North Korea says it will stage nuke test

Infinity_Now

jlew24asu wrote:

exactly my point. you would rather live with osama in a cave then listen to bush give a state of the union address. its sad.

Think before you speak, cause we've already been over this multiple times in this very thread.

You've said the same rhetoric. I've defended our mutual liberty.

inmytree

jlew24asu wrote:

great response. jesus fucking christ. just picturing you say it as you typed it made me laugh.

I'm glad I can bring joy and happiness to you day...

jlew24asu wrote:

seems to be alot more hatred for bush then osama around here. wait who is the enemy of america, cant remember.

I'm sorry, I missed the "I love osama" posts...I would think that the hatred for bin laden and his actions are a given...perhaps every time I post a criticism of bush I need to add the words..."oh, yeah, I hate bin laden"....

lets see: bush was dead wrong in leading the US to war with Iraq...and oh, yeah, I hate bin laden, too...

or this one: man, that foley guy is an ass and he should be held accountable for his actions...and oh, yeah, I hate bin laden, too..

is that better...?

jlew24asu

inmytree wrote:

I'm glad I can bring joy and happiness to you day...



I'm sorry, I missed the "I love osama" posts...I would think that the hatred for bin laden and his actions are a given...perhaps every time I post a criticism of bush I need to add the words..."oh, yeah, I hate bin laden"....

lets see: bush was dead wrong in leading the US to war with Iraq...and oh, yeah, I hate bin laden, too...

or this one: man, that foley guy is an ass and he should be held accountable for his actions...and oh, yeah, I hate bin laden, too..

is that better...?

much better thanks

inmytree

jlew24asu wrote:

much better thanks

why do you like bin laden better that bush...?

Infinity_Now

Ahem!

Back to Korea.

...ok, I've nothing more to say about Korea.

Back to Iran then,

What do you - all of you - think of Russia selling Iran nuclear technology, then telling Bush Co. and the world that Russia is siding with U.S. efforts to disarm Iran - who don't own any nuclear weapons - ?

They sell them technology, then say they demand sanctions for having such technology?

Could it be possible, that Korea is actualy trying to defend itself - having shown no actions of aggresion yet - defending itself against hypocritical and unstable western relations?

jlew24asu

inmytree wrote:

why do you like bin laden better that bush...?

no I hate bin laden and everything he stands for. hope I cleared that up for you.

jlew24asu

Infinity_Now wrote:

Ahem!

Back to Korea.

...ok, I've nothing more to say about Korea.

Back to Iran then,

What do you - all of you - think of Russia selling Iran nuclear technology, then telling Bush Co. and the world that Russia is siding with U.S. efforts to disarm Iran - who don't own any nuclear weapons - ?

They sell them technology, then say they demand sanctions for having such technology?

Could it be possible, that Korea is actualy trying to defend itself - having shown no actions of aggresion yet - defending itself against hypocritical and unstable western relations?

o man, now we are defending the actions of the government of North Korea. you know what, yea your right. they should have nukes just in case us wacky americans want to invade their country. they should have every right to fire a nuke at south korea.

Infinity_Now

jlew24asu wrote:

o man, now we are defending the actions of the government of North Korea. you know what, yea your right. they should have nukes just in case us wacky americans want to invade their country. they should have every right to fire a nuke at south korea.

Where in my words do you find any condolence for N. Korea using their most likely weak ass nukes?

"Could it be possible, that Korea is actualy trying to defend itself..."
I was raising a debate, a query, not making a statement.

And no - "we" aren't defending anybody. You are making shit up.

jlew24asu

Infinity_Now wrote:

Where in my words do you find any condolence for N. Korea using their most likely weak ass nukes?

"Could it be possible, that Korea is actualy trying to defend itself..."
I was raising a debate, a query, not making a statement.

And no - "we" aren't defending anybody. You are making shit up.

ok fine i'll play along. no its not possible. kim jong il wants a nuke to prove to the west they (he) are powerful. and you right, it may be a weak nuke, but will do major damage to the innocent neighbors to the south.

trappedinmyradio

pushmepullme wrote:

Why aren't North Korea allowed nuclear weapons, exactly? America has shit loads of them and I don't hear anyone saying bomb the fuck out of America...

the rationale for the U.S. having nuclear weapons is that the U.S. has them as a defensive measure. there is a fear that North Korea would use nuclear weapons to defeat their enemies.

the first part of that argument is not a good one. the second part is, at least, arguable.

Infinity_Now

Now it's a chicken and the egg debate:

If we didn't have any nuclear weapons, would they?

Why would they?

Why do we have nuclear weapons, if most countries - most of our "enemies" do not?

Infinity_Now

trappedinmyradio wrote:

the rationale for the U.S. having nuclear weapons is that the U.S. has them as a defensive measure. there is a fear that North Korea would use nuclear weapons to defeat their enemies.

the first part of that argument is not a good one. the second part is, at least, arguable.

There is fear.

But the official statement by N. Korea is that their arms are for defense.

There is no trust.

If we don't trust them, then we will end up only fearing them.

If we won't trust them, that theirs are for defense, then how can they trust us that ours are for defense?

What reason have they to trust us?

trappedinmyradio

Infinity_Now wrote:

There is fear.

But the official statement by N. Korea is that their arms are for defense.

There is no trust.

If we don't trust them, then we will end up only fearing them.

If we won't trust them, that theirs are for defense, then how can they trust us that ours are for defense?

