1
   

Does Bush Really Care about National Security?

 
 
Reply Tue 22 Mar, 2005 04:19 pm
Quote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/21/northkorea.nukes/index.html

(CNN) -- North Korea is claiming to have boosted its nuclear weapons arsenal to counter what it says is the threat of imminent invasion by the United States and South Korea.

The secretive communist state's official Korean Central News Agency reports on its Web site that current U.S.-South Korea military exercises, which began Saturday, are escalating tensions on the peninsula and are ultimately aimed at launching a pre-emptive strike on the North.

"The reality goes to prove that it is very just for the DPRK (North Korea) to have opted for bolstering its self-defensive nuclear arsenal in order to protect the peace of the country and the fate of the nation from the U.S. moves for aggression," the Web site says.

"The DPRK's nukes serve as a powerful deterrent to keep the balance of forces in Northeast Asia, prevent the outbreak of a new war and preserve peace," it said.

A later statement on the Korean Central Broadcasting Station said the North had "taken a serious measure by increasing its nuclear arms arsenal in preparation for any invasion by enemies," according to a report by South Korea news agency Yonhap.

No details were released by Pyongyang of what the nuclear measures entailed.

The United States has around 33,000 troops based in South Korea and conducts twice-yearly war exercises with its Asian ally.

The extent of North Korea's nuclear capability is not widely known as its supposed devices have not been tested.

However, the U.S.'s Central Intelligence Agency believes Pyongyang has perhaps two nuclear bombs and enough weapons-grade plutonium to make several more.

North Korea has frequently claimed it would increase its nuclear deterrent in response to the perceived threat of invasion by the United States, but the Monday announcement appeared to be the first time Pyongyang has claimed actually to have done so.

The United States has repeatedly denied it intends to attack North Korea, a position reiterated by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her visit to China earlier this week.

The United States, Russia, Japan, South Korea and China began a joint diplomatic effort with North Korea in 2003 aimed at persuading Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear program, but it has been stalled since North Korea refused to attend the last scheduled round of talks in September.

Last month, Pyongyang declared it had nuclear weapons and would indefinitely continue its boycott.

Speaking in Beijing on Monday, Rice said Washington would "have to look at other options" if the North did not return to the talks.

"Obviously, everyone is aware of the other options in the international system," Rice said.

"Of course if we cannot find a way to resolve the North Korean issue in this way (through six-party talks), then we will have to find other means to do it."

Rice, who met Chinese leaders during the final leg of her six-nation Asian tour, also asked Beijing for more help in bringing North Korea back to the negotiating table.

"We need to resolve this issue, it cannot go on forever," Rice said earlier.

The North Korean statement also comes the country's premier, Pak Pong-ju, heads to China for talks that will likely will touch on the nuclear crisis.


It would seem as though threatening North Korea, calling them evil, and invading Iraq, has only emboldened them to continue producing nuclear weapons. It has been theorized that these missiles have a range that includes the United States West Coast. Boy, talk about an imminent threat...

Meanwhile, Iraq is a fertile breeding ground for terrorists, now, and central in bin Laden's Al Qaeda movement.

Funds for homeland security haven't gone NEARLY far enough in securing our borders and our ports.

And the intensive polarization of the this country by the current antagonist in the White House has divided a country that cannot win this ideological war against terrorism unless there is a collective belief system that can rally ALL Americans. For a short time after 9/11, that was the case.

It's amazing how much damage one man can inflict on Americans against a cause he so vehemently uses for his own pure political gain...
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,569 • Replies: 34
No top replies

 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Mar, 2005 04:48 pm
Haven't you heard? Bush wants China to "intervene" on North Korea. Bush "washed" his hands on NK when he said he will not negotiate with NK.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Mar, 2005 05:02 pm
Bush on North Korea and Iraq.
**************************


Bush says diplomacy will work in North Korea
Anne E. Kornblut, Boston Globe

Wednesday, January 1, 2003


Washington -- President Bush said he believes the standoff with North Korea "can be resolved peacefully through diplomacy," even as Pyongyang suggested Tuesday that escalating tensions with the United States might prompt it to break with a decades-old nuclear nonproliferation treaty.

The president's first comments on the North Korean situation in two weeks are the latest step in the administration's effort to emphasize diplomatic engagement with Pyongyang, a shift away from some of the tough talk that characterized the early days of the standoff over North Korea's nuclear program.

