You're assuming that Kim Jong-Il s sane? Much of their rhetoric appears, unfortunately, to have a decidedly suicidal and fatalistic overtone. It may well be that they would rather be destroyed in a final battle than fail in their longstanding goal to unify the peninsula under the Communist banner. They may also think that they can win. I know that it is difficult to think that a governmenmt could be so irrational and deluded - we like to think that all state-level decisions are calculated efforts to achieve some logical political or economic goal, and that if we could just figure out what the real motive is underlying that logic is then we can sort everything out to everyone's benefit, but the reality just may be that there are a couple of regimes out there that are not at all rational in their decision-making. Unfortunately, if any regime on the planet could be said to be truly insane, it is Kim's regime.
I know everybody is saying that it was irresponsible for bush to coin Iran Iraq and North Korea as the axes of evil I have no problem with that at all Winston Churchill was blasted by British French and Americans for is anti Hitler speeches in the late 1930s but he was right about Hitler. Our enemies would still be enemies no mater who was elected president in 2000 these three countries only understand one thing force they only want peace on their terms like Hitler the more you concede to them the more they want and on top of that you can depend on them not for filling their end of the deal Bush should be respected for standing up to these countries early on and not backing down to them before it is to late like almost everybody else I hate war but unlike other peace lovers I understand that you don't get peace though weakness for example when carter was president no mater what he did he couldn't get hostages released in Iran until Reagan became president
Anything that is leaked, is diplomacy... diplomacy isn't just Colin Powell talking to the UN. Leaking the formations of battle plans is an exercise in diplomacy, and does not necessary mean war is incipient... a threat is not a declaration of war. And a veiled threat is a step below even that. Just letting NK know that we're taking them seriously... without sounding like war mongers and undermining the Iraqi issue. Standard operating procedure... and smart.
I know everybody is saying that it was irresponsible for Bush to coin Iran Iraq and North Korea as the axes of evil. I have no problem with that at all. Winston Churchill was blasted by British French and Americans for is anti Hitler speeches in the late 1930s, but he was right about Hitler. Our enemies would still be enemies no mater who was elected president in 2000. The idea that the problems that we have with North Korea are their because of bush's axis of evil speech is nieve at best These countries only understand one thing force. they only want peace on their terms like Hitler the more you concede to them the more they want, and on top of that you can depend on them not for filling their end of an agreement. Bush should be respected for standing up to these countries early on and not backing down to them before it is to late. Like almost everybody else I hate war, but unlike other peace lovers I understand that you can't have peace though weakness. For example in 1979-81 when Jimmy Carter was President no mater what he did he couldn't get hostages released in Iran until the day that Reagan became president
Just letting NK know that we're taking them seriously... without sounding like war mongers and undermining the Iraqi issue. Standard operating procedure... and smart. Agreed. They are ratcheting up the rhetoric, and so are we. This is going to be a game of chicken, basically.
Dude Im just scared silly by all of the enemies we have made recently. It seems like Bush is just pissing off more people every day....
<a HREF="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-590834,00.html">Missile launched by North Korea</a> <i>SOUTH Korean troops were on alert this morning after North Korea fired a missile into the sea, increasing tensions over its suspected nuclear weapons programme. The missile, which the South Korean defence ministry described as an anti-ship weapon, was fired from an unknown location into the Sea of Japan. It was immediately not clear whether it was intended to test new technology or was part of a military exercise. The launch was timed to cause maximum alarm. This morning, South Korea’s new president, Roh Moo Hyun, was being inaugurated in Seoul in a ceremony attended by politicians from all over the world, including the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and the Japanese Prime Minister, Junichiro Koizumi. Since last year, when North Korea announced that it was resuming operations at a power plant suspected of producing nuclear weapons material, the US and Japan have urged it not to launch missiles. However, in 1998 a long-range rocket was fired over northern Japan into the Pacific Ocean. South Korea believed this missile was a small, conventional device, not the long-range, ballistic Taepo Dong rocket that US officials fear can possibly hit parts of continental America. “We believe that this is part of North Korea’s usual tests of its weapons during the military exercise,” said Colonel Kim Sung-ok, of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff. </i>
You're assuming that Kim Jong-Il s sane? Here we go again from Treeman. Another enemy is declared insane. Sadam's insane. Kim's insane, therefore all the crazy little war scenarios can't be discounted no matter how screwy they appear. Hey let's declare Iran's leader to be insane, too. The article was just more garden variety right wing war scenario playing. Our 100's of nuclear warheads won't deter N. Korea, because Kim is insane. He is insane. Doesn't matter if N. Korea has been deterred for 50 years Kim is insane. Past actions are no predictor of future actions for the insane. He wants to die and kill Americans. He is insane. He prefers to die. You can't prove otherwise since he is insane. He is therefore anything is possible including all of my little right wing military scenarios that welike to play so much. B-bob, I'm surprised you're falling for these scare tactics and the insane bit. Don't you have any memory whatsoever of the Cold War and mutually assure destruction? I know, Treeman would proclaim Stalin and Mao etc. were sane, but Kim is insane. Heath is right this is mainly an economic ploy. Although unfortunately by the "axis of evil" blunder Bush probably did start this crap. Offcially proclaiming that you will invade premeptorily anyone who threatens your domination does make those you threaten act wierd. Welcome to a preview of a "positive issue environment" and the buildup to the 2004 election. N.Korea as 2004 ace in the whole. ***************************** ***************************** China rejects Powell's N. Korea plans. The US resumes major food aid to N. Korea. etc. Real news, not rightwing war gaming scenarios about N. Korea.. N. Korea and China
So we are going in to liberate the NK people and protect SK, and will immediately accomplish the immolation of both? WHat, exactly, would be the point then?
Or we could do nothing and let N Korea hold the entire Asia-Pacific Theater hostage with his WMD's. Just imagine for 1-second what a nuclear bomb over Tokyo would do? You think the economy is bad now? It would be crushed!! We owe it to history to "nib this in the bud" or else we will pay the price with our dearest blood.
here's what i don't understand about you, glynch. you scream and cry about the injustices of US policy...you talk about bush like he's a madman...a murderer...and an idiot. but you don't apply that same thinking when talking about dictators who starve their own people...who turn WMD on their own people...who seek to conquer other countries to expand their own borders. do you not see that as inconsistent?
I see the inconsistency, MadMax... glynch: Please provide an example of 'sane' behavior that Kim Jong-Il has displayed over the past 9 years. I can provide you with numerous examples of illogical behavior by the North during the same period (constant military probing of the DMZ, instigation of naval battles for no apparent reason, use of kamikaze saboteurs against SK targets, firing missiles over Japan, proclamations about NKs willingness to commit national suicide... it goes on). Plwease provide me with an example of rational behavior that Kim has displayed. Macbeth: Yeah, dude, you're right. Since we probably can't save Seoul, we might as well just pack it up and bring the boys home. The South is doomed anyway, Kim Jong-Il can have it... You are just determined to roll over for every dictatorship you see, aren't you?
Its ironic that wherever we seem to try to help is where the most resentment for us is. OBL stated that our support of Israel and our troops in Saudi is why he's pissed at us. NK is against us and there is even resentment in SK because of our troops stationed there. I would rather not have any troops there and simply allow them to buy US products and services. This will limit backlash against our corporations that we are seeing nowadays. I think we need to cut funding to much of the world except economic aid to nations that we feel will be future users of our goods and services. If we truly need Iraq to stabilize our dependance on oil then lets be aware that they will not be happy about it. I think its easy for us to coin the phrase "madman" when we demonize a foreign leader but the world is predominantly run by dictators and their inefficient economic systems. Maybe i'm just a little pissed after watching 'Black Hawk Down' again last night and the thought of our troops trying to protect those that hate them is sickening to me.
Madmax, I expect better of you. here's what i don't understand about you, glynch. you scream and cry about the injustices of US policy...you talk about bush like he's a madman...a murderer...and an idiot. but you don't apply that same thinking when talking about dictators who starve their own people...who turn WMD on their own people...who seek to conquer other countries to expand their own borders. do you not see that as inconsistent? Nope. Not consistent. Show me where I have said that there are no injustices in Iraq or N. Korea. Show me where I have advocated the UN or another country attack the US because it has injustices that must be irradicated by invasion. For the record there are great injustices in N. Korea and Iraq.-- even more than in the US. I sure think this is mouthing the obvious. I don't therefore conclude that they need immediate invasion or that they are clear and present dangers to the US which is the strongest nation on earth. Unfortunately you remarks are just another version of the bs that if you are against this war or Bush's foreign policiy toward these two countries that you therefore totally support N. Korea and are a Sadam lover . For the record Bush is not insane. Show me where I've said this. He is not a murderer,although his policies will needlessly kill a lot of inocent Iraqis. The morality of his war has been found wanting by the majority of the religions in the worl, as well as a majority of the people on the planet. Bush is not an idiot, which I will define as low IQ. His IQ seems to be above average, although given his dyslexia and short attention span, at times he doesn't seem to have it all working properly or have the depth of information possessed by other presidents.
fair enough, glynch. the impression i get from your 99% of your posts is moderated by this one. for the record, this was the first time i can recall you ever lamenting the track record of hussein. characterize my comments as you will...they stand, nonetheless.
