How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Time to Beat the Bush.......again   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Time to Beat the Bush.......again

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 10-10-2006 12:13 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

There used to be a time when our government stood together in the face of international crises or threats. Those days are obviously long gone. The minute the news of the North Korean nuclear testing came out, Democrats ran to microphones to blame it on George Bush. After all, there's an election coming. Who could resist such a mouth-watering opportunity, right?

Democrats condemned North Korea's actions and cited the reported test as evidence that Bush's foreign policy strategy is ineffective. They point to six-party talks with the United States, Russia, China, Japan, South Korea and North Korea that have stalled and so far failed to quell North Korea's nuclear ambitions.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev, said the Bush administration has for several years been in a state of denial about the growing challenge of North Korea, and has tried to downplay the issue.

Rep. Edward Markey (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., co-chairman of the House Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation, said the test might have been avoided if the Bush administration had been more willing to fully engage North Korea diplomatically. "The Bush administration has spent six years without a coherent North Korea policy, leaving the United States rudderless in the face of Pyongyang's brinkmanship," he said.

Democratic Sen. John Kerry, the president's rival in 2004 and a potential 2008 candidate, assailed Bush's policy as a "shocking failure," and said, "While we've been bogged down in Iraq where there were no weapons of mass destruction, a madman has apparently tested the ultimate weapon of mass destruction."

"We had the opportunity to stop North Korea from increasing its nuclear power, but George Bush went to sleep at the switch while he pursued his narrow agenda in Iraq," added Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat in a tough campaign in New Jersey.


These same people who assailed Bush for  not working with the UN  or other countries in Iraq now scream that he didn't act alone on North Korea. How about that?

Let's not forget Hillary, who came up with her own condemnation of Bush. Of course, this is nothing new for her. Here's a little trip down memory lane to last year with the gal who would be president and whose husband handed the nuclear technology to North Korea on a silver platter:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/4/30/110516.shtml


New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is blaming President Bush for the fact that North Korea can now hit the U.S. with nuclear missiles - after a top intelligence official told her Thursday that Kim Jong Il's ICBMs can now reach the Northwestern U.S.

"They couldn't do that when George Bush became president, and now they can," Mrs. Clinton complained to the New York Times.The top Democrat pointed her finger at the Bush administration despite a 1999 congressional finding that North Korea first obtained the capacity to develop nuclear weapons under her husband's administration, which actually gave Kim Jong Il nuclear technology in exchange for the promise that he would not make weapons.

A report compiled at the time by the House North Korea Advisory Group warned: "If the [Clinton administration's] 1994 Agreed Framework is implemented and two [U.S. Light Water Reactors] are eventually built and operated in North Korea, the reactors could produce close to 500 kilograms of plutonium in spent reactor fuel each year; enough for nearly 100 bombs annually if North Korea decides to break its obligations and reprocess the material."

The advisory group also blasted the Clinton administration for making North Korea "the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid in the Asia-Pacific region."

"In an astonishing reversal of nine previous U.S. administrations," the report said, "the Clinton-Gore administration, in 1994, committed not only to provide foreign aid for North Korea, but to earmark that aid primarily for the construction of nuclear reactors worth up to $6 billion."

The advisory group also warned that North Korea would soon be able to hit the U.S. with ICBMs - and blamed the Clinton administration for facilitating Pyongyang's progress.


Want some interesting reading on the subject of North Korea? http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/4/30/110516.shtml

It's bad enough that the situation exists but to have the Democrats go on a feeding frenzy to further their election chances is despicable.  How many Republicans have come forth to lay blame on Clinton, where it belongs? Could it be that just perhaps they are thinking a little more of the country than the political gains/losses it would present? Hillary says North Korea didn't have nuclear capabilities when Bush was elected and they do now so it must be his fault. This is a woman to be admired???

McConnell said it  best......

Sen. Mitch McConnell  of Kentucky, the Senate's second-ranking Republican, accused Democrats of playing partisan politics with a nuclear weapons threat. "Listening to some Democrats, you'd think the enemy was  George Bush, not Kim Jong Il," he said.

