“Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”
Ronald Reagan wasn’t talking about U.S. foreign policy when he uttered that campaign line in 1980, but the Gipper’s words are coming back to haunt the Bush administration today.
An analysis in the Washington Post notes that nearly five years after President Bush named Iraq, Iran and North Korea as an “axis of evil,” the United States is now in crisis mode and facing diminished options with each.
In his 2002 State of the Union address, Bush said of the three nations: “These regimes pose a grave and growing danger. . . . In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.”
We’ll never know what the price of indifference might have been in Iraq — perhaps something less than we’re paying now. With North Korea and Iran, it’s hard to see how indifference could have been worse than a mulish refusal to engage.
In any case, the answer to Reagan’s defining question would seem to be “no.” It adds up to an election liability that will be hard to spin.
Posted by Dave Knadler
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Let immigrants run
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
46 Comments
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
IT’S ALL CLINTON’S FAULT!!!
/sarcasm off
That W–all hat, no cattle.
So we launch military offensives agains Iraq based on their grave and growing danger (haboring al-quada terrorists…) but we “have no intention of attacking” NK based on their grave and growing danger (nuclear testing).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bush;_ylt=AuRKhwD_AwZoPkB_QETouKKs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ–I guess NK has nothing that we want unlike Iraq with Oil or potential for kickbacks with big companies like Haliburton.
As the Decider says: ” Some people seem to dismisunderestimate me. I studied the facts and came to a contusion, and that’s that! I don’t reneediate any more facts!”
gster,
Man, you’re KILLIN’ me.
Thanks.. it’s not easy putting your best foot forward when it’s in your mouth!
A future Bushism? :”It’s not easy putting your best foot forward when it’s in your mouth! But at least you know your foot is clean!”
And a grim forecast for Bush’s elective war in Iraq:
Army: Troops to stay in Iraq until 2010LOLITA C. BALDORAssociated PressWASHINGTON – The U.S. Army has plans to keep the current level of soldiers in Iraq through 2010, the top Army officer said Wednesday, a later date than Bush administration or Pentagon officials have mentioned thus far.
The Army chief of staff, Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, cautioned against reading too much into the planning, saying troops levels could be adjusted to actual conditions in Iraq. He said it is easier to hold back forces scheduled to go there than to prepare and deploy units at the last minute.
“This is not a prediction that things are going poorly or better,” Schoomaker told reporters. “It’s just that I have to have enough ammo in the magazine that I can continue to shoot as long as they want us to shoot.”
Even so, his comments were the latest acknowledgment by Pentagon officials that a significant withdrawal of troops from Iraq is not likely in the immediate future.
Currently there are 141,000 troops in Iraq, including 120,000 Army soldiers. Those soldiers are divided among 15 Army combat brigades plus other support units.
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/15732345.htm
Busy makes things worse everyday and there will never be an end to this daily death, until we leave Iraq.
The Palestinians have been fighting the invading Jews for 58 years and the Iraqis are no different when it come the us invading Americans.
They will never stop fighting as long as we are there.
When we leave it will be over and they won’t attack us here at home because they know we will bomb them back to rubble.
Bush is trying to use that to keep Americans afraid, when the only thing we have to fear is what will happen to us if we don’t leave.
It’s been four years and have they slowed-down their resistance to us or stepped it up?
By the standards of liberals, Bush is a dismal failure.
By the standards of conservatives, he is just as bad.
He grew government spending by 9 percent again last year, twice the rate of inflation, and faster than any liberal President including LBJ.
He failed at stabilizing Iraq.
He failed at making his tax cuts permanent.
He failed at piratizing Social Security.
He failed at increasing wages, which have lost ground to inflation since he’s been in office.
He failed at creating jobs as fast as Clinton–the first four years he barely broke even, and that was only because he created so many GOVERNMENT jobs.
He failed at reducing the national debt which stands at a historical high both in nominal dollars and as a percentage of GDP.
He failed at capturing Osama bin Laden which he claimed was priority one after 9-11.
He failed to reduce the threat of terrorism against the US and instead increased the threat.
Who can still be in favor of this catastrophe that walks like a man . . . WORST. PRESIDENT. EVER.
http://download.premiereradio.net/guest/rushlimb/pdf/nailing.pdf
Jeff–clue…..Nobody is gonna’ look at links from rushlimpballs.How about a reputable news org?
