North Korea Problems: President Clinton in Pyongyang

[Poverty]

That would likely be the case. But it still would probably not happen as it isn't needed.
Which was totally why they continued to support the Isreali army by selling weapons, right*








*Not a political statement. Just an observation. If they truely gave a damn they would do something about it instead of saying they didn't like it.

The government didnt do diddly sqwuat. Remember I said the public. We generally arent listened to much Ive noticed over the past couple years

 

[ledhed]

No thats not what I meant at all.

I meant that if whats comin out in the media is true america should have bumped him off a long time ago, before letting it get to this stage, especially if they are so worried about this. (I think this is another hyped up iran situation with a bit more substance)

However we might never have been in this mess in the first place if america didnt squeeze them so much, and its the hard right wing attitude which I personally would call extremism in its own right that forces nations such as korea and iran to feel the need to develop these weapons to protect themselves.

Ledhead keeps bringin up the agreement with clinton and the 90's but obviously he doesnt want to or hasnt delved a bit deeper and further back into history to maybe see why some would argue north koreas actions are necessary.

People right now are saying the whole world are condemming north korea, but I can assure that is not the truth, there are plenty of people out there other than the north koreans celebrating this achievement.



May I ask why?

Your really funny...**** my dad fought in Korea for almost 4 years...I happen to like the fact he keeps in touch with his Korean soldier friends and when my Marine brother was stationed in korea he had nothing but good things to say about the south. So whenever you decide to actually educate yourself on Korea as a country and what the North has been doing with itself since 1950 and how their relationship with China has become strained...and other usefull facts like all of the broken treaties and the violations and the kidnapping of japanese and english speaking people to be teachers for their spys and tha fact that they are VERY paraniod. AND they starve their people to pay for an army they do not need and they are ruled by a supreme dictator and have absolutely no semblance of any type of democracy. Nor can he run an economy without blackmailing his neighbors ....OHHHH please give me the positives about NK...I cant WAIT . And maybe just throw in something usefull that shows you actually have a thought process and can use it .
And BTW ...the above more than justfies my curiouity and interest in Korea ..and thats the ONLY reason I bother mentioing it..it hard to sit around with adults talking about a country without it getting you interested ...

I might actually take you seriously .


*****And BTW ...the above more than justfies my curiouity and interest in Korea ..and thats the ONLY reason I bother mentioing it..it hard to sit around with adults talking about a country without it getting you interested ... Not saying I wouldnt have been interested in the culture and history without the experiance but ..it was an incentive .



One important question you should attempt to answer.

WHY did NK sign a treaty and break it and then complain that because they broke the treaty and had sanctions placed on them it was OK for them to make a nuke . The one they were making in secret while all the time telling everyone they were not .

Please explain to me why or how this bit of fact and history is not VERY important to the current topic and why you insist on ignoring it .

 

[Danoff]

So why aren't you guys sending more troops to Afghanistan to help us Brits!? Sheesh. Well it's nice to know you still have loads left.

My whole point was that an assault on NK wouldn't require troops (which we're officially out of unless we start redeploying). We wouldn't use troops in NK. We'd use bombs - which we're officially not out of.

 

[Tornado]

The government didnt do diddly sqwuat. Remember I said the public. We generally arent listened to much Ive noticed over the past couple years

So elect people you want to run the country, but keep this in mind: The U.K. and U.S. created the problem 60 years ago. So it is required that the two governments support Isreal regardless of who is in office. And remember, anti-semitism would probably be rallied upon far more than "Isreal killing off arabs," which is a phrase I have come to both loathe and respect.
The people in charge couldn't care less what Isreal would do to people who "just happen to be our enemies," and niether could the majority of the people who elected them. It's the same reason there hasn't been any serious sanctions against Putin over Chechnya: Part II. As long as it happens in places that we don't like anyways, "who cares?" is the general cry among the governments.
China could probably turn all of North Korea into a parking lot and the general concensus on the world stage would be "too bad about the civilians, but at least Crazy Specs is gone." Ruthless and cruel, yes, but probably true.

