Last Sunday night, right around the time the St. Louis Cardinals clinched a berth in the National League Championship Series,
North Korea successfully tested a nuclear bomb underground. This was a massively destablizing maneuver that threatens, at the very least, the countries of
South Korea,
Japan,
Russia, and
China and, at the very most, the entire world. Kim Jong Il (left), the leader of
North Korea, has essentially thumbed his nose at the world and, in doing so, has shown the complete and utter failure of diplomacy on the part of the
United States for the last 20 years.
The Bush Administration, in particular, has done nothing to stop this and has allowed "diplomacy by proxy" to occur, letting China handle the matter. I don't want to rip Bush Co. too much here because clearly the things that Bush 41 and Clinton did also did not work but does our current leadership know what the word diplomacy even means? I have talked with many people about this over the last few days and most of them want to bomb North Korea. Some think further sanctions are in order. None of the choices seem appealing to me. If we weren't embroiled in the Iraq War, a military option might hold a little more weight.
The way I see it is that we need to take a page from the Reagan playbook and choke off any money going into North Korea so Kim can't pay off his generals. This idea was put forth by by Congressmen Ed Royce (R-Cal) in a recent interview on MSNBC. He feels, as does John Bolton (US ambassador to the UN), that an an interdiction of cargo comes under the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) launched by the U.S. in May 2003. The measure encourages member countries to share intelligence and train to interdict weapons from North Korea, Iran and other states of concern. All ships going in and out of North Korea would be searched and their cargo potentially seized, not just for weapons, but now for everything.
I really think this is the only way to stop this guy. If his generals aren't being paid, then their loyalty will begin to strain considerably and their will be a coup. Now, what if the next person is worse? Well, I think that is a risk we have to take because the other options of doing nothing or bombing them are totally unappealing.
Oh, and if you want to hear the North Korean's side of all this check out their official web site here. There are lovely souvenirs you can purchase there. Whee!!!
Last Sunday night, right around the time the St. Louis Cardinals clinched a berth in the National League Championship Series, North Korea successfully tested a nuclear bomb underground. This was a massively destablizing maneuver that threatens, at the very least, the countries of 
16 comments:
North Korea is but a proxy for China. China is using them toput another burr undre our saddle. They want to show the world that we are too weak to respond. Iran is watching and they (China) is using North Korea to influence our election. They know that anything they can do to hurt Bush and the Republicans will increase the odds that the Democrats will control our Congress. They also know that the Democrats are weaker than tea when it comes to defence. They own over 50% of our treasury notes and when the time comes they will call in our markers and expose to the world that we have sold ourselves out for cheap TVs and video games.
Hey Markadelphia,
I sure hope you are right re: the upcoming elections. We the people should take back our government from the greedy, amoral Republicans and give power back to the party pure of heart and free from corruption.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/12/reid.landwindfall.ap/index.html
The next time you, blk, or anybody else wants to waste my time with how corrupt and evil Republicans are, spare the electrons and look in the mirror.
Hmm...let's see....corrrupt land deals, shady financial goings on, petty larceny (aka everyone in corporate America) OR people who murder innocent children for the power that financial gain brings...gosh, I'm really going to have to think about that choice for awhile.
I"m sure Harry Reid has been guilty of one thing or another in his time. All politicians are. I have said repeatedly that the Democrats certainly are not guilt free. But do you honestly believe that anyone in the Democratic Party can hold a fucking candle to 600,000 dead in Iraq? The current Republican leadership (aka not all Republicans) are the most evil and corrupt people on the planet who will stop at nothing to gain the power over all of us that they so greatly covet. The fact that they hold themselves up as some great moral compass makes sick to my fucking stomach.
So, no, PL I won't be looking in any mirror at all because it's not even a contest...why don't you go out on the Web and take a look at some video from the Bagdahd morgue? Then try giving me your Harry Reid petty bullshit....
Video from the Baghdad morgue doesn't move me in the least.
Anyone in the Democratic Party that is currently alive, you mean? Maybe not. But you don't need to look any further than your previous topic re: conspiracies to see the list of Dems that are 1-to-1 comparisons to the people you decry as evil.
If the best the Dems bring to the table is "we're not quite as evil" then they've got nothing that interests me. And I've got no qualms about nailing their supporters as hypocrites. Petty bullshit my ass.
We're talking about a mindset here. To me, LBJ is/was no different than Bush...two hopelessly corrupt men backed by big power from Texas. LBJ was a Democrat and Bush is a Republican so it's not necessarily the party...you are correct.....but Harry Reid? C'mon, PL! What big power people are backing him? They probably control...what?....ten people in Idaho?
The people I'm talking about control and manipulate much more and the Harry Reid thing is part of that manipulation. I think it is high time that we popped up some popcorn and watched the movie "Why We Fight."
Well, Harry Reid has been tied to Abramoff on a number of deals from '02 to '04. Tom DeLay earns a "bye, bye dickhead" from you for the same thing. Corrupt is as corrupt does...if all politicians are guilty of something (your words) I honestly don't see how the people you support have any moral ground and the people I support are "evil".
As far as watching "Why We Fight"....no need. I have never denied the influence of the military and the industry that supports it. In fact, I have consistently embraced it as a necessary evil. I certainly wish we lived in a world where it wasn't necessary, but I'm enough of a student of history to know that the world has never been that way. You are pursuing a vision of the world that I just cannot support.
PL, your argument seems to be, Republicans aren't bad, because, because, um....some Democrats are bad too! Yeah, yeah, that's why Republicans are great people.
Pointing out the other party's misdeeds, dirty laundry, etc. doesn't change the culture of corruption perpetrated over the last decade or so, culimanting in launching a war based on lies that is destructive to ourselves and another region of world.
Yeah, and just to add in...the Abramoff thing is small peanuts regardless of who is involved...Democrats or Republicans. I haven't really harped on that too much because if Republicans laundered money, so what? Democrats have done it too. Tom DeLay is not being indicted on anything related to Ambramoff, as far as I know. He has a whole ton of other things that he is up to...which is why he earned a "bye bye dickhead."
I'm surprised that no one noticed in my original post that I was agreeing with a Republican on how we should handle North Korea.
Air America filed bankruptcy today.
Adam, your assessment of my argument couldn't be further from reality. In fact I'm arguing something akin to the exact opposite. This blog has a strong history of people harping on how evil Republicans are. Posters have argued that [to summarize a multitude of arguments] we need to clean house of these evil Republicans. I'm simply pointing out what I perceive to be the disingenuousness of those arguments.
BTW - find one spot where I said Republicans are great people. Yet another mischaracterization typical of this blog, similar to the times when people have assumed that I support GWB simply because I defend him against the bs bandied about on here.
PL, All I was saying is that you seem to be pointing out misdeeds by the Democrats as enough evidence to excuse misdeeds by the Republicans. Generalizations of one group based on specific actions of individuals aren't accurate and don't contribute to honest debate.
I apologize if you weren't saying Democrat ills excuse Republican ills, but that's the way I read your post. Sorry for generalizing. ;)
It's hard to assume you're just defending GW to set the record straight and not because you support him. I think his actions and incuriousness is pretty despicable and I wouldn't defend someone like that unless the accusations were pretty glaringly incorrect.
Adam, welcome to America in the 21st Century. The accusations against Bush Co. are glaringly acccurate and yet somehow in the end they are spun to be just "opinions." The usual outlets of information (media, schools) are all "liberal" so no one should trust them, right?
Great place to be, eh?
So it's OK to accuse somebody of murder as long as the accusation isn't "glaringly incorrect"?
Curious.
PL, we have been over this before. Please explain to me how Bush and Co is NOT responsible for the deaths of....how many is it again?....600,000 Iraqi civilians? Not to mention the almost 3000 American troops? In any court of law in our country he would be guilty at least of negligent homicide.
I neither know nor care if GWB would be guilty of negligent homicide according to our courts. Aside from the fact that such a consideration has no bearing on the global scale, I have no faith in our court system to correctly interpret laws as they might apply here.
But that's hardly the issue. Yes, we've been over the whole "murder" thing before. And we've seen that you are either unable or unwilling to accept the fact that there are alternative perspectives to what has occurred with regard to the war in Iraq. Perspectives that have nothing to do with "spin", nothing to do with political ignorance, and nothing to do with blind party loyalty.
Is GWB responsible for the deaths of Iraqi civilians and our troops? Sure, to the degree that any leader is responsible for deaths when war is involved. I haven't/can't/won't argue that point. I can't even imagine the degree to which that's a horrific thing to have to deal with. I still vividly recall the interview with GB1 when he broke down on camera trying to explain how he felt about sending soldiers to their deaths in the first gulf war.
But your basis for "murder" deals with intent....why the war was started. On this point, I don't grant you that what you perceive to be reality is "fact". So to the degree that you draw conclusions based upon your "fact" I will continue to disagree. It's not any more complicated than that. It doesn't bother me that I think you're grossly wrong, or that you are persisting in embracing an inaccurate reality. If it bothered me, I'd stop reading and posting. But for the sake of churning through today's issues when I'm bored at work it's important for me and my position to address the fact that what you posit as fact and reality is, in fact, your view. I'm not talking about GWB and the quality of his leadership....aside from the points where I have agreed with you (missteps in Iraq, Katrina, etc.) addressing quality of leadership would be largely subjective and therefore a largely unproductive (although possibly entertaining) exercise. I'm talking about your perception of intent. Your perception of causation. GWB lied...GWB misled...GWB started the war because...
You can come back with the diatribe about your perception actually being reality....that's OK. I respectfully, but vehemently, disagree. With that, Adam (and everyone else) maybe has a better understanding of "Why I Fight."
Post a Comment