No kidding, senator. Bush has  ALWAYS been the enemy. It's taken you this long to figure that out????

iliana
Member Patricius
since 12-05-2003
Posts 13488
USA


1 posted 10-10-2006 12:18 AM       View Profile for iliana   Email iliana   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for iliana

What a rant! Mike, I've just one question for you:  Do you do volunteer work for the Party or are you paid? You really do know how to throw a spin.  (ps: don't count me as a hillary fan, either)  OBAMA OBAMA! (I can dream, can't I?)  *smiles*
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


2 posted 10-10-2006 12:39 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Actually, Iliana, it's no  spin at all. it's fact and you won't find one thing there misquoted or misrepresented. If you want to label it as pure rant, be my guest. That's one way to dismiss itwithout addressing it, I guess.

To tell you the truth, I've never considered myself as a strong Republican at all. I was a pure Kennedy fan way back when.  What I HAVE become, though, is a strong anti-Democrat. They have shown me they have absolutely no regard for the well-being of this country at all. Their being in power is the only thing that matters to them and they will use the sleaziest tactics  known to man to get there.  I have no respect for them at all. I am referring to the Democratic leaders, not the  average person who votes Democratic. I suspect that there are even many of them whose own party tactics they find disturbing.
Larry C
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Patricius
since 09-10-2001
Posts 10765
United States


3 posted 10-10-2006 01:48 AM       View Profile for Larry C   Email Larry C   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Larry C's Home Page   View IP for Larry C

Michael,
I'm pretty sure you'll get Serenity's attention with that title! And she won't be thinking politics. I registered as a Republican for years and then quite some time ago identified myself as an Independent, though I vote more Republican than Democrat. Your remarks mirror my comments at the office today. I totally agree and didn't even have to do any research, I'll just quote you. Thanks.


If tears could build a stairway and memories a lane,
I'd walk right up to heaven and bring you home again.
iliana
Member Patricius
since 12-05-2003
Posts 13488
USA


4 posted 10-10-2006 03:12 AM       View Profile for iliana   Email iliana   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for iliana

While I might enjoy a banter with you over Clinton’s mistakes and might even banter on your side (who knows 'cuz I'm not going there), I believe he inherited this situation from his predecessor's wheelings and dealings.  Some interesting information for you. http://www.consortiumnews.com/2000/101100a.html  http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0310-03.htm  

Here's what wiki has to say about Moon and his political influence:    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Myung_Moon

And here's a really juicy article indicating Moon's influence over the press in Dubya's campaign in 2004:   http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen01142003.html Did you know that it was one of Moon's initiates who coined the term "Axis of Evil" for Dubya?  Just do a search on this guy, Mike.  It is fascinating how he has been influencing government with his money even during the Nixon era, the Contra affair, and Watergate.  

Lastly, Mike, you didn’t have to spin things, the media did it for you.  Just another link  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsMax  to show you that NewsMax has a purpose....and that is to champion what it believes to be conservative causes, including trashing Hillary Clinton (and I am not a fan of hers, just looking at all sides here).  I don’t stop reading when I find something to suit my politics because having worked in media business, particularly involving government and legal issues, I’ve found there are always two sides to the story.  Mainstream journalism can rarely be trusted to give the entire story when it comes to politics.  My feeling about who's to blame is people who want power, whether that is a religious empire for the Moon Unification Church or someone hoping to build a dynasty within the U.S.   Mike, if you haven't read any of the above links or done a search for Moon, please at least take a look at this,  http://youtube.com/watch?v=f08clPMODw8&search=sun%20myung%20moon and then do a search for Sun Myung Moon videos on the net -- it's all jaw dropping, really. You asked me once to name some globalists....look no further.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


5 posted 10-10-2006 10:27 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
What I HAVE become, though, is a strong anti-Democrat. They have shown me they have absolutely no regard for the well-being of this country at all.

I'm guessing the people whose tactics you don't like, Mike, are practicing something called "the end justifies the means." I wonder who they learned that from?

But lets' assume you're right and these really are "bad" people. Are you actually claiming there's not one single Republican out there playing similar political games? When you attack a group designator in lieu of specific people, that's certainly the implication you're making. It is the group that is guilty, you are saying, not the individuals. You know, just in case sleazy political maneuvering turns out to be non-partisan, Mike, maybe you should enlarge your group designator to cover both Democrats and Republicans. Oh, wait, that might not work either. If we call them Americans, after all, that would make you a strong anti-American? I'm sure that's not where you wanted to go.

