North Korea

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Oct 9 2006, 10:11 AM) [snapback]330005[/snapback]</div>

ask bill clinton and jimmy carter - the architects of the agreed framework of 1994 - the people who brought you a nuclear armed noko- they know what to do - their mess - let them clean it up - oh and dont forget madeline albright the co-conspirator.

and you will watch and do nothing to prevent iran from going nuclear??

do you still trust the UN and all its nuclear watchdog agencies to prevent iran from going nuclear or are you going to kick and scream when bush attacks their nuclear facilities?????

and if noko could take out california or parts of it - so be it - they never wanted money spent on star wars or related technologies - they never wanted a strong military deterence - ironic they are first in noko's nuclear sights - ironic how they must be feeling in berkeley tonight - must be resting comfortably

seriously , we can understand why noko launches a nuke at us and takes out part of california - if they do i hope we dont do anything silly in return like strike back and make any more people mad at us or give reason to those to attack us again. i would just offer a peace settlement - give him san fran or la in return for a peace treaty

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 9 2006, 11:06 PM) [snapback]330432[/snapback]</div>

This lie is getting really tired. Clinton contained noko. Bush(s) did not.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikepaul @ Oct 9 2006, 11:36 AM) [snapback]330062[/snapback]</div>

You hawks are probably right - might as well use military might.
After all, what chance does diplomacy have when our cheif diplomat is crude warmonger like John Bolton. Even the Bush administration acknowledges he's a undiplomatic loose canon. But then, what can we expect from yet another PNAC neocon who is pro war, but afraid to fight.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Marlin @ Oct 9 2006, 01:08 PM) [snapback]330078[/snapback]</div>

Sounds like our fiscal policy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Oct 9 2006, 09:15 PM) [snapback]330437[/snapback]</div>

Do those blinders really work? Do you really believe what you say? :huh:

Clinton didn't contain anything!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework

If that is your definition of “contain,†then I'd bet you would also say that Clinton contained his little bent willie while in the Oval Office too.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Oct 10 2006, 12:15 AM) [snapback]330437[/snapback]</div>

you cannot create history as much and as often as you repeat yourself.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Oct 9 2006, 04:59 PM) [snapback]330216[/snapback]</div>

Of course, much like Pakistan, they all SAY that, much like Pakistan saying they're 100% with the U.S. on terror... When China, Russia, Japan, etc. take meaninful action, then there's something to work with... Until then, lot of hot air blowing around...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Oct 10 2006, 01:06 AM) [snapback]330477[/snapback]</div>

Not pointing fingers my good doctor. I am pointing out failed policy and hopefully learning from past mistakes. We CANNOT allow Iran to follow the same pathway NoKo did. I hope that all Americans will back President Bush in his undertakings to PREVENT Iran from going nuclear and from PREVENTING NoKO from exporting nuclear technology and/or nukes themselves. This HAS to rise above partisan politics.

Unfortunately there is no good answer now - what needs be done is an embargo of NoKo, China has to stop providing NoKo with fuel and food, SoKo will have to stop being soft too and hopefully we can talk SoKo and Japan out of going nuclear themselves. We also have to make it plain and clear to NoKo - any transfer of technology or weapons or anything related in any way/shape or any form of damage, death and/or destruction related to their nuclear program will instantly bring upon them a level of aggression and destruction that they will not survive. They have to shut down - if the UN does not act now it will forever be looked upon as an impotent incompetent and worthless organization. Nobody will be able to argue that.

Peace, Out.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 10 2006, 12:06 AM) [snapback]330432[/snapback]</div>

You just knew someone's solution to the problem of North Korea would be preventing Iran from getting Nukes. :huh:
I'm just surprised it took this long into the thread.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 10 2006, 08:41 AM) [snapback]330521[/snapback]</div>

Thank you for providing something to think about. It's a sticky situation, no doubt, and whose "fault" it is doesn't really matter. Our local paper had an editorial about the existing situation and what can be done. The whole thing can be found here: http://www.nj.com/opinion/ledger/editorial....xml&coll=1, but here is what was mentioned about the possible courses of action:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Oct 10 2006, 08:49 AM) [snapback]330522[/snapback]</div>

The real issue is Iran - and that the WORLD CANNOT allow them to join the nuclear club.

I will respectfully disagree with your paper's editorial - it is a little early to see how China and SoKo will react - we know how Japan is going to react - and we know what the UN should do. We shall see. We all agree this guy has to be gotten out of there.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 9 2006, 09:06 PM) [snapback]330432[/snapback]</div>

This man who once swore to "First, do no harm" has some serious problems about California and the safety of its people. America to him is only for his small vicious circle of bigots. (I'm pretty sure the word applies here.) The rest of us are up for grabs.