Check it out Ben!!Your prediction came true.limpballs blames Clinton.Man, what are the odds on that?
I beat him to the punch by almost 3 hours.
We’ll never know what the price of indifference might have been in Iraq — perhaps something less than we’re paying now. With North Korea and Iran, it’s hard to see how indifference could have been worse than a mulish refusal to engage.
This is ridiculous, Monday morning quarterbacking at its worst.Maybe we wouldn’t see the results of indifference either in our lifetimes or maybe not our children’s depending on your current sitution. Perhaps we are dealing with the indifference of the last 25-50 years?
let’s see some facts, you could check his out if you wanted to
Mr. Kia is right.
America is indifferent. When OPEC started pumping more oil than we needed in the early 80’s, after sending a shot over our bow in the 70’s, the nation could have said. “We don’t want to be vulnerable to OPEC in the future.” Instead, they allowed our guvment to scotch Carter-administration renewable and domestic fossil energy projects. So we all get to ride the yo-yo.
Is that what you want? Paying $2.50-3.00 per gallon of gas, totally screwing up your household budget for months, then relaxed in the fall to encourage you to think, “This administration isn’t so bad,” just before elections?
Well Tracy and Ben
I see you called it, but I don’t see any denial. Darnit Rush was right.
What in that letter is false?
Please Tracy, put up a “reputable” sight. Because Jimmy “worst president EVER” Carter’s little story in the Times today, left out a few teeny, tiny things today.
Gene Ratson–
I skimmed over Rush Limbahhumbug’s post and nearly blew grits at the bile and raw sewage festering on the page.
But no matter how you ditto heads spin it, the bomb test occured in October 2006.
It didn’t happen in 1996 or 1998 or even 2002.
It happened FIVE YEARS AND 10 months after the Worst President Ever forced his way into the Oval office despite the will of the people.
Anything that Clinton did could have been undone by now.
That is, if our government weren’t run by f*cking criminals and the useful idiots like you and Jeff that enable them no matter what they do or don’t do.
Heartlander,
Have you seen graph ‘World oil consumption and real price, 1970‚Äì1Q2004′ on page 15 (PDF pg 39 of 332) of book at http://www.oilendgame.com/ (free PDF download)
A wild yo-yo ride of price/demand in ’70s and ’80s. Also good read, ‘Oil is Fungible’, one page earlier.
Graph on page 239 (PDF 253 of 332) shows how we could cut future oil use.
The Reich-wing has Limpballs, but we have the “Rude Pundit”–
Check this out:
Now, Kim Jong-Il’s pissant nuke is, among other scarier things, a cry for help. Not just mental health help for a nutzoid dictator of a decimated country, a pathetic monomaniacal boy who is so overcompensating for his lack of stature that he has to show everyone in the area his little missle so we can all be so f**king impressed. No, it’s also a cry for attention. And, like a toddler holding a butcher knife to his own throat, we probably oughta be gentle and bribe it away from him. Start by, oh, f**k, why not bilateral talks. Just for the f**k of it. Just to see if it works. Then start talkin’ the cash money. Naive? Yeah, but the sophistication of bombs and bullying has worked so well in the last few years.
Like the f**kin’ right wing, though, man. They’re so caught up in the idea of punishing those who are less privileged than them that they wanna f**k up North Korea (and try to f**k with China). Take David Frum, he of the National Review, he who co-wrote with Richard Perle a book about how to crush the world and re-shape it, he who said in January 2004 on the Today show, “Afghanistan was a success. Iraq was a success,” he who opined to Bill O’Reilly that same month, “At every decisive moment in this war, President Bush has made the right calls.” He now has set his beady eyes on North Korea and declared that it’s time to f**k some s**t up.
Writing in the New York Times today, Frum says that a nukey North Korea means it’s time to “end humanitarian aid” to that starving nation, to ramp up the Star Wars missle “defense” production, and to let Japan become nukey ’cause that’ll f**k with the minds of the Chinese, who deserve, Frum goes on, to be pimp-slapped for the North Korean nukiness.
Frum concludes, “Countries like North Korea and Iran seek nuclear weapons because they imagine that those weapons will enhance their security and power…when negotiation fails, as it has failed in North Korea and is failing in Iran, rogue regimes must be made to suffer for their dangerous nuclear ambitions.” ‘Cause, you know, pissing off the entire Muslim world ain’t enough for these idiot utopian neocons. And where in the annals of bugf**k insanity has starving a starving people actually led to the desired effect? Iraq?