The alternative, I guess, is to treat people as individuals and realize that perhaps both parties at this very unremarkable time in history suffer from misguided ideals. When people do what seems expedient, instead of holding fast to what is ethically right, the results are rarely what anyone expected.

***


Of course, if a nuke lands in the middle of Southern Michigan, Mike, it's going to be comforting to know it's Clinton's fault and our current President isn't willing to accept any responsibility for it. That is what you said, right?


serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


6 posted 10-10-2006 01:33 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

I just wanted to note that here I yam, lurking, just minding everybody else's business and once again I get yanked into the bushes. I'm innocent this time, Mike.

Larry ?Trying to get me into trouble are ya? Tempting me to be myself like that, why I oughtta... smack ya!

Now, proceed good people. I'm celebrating a Bush this week. (Focus, Karen, focus!)

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 10-10-2006 02:18 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Of course, if a nuke lands in the middle of Southern Michigan, Mike, it's going to be comforting to know it's Clinton's fault and our current President isn't willing to accept any responsibility for it. That is what you said, right?

Actually that's not what I said at all but you make a nice twist of it.   My point is that Bush has not claimed to not accept any responsibility, nor has he laid any blame at the Clinton doorstep. My point is that it is the Democrats rushing for airtime to do exactly that to him in an effort to increase their election chances. Based  on the fact that Clinton's wheeling and dealing with NK made this  situation possible in a large way, that it a ludicrous thing to do. It's like blaming a man for having his face in the way when you threw a punch.

No, Ron, sleaze is not limited to Democrats alone. It's part of our political process, unfortunately. For the past six years, however, the Democrats have raised it to a new level. They have done nothing but go after Bush in ways that are not only shameful but also detrimental to the US overseas. They have jumped on every opportunity, valid or not, to condemn the administration in the largest print possible for the world to see. Abu Ghrab, Gitmo, Bush's military record, surveillance.....the list goes on and on. They keep it alive for a week or so and then let it go. None of these topics mattered at all to them but they just did it for the negative publicity and a chance to slam the White House. Throw enough dung against the wall and maybe something will stick. LR claimed in a thread that anything done here that portrays the US government in a bad light overseas is bad for the country and he is right. Does that matter to the Democrats? Not a whit, apparently. They have given aid and comfort to the enemy with their constant barrage of attacks on the President of the Unites States in a time of such world turmoil, a time when the US should project the image that, differences or  not, the parties are united in a common cause. Instead we get "Impeach Bush!" "Fire Rumsfeld!" "Rice must go!"

In a world such as the political arena, where members are highly educated, well-bred and raised with privilege, wealthier than the average person could ever hope to be, one expects to find class. Isn't it ironic that the one showing the most class is a little Texan that stumbles over three-syllable words? Well, that's the way it is. The Democrats assailed Bush's military service. Did Bush say anything about Kerry's, which was about as authentic as a three-dollar bill? Did he say anything about Clinton, who left the country not to serve and protested against the United States overseas? Not a word. He simply thanked Kerry for his service to the country. Has Bush ever gone after Clinton for anything at all? Not a word. Clinton, however, has recently gone overseas several times to badmouth Bush. Has Bush ever said anything against Carter, even when Jimmy gave a big bearhug to Michael Moore at the DNC and sat him at his table? Not a word. Carter, however, has followed in Clinton's footsteps to badmouth Bush. All of these senators listed above that rushed in to blame Bush for North Korea.....has Bush criticized any of them? Nope....not even Hillary, who has been very active in her condemnation of him. While all of these individual are doing their best to bring him down, Bush seems to be the only one showing class and the only one considering what type of rhetoric is most beneficial to the United States in the eyes of the world. He has criticized no one and done his best to present the United States in the most positive light.

At any rate, the topic of this thread was the once-again rush of Democratic attack dogs to immediately lay the blame on Bush for the North Korean situation for political purposes - as they have done for many other topics- and whether or not anyone else had opinions on it. It was not who got us into the NK mess, as Iliana seems to believe. It was...was it right for them to do this, when  it  is so obviously for political gain only? Is it beneficial or harmful? Does it matter? I didn't see an answer to that, Ron.

My replies are my personal opinion and my opinion is this:

When George Bush attacks, it is against foreign terrorist regimes.

When Democratic leaders attack it is against our own governemnt.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


8 posted 10-10-2006 05:44 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

With all due respect, Michael, I do recognize the general point you are trying to make here; that resorting to political finger-pointing domestically isn't going to do anything to defuse the threats and issues that we face in this uncertain world, and the Democrats here I agree should be using their energy more productively here to bi-laterally work together with the GOP to seek solutions to dealing with this matter at hand, rather than resort to a family feud. I agree with you there.

However, I must say I also find it curious how you haven't spoken out with an equal volume at the number of instances the Bush Administration has been doing likewise against not only the Democrats, but virtually anyone who disagrees with them on issues such as Iraq.

Three weeks after 9/11, when Bush is his special address called for bi-partisan unity in confronting the threats that face us in the war on terror, and saying, "We must put aside our differences and work together to meet the test that history has given us.”, he is now going out on the campaign trail, almost coming close at times to suggesting that the Democrats are the real enemies of freedom, speaking out at them with a similar volume he has against the true threats facing our nation; al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Kim Jong II, etc.

Bush At Heller for Congress Reception: Reno, Nevada: October 2, 2006

Last Monday, Bush appeared at a $360,000 fundraiser in Reno, Nevada for state Secretary of State Dean Heller's congressional campaign, and said, "If you listen closely to some of the leaders of the Democratic Party, it sounds like - it sounds like - they think the best way to protect the American people is, wait until we're attacked again,".

Bush At Doolittle For Congress Reception: El Dorado Hills, California: October 3, 2006

Bush At Pombo For Congress Reception: Stockton, California: October 3, 2006

Last Tuesday, Bush made a couple campaign stops in California; one at the Serrano Country Club in El Dorado Hills, California for John Doolittle's re-election bid, and another at the Stockton Memorial Civic Auditorium in Stockton, California, where both times he again demonized Democrats, saying, "Democrats take a law enforcement approach to terrorism.  That means America will wait until we‘re attacked again before we respond.”.....and at the other, "If the people of Arizona, if the people of the United States don't think we ought to be listening in on the conversations of people who could do harm to the United States, then go ahead and vote for the Democrats. If you want to make sure those on the front line of protecting you have the tools necessary to do so, you vote Republican, for the safety of the United States of America."

Bush At Renzi For Congress Breakfast: Scottsdale, Arizona: October 4, 2006

And last Wednesday, Bush appeared at the Camelsback Inn in Scottsdale, Arizona for a fundraiser breakfast for Rick Renzi, saying, "177 of the opposition party said, ‘You know, we don‘t think we ought to be listening to the conversations of terrorists.‘”, as well as again repeating, "If the people of Arizona, if the people of the United States don't think we ought to be listening in on the conversations of people who could do harm to the United States, then go ahead and vote for the Democrats. If you want to make sure those on the front line of protecting you have the tools necessary to do so, you vote Republican, for the safety of the United States of America."

*

As much as I am no fan of the Democratic Party like I'm not of the Republican Party, I also believe neither party would ever intentionally want to wait until we are attacked again, would actually want the terrorists to succeed, etc, and believe these are lies and slander, pure and simple. 177 Democrats, for instance, opposed the president‘s seizure of a further weakening of our Constitution and Article III of the Geneva Conventions. And despite his heated rhetoric, he can't name one Democrat who ever specifically said the government shouldn't be listening to the conversations of terrorists.

It is rhetoric like that that makes it sound as though he was serious when he said, "Either you're with us or against us!", and it's as though it's almost borderline of him suggesting that not only the 177 Democratic representatives who challenged that vote in Congress, but anyone who disagrees with his policies on Iraq or the war on terror or anything in particular is treasonous.

It feels sometimes, somehow, that Bush only hears what he wants to hear. The fact is, no matter how much some try to attempt to re-write the history and memory of September 11th, 98% of Americans polled have said they can still remember where they were and how they first heard about the tragedy, and even half of Americans say they think about 9/11 multiple times every week, and when our nation was arguably seemingly 50/50 prior to the attacks, a genuine spirit of national unity blossomed in response to this tragedy which claimed several thousand innocent lives and broke tens of millions more American hearts nationwide. And any poll you look at following September 11th shows a unanimous majority among all parties, all labels, all demographics, etc. agreeing that we must go after those directly responsible for those attacks, and regardless of the disagreements that may come up in how we go about going after them, this unanimous spirit remains very much alive to this day.

The roller-coaster ride of this president's popularity indicates how crucially important it is to be two things; 1) someone who is strong, visionary and stays true to his word, but also 2) understanding, flexible and competent. Bush is very much the former, but lacks the latter very much I believe, and it shows just how being either extreme can backfire, where in Bush's case the reason why his popularity is in the 30's is because a majority of the American public believes he is way too stubborn, is warped up in his own bubble, his own reality, and won't even listen to many of his own generals and intelligence experts and accept their questions and criticisms toward Iraq and the war on terror, where he said last week also, "I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me,", which strikes me as codename for his state of denial Woodward has also been talking about.

*

The bottom line is, I do happen to agree with you very much in that the Democrats shouldn't be channeling all their energy toward Bush on the North Korea issue, as it is inconvenient and it doesn't do anyone any good here.

But I also find it curious why you haven't responded likewise to the same polarizing rhetoric this administration has been shooting at the Democrats, perhaps all his critics in general.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

[This message has been edited by Mistletoe Angel (10-10-2006 06:36 PM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


9 posted 10-10-2006 06:21 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

Their being in power is the only thing that matters to them and they will use the sleaziest tactics  known to man to get there.



Do we really need to get into the entire treasure trove of Rovian sleazy tactics Mike?  On the spectrum of sleaze I'm not even sure this registers.

Aren't politicians, particularly in election years, supposed to call attention to the differences between themselves and opponents?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


10 posted 10-10-2006 08:50 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The same polarizing rhetoric, Noah?

We must put aside our differences and work together to meet the test that history has given us

You call that polarizing rhetoric? I'm afraid your examples fall way short of anything similar to Democratic attacks. From the beginning the Kennedys, Boxers, Pelosis, Kerrys and a host of others have piled  insult upon insult and accusation upon accusation upon Bush personally. Nowhere in your examples  or anywhere else has Bush attacked any individual member of the Democratic party, not even those who have missed no opportunity to go after him relentlessly. If you want to form a comparison, you are going to have to come up with better examples than "putting aside our differences and working together".
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


11 posted 10-10-2006 08:53 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Aren't politicians, particularly in election years, supposed to call attention to the differences between themselves and opponents?

Sure, LR. Can you point out where they have done that in the comments I started this thread with?
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


12 posted 10-10-2006 09:01 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

certainly
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 10-10-2006 10:04 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Thank you for the links, Iliana...very interesting reading.

While I might enjoy a banter with you over Clinton’s mistakes and might even banter on your side (who knows 'cuz I'm not going there), I believe he inherited this situation from his predecessor's wheelings and dealings.

In that case you agree with me that the Democratic rhetoric blaming the North Korean situation on G.W. is wrong. Thank you
JesusChristPose
Senior Member
since 06-21-2005
Posts 679
Pittsburgh, Pa


14 posted 10-10-2006 10:20 PM       View Profile for JesusChristPose   Email JesusChristPose   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JesusChristPose

~ Balladeer, you rock!

~ Don't worry, others may not be able "to see" the critical thought and objectiveness that you relate in your posts, but I do.

~ As a debator, you are the man.   

"Melvin, the best thing you got going for you is your willingness to humiliate yourself."

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


15 posted 10-10-2006 10:27 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Thank you, JCP....I appreciate the support

Same to you, Larry, my friend.

[This message has been edited by Balladeer (10-10-2006 11:06 PM).]

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


16 posted 10-10-2006 11:19 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

I wish I had time to do some homework but if someone else has the time can you check on these:

1. The 1994 agreements were never actually implemented. That is, America never gave the North Koreans technology to make light water reactors.