Has Star Wars gone anywhere under the past 8 years of total Republican domination? Why aren't all the Red states just jumping in to fill the void?

Does he have any idea of the size of the military industry out here? Is he aware of our military bases that protect his butt from everything to the West? Even the blessed Bush came out here to make his "Mission Accomplished" speech.

What a hate monger!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alnilam @ Oct 10 2006, 01:03 PM) [snapback]330809[/snapback]</div>

YES, it has!
And much further along than the rusting piles of hardware we would now have had there been total anti-military, ultra-lib domination.

These types of programs are normally kept in the dark. Military doctrine say you don't divulge your offensive or defensive capabilities until after they are first used and your enemy know for certain they exist.

When did you first hear about the F-117 Stealth Fighter? . . . after it was first used in Desert Storm.

I have no doubts great strides were made in “Star Wars†capabilities. We just won't hear about it until the first publicly confirmed enemy missile is shot down. You want your enemies wasting their time and money on systems you know you can defeat.

Also, right now, nobody can say for certain that the US didn't used the North Korean missile launches as a real world, live fire, test of a “Star Wars†system. After all, the missiles reportedly failed soon after launch . . . exactly the time aircraft-born anti-missile lasers are most effective.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Oct 10 2006, 08:41 PM) [snapback]330951[/snapback]</div>

I seriously doubt it. I was interviewed to work on it back in the 80's, and know people who worked on it. That money has long since dried up.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 10 2006, 07:33 AM) [snapback]330516[/snapback]</div>

I suppose you support firing Rumsfeld then, who sat on the board of ABB that sold nuclear reactors to NoKo in 2000.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Oct 10 2006, 06:53 PM) [snapback]330953[/snapback]</div>

Back in the 80's??? :huh: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Ouch! That hurts! :lol: Must-stop-laugh-ing . . .

Whew!!!! :blink:

Back in the 80's, the Navy was flying F-4 Phantoms off of aircraft carriers.
That money too has long since dried up. Those aircraft, what are left, are now targets.
I agree, the money allocated back in the 80's for missile defense has long since dried up . . . AKA . . . was spent!


http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/abl/abl7.html

The ABL weapon system will use a high-energy, chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) mounted on a modified 747-400F (freighter) aircraft to shoot down theater ballistic missiles in their boost phase.

The first YAL-1A is known as the Block 2004 aircraft. This aircraft was designed as a prototype rather than an operational asset. Although it will have a limited lethal capability for contingencies, much of the support equipment to generate the chemical laser's fuel at forward bases is not expected to be available until around 2006.

To date, the program has been concentrating on activities associated with getting “first light†through six fully integrated laser modules, and integrating the beam control system. All Block 2004 efforts are focused on achieving a successful, live shoot-down of a ballistic missile during FY05.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/abl.htm

2006!!!! Not 1980something.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Oct 10 2006, 09:49 PM) [snapback]330980[/snapback]</div>

Yes of course - dried up means spent! (duh) And I didn't say it dried up in the 80's, I said I interviewed in the 80's. The people I know who worked on it were working on it in the 90's.

So, $60 billion was spent on it during the 80's and 90's. The article you reference talks about things like a not-to-exceed $118 million contract for some work in 2003/2004, and a not completely funded project in 2006. How much money has been spent on it since 2000? Quite a drop in priorities for such a nukyalar-obsessed administration.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Oct 10 2006, 11:04 PM) [snapback]330985[/snapback]</div>

So are you for ABM defenses or not - I could not tell from these posts? And those nuclear reactors were sold by the clinton administration as part of the "agreed framework" along with other concessions to NoKo.

 

Well if they have already tested a nuke, I would think the cap has been left off and the paste is running out of the tube...

Really though, since Iraq is soo wrong of a war why should we worry about N. Korea? I woud guess our inteigence dept. is wrong again.. Put Hillary in office, maybe she can help them maybe even give them a few old gutted ICBMs they could use for testing purposes... :lol: :lol:

This is an EYE OPENER! :blink:




Pretty, but deadly!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Oct 12 2006, 12:02 PM) [snapback]331735[/snapback]</div>

why is iraq a wrong war? hillary would not be able to indentify an ICBM if her life depended upon it - unless it had batteries in it :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 12 2006, 12:06 PM) [snapback]331740[/snapback]</div>

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: