Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 182
  1.    #141  
    Blaze, you keep on sharing how NOT to handle it, how we have put NK in a situation of being a victim in the situation, but never talked about what you think we should do....so with the knowledge that :
    • NK currently have up to 8 nukes and missiles that can reach any Pacific coast city in the US
    • Threatens that any sanctions is considered an Act of War. With sanctions being an Act of War that warrents nothing to be held back.
    • They continually stall and noncommittal during the 6 Nation negotiation talks over the last 1 1/2 years or so
    • Lied to us for 10 years or so years under the Clinton deal about stopping and scrapping their nuke program in return for aid
    • They are suspected of helping share technology with Iran
    ......how would you handle it?
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 04/24/2006 at 04:42 PM.
  2. naivete's Avatar
    Posts
    636 Posts
    Global Posts
    640 Global Posts
    #142  
    Well, it will be Hiroshima all over again. Except this time, we're not the only ones with nukes.
  3. #143  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    ...I would not treat nuclear armageddon like a **** measuring contest...
    And just exactly who will be their knight in shining armor? It looks like a pretty one-sided fight to Besides, it doesn't have to be nuclear Armageddon. There are conventional alternatives short of ground troops and strategic ones as well - look at Congressman's Tancredo's suggestions on Mecca and Medina - they get XX hours to evacuate and then level it. I know, I was the one to use the "glow in the dark glass factory" invective, but the true key is that there must be consequences to their actions and threats.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  4. #144  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Blaze, you keep on sharing how NOT to handle it, but never talk about what to do....so with the knowledge that NK currently have up to 8 nukes and missiles that can reach any Pacific coast city in the US.....threatens that any sanctions is considered an Act of War.....They continually stall and noncommittal during the 6 Nation negotiation talks over the last 1 1/2 years or so.....lied to us for 10 years or so years under the Clinton deal about stopping and scrapping their nuke program in return for aid....they are suspected of helping share technology with Iran.....how would you handle it?
    Lied to us for 10 years under the Clinton deal about scrapping their "nyüklyr" program? Those negotiations were broken off mid stream when we elected a Texan to the White House.

    You are right, "what to do now" is not easy to answer. Looks like it is possilbe to F*** the world up so bad theres no easy way out.

    After 9/11, this president inherited a world squarely behind him 110%, and divided 99% of the world against us. Completely ignoring Osama Bin Laden, and instead choosing to overthrow the only secular power in the middle east, , significanly strenghtening Iran in the process. Now you ask what do we do? Do we leave and allow the Islamic Extremists to take over? Or do we just continue occupying an islamic state ... well .. forever?

    What you do i suppose at this point, is you elect a new president, who promptly apologizes for the last president. And makes it clear to the world, he did not represent all or even the majority of americans.
  5. #145  
    Quote Originally Posted by dstrauss
    ...as well - look at Congressman's Tancredo's suggestions on Mecca and Medina - they get XX hours to evacuate and then level it.
    I cannot think of any response to this inside the guidelines of the forum.
  6.    #146  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    Lied to us for 10 years under the Clinton deal about scrapping their "nyüklyr" program? Those negotiations were broken off mid stream when we elected a Texan to the White House.
    Again it appears that you are so bent on blaming Bush for the sake of blaming Bush that you disregard the reality of the situation and the historical facts. So....yet again, let's review the facts concerning yet another one of your claims.......It was Clinton that began the process to report NK's violations of the NPT and the signed Agreed Framework while under his watch:


    After extended negotiation, North Korea and the United States entered into the "Agreed Framework" on Oct. 21, 1994. Under the deal, North Korea would suspend all work at the Yongbyon complex, end all efforts to enrich plutonium for weapons and open its facilities to international oversight.

    ------------

    Even as the nations were debating implementation of the Agreed Framework, North Korea, the U.S. argues, was breaking the spirit, if not the letter, of the pact. Within months of signing the framework, North Korea and Pakistan reportedly cut a deal to trade missile technology for Pakistan's uranium enrichment techniques — the Agreed Framework had banned plutonium enrichment programs.

    For more than three years, the North Koreans worked quietly on their uranium project while urging the U.S. to fully implement the Agreed Framework. According to a Chinese government report that was leaked to a Japanese newspaper, the project included a secret uranium processing facility located inside Mount Chonma, near the Chinese border.

    The Clinton administration apparently learned of the secret program in late 1998 or early 1999, and by March 2000, President Clinton informed Congress he could no longer certify that "North Korea is not seeking to develop or acquire the capability to enrich uranium."