2. We agreed to give them this technology because it does not lend itself to the development of nuclear weapons.

3. N. Korea does not have the capacity to send a nuclear weapon to Saipan let alone N. America.

4. Wasn't it already thought, a 'slam dunk' if you will, that North Korea had two or three nukes?

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

possible dangers now:

1. This might trigger a nuclear arms race in the region. Japan is now talking, somewhat openly, about going nuclear.

2. North Korean needs cash. They wouldn't hesitate to sell their 'stuff' to terrorists.

3. The collapse of the North Korean regime altogether. Believe it or not, this is in nobody's national interest at the present time.

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

The funny thing is that the South Koreans I've talked to today and yesterday are, well, not just unconcerned, they are positively apathetic.

To a large extent, North Korea is still following the same pattern of brinksmanship that they always have. The danger here is simply that a spoiled brat that has actually detonated a nuke is different from a spoiled brat that hasn't.

We live in interesting times. I wish it were boring.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


17 posted 10-11-2006 12:22 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Brad, some of your questions may be answered here..

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=245372699451426

Another probable 2008 presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said, "The truth is the Clinton administration knew full well they didn't have a perfect agreement (in 1994). But at least they were talking."

That gets to the heart of the Democrats' foreign policy failures: Talking with tyrants is always better than shunning them, no matter the situation. Neville Chamberlain thought so, too, in the late 1930s, and millions paid for his naivete with their lives.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. — yet another likely White House hopeful — quickly pointed out the obvious fact that Bill Clinton's agreement 12 years ago was "a failure." McCain noted that "the Koreans received millions and millions in energy assistance. They've diverted millions of dollars of food assistance to their military."

Clinton set up a state of affairs in which the U.S. spent billions trying to bribe North Korea, then we crossed our fingers that it would behave itself. It didn't work. Much of our aid was secretly diverted to uranium enrichment during the Clinton administration.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


18 posted 10-11-2006 02:51 AM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Read through my previous response again, Michael, especially over the quotations that I have bolded and italicized which were actual quotations spoken on the campaign trail. When you do so, you'll find that my purpose of listing that comment he made on 9/11 (which wasn't devisive) was to compare and contrast that rhetoric of unity to the political, divisive rhetoric he made last week on the campaign trail.

In each particular comment I note out, Bush isn't specific on who he's referring to among the Democrats as those who don't want us to listen on the messages of terrorists and such, and it strikes me very much as though he's referring to the Democratic Party establishment in general.

What I've been attempting to point out to begin with is while you charge that the Democrats appear to depict Bush as the enemy of sorts, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove and others and other administration officials have been doing likewise in suggesting the Democrats don't believe in defending this country and are impediments to achieving freedom and such.

I agree with your initial point, and therefore I hope you can accept that this behavior is discouraging from both ends.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
iliana
Member Patricius
since 12-05-2003
Posts 13488
USA


19 posted 10-11-2006 03:23 AM       View Profile for iliana   Email iliana   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for iliana

Mike, and yet you give us another biased, capitalistic and globalistic newspaper link!  Of course, Investors.com will say the democrats were in the wrong because the stock market has benefited from this Republican rule.  That doesn't mean the middle class has benefited though nor has our overall economy (and we have had this discussion...no need to rehash).  The stock market has one God and one country...Money.  

By showing you the shady link between the Bush boys and Rev. Moon and his money and newspaper conglomeration, I was merely trying to show you that it was during George H. W. Bush's presidency, with the assistance of his "friend," Rev. Sun Myung Moon, that North Korea started its major arms build up.  In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if NK didn't purchase arms through The Carlyle Group (Bush family on the BOD) or other Bush enterprises though I do not know for a fact and that is just my cynicism popping through.  Although I did find a reference which quoted a New York Times article (from 3/5/01) stating, "Mr. Bush led Carlyle's successful entry into South Korea...[that included] control of KorAm, one of Korea's few healthy banks." Moreover, Carlyle chief Frank Carlucci, who was Bush's National Security Adviser, was seen with Rev. Moon at the Second World Peace Conference in Seoul -- that was sponsored by the Unification Church."