F**k David Frum, who with Iraq joyfully bounced like the head cheerleader getting f**ked doggie style behind the bleachers by the high school quarterback, so full of himself even when he was proved objectively wrong in virtually everything he said about Iraq, s**t like “The shooting should be over within just a very few days from when it starts,” which he wrote in the February 24, 2003 National Review , or this, from an Australian television interview in August 2005, “I know Ahmed Chalabi not well but reasonably well. He is not a perfect man. But in a country full of very, very imperfect people, I think he is and always has been our best hope as somebody who shares democratic ideals, has political effectiveness, understands the system, is committed to a united and democratic Iraq.”
Listening to David Frum talk about foreign policy is like listening to Jeffrey Dahmer talk about cooking. He may be some kind of expert in making what’s in the pot, but would you dare eat it?
Take it easy Capn. It’s been 5 years and 10 months, and you still ain’t over it yet. Tsk Tsk.
I’m guessing your way back machine is broke, that is why you still go on and on about the election.
I’ll say it again. What in that was false?
So we know that NK was secretly doing it nuke thing in 2000, they violated the agreement.So let me get this straight, you’re problem is that NK set off the bomb in 2006.So in Jan 2001, if Bush had sent two stealth bombers into NK, for violating the agreement and took out the reactors or their nuke processing area, you would have been alright with that.
You wouldn’t per chance say anything like, oh I don’t know.
North Korea never did anything to us.
Their leader has never done anything to us.
They have no way to deliver these WMD’s against us.
I bet they don’t even have WMD.
They have these reactors for “peaceful” purposes.
That the leader, Kim, is starving his own people so the military is fed, why thats just keeping the people from being overweight.
Why his torture and rape rooms aren’t anymore wrong then Saddam, Euday and Husay’s and those guys are alright. I mean they never did anything to us.
I’m sure you wouldn’t have been saying anything like that would you Capn. Nope, not you.
I mean your logic works very, very well. That Bush has been trying to have 6 party talks, so that we are not “going it alone” doesn’t really mean anything to you.
That he has been trying to let diplomacy work ever since he has been in office, doesn’t mean anything to you.
That it was decided NOT to pay NK its extortion, doesn’t mean anything to you.
None of this means anything to you you because you (using a left side word) are a Clintonbot.
That ol Billy boy had SEVEN YEARS to deal with OBL and Bush had 7 months, well that just seems logical to you.
That the Dems have voted EVERYTIME against missle defense and not 4 days after NK’s test, now the Dems are screaming for it. That seems very practicable to you.
That Hillary goes off on this administration as the fault behind NK is laughable. Why didn’t she just stand up and tell the truth. Billy and Jimma made the deal, it was Bush’s job to pay the bill no matter how screwed up the deal was.
Now Billy can look like the great peacemaker. How difficult can it be to be seen as a peacemaker when all you do is capitulate.
The appeasers in 37,38 and 39 were seen as great peacemakers also. Even when they went to Hitler and said, here write down what you want and we’ll give it to you so you won’t have to use your army against us.(Munich, prologue to tragedy, author JW Wheeler-Bennett) Guess they didn’t want German guns to get dirty.
Geneo?
How many nukes did N Korea have while Bill Clinton was in office? How many American servicemen died on Bill Clinton’s watch? How many Iraquis died on Bill Clinton’s watch?
Oooohhh you aint fairing so well!
I got more, but let’s see if you can get up off the canvas.
Whoa, Mean Gene, thanks for that post.
Now I see why you continue to support Bush.
All your wheels ain’t on the track . . . I can’t understand let alone answer all the rambling inchoherence of your post, anymore than I could answer a deluded homeless man mumbling, “who stole my cerebellum? who stole it?”
However, lest there’s a reader out there who thinks I’m ducking a fight, let me prove that Gene isn’t paddling with all his oars in the water:
1. He’s outraged–OUTRAGED, I tell you–that Saddam Hussein tortured and raped people in Iraq. But when WE torture and rape people in Iraq, in the same Abu Ghraib prison that the Ba’athists used, it’s “fraternity high-jinks.”
2. He honestly believes that people who don’t support the debacle in Iraq are the same as the people who capitulated to Hitler.
3. He thinks that what liberals “think” somehow has an effect on Bush or Kim Jong Il. Bush didn’t do anything to stop the nukes in NK, because he didn’t do anything to stop the nukes.