 

[ledhed]

My whole point was that an assault on NK wouldn't require troops (which we're officially out of unless we start redeploying). We wouldn't use troops in NK. We'd use bombs - which we're officially not out of.

Ummm we turned Afghanistan over to NATO...by a negotiated agreement that spells out the troop structure and what needs to be done if your commanders think they need more.

BTTW ..last I looked the Taliban and AlQueda fighters are GETING CREAMED ..big time wasted...masscred..in fact the press is so astonished at all the dead talibans and Al Queda types they re calling it a RESURGENCE !!



Only in Americca...and Britaian ...and France etc.. ..can the complete destruction of an opposing force be called a sign of victory for all the dead dudes ....


It makes you think they are rooting for a loss ??? Did they invest hevily in prayer rugs ??


The bigger problem is the bumper heroin crop.....a world record..not good because the Taliban and the Al Queda's get a cut of thhe cash and they run away to regroup nad buy more Jihadist for us to kill in Pakistan...because the Pakistani president is leaving their remote hideouts alone now by agreement...hey he wants to live I guess .

Its kinda weird though why we cant just follow them into Pakistan and kill them and the he can blame us ..we are already SATAN how much worse can we get ???

 

[McLaren]

That is something that not only do I doubt to happen (remember, uh, Hiroshima), but if it was to happen I'm sure the world reaction would essentially be a unified "So What." The West would care about as much as it cares about anything Isreal does, and for the same reasons, and China would probably be rather agitated and nothing more.

Maybe it's me, but I would think that Japan would have the technology to build a pretty destructive weapon within a short time if it were attacked.

I mean, Japan may not have the WOM like we or others do, but I'm pretty sure their smart brains could build something that can do some serious damage.


My only question is, how big can a bomb to N. Korea be, before the effects hit S. Korea? From my understanding, we're still allied with the South.

 

[vladimir]

nuclear wepaons are defense weapons, there is no need to rush to war.

we don't need to bomb north korea of the map, we need to get rid of kim jong il...

i don't understand this guy, he loves the NBA, watches james bond, drives a benz, drinks french wine and collects italian bicycles. he should love us.

 

[Tornado]

Maybe it's me, but I would think that Japan would have the technology to build a pretty destructive weapon within a short time if it were attacked.
I mean, Japan may not have the WOM like we or others do, but I'm pretty sure their smart brains could build something that can do some serious damage.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I have no doubt that Japan could whip up something stupidly destructive in a very quick pace, even if it wasn't a tactical nuke, and probably even without any help. I'm just saying that the population and the government would resist to doing it until the last minute, and that it really wouldn't be necessary.

 

[socomplayer2]

"Why, Herrow"​

 

[Danoff]

nuclear wepaons are defense weapons, there is no need to rush to war.

Nuclear weapons can be offensive (especially in the hands of a lunatic or terrorist). Just becuase they've only ever been used defensively doesn't mean there is no way to use them offensively.

we don't need to bomb north korea of the map, we need to get rid of kim jong il...

Bombs can help with that.

 

[McLaren]

Bombs can help with that.

Curiously, what would happened if we tried to send in trained snipers? Would the world consider us even more evil?

 

[Tornado]

It would probably lead to a failure of proportions exceeding the Kennedy-Kennedy/Castro screw-ups of the 60's.

 

[Danoff]

Curiously, what would happened if we tried to send in trained snipers? Would the world consider us even more evil?

Yup. But also, if we don't send snipers we're more evil as well.

 

[askia47]

Since he's not answering, how about that Kim Jong-il is pretty much the Asian Hitler? I also don't want a mass murderers to have access to a assault rifles, or let child molesters work in kindergartens!

Agreed, North Korea tortures and kills its own people, why not bring it down. They violate alot of human rights laws and the people are starving. The nuclear program is just another reason to destroy it.

 

[ledhed]

I want that doll !

 

[vladimir]

Nuclear weapons can be offensive (especially in the hands of a lunatic or terrorist). Just becuase they've only ever been used defensively doesn't mean there is no way to use them offensively.

actually, they have only ever been used offensively as far as i'm aware.
and yes, in the hands of terrorists or lunatics they are very dangerous. kim jong-il, however, is a scared man. he is scared of getting wiped off the map by the US of A. thats why he wants a nuke so desperately. because he thinks he might be able to use that as a threat if someone would attack north korea.
if some country would use a nuclear weapon to attack another country, it would get a nuclear response and whether it would be from the US, russia or china, the attacking country would vanish from the face of this planet...

Bombs can help with that.

aim correctly, don't cause too much collateral damage, do it without risking him launching a nuke, do it without first telling us that he had deadly nuke carrying satellites that could send a nuke to any point of the planet in 45 minutes and i would be all ok with it.
but as far as i know there isn't too much oil to be found in north korea so i wouldn't at all be surprised if iran would still be the next target instead of north korea.
in my opinion the US should have gone to north korea instead of iraq because apparently kim jong-il is a much greater thread nowadays...

 

[a6m5]

While I agree that U.S. has a lot of interest in oil and Middle East(no, U.S. is not stealing, but both oil and region are very important to the U.S.), what has delayed, or perhaps nixed the strike on North Korea is the risk of massive casualty on the South Korean side from the N.K.'s retaliatory attack IMO.

 

[vladimir]

then get support into the south, get the border secured and go in.

before iraq some people feared saddam might launch his WMDs into israel. ironically, they were the same that were in favour of the war.

 

[Tornado]

There seems to be a country that would probably prefer we not meddle with the affairs of the ROK.

 

[ledhed]

Danoff whhen was a nuke used defensively ??

Are you being tricky again ???


Please dont say because the US justified the use to save a million lives it was defense....please..I dont have any duct tape to wrap my head and brains are hard to get ...



Dropping those two Atomic bombs was a display of OFFENSIVE might that was meant to bring Japan to its knees begging for surrender.


And yes it saved millions of lives on both sides because Japan did not have to be invaded . But thats not defensive use ..


But please go ahead I did'nt mean to second guess...

 

[vladimir]

is there anything we should know within that article?

Wang Guangya, Chinese ambassador to the United Nations:
"China is ready to discuss with other council members to see how the Security Council could react firmly, constructively and prudently with regard to this challenge."

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs also said North Korea "ignored the widespread opposition of the international community and conducted a nuclear test brazenly."

it doesn't look like they're too fond of it. china is more and more aware of its enormous potential and that it can only unleash it if getting closer to the west. such changes, however, can't be rushed.
china will tolerate north korea up to a point, maybe this is it already.

 

[Tornado]

is there anything we should know within that article?

No. I linked to the wrong article and am too lazy to find which one it actually was.

 

[YSSMAN]

Back in the day I wrote a paper about the situation in North Korea as of 2002/2003. In my own little corner in my midwest suburban high-school I realised something: They are going to have nuclear weapons, eventually, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it unless foreign policy not only from the United States, but China, Russia, and Japan remains firm. Did it? Nope. Thats where we went wrong.

But heres the thing, we knew about the problem long before any of this was a threat by any standard it is today. I'm talking about the Clinton Administration's generalized "appeasement" of Kim-Jong Ill, baisically funding his nuclear weapon program as a means for "peace" in Asia. Wow, how silly we were.

...And to think that the National Threat Assesment of 2000 included literature about Kim-Jong's possible 8 nuclear weapons by 2010, Saddam's reach for WMD's, and the growing threat posed by Iran. This is 2000 folks, in a report that took several years to compile under the Clinton Adminsitration. And yet it is Bush's fault? Not hardly...

Simply put, we are all to blame here. Weak foreign policy due to the constant bickering between the US, China and Russia stopped progress dead in it's tracks. Accusations fly that the US was reluctant to negotiate and thus this happened, but people forget that China and Russia didn't want sanctions to push the DPRK back to the negotiating table.

...And don't get me started with the UN either, as they dropped the ball as well. We can pass resolution after resolution, but that won't stop someone as crazy as Kim-Jong, we all know that...

---

So where do we go from here:

- The UN *MUST* enact strict sanctions against the DPRK, and *MUST* enforce the rights of the IAEA to investigate the actions and status of their current nuclear stockpiles.
- The DPRK *MUST* comply to anti-proliferation (sp?) laws, and *MUST* be under strict observation by the UN.

...Or we can do what I fear may eventually happen, war...

War is a long-way off in the distance, and it will be an international effort I belive. Although I doubt that many US troops will fight directly, you can bet your ass that we will be in the sky and on the water, defending our allies in South Korea and Japan to the best of our ability. We would have to depend on the Chinese and Australians, possibly even NATO for fighting forces against the DPRK, the US playing a very passive role as I see it.

...But we need to worry more about what the UN and the "Six Nations" will do in response right now, that really all there is to it...

---

BTW: Poverty, I'm dissapointed in you. You fell into the anti-American trap, and for that I'm sorry. I know that many people can't help but blame the US for what happens in any corner of the world, but you can also thank your country for not pushing hard enough for sanctions in the UN, and the same goes for France.

...Sure, there could have been a lot more done on behalf of any of the major Allied powers, but post-test, we need to be focused more on the problem at hand, not why America is always WRONG.

 

[Tornado]

...Or we can do what I fear may eventually happen, war...
War is a long-way off in the distance, and it will be an international effort I belive. Although I doubt that many US troops will fight directly, you can bet your ass that we will be in the sky and on the water, defending our allies in South Korea and Japan to the best of our ability. We would have to depend on the Chinese and Australians, possibly even NATO for fighting forces against the DPRK, the US playing a very passive role as I see it.

I'm sorry, but I simply cannot see that happening, because I personally do not believe that China will allow what is essentially one of it's puppets to try to bite it. China and the ROK directly parallels the Soviet Union and one of it's many Warsaw "allies," and I honestly can't see China allowing what will undoubtably lead to a rebellion against Chinese influence.
Perhaps a joint force involving China will happen, but I really doubt that any major world conflict will occur. Of course, maybe I'm basing my opinion too much on GiTS: S.A.C. 2nd Gig, but it seems logical enough of a solution.

 

[Max_DC]

I think we have bigger problems than NK having A-bombs... while not nice, I'm more afraid of China & India eating all our jobs in EU/USA/Japan... THAT will kill us, not North Korea... They will chew us and spit us out again, you'll see...mark my words....

 

[Sureboss]

North Korea will only use their weapons in a defensive situation, as insane as Kim Jong-il is he's not stupid enough to attack another country with a Nuclear bomb.

The big problem I think is selling their technology to terrorist groups. North Korea live in their own little world, a very strange country that needs to be dealt with respect (even if you have no respect for them).

I'd say,....

We'll help re-build your country if you give up your weapons. Very unlikely to happen, but it's what I'd do/try to instigate.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Hillary Clinton is a despicable doucebag. She has the nerve to blame Republicans for this problem. No, the blame is ALL on her so-called "husband." These doucebag, hippie, dope-smoking morons deserve all the credit for our problems with North Korea.

When North Korea was acting aggressive and childishly demanding financial aid to save his starving people, or it'll start a nuclear weapons program, was the time when Kim Jong-il should have been dealt with more aggressively by our "Clinton presidents." Instead, those doucebags hand him the money to finish up his nuclear weapons program while his people continued to suffer and die. Not one penny of that money Clinton gave went to helping North Korean people. It all went into the Kim Jong-il's nuclear weapons program.

Clinton was warned repeatedly not to do it, but he did it anyway. Now, we have to deal with his retarded mistakes. So, the next time you hear that stupid b**** Hillary open her fat, worthless mouth about who's fault this is, you know where you can tell her to go shove it.

 

[ledhed]

In 2003 they said this ...