I DID NOT SAY I AGREED WITH YOU.     In fact, Clinton's tactics did seem to work and I believe Brad is correct.  Can't believe I'm defending Clinton, but in this case, yes, I think Brad is right.  

G.W.'s stubborn policy of refusing to even sit down and talk about things with Kim Jong-il, I believe, effectively worked to call the mad-man's bluff.  If the administration believed he was a loose cannon, then they shouldn't have given him the opportunity to accomplish what he has.  The truth, I believe, is that they have been too distracted with other issues...."stolen elections" twice, DeLay, an inappropriate Supreme Court nominee (what was he thinking???), two more Supreme Court judges, the detainee torture issue, the Iraq mess, "spying on Americans" allegations, Katrina and FEMA incompetent appointee, the 911 Commission and Richard Clark's allegations that the administration was warned...oh, and then there are all those signing orders he had to create, over 750 of them...the Israeli/Lebanon war...the War Crimes bill which was a major coup in more ways than one...and on and on....Dubya's had a lot on his plate....but then again, I hear he has a very hearty appetite.  You have to ask yourself, "Why wouldn't we meet with NK?"  And, why wouldn't the party in opposition want to use the failure of this administration to keep NK at bay as an example of failed foreign policy in the upcoming election?  

Oh and, you're welcome.  Glad you found it interesting.  You know, it's really true; they did crown Rev. Moon King of the World and the Second Coming a couple of years ago, in our very own Dirkson Senate Office Building with many elected politicians in attendance -- one of those was Dennis Hastert and I believe another was Orin Hatch.  Very, very weird.  Here's another link for you; this one will give you a concept of just how far reaching this man's influence is  http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/m/moonies/#resources

This is off track, Mike, but do you remember when I said in another link I felt like the next big business venture for the Bushes (particularly Neil Bush) would be education?  Well, Rev. Sun Myung Moon recently made a $1,000,000 donation to Neil's COWs program.  I know this all sounds nuts...but it is happening.  http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_42/b4005059.htm  

[This message has been edited by iliana (10-11-2006 05:28 PM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


20 posted 10-11-2006 04:03 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

he truth, I believe, is that they have been too distracted with other issues...."stolen elections" twice, DeLay, an inappropriate Supreme Court nominee (what was he thinking???), two more Supreme Court judges, the detainee torture issue, the Iraq mess, "spying on Americans" allegations, Katrina and FEMA incompetent appointee, the 911 Commission and Richard Clark's allegations that the administration was warned...

Stolen elections...get off the party line, please. Even the Democratic leadership knows they weren't stolen  but it sure made for good copy. They ignored the two independant and then their own ballot recounts (in which Bush was shown to be successful) so that people even years later would come out  still pointing a finger at those stolen elections.

The detainee torture issue? Spying on Americans allegations? Well, Iliana, who heaped these on the President's plate? Yep, our friendly Democrats. Did anything come of them? Nope. Just more fodder to fertilize the masses with. You think it would be better if Bush didn't have so much on his plate? Tell the Democrats to stop dumping it there!

Sit down with a dictator to solve the problems? Clinton tried it...Carter tried it.  Doesn't work. Bush is smart enough to know that it doesn't work. What exactly would you say to Ill? Here's a man who's a complete terroristic dictator, who starves and slaughters hiw own people, who has no regard for either his country's well-being or the thoughts of the world community...what do you say to him in a sit-down? How's the weather in North Korea? Do you tell him the advantages to his country if he cooperates? He's shown he doesn't care. Do you tell him there will be sanctions? He doesn't care. He has his own little empire there. So what do you tell him to convince him to change? Sure, it would be a wonderful thing to make work. Noah would like to sit down with the terrorist leaders and explain to them that killing is wrong and we all need to get along. IT DOESN'T WORK! It's been tried throughout history, the latest before this being Chamberlain sitting down with Hitler. That didn't work out too well, either, did it? You or anyone else want to claim the Bush's refusal to sit down with Ill has in some way led to this result? Bush is smart enough to know that it just doesn't work. When asked in a news conference today about a sit-down with Ill, he responded "He knows exactly how  America feels". He's right. If you think that's wrong, you can convince me very easily. Just tell me what you would say to Ill on a one-on-one basis to get him to stop his nuclear ambitions. I'm all ears. Bush understands the situation exactly and is not going to put on a Pollyanna smile and waste time going through some mock routine to obtain a result unobtainable. Bush said today that the only discourse possible must come  from many throats,many countries, all speaking the same message.  George Bush alone, or any US president, would not be able to bring  about results. They would simply try to play him in the same way they played Clinton.