What reason have they to trust us?

i am not arguing anything here. i think we should get rid of our nuclear (read: nuke-u-lar) weapons if we are going to hold fast to our desire that other nations not possess them. if we have them and say they are for defense then other nations should be able to say the same...this should not be a do as i say, not as i do situation.

truroute

Infinity_Now wrote:

There is fear.

But the official statement by N. Korea is that their arms are for defense.

There is no trust.

If we don't trust them, then we will end up only fearing them.

If we won't trust them, that theirs are for defense, then how can they trust us that ours are for defense?

What reason have they to trust us?

Hmmmmm....trust N. Korea.....hmmmmmm

Anyway, N. Korea is nothing but a "puppet" (for lack of a better term) for China. Taiwan is a stick in thier side, NK is a stick in ours. So US and China are even on stick-in-sides.

truroute

trappedinmyradio wrote:

i am not arguing anything here. i think we should get rid of our nuclear (read: nuke-u-lar) weapons if we are going to hold fast to our desire that other nations not possess them. if we have them and say they are for defense then other nations should be able to say the same...this should not be a do as i say, not as i do situation.

Again, look at the history of why we have them, and still have them today. The "we should get rid of our nukes so others do too" is stupid. It will not happen. US gives up nukes, China or Russia say: Thanks, thats a nice thing to do. Good bye Taiwan.


(ya ya ya, US the first and only to use. We already covered that)

Infinity_Now

truroute wrote:

Again, look at the history of why we have them, and still have them today. The "we should get rid of our nukes so others do too" is stupid. It will not happen. US gives up nukes, China or Russia say: Thanks, thats a nice thing to do. Good bye Taiwan.


(ya ya ya, US the first and only to use. We already covered that)

Well - we wouldn't give up our guns for nothing - what about if we give up our nukes, then Taiwan gets solidarity or something?

inmytree

I told you, it's time to invade...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061005/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_nkorea_17;_ylt=Al.51Q_ptZgdYQgvO9vb43OCscEA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Diplomat says U.S. has warned N. Korea

By FOSTER KLUG, Associated Press WriterThu Oct 5, 1:33 PM ET

The United States warned North Korea anew on Thursday not to test a nuclear weapon. "It isn't in their interest and it isn't in anyone's interest," the top U.S. negotiator on the communist country's nuclear program said.

"We will not accept a nuclear state," Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill told AP Television as he urged North Korea to resume negotiations that have involved six nations.

The United States has sent a message of "deep concern" to the North through diplomatic channels at the United Nations in New York, Hill said Wednesday. He did not elaborate on the message, except to say the North Koreans had received it and had not yet responded.

The North Korean announcement gave no date for any test, but U.S. intelligence agencies are keeping close watch over activity at possible test sites in the North.

"If they think that by exploding a weapon, that somehow we will come to terms with it, we won't," Hill told reporters after an appearance at the Johns Hopkins University's school of international studies. "If they think that firing off a weapon will somehow make them a part of some sort of nuclear club, they should think again."

The United States and North Korea have no diplomatic relations outside deadlocked six-nation nuclear talks and rarely communicate with each other so directly. That gives the U.S. message a seriousness that exceeds the public statements Washington has issued so far.

Hill would not discuss policy options, but he said senior U.S. diplomats, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, were in steady communication with their counterparts in Asia and Europe.

In the event of a nuclear test, Hill said, "We would have no choice but to act and act resolutely to make sure (North Korea) understood, and make sure every other country in the world understands, that this is a very bad mistake."

The U.S. message to North Korea came as Washington sought to marshal a unified diplomatic front against a possible nuclear test.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns and Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Shotaro Yachi agreed Wednesday that if North Korea should test, international sanctions were one of the tools both nations would expect the Security Council to consider, a State Department official said.

Meanwhile, the United States was paying close attention to movement at possible North Korean nuclear test sites, but authorities cautioned against reading too much into every movement during this heightened period of interest.

A U.S. intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the highly sensitive situation with North Korea, said the United States is now seeing the movement of people, materials and vehicles and other activity around one possible test site. But, the official said, it could be similar to activity seen a couple of months ago. Then, no test occurred.

The United States has spy satellites and other eavesdropping equipment aimed at North Korea, including ground-based seismic sensors.

At the United Nations, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton discussed the matter with the Security Council, State Department spokesman Tom Casey said, and the United States would "hope to see some action there in the near future."

In Asia, North Korea's neighbors worked to forge a common front against Pyongyang's threat. Japan, China and South Korea announced a series of summit meetings during the next week to repair damaged ties and coordinate a strategy for dealing with North Korea.

While North Korean leader Kim Jong Il may decide to hold the test, it cannot be ruled out that Tuesday's threat was saber-rattling, an effort to force a change in stalled nuclear negotiations or some other motivating factor.

A U.S. government official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said Pyongyang could hold a nuclear test with little or no warning. The calculation, the official said, is political, rather than technical, because North Korea is believed to have such a device.

The North Korean government's public statement gave it an opportunity to gauge what world reaction might be; U.S. authorities are treating the statement with seriousness and do not see it as pure bluster, the official said.

Intelligence agencies also are considering dates for a possible test that might be of interest to Kim, the country's ruler.

Oct. 8, for example, marks the anniversary of Kim's ascension as head of the Workers' Party of Korea in 1997. It also would coincide with the likely approval of South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon to become secretary general of the United Nations.

Kofi Annan steps down from the post on Dec. 31, and the U.N. Security Council has set Oct. 9 to elect his successor.

Thoughts_Arrive

The similarities.....

josevolution

Im not willing to send my son to fight over there at all fuck that !

Thirty Bills Unpaid

It's crazy when a country is stuck with an idiot as its leader.