    ----------------

    In December 2002, KEDO moved to cut off the supply of fuel oil to North Korea, citing the North's violation of the Agreed Framework. North Korea's response was swift and reportedly unexpected.

    "By their own admission, Bush administration officials were surprised by the intensity of North Korea's moves in late December 2002 to re-start nuclear facilities at Yongbyon and expel officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency placed there under the U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework of 1994 to monitor the shutdown," Larry A. Niksch of CRS wrote in a report for Congress.

    "North Korea announced that it would re-start the nuclear reactor shut down under the Agreed Framework and resume construction of two larger reactors that was frozen under the agreement. It also announced that it would re-start the plutonium reprocessing plant that operated up to 1994. It threatened to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty."

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/...a/nuclear.html
    Your claim that Bush broke off negotiations mid stream is only half of the story. Yes Bush cut off negotiations. But you apparently accidentally forgot to say why (or made the claim with being ignorant to the facts or simply did not want to include the why in your argument). NK had just drawn a line in the sand and restarted it's nuke program full force and was demanding that there be ONLY negotiations between the US and NK ONLY. The Admin also wanted SK, China, Russia, and Japan, as they hold a tremendous amount of influence with NK as they are their main supporters of aid for the country. NK knew that, so they did want them involved as it was a disadvantage for them and their own personal agenda with trying to act without any accountability. Bush stuck to condition of 6 way talks, and NK eventually complied. Right or wrong it was an understandable move in the negotiation process.

    If you really need verification of nearly month by month updates with NK and their actions since 1985, feel free to enjoy this leisurely read:

    http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheet...chron.asp#2003


    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    What you do i suppose at this point, is you elect a new president, who promptly apologizes for the last president. And makes it clear to the world, he did not represent all or even the majority of americans.
    A great dodge of the question....or do you really think pandering to NK by giving them another 3 years to continue with their plans with a free pass for breaking all of their agreements is a positive plan of action (or more accurately inaction)? What happens if a another Rep Prez is elected with similar approve to NK? Wait another 4 years until we deal with NK when hopefully a Dem Prez is elected?

    Again, you seem to be full of pointing out who has not acted to your liking while failing to offer any meaningful alternatives.

    Blaze......Again, how would you handle NK?
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 04/25/2006 at 08:52 PM.
  7. #147  
    Blaze,
    You said:
    This is very simple.

    If I am the leader of North Korea, and I heard President Bush Say ...

    Then i saw the president, invade and occupy Iraq, and literally drop a nuclear device on Iran, I might not wait around to see what happens next.
    You seemed to be implying that Bush's statement was a mistake, that you as leader of North Korea would do something in response. I asked you what you would do that would demonstrate Bush's error, but you ignored the question.


    Lied to us for 10 years under the Clinton deal about scrapping their "nyüklyr" program? Those negotiations were broken off mid stream when we elected a Texan to the White House.
    You are not at all familiar with North Korea or its actions over the last several decades. And you're clearly not familiar with the 1994 Agreed Framework nor North Korea's willfull violations of that framework. What's annoying is that you don't let ignorance stop you from making judgements, or from sharing those ill-formed judgements.
  8. #148  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    I cannot think of any response to this inside the guidelines of the forum.
    There's a great line from the Lion in Winter, where Henry is arguing with Phillip:

    You haven't got
    the feel of this at all, lad.

    Use all your voices.
    When I bellow, bellow back.


    I'm surprised to find you speechless (even within the confines of the forum guidelines). Feel free to bellow back. Sometimes we all lapse into hyperbole, but the point is still the same - decisive action is what the situation demands. Did Chamberlain prevent WW II? What did years of negotiating in Panmunjom and Paris get us except more dead American service personnel? Other than Muammar Khadaffi, name one dictator since WW I who has backed down and accepted a civilized resolution to world tensions.

    In today's parlance, there is a corollary to Roosevelt's "Speak softly and carry a big stick." It's "swing for the fences."
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  9.    #149  
    Interesting read:



    Unresolved Questions Surround Iran’s Nuclear Program
    March 3, 2006

    http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheet...AEA-Issues.asp

    I found some of these points very interesting:

    Uranium-Casting Document

    According to Heinonen’s report, Iran has shown agency inspectors a 15-page document detailing the procedures for reducing uranium hexafluoride to “metal in small quantities” and “casting…enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispheres.” But the document did not “include dimensions or other specifications for machined pieces for such components,” the report says, reiterating information ElBaradei first reported in November.