I feel confident that, if Bush HAD tried to play it alone with Ill, the same Democrats criticizing him now for not doing it would be criticizing him for doing it. "A little more heaped on your plate, Mr. President?"
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


21 posted 10-11-2006 04:13 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

...and you call Investor's Business Daily now a biased newspaper because the stock market has gone up under Bush? Do you have any idea in the world how amazing that statement is?
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


22 posted 10-11-2006 04:43 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Mike,

So, what do you propose?

Hmmm, we get rid of the North Korean government and what do we do with 20 plus million living there?

Send them to America?

You think I'm joking? South Korea does not have the resources to absorb these people. China does not want these people. Russia? Japan?

Madagascar?

The point of the 1994 agreement was to keep NK from developing a nuclear bomb at that time.

It worked.

Bush's strategy was to snub North Korea whenever he could -- from day one. And it still took another six years for the North Koreans to finally test a nuke.

This is a successful strategy?

You can accuse me of being a cold fish, of not caring about the North Koreans.

To this, I plead guilty.

But geo-political strategy isn't about caring about the other guy, it's about what's best for you. It's about getting the other guy to do what you want him to.

Did that happen?

________________

You seem to think Bush criticism jumps from one issue to the next forgetting the last. I keep seeing the sentences getting longer and longer.

iliana
Member Patricius
since 12-05-2003
Posts 13488
USA


23 posted 10-11-2006 04:46 PM       View Profile for iliana   Email iliana   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for iliana

Taken by just what you quoted, it does sound like a ridiculous statement, Mike....but once again, you've taken things out of context.  

The items I put in quotes were not accusations....they were things Bush has had to deal with....I did not mean them as absolute truths.  The things within his own party...the Abramhoff scandal, leaking secret information, Tom Delay, Iraq, detainee torture, 911, Katrina handling, supreme court appointees, oh and let's not forget the Dubai ports deal and border problems......how can you blame that on Democrats? res ipsa loquitor

"The detainee torture issue? Spying on Americans allegations? Well, Iliana, who heaped these on the President's plate? Yep, our friendly Democrats. Did anything come of them? Nope."  Actually, yes something did come from it, Mike -- namely the new war crimes bill he signed a couple of weeks ago after the Supreme Court's recent ruling basically made it possible for him to be tried for war crimes.  He pushed to get the war crimes bill passed, which incidentally gives him a full pardon from any war crimes and assaults individual human rights of detainess whether foreign or American citizens (and we have argued this too), giving him or any president complete interpretative powers of the word "detainee" and anything else in that bill.    

"...and you call Investor's Business Daily now a biased newspaper because the stock market has gone up under Bush? Do you have any idea in the world how amazing that statement is? No, Mike, that is not the reason I called it biased, capitalist, etc.  The reason why I said that is because it caters to a specific group of people -- and there is no way you can argue that it doesn't.  

You might be right about how Bush is handling NK.  I don't know, but I thought maybe he could have been more actively putting pressure on China and the other countries...but then again, I think we are not really in a financial position to put any kind of pressure on China anymore.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


24 posted 10-11-2006 06:21 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Brad, you are asking me what I propose? I wish I knew! What I DO believe is that any solution will have to come from a coalition of countries. I do not believe that Bush sitting down with Ill, either past, present or future, would solve anything. The  only possible thing that MIGHT make him back down is the solidarity and resolve of surrounding nations.

We have gotten way off topic and it's my fault for joining in it. The question of this thread was not whose fault was it or how to resolve it. The question was - it is right for the Democrats to immediately jump up and start cricizing and blaming Bush as soon as the testing came out? Was it right of them? Was it right for America? Should they have  made that the immediate focus or should resolving the issue be the paramount concern? There is always time to point fingers later. Was it right for that to be their first act in order to further their election hopes or not?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Time to Beat the Bush.......again   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors