not a potshot at Clinton just a fact). South Korea, the country most threatened by NK, deems them not to be a threat and wants to use peaceful means to solve this problem. Also, Japan, Russia, and China want to use peaceful negotiations. Negotiations still have not failed and China is starting to take a larger role by trying to reel in NK and get it to the discussion table in good faith. Also, China wants stability in the Korean Peninsula. They do not want war and they realize that they need to get NK in line now because they understand that the Bush Admin won't keep putting up with BS from rogue states forever. Hell, China doesn't exactly love the North Korean tactics since they are committed to a non-nuclear peninsula. My point is there are major powers in the region that want to solve this problem peacefully. Further, there is a major power in China that is willing to use its influence to attempt to get North Korea to negotiate in good faith. China also has the ability to use its power to influence the North Korean government. None of this was present with Iraq. Also, NK is not a threat to us....you are exaggerating that they are. Thats what every person who was against the war in Iraq did...say "Well isn't there a bigger problem in North Korea? Why isn't Bush doing something about that?" Its because NK is a threat to South Korea and not us, at least not anytime soon unless they are somehow able to stop their country from imploding. Anyhow, do you know what NK's plan is for retaking the South? Nuke Seoul! LOL...I know its funny, but that is their only plan. Just nuke Seoul. They have no other major tactical plans except for nuking the capital. I dunno the simplicity of it and the Dr. Evil aspect of it makes me laugh. My point is we are not the focus of NK's army...South Korea is. So combine this with what I said above and you will see why we have not attacked North Korea, and why we are trying negotiation and multilateralism. Now to go out and say the administration lied about the threat of Saddam is a pretty outlandish statement. It would be one of the biggest conspiracies in American history. You are basically calling the President, Colin Powell, and the whole administration liars. Do you actually think Powell would flat out lie in front of a worldwide audience in a report to the UN? If you do then I don't know what to say. It's certainly much more plausible that they were mistaken on the numbers of WMDs in Iraq rather than just lying. Also, hasn't Saddam Hussein showed that his ties to Al-Qaida were much deeper than we though? Does that mean anything to you? Further...why did the administration need a victory? Didn't we just whip the Taliban? You saying the administration needed a victory so we attacked Iraq is like saying Clinton shot off Cruise missiles to distract America from him and Monica. Weren't Bush's poll numbers still pretty high? Anyhow, Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat...he became one after the Gulf War....he was a dictator pursuing weapons of mass destruction, who was not willing to negotiate, who had ties to Al-Qaida, who sponsored terrorism, and who we tried to use diplomacy with for 13 years after the Gulf War. If we keep trying diplomacy with NK for that long with no results and in fact actually going backward then maybe you will have a point for attacking NK.
U gotta be kidding me!It was prouved by unbiased Reporters that that report was the exact copy(even with the spelly mistakes!) of a paper written by 2 college students for the Gulf war 10 years before!The 2 guys were even interviewed on TVs though out the world! I don't know if the war justified or not(well actually I do know!) but u can't tell me Powell hasn't lied during that UN conference! I'll try to find links to the report,shouldn't take too long... ALA
I heard something about that, but I would imagine there would have been much more controversy if it was true. Kind of like with the North Korean missile landing in Alaska, which was reported and then found out not to be true.
Here's a couple of links to the story. http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/WATUSsecuritycouncilfalsehood.htm http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=2986 I even got a article from a foreigh newspaper say Blair admitted forging the documents for the US adm! ALA
Batman, I largely agree with you. You missed the obvious distinction , though. We employ a diplomatic solution to those countries where we don't want to occupy or exercise direct control as they dont have oil. WMD have always been a secondary or perhaps even a red herring issue.
I love watching "Team Bush" try to come up with whatever nonsense they can to defend the administrations poor actions both in choosing military targets and diplomatic relations. In this case the real threat to the US has always been the military crisis in North Korea. To call pre-war Iraq a threat to the United States is absurd, we all know that the US wanted to show the world our power after 9/11. Afganistan was a legitimate target, but Iraq was a power play pure and simple.
Re cannot goto war with N Korea not so much because of N Korea being tough as much IMO as because they nieghbors are tough. China, Japan, Russia, even S Korea do not want a war. . . .and unlike Syria, Jordan, and Turkey . .. we actually give a d*mn what they think. I know those three did not want the Iraqi war either but .. . . it was NOT IN THEIR BACK YARD Major difference imo Rocket River
LOL are those links a joke? Give me a serious link to a reliable news outlet. Not some anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-American power sites. I mean the Natural Law Party site you gave is a joke...its only conspiracy stuff. I don't think if Blair forged something, which he didn't, he would admit to it. I mean if you want to call him corrupt then thats fine, but at least give the guy credit if you want to make up a conspiracy. He is a pretty sharp guy. You do realize that if really did admit to forging documents he would be out of office right now. Check out your sources before you believe them man. Anything that only has conspiracy stories isn't very reliable.
Exactly. With Iraq, we had no neighboring countries willing to step up and deal with the situation. But we have very stable nations immediately surrounding North Korea...all of whom say the problem can be dealt with through diplomacy. These are countries that are far more threatened by NK than we are. That's the difference...plain and simple. But let me add this...if we can liberate the people of North Korea, I'm all for it. If we can do that without significantly risking a nuclear strike on NK's neighbors who happen to be our allies, I'm all for it.
There was a lot of controversy outside the USA. Another example of the pathetic state of the media in this country.
That won't happen...the only way the North Koreans will be "liberated" is through reunification with the South. There will be no war on the peninsula unless we withdraw from the South and then the North decides to invade.
Wasn't Saddam extracted because he was a decade late in complying with the UN sanctions? 9/11 happened and our tolerance went out the window. His continued presence and probable willingness to hand out weapons of any sort to terrorists like they were Halloween candy made it time for him to go.
I am not using hyperbole in saying that this unelected President, who came to power thanks to a conservative justice with no understanding of the Constitution, thinks he has some sort of mandate to re-shape the world in the American image. He is going after the oil countries first. He is working his way up the food chain. When he thinks we're big enough to b****-slap China, we'll take on North Korea. And the North Koreans and Chinese know it. In Gore Vidal's recent TV interview (C-Span), he speaks about how he spoke to an anti-war rally of 100,000 in Los Angeles. 100,000! But, as usual, the media ignored it. Didn't even get a photo in the L.A. Times. (Although a photographer did get a picture of it.) Also, the NY Times underreported the numbers of a recent protest rally. It's all about the money, and the big money owns the newspapers. So we get nothing about a great number of Americans who actually oppose or, at least, are highly suspicious of, this Administration's actions and just how far it is willing to push his war agenda. Why oh why did we have to get a fundamentalist in the White House? "God saved me from alcohol. Now I'm gonna save America from her enemies. What? The Cold War's over? Whoops! Hold on; just got a message from God. (Funny, he sounds a lot like Paul Wolfewitz.) God says He wants me to get Armageddon going. And that it sure would be nice if America had control of all the world's oil, because America good, everyone else bad."
1. wow 2. gore vidal is trustworthy..he's also a noted crowd counter. we should assume that he tells the truth and everyone else is hiding something from us.
You cry and bemoan the fact that weapons inspectors weren't given enough time in Iraq, then you give up on our search for WMD in Iraq, only about 60 days from the start of the invasion? Your logic is extremely inconsistent when it is convenient to you politically, Batman.