    This revelation has generated additional concern about Iran’s nuclear program be cause shaping uranium into hemispheres is used in developing explosive cores for nuclear weapons. The report acknowledges that the procedure is “related to the manufacture of nuclear weapon components.”

    -----------------------------

    Other Possible Military Projects

    The former State Department official confirmed press reports Feb. 22 that the United States acquired a laptop computer, believed to be of Iranian origin, contain ing information documenting what appear to be several related projects that may constitute evidence of a nuclear weapons program. The United States has provided this intelligence to the IAEA, the Vienna source said.

    ---------------

    Apparently calling into question Iran’s claims that its nuclear program has no military dimension, the report says that the uranium project, high-explosives tests, and re-entry vehicle design all have a possible “military nuclear dimension and appear to have administrative connections.” This claim is based partly on the fact that the relevant documentation was all found on the laptop.

    ------------

    Polonium-210 Experiments

    The IAEA has also not been able to resolve residual uncertainties regarding Iran ’s experiments involving the separation of polonium-210, which is a radioisotope that can help trigger a nuclear chain reaction in certain types of nuclear weapons. ElBaradei reported in November 2004 that the IAEA is “somewhat uncertain regarding the plausibility” of Iran’s claim that the experiments were not for nuclear weapons because the civilian applications of polonium-210 are “very limited.”


    EDIT: Here is also a very detailed analysis of the Iran situation with several potential solutions and possible consequences:

    http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_...ranFeature.asp




    And if you want a whole list of various reports and articles:

    http://www.armscontrol.org/country/iran/
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 04/24/2006 at 07:52 PM.
  10. #150  
    <merged>
  11.    #151  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    The good news is that according to the latest reports (at least the latest I heard) the nuclear program in Iran is years away from military strength uranium. At the moment they only have weak (3% if I remember correct) uranium for power generation, not the needed 80% strength..
    I will have to look it up, but I have seen reports ranging from as soon as 18 months to as long as 5 or 6 years. I have yet to see any real consensus on this.

    I personally think all the numbers are estimated. The shorter end may be using deduction from unconfirmed or circumstantial evidence. While the longer times are based solely on confirmed information without taking into account any unconfirmed intel.

    The question is, do we take the chance when they are unwilling to prove us wrong, and how long do we give ourselves to take those chances.
  12. #152  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I will have to look it up, but I have seen reports ranging from as soon as 18 months to as long as 5 or 6 years. I have yet to see any real consensus on this.
    From what I recall, I believe the confusion in timelines is this:

    It will take Iran 18 mos. to put together and have a fully functional, and sustaining system of cascading centrifuges with all the needed components to make weapons grade materials. Once that's completed, then they'll have to have a way of turning it into a weapon, and then have the means to deliver it.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  13.    #153  
    You may be right. But they are suspected to have the means to deliver it already....thanks to North Korea sharing missile technology with them.
  14. #154  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    You may be right. But they are suspected to have the means to deliver it already....thanks to North Korea sharing missile technology with them.
    Yes, the bad news is they may already have the means to score from anywhere. Besides, with their terrorist connections, delivery systems may be the least of their worries.
    Last edited by dstrauss; 04/25/2006 at 03:02 PM.
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.
  15. #155  

    Iran to shun UN atomic watchdog if hit by embargo

    Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:41 PM ET

    By Parisa Hafezi

    TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran said on Tuesday it would freeze ties with the U.N. nuclear watchdog and speed up its atomic programme if it were hit by international sanctions.

    "If you impose sanctions, Iran will suspend its relations with the (IAEA) agency," chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani told a conference on nuclear issues in Tehran.

    "Suspension means we will accelerate our activities."....
  16.    #156  

    Israeli spy satellite launched to watch Iran
    Russian cosmodrome puts ultra-high-resolution Eros B into orbit

    MOSCOW - Russia on Tuesday launched a satellite for Israel that the Israelis say will be used to spy on Iran’s nuclear program.

    ---------------

    The satellite is designed to spot objects on the ground as small as 27½ inches (70 centimeters), an Israeli defense official said. That level of resolution would allow Israel to gather information on Iran’s nuclear program and its long-range missiles, which are capable of striking Israel, he said.

    “The most important thing in a satellite is its ability to photograph and its resolution,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive subject matter. “This satellite has very high resolution, and (state-run) Israel Aircraft Industries has a great ability to process information that is relayed.”

    -------------------

    Russia, which has developed ties with Israel since the collapse of the Soviet Union, is also a major commercial partner of Tehran and is building an $800 million nuclear power station in Bushehr, southern Iran.

    But it insists that the transfer of nuclear technology to Iran will not endanger the non-proliferation regime and has rejected U.S. calls to abandon the project as well as to halt military sales to Tehran. The Russian defense minister confirmed Monday that Moscow will go ahead and supply Iran with sophisticated anti-aircraft missiles.

    FULL STORY: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12481685
  17.    #157  


    Iran Says It Will Share Nuclear Skills

    TEHRAN, April 25—Iran's supreme leader said today in a meeting with the Sudanese president that Iran was ready to share its nuclear technology with other countries.

    "Iran's nuclear capability is one example of various scientific capabilities in the country. The Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to transfer the experience, knowledge and technology of its scientists," said the supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, IRNA news agency reported.

    Mr. Khamenei's comments to the leader of Sudan, one of the most unstable countries in Africa, came a few days ahead of the Friday deadline by the United Nations Security Council for Iran to suspend its sensitive uranium enrichment activities.

    ---------------


    Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, said that if the Security Council imposed sanctions, Iran will suspend its cooperation with the United Nations nuclear agency, and any military strike aimed at destroying its enrichment facilities will lead Iran to hide its program.

    "If you decide to use sanction against us, our relation with the agency will be suspended," Mr. Larijani said. "Military action against Iran will not lead to the closure of the program," he added. "If you take harsh measures, we will hide this program. Then you cannot solve the nuclear issue."

    FULL STORY: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/25/wo...&partner=MYWAY
  18.    #158  
    Interactive Iran Nuclear Network
  19.    #159  
    Boy, they just don't stop.........they are really paranoid that simply because they hid their nuke program for 20 years, they refused inspections of their nuke sites to prove their processing is for peaceful means, they refuse to answer detailed questions and provide documentation of their nuke network and capabilities, started processing again against the negotiation commitments, hid 4,000 centrifuge machines from the IAEA, kicked out IAEA inspectors, refused an offer by Russia to meet all their needs if their intent of nuke energy was for only electricity, and threatened to share their nuke technology with unstable govs against the NPT agreement......that they will get slapped with sanctions.

    This is day three of threats from Iran as the first meeting with the UN concerning Iran is about start. As typical UN procedures, this is only the first meeting to establish a resolution, so that they can meet later for another resolution about potential consequences when Iran does not comply with the first resolution, so they can come back for another resolution to establish the consequences, so they can come back with another resolution to enforce the consequences, so they can come back with another resolution to enforce the resolution that enforced the consequenses........

    ......I don't know what Iran is so nervous about, they have loads time yet!

    Iran threatens to strike at US targets if attacked

    TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran vowed on Wednesday to strike at U.S. interests worldwide if it is attacked by the United States, which is keeping military options open in case diplomacy fails to curb Tehran's nuclear program.

    Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made the threat two days before the U.N. nuclear watchdog reports on whether Iran is meeting Security Council demands to halt uranium enrichment.

    Iran says it will not stop enrichment....

    "The Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity," he said.

    -------------------

    The United States called on Iran to pursue diplomacy and warned that a confrontational approach would affect U.N. Security Council deliberations.

    ---------------------

    In response to the U.S. refusal to rule out military action, Iran has warned Washington that its forces in the region were vulnerable. Iran's war games in the Gulf this month were widely seen as a veiled threat to a vital oil shipping route.

    ---------------------

    Iran said Tuesday it would suspend relations with the IAEA if sanctions were imposed. Diplomats said this could mean withdrawing from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

    FULL STORY: http://reuters.myway.com//article/20...R-IRAN-DC.html
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 04/26/2006 at 08:44 PM.
  20. #160  
    In the white house situation room, in the days after September 11, 2001, when the president returned to the White House and took over for Terrorism Zhar, Richard Clarke, Mr. Clarke was recalling how the president took him in a side conference room, and asked him if Saddam could have done it.

    Mr. Clark responded that there was no evidence that Iraq was responsible, and that they knew where Osama and Al Quaida were.

    The president responded... "Iraq. Saddam. Find out."

    Mister Clarke commented that invading Iran would actually make more sense, given their suspected nuclear program and the fact that Iran actually was an Islamic theocracy etc...
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast

Posting Permissions