It has nothing to do with what I want or how I would have reacted.
But you’re consistent. You think that what liberals “think” plays a major role in the success or failure in Iraq too. Ignoring the obvious that Iraq will be decided by the people who live there, not by f***ing idiots who blog.
Sad, Gene, you and your ilk are just sad . . .
So, Bush tried to rip off Reagan’s “Evil Empire” tactic, and it failed miserably. What else is new?
I count 257 US servicemen killed in terrorist attacks on Clinton’s watch. With basically nothing but a band aid put on the problem.In fairness however all of the following past President’s have buried their respective heads in the sand with regards to militant islam and its attacks on the US.
November, 1979 – American Embassy take over in Tehran (carter)April, 1983 – US Embassy compound in Beirut (reagan)October, 1983 – US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut (reagan)December, 1983 – US Embassy in Kuwait (reagan)September, 1984 – US Embassy in Beirut (reagan)April, 1985 – Madrid restaurant (reagan)August, 1985 – US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main (reagan)October, 1985 – Achille Lauro (reagan)April, 1986 – TWA Flight 840 (reagan)December, 1988 – Pan Am Flight 103 (reagan)January, 1993 – CIA Agents Langley, Virginia (Clinton)February, 1993 – World Trade Center, 1st bombing (Clinton)November, 1995 – US military complex, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (clinton)June, 1996 – Khobar Towers, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (clinton)August, 1998 – US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (clinton)October, 2000 – US Cole (clinton)
I have to say JR, you do think very highly of yourself. You make one point that has absolutly NOTHING to do with the items I posted and think you have “knocked” me down. You’re funny.With Capn Crunch, nuff said. He’s as fruity as the cereal he’s named after.
So you really are comparing the torture that was committed by Saddam and Sons with the naked pyramid, underwear on head, dog barking at “torture” that was done by some idiot lower EM’s.Exactly like Randi Rhodes.Thats okay JR, that you think like her, I’m not shocked.You still haven’t responded to a question I posed weeks ago. I’ll try again.Randi Rhodes said that the underwear on head, naked pyramid, was the most sickening, disgusting thing she had ever seen in her life, and yet I still wonder what she thought of what Euday and Husay were doing. She probably put it on the same level.
And yes I know she made the allegation that US service persons had raped a small boy at abu gharab and supposedly had video evidence of it, and yet here it is a year later and I still have not seen this alledged video on Communist New Network. Maybe you got the evidence JR. And don’t bother showing me an interview of some REMF, who only joined the military to pay for college and just didn’t understand what all the guns were for, he was just there to get college money.
Never said that about Iraq and capitulation.What I’m looking for from you is how what Billy boy, Jimma and Madeline Halfbright accomplished in regards to NK, that wasn’t capitulation?
Your point number 3 made no sense to me whatsoever. I didn’t take a dump today, because I didn’t take a dump today. Whats your point.
Let me try the question again. I wish I could type slower to give you a chance to keep up.
You are saying that Bush did nothing to stop the nukes in NK. I guess my question is what would you have had him do?
He went with 6 way talks, so there would be no misunderstandings. Russia, China, Japan, SK are all neighbors of NK, WHY shouldn’t they be involved. Last I heard this was called, say it with me. DIPLOMACY.
OR
We could have gone with Billy boy and Jimma’s DIPLOMACY of okay Kim what do we need to do to make you stop the nukes. We don’t care whether you abide by it, we’re putting that on the next president. Again, we just want to look like peacemakers. Last I heard this was called, say it with me. CAPITULATION.
Lets see what other options did we have. This goes back to my previous posting. With all the Dems saying that the Bush Administration has done such a horrible job in regards to NK. The Dems are either for MORE capitulation or use of military solution. Like I said in the previous posting. So if Bush had sent in 2 stealth bombers and taken out the problem, then there would have been the greatest outpouring of admiration for the president he wouldn’t have been able to sit down for a week. Is that what I’m suppose to take from the Dems response so far.
I guess what I’m asking JR, is would that have been your response. If the president had sent in the bombers this past Monday morning, would that have placated you? Or do you think the president should have done more capitulation.
The two capitals most interested in our response to the NK situation is Tehran and Bejing. If nothing serious happens within 2 weeks, either by us or the UN (LOL) sorry I still can’t say UN without a smirk coming over me.You will very possibly see some type of demonstration by Iran within 6 months. They see that the UN has no authority and will d nothing but send a stronger sounding letter. They see that half of this country will not stand behind the president NO MATTER WHAT, simply because they hate Bush. That they will cut off their nose to spite their face, doesn’t matter, they hate Bush that much. They hate Bush more than what is good for them in the big scheme of things. They hate Bush so much, that they will convince themselves that all we have to be is nice to our enemies and they will be nice to us.AGAIN, see Capitulation, 1937-1939.
Sorry JR, I looked back at the postings and saw that I mixed you and Capn crunch up.
How many nukes did NK have while Bill was in office. You mean secret or what Kim TOLD Billy and the IAEA, he had.Boy that Jan 20 or 21 date is a magical date for you Dems. Nothing else has happened before that date once a new president is sworn in.So you refuse to acknowledge the extortion payment and capitulation accomplished by Billy, Jimma and Halfbright. I’m still waiting to hear what was in Rush’s posting that was incorrect or not true.Did Billy okay it or not? Did the government of NK not first go against the agreement.
You people are already making excuses for NK. Well if Bush hadn’t called them the axis of evil then he wouldn’t want to have nukes.
Then why didn’t WWIII happen when Reagan called Russia the Empire of Evil or whatever he called them.
Well makes sense now. Bush hurt Il’s feelings so what else could Kim do but go snuggle up to a nuke or two.
KIA – problem is with your list is that many of these are only vaguely connected. For example, attacks against our troops supporting Israeli occupation of Lebanon was primarily a local Lebanese response.
The embassy in Tehran was a response to our prior overthrow of their democracy and installation of the dictator Shah. The embasy takeover took place very soon after overthrow of the dictator.
It is speculated that the attach on Pan Am 103 was in retaliation to the downing of a civilian Iran Air flight.
We then see to trends in your list: a series of attacks tied to secular Palestinian groups (80s) and now the Islamic extremist group alQuada in the 90s-00s.
Gene – yesterday I posted a flashback article that showed Bush’s payoffs to N Korea and, more importantly, his decision to remove inspection requirements.
This is ridiculous on both sides, the problem is North Korea and Iran not President Clinton or Bush. It is not our fault North Korea is ruled by a dictator. It is not our fault Iran is ruled by religous extremists who have vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Unless South Koreans are ready to go to war and they are not, there is nothing we can do militarily to North Korea. China does not want to deal with refugees from North Korea caused by sanctions and China enjoys watching Kim annoy the west. The regime in Iran will be the next likely target in the war on terror as we are fighting them already in Iraq.
North Korea is, absolute, positively the Democrats fault.For being so ridiculous on this post so far, I will subject you libs to another Ann Coulter post:
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi
Now Ben, JR, Capn “Crunch” and Douggie Do Right: Try something refreshing, try something different, try to disprove a single fact or a single quote in Coulters column.Clinton and Carter agreed to a very bad deal, again, prove it wrong libs:
“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.”
Gee, Paul, I think NK was not doing nuclear research until your lord and master, bush, called nk an axis of evil country.
Which makes the point: with this countries military so strewn out fighting a war in afghanistan and iraq, we will in no way be able to handle a nk invasion of sk. Nor will we be able to handle iran, should they decide israel needs nuking.
And why is that? Could it possibly be because the current administration has no idea what it’s doing? Because the current administration is totally incompetent?
Ann Coulter . . . hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
Paul Rosell
Coulter? Thanks, no. I stopped reading your links when you used a chat room as a source.Entertain me prollie Paul. Go get me a link to a comic book or maybe a fortune cookie.
140,000 US troops bogged down in Iraq. According to military leaders that will be until at least 2010. That is 140,000 troops we cannot use elsewhere if needed.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Now we all know what “Four More Years” refers to. Sad.
Concerning the photo for this thread, consider this caption:
BUSH: “Why yes, since I am the President of the United States, I can have a presidential seal above my urinal.”
Twice in a press conference today, GWB used the word “Caliphate” and stated what that’s what we must battle. We better learn what this title means, and what its implications are.
Paul F. Rosell,
Coulter gets paid for her “work” — you get LAUGHED at, DEBUNKED, and ZERO CREDIBILITY at this blog.
Paul posts: “try to disprove a single fact or a single quote in Coulters column.Coulter: “…North Korea promised not to develop nukes, and we showed how much we trusted them by agreeing to no weapons inspections for five years.”
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2003/inspectorsrecall20030103.html“Staff Report, 03 January 2003The IAEA’s last inspectors to leave North Korea did not come home empty handed. They brought back all metal seals that North Korean authorities had cut at safeguarded nuclear facilities at the Nyongbyon site in December 2002, in preparation to restart nuclear operations frozen since 1994. Nuclear material under safeguards in North Korea is now left without any Agency monitoring….‚”The inspectors were asked to leave the country immediately,” he recalled. “But first our inspectors witnessed our surveillance equipment being turned off and our seals removed. The DPRK authorities covered all surveillance cameras and pointed them to the wall.”
Besides the broken seals, the inspectors managed to retrieve all video cards and tapes from the 15 cameras that once provided 24-hour monitoring at North Korea’s frozen nuclear facilities. Around one hundred North Korean officials and staff watched as all monitoring equipment was dismantled at Nyongbyon.”——
Coulter: “Even Hans Blix thought we were being patsies.”
1) Paul, post Blix’s exact quote, and the context.2) Also explain why Powell said this:
‘Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy’http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron.asp“March 6, 2001: At a joint press briefing with the Swedish foreign minister, Secretary of State Colin Powell says that the administration “plan[s] to engage with North Korea to pick up where President Clinton left off. Some promising elements were left on the table and we will be examining those elements.” “—–
Coulter: NY Times, Oct. 17, 2002, “North Korea has admitted…”
http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron.asp“October 16, 2002: … North Korea has denied several times that it admitted to having this program.”
Cosmos has soundly debunked Paul yet again. Paul, when will you learn? Coulter, like you, get paid to lie. The non-conservatives (everyone who isn’t insane or intentionally ignorant) research their information and present sound arguments.
Paul, do you enjoy being embarrassed?
“It is not our fault Iran is ruled by religous extremists who have vowed to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.”
jw, you’re MOSTLY right. BUT. . if we hadn’t overthrow Mossadegh and installed Reza Pahlavi, I have a feeling things would have been a bit different. Just sayin’.
Feel free to blame Johnson and Carter for going with the flow. It’s not like we EVER learn from history here. . .
P.S. Want a link?
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEED8143EF933A2575BC0A9659C8B63&sec=&pagewanted=print
Yes, it’s only Wikipedia, but it’s sooo easy. . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliph
Thanks for the heads-up, heart.
Tracy “Webster’s” Dictionary:REPUTABLE: Someone who agrees with Tracy!
DougCosmos didnt land a glove.Clinton screwed up North Korea.
From the following, a very liberal, pro Clinton/Carter Website:http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_n12_v29/ai_20089207/pg_2“Removal of the spent fuel rods began on May 8 without international observation or approval. On June 2, when more than 60 percent of the fuel rods had been removed, IAEA Director General Hans Blix sent a strong letter to the UN Security Council that was an implicit call for international action. Blix’s letter was the opening gun in the long-discussed drive for UN sanctions against the recalcitrant, often-maddening DPRK.
North Korea issued a formal statement on June 5 announcing that “sanctions mean war, and there is no mercy in war.” Undeterred, Washington proceeded with diplomatic consultations aimed at a sanctions vote in the Security Council and, in parallel, with plans for a stepped-up U.S. military presence in and around Korea, preparing for the possibility of war.”(The above all happened in 1994, prior to the Clinton/Carter sell out of our national security.)—-Coulter is clearly correct that Hans Blix was one of the first to speak up in the North Korean issue.Blix commented very little on the Carter initiative, since Carter cut Hans off at the pass, so to speak, that is understandable isnt it?
Paul F. Rosell,
So instead of responding to my point about IAEA inspections and monitoring occuring from 1994 to Dec 2002 — you post about spent fuel rod removal in ‘94, shortly before the IAEA arrived?
You ignore Powell’s March 6, 2001 comment.
And you make excuses for Blix not commenting on Carter’s agreement.
‘IAEA HEAD ENDORSES NUCLEAR PACT WITH NORTH KOREA (10/19/94)’http://www.fas.org/news/dprk/1994/70807932-70812181.htm
Problems started before Clinton took office in 1993.http://cns.miis.edu/research/korea/nuc/iaea7789.htm
Good explanation and links at,http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-scheer/dear-leader-brings-it-on_b_31455.html
Bottom line Paul — tell us how much plutonium NK produced before, during, and after Clinton’s time in office.