North Korea Nukes Clinton Legacy
Charles R. Smith
Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2003
Asian Arms Race Result of Appeasement Policy


The leftist media spin is that the current crisis in North Asia is the result of George W. Bush calling Pyongyang a member of the 'axis of evil.' In reality, the soft-line appeasement policy taken by Clinton against North Korea and China is what has led us to this point.

For example, former Clinton adviser Paul Begala, now serving as a talking head on CNN, claimed that the Clinton administration contained the threat from North Korea. Clearly, Mr. Begala missed the 1990s.

Of course, Mr. Begala simply forgot that Clinton's military chief of staff testified in 1998 that North Korea did not have an active ballistic missile program. One week later the North Koreans launched a missile over Japan that landed off the Alaska coast.

During the early Clinton years, hard-liners and so-called conservative hawks advocated a pre-emptive strike to halt North Korea's nuclear weapons development before it could field an atomic bomb. Instead of taking the hard line, President Clinton elected to rely on former President Jimmy Carter and decided to appease the Marxist-Stalinist dictatorship.

Carter met with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang and returned to America waving a piece of paper and declaring peace in our time. Kim, according to Carter, had agreed to stop his nuclear weapons development.

The Clinton appeasement program for North Korea included hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, food, oil and even a nuclear reactor. However, the agreement was flawed and lacked even the most informal means of verification.

In return, Kim elected to starve his people while using the American aid to build uranium bombs. The lowest estimate is that Kim starved to death over 1 million of his own people, even with the U.S. aid program.

Axis of Evil and Friends

North Korea was not left all alone in its effort to obtain nuclear weapons. North Korea relied heavily on China, its closest ally, to assist in its all-out effort to obtain the atomic bomb.

Beijing elected to covertly aid its North Asian ally by proliferation. China allowed Pakistan to send nuclear technology purchased from Beijing to North Korea in exchange for No Dong missile technology.

Beijing provided Pakistan with its nuclear weapons technology, including an operational atomic bomb design. Pakistan is now providing North Korea with equipment and engineering to assist in its bomb-making efforts.

The fact remains that North Korea acquired some key equipment for its nuclear weapons program from Pakistan in 1998. The key equipment, including a working gas centrifuge used to enrich uranium, was shipped to Pyongyang in the coffin of the murdered wife of a North Korean diplomat.

Beijing's indirect assistance includes allowing Pakistani C-130 cargo flights over China to Pyongyang that carry key equipment for nuclear weapons production. The flights return to Pakistan with North Korean No Dong missile parts.

Missiles for Nukes

Pakistan also benefited from the trade in weaponry. The missiles-for-nukes trade gave Pakistan an operational means to deliver its atomic bombs.

Pakistan has since successfully test-fired and deployed its own version of the No Dong missile, called the Ghauri. The North Korean-designed missile has a range of nearly 900 miles and can cover virtually all of India, Pakistan's rival in Southwest Asia.

The ultimate irony here is that the North Korean No Dong and Tae Po Dong missiles are based on technology given to Pyongyang by China. In 1994, the Wall Street Journal revealed that Chinese-made CSS-2 missile technology had found its way into North Korean hands.

China has also allowed North Korea to ship SCUD missiles through its territory for Middle Eastern customers. According to a Canadian undercover operative, North Korean agents moved dismantled SCUD missiles through China into Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.

The allegations proved to be correct because U.S. satellites were able to follow Chinese-made M-11 missiles bound for Pakistan over the same land route in 2000. The illegal export of M-11 missiles brought swift sanctions against Beijing by the Bush administration.

In recent months China has been much more overt about assisting Pyongyang with its nuclear weapons program. In 2002, China sold Pyongyang a large shipment of tributyl phosphate, a key chemical used to extract plutonium and uranium from spent fuel rods for atomic bombs.

U.S. Pressure on Asian Allies

In contrast, the U.S. repeatedly told India, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan that they should not develop nuclear weapons. The U.S. position was that the no one had the right to bring a new arms race to Asia.

The U.S. also backed up this policy by placing severe restrictions on the export of nuclear and ballistic missile technology to India, Taiwan, Korea and Japan. The trade agreements also had teeth built into them in case U.S. technology was abused.

For example, when India developed and tested its nuclear bomb, the U.S. responded with hefty sanctions and a diplomatic freeze that is just now beginning to thaw.

Compared to the strict U.S. policy, China did not discourage its client states, North Korea and Pakistan, from developing nuclear weapons. Instead, China has overtly and covertly assisted both nations to develop and deploy active weapons upon working delivery systems.

Nature abhors a vacuum, especially in the case of nuclear weapons. The whole equation of Asian defense has changed overnight. As a result of China's nuclear proliferation, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan may now have to follow Pyongyang's lead and begin their own atomic weapons programs. That decision will be made in Tokyo, Seoul and Taipei, not in Washington.

It should shock no one, including the China lobby and DNC apologists, that Beijing will continue to support North Korea's nuclear weapons program.

However, some fools continue to be suckered by Beijing's obvious ploy to dominate Asia. The fools' hope that China will restrain Pyongyang continues to echo off the lips of the leftist media, as if by simply wishing it were true will make it so.

The fact remains that Bill Clinton's legacy is an unstable world filled with hungry dictators and nuclear weapons. The result of the Clinton appeasement policy toward China is a new arms race.

Its 2006 what has changed... ???

 

[ledhed]

Clinton started out, as mentioned before, trying to altogether ignore some eminent problems brewing in North Korea. In his Essay "Clinton's Foreign Policy in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, and North Korea", Thomas H. Henriksen gives a detailed account of the events that shaped Clinton's early policy towards North Korea. He mentions that Clinton never made any talk about North Korea during his first presidential campaign in 1992. However, Clinton very quickly figured out he would have to deal with North Korea when fears starting to arise that they were generating materials for nuclear weapons with their small nuclear reactor in Yongbyon. Clinton, in response to these fears, decided to start military training exercises, known as Team Spirit, in South Korea. This flexing of military muscle prompted North Korea to threaten to pull out of the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT). After some negotiations North Korea agreed to pull back on their threat of withdrawing from the NPT. This led Clinton to reward North Korea for its reversal by not considering any trade sanction or military actions against the DPRK. Things started growing worse though as the fear that North Korea had nuclear capabilities grew. Leading the fears along was the fact that the dictator of North Korea at the time, Kim Il Sung, was blocking nuclear inspectors from reaching the nuclear reactors they wanted to inspect. Furthermore, it was later concluded by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that North Korea did indeed have nuclear capabilities. These new developments brought the United States to the brink of war with North Korea. Before shots, or rockets in this case, could be fired an agreement known as the Agreed Framework was signed on October 21, 1994. Among other things in this treaty, North Korea agreed to shutdown their old reactor and submit to inspections by the IAEA. In return the United States would help fund the building of two so-called light water reactors, which do not produce as much plutonium as the older reactors that the DPRK had. Also the Unites States would ship oil to North Korea until the new reactors were completed in order to compensate for the loss of power after shutting down the old reactor (previous paragraph came from Henriksen, 29-38).

******That worked out real well didnt it ?******

The events that transpired between the United States and the DPRK early in Clinton's administration are rich in Foreign Policy decision making. One can pick out many examples of ideas such as bilateral diplomacy. In his book, American Foreign Policy: Past, Present, and Future, Glenn P. Hastedt mentions that bilateral diplomacy is, "[a] form of diplomacy in which two states interact directly with one another" (291). From this definition it is apparent that in fact much of the dealings with North Korea during the Clinton years were of a bilateral-diplomatic form. Additionally, a form of military coercion is also apparent, although the effectiveness can be debated. This apparent coercion came in the form of Clinton's resumption of the Team Spirit training exercises. Clearly these training exercises, which took place along the borders of North Korea, were meant to intimidate the DPRK; attempting to show North Korea that if they tried anything we would be ready to attack. Yet the only effect these training exercises lead to was the threat from the DPRK to withdraw from the NPT. This threat made it clear to the United States that a show of aggression would only provoke the leader of the DPRK to do something drastic, and hence the military coercion was not an effective policy.

As a result of the failure of a coercive approach, the United States had to turn to different approaches. Namely, the United States would have to move away from military unilateralism and more towards economic multilateralism. The United States did just that. As Henriksen reports, the United States along with Japan and South Korea persuaded the DPRK to not consider dropping the NPT. The United States then rewarded North Korea for this decision by not imposing any trade sanctions (31). This last action is an obvious example of economic reward. This approach of essentially rewarding good behavior would come in handy again. This time it was in the crowning achievement of Clinton's dealings with North Korea,[//size] the agreed framework treaty. In this case the United States rewarded North Korea for turning off their old nuclear reactors by building them new reactors and shipping oil to them (Henriksen, 34). It can be argued though if this is really a reward. The reactors the United States would help build are too compensate the DPRK for closing their older reactors, and the oil is only being shipped until the reactors are up and working. This would appear to be, in short, something that the United States agreed to do in compensation, and not as a reward. However, the U.S. could have just as easily demanded that North Korea stop their reactors without any compensation (but what are the chances that North Korea would agree to that). Perhaps then this end of the agreement can be thought of as more of an incentive than a reward.

WELL DUH......


AND WE SEE SO VERY WELL HOW THAT WORKED OUT .

NEVER MAKE A DEAL WITH A DICTATOR UNLESS IT HAS A " YOU LIE YOU DIE " CLAUSE IN IT .

So what did Mrs. Clinton say again ?


http://www.people.umass.edu/mray/essays/northkorea.html

Then North Korea dropped a bombshell when, on October 16, North Korea admitted that it had an active nuclear program (Sanger, 1). About a month later, the Bush Administration decided to halt the oil shipments, which were part of the agreed framework, starting with the December shipment. The administration however, under pressure from South Korea and Japan, allowed the November shipment, which was already en-route, to proceed to the DPRK (Dao, 1).

Yes Mrs Clinton explain again to the world what a FOOL your husband is ? Please...save me the time .

much of the dealings with North Korea during the Clinton years were of a bilateral-diplomatic form.

And considering HOW well this approach has worked for the DEMOCRATS and Clinton why are these MORONS pestering Bush to do it ?


They ARE that stupid.....and they want to get elected and ccontroll congress...God save us please ...

Thats their plan...forget China and the rest and go bback to direct talks so NK can bend you over and take you like they did Clinton.....Kim -ill bung had to use a milk crate but he sure did Bill good .

Nothing like a TOTAL failure to ensure that a Democrat will endorse a failed plan .... I guess if Bush was that dumb....well you never know...he might just do us all a favor and shoot the midget Dictaor of Oz.


Bottom line here...Clinton had the job of fixing the NK problem ...He BLEW IT...( sorry Monica ).

 

[Max_DC]

Hillary Clinton is a despicable doucebag. She has the nerve to blame Republicans for this problem. No, the blame is ALL on her so-called "husband." These doucebag, hippie, dope-smoking morons deserve all the credit for our problems with North Korea.

When North Korea was acting aggressive and childishly demanding financial aid to save his starving people, or it'll start a nuclear weapons program, was the time when Kim Jong-il should have been dealt with more aggressively by our "Clinton presidents." Instead, those doucebags hand him the money to finish up his nuclear weapons program while his people continued to suffer and die. Not one penny of that money Clinton gave went to helping North Korean people. It all went into the Kim Jong-il's nuclear weapons program.

Clinton was warned repeatedly not to do it, but he did it anyway. Now, we have to deal with his retarded mistakes. So, the next time you hear that stupid b**** Hillary open her fat, worthless mouth about who's fault this is, you know where you can tell her to go shove it.

Relax dude, the world isn't that simple... I don't think that one person/party/country can be blamed for the development.
Why so upset? So they have nuclear weapons...meh whatever...