"The international community, particularly those countries close to North Korea, understand the stakes involved," Bush said. "I believe this is not a military showdown. This is a diplomatic showdown."

His remarks on North Korea stood in stark contrast to his views about Iraq, where Bush has forced the return of U.N. weapons inspectors and is planning for a possible war if their mission fails.
Acknowledging a recent military buildup in the region, Bush said there is still a chance to avert a military strike -- but sounded exceptionally grim about the consequences of leaving Saddam Hussein unchecked.

"An attack from Saddam Hussein or a surrogate of Saddam Hussein would cripple our economy," Bush told reporters as he headed into a coffee shop near his ranch in Crawford, Texas. "This economy cannot afford to stand an attack. And I'm going to protect the American people."

MY COMMENT: Ooops, Saddam didn't have any WMDs.

Asked why he is more worried about Hussein, who has no nuclear weapons, than the nuclear-armed and often unpredictable North Korean leader Kim Jong Il,

Bush said Iraq has openly flouted international law for 11 years, and Hussein "has not heard the message" that he must abandon his weapons of mass destruction. MY COMMENT: Of which he had none or very little.

The announced deployment of thousands of soldiers from the 3rd Infantry Division in Georgia to Kuwait put the armed forces another step closer to a major deployment to the Persian Gulf, and Bush's budget director, Mitch Daniels, said this week that a war would cost approximately $60 billion, far less than originally expected. MY COMMENT: Oooops, another mistake.

Still, Bush said no decision has been made on whether to use military force against Hussein's regime, and he challenged a reporter who implied as much.

You said we're headed to war in Iraq," Bush said. "I don't know why you say that. I hope we're not headed to war in Iraq. I'm the person who gets to decide, not you. MY COMMENT: Ooops, what have Bush gotten us in to?


"We have got a military presence there to remind Saddam Hussein, however, that when I say we will lead a coalition of the willing to disarm him if he chooses not to disarm, I mean it."
MY COMMENT: Disarm what?

THE GREATER THREAT
Some administration critics contend that North Korea is a greater threat than Iraq. Warren Christopher, secretary of state in the Clinton administration, urged Bush in a New York Times op-ed article Tuesday to "step back from his fixation on attacking Iraq" to reassess U.S. priorities.

Referring to North Korea and Iraq, Bush promised to renew his efforts to avoid war, saying, "One of my New Year's resolutions is to work to deal with these situations in a way so that they're resolved peacefully."

Bush has been on vacation at his ranch since last Thursday, and was largely out of reporters' reach through most of December as the confrontation in North Korea escalated.

Secretary of State Colin Powell was dispatched earlier this week to publicly shift the administration's approach toward the Korean Peninsula -- toning down earlier remarks by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld suggesting that the United States would consider going to war.

Many foreign policy specialists view a military strike against Pyongyang as risky -- far more so than one against Baghdad, given North Korea's army of 1 million and proximity to Seoul. At the same time, South Korea supports dialogue with the North, and has fiercely objected to what is perceived as belligerence by Bush, who last January called Pyongyang part of an "axis of evil" along with Iraq and Iran.

NORTH KOREA'S THREAT
In a move that could escalate tension in the region, North Korea threatened Tuesday to withdraw from the 1970 nonproliferation treaty, the international accord that's the foundation of efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons.

North Korea's ambassador to Moscow, Pak Ui Chun, said North Korea has been forced to pursue the development of nuclear weapons because the United States cut off supplies of fuel oil and is "threatening us with a preventative nuclear strike," according to Russia's Interfax news agency.

"In these circumstances, we also cannot fulfill the nonproliferation treaty,

the basic clause of which is the obligation of nuclear states not to use the nuclear weapon against states which do not possess it," he was quoted as saying.

In 1993, North Korea tried to withdraw from the nonproliferation treaty under a clause that allows member nations to pull out in cases of extreme national emergency. That set off a strikingly similar crisis that nearly resulted in the Clinton administration ordering a military strike on North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear complex.

The showdown was settled in 1994 with a now virtually moribund agreement under which North Korea was supposed to put its nuclear program on hold in exchange for energy assistance, including shipments of fuel oil and construction of two light-water nuclear reactors.

With Pyongyang's recent expulsion of U.N. weapons inspectors and reopening of a nuclear plant, Bush administration officials have advocated the approach of "tailored containment" or using diplomatic pressure and isolation to persuade the regime to change its mind. In the last few days, the White House has softened its approach further, without taking the final step of agreeing to negotiate with North Korea.


'CAN BE DONE PEACEFULLY'
Bush adopted the more conciliatory tone Tuesday. "I view the North Korean situation as one that can be resolved peacefully through diplomacy," he said. "There's strong consensus not only amongst the nations in the neighborhood and our friends, but also at the international organizations, such as the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), that North Korea ought to comply with international regulations. I believe this can be done peacefully through diplomacy, and we will continue to work that way."

As security around the nation was tightened for New Year's Day, Bush reflected on the condition of the country compared with a year earlier. Despite Osama bin Laden still on the run, the shakiness of the economy and the potential for another war, Bush said, "It's a lot safer today than it was a year ago."


Chronicle news services contributed to this report.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Mar, 2005 05:45 pm
Bush cares about Bush and little else.
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Mar, 2005 11:52 pm
Quote:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20050322/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/bin_laden_afghanistan

By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer

WASHINGTON - A terror suspect held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was a commander for Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (news - web sites) in the 1980s and helped the al-Qaida leader escape his mountain hide-out at Tora Bora in 2001, according to a U.S. government document.

The document, provided to The Associated Press in response to a Freedom of Information request, says the unidentified detainee "assisted in the escape of Osama bin Laden from Tora Bora." It is the first definitive statement from the Pentagon (news - web sites) that bin Laden was at Tora Bora and evaded U.S. pursuers.

The detainee is not identified by name or nationality. He is described as being "associated with" al-Qaida and having called for a jihad, or holy war, against the United States.

In an indication that he might be a higher-level operative, the document says he "had bodyguards" and collaborated with regional al-Qaida leadership. "The detainee was one of Osama bin Laden's commanders during the Soviet jihad," it says, referring to the holy war against Soviet occupiers.

The events at Tora Bora were a point of contention during last year's presidential race, and Bush as well as Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) asserted that commanders did not know whether bin Laden was there when U.S. and allied Afghan forces attacked the area in December 2001.

Cheney said last Oct. 26 that Gen. Tommy Franks, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, had "stated repeatedly it was not at all certain that bin Laden was in Tora Bora. He might have been there or in Pakistan or even Kashmir (news - web sites)," the Indian-controlled Himalayan region.

Franks, now retired, wrote in an opinion column in The New York Times last Oct. 19, "We don't know to this day whether Mr. bin Laden was at Tora Bora in December 2001." He added that intelligence assessments of his location varied, but bin Laden was "never within our grasp."

On several occasions in the days following publication of that column, Bush cited it on the campaign trail as evidence that bin Laden could have been in any of several countries in December 2001. "That's what Tommy Franks, who knew what he's talking about, said," Bush said on Oct. 27.

Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), the Democratic presidential nominee, lambasted Bush during the campaign for having missed a chance to capture or kill bin Laden at Tora Bora, a mountainous area along the Pakistan border that became al-Qaida's last stand in Afghanistan. U.S. warplanes bombarded the area in December 2001, and Franks had Afghan soldiers lead the ground assault, backed by several thousand U.S. ground troops, including Special Forces, in a cave-to-cave search.

The newly revealed statement is contained in a document the Pentagon calls a "summary of evidence" against one of 558 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. It was provided to the AP this week.

The evidence was summarized last December 14 for a Guantanamo Bay hearing to determine whether the prisoner was correctly held as an "enemy combatant."

The assertion about his efforts and bin Laden's escape is made as a statement of fact; it does not indicate how the information was obtained.

Navy Lt. Cmdr. Daryl Borgquist, a spokesman for the Combatant Status Review Board for which the document was prepared, said Tuesday he could not elaborate on the Tora Bora statement, or its sources, because the statement was derived from classified information.

Bin Laden, whose al-Qaida terrorist organization was behind the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, had operated from Afghanistan until the U.S. invasion in October 2001.

He remains at large. For many months, officials have said they believe bin Laden probably is hiding in the Afghan-Pakistan border region, although last week Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declined to endorse that view, saying bin Laden's whereabouts were unknown.

In mid-December 2001, a spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Rear Adm. John Stufflebeem, told reporters there had been "indicators" of bin Laden's presence at Tora Bora in early December.

"And now indicators are not there," Stufflebeem said. "So maybe he still is there, maybe he was killed, or maybe he's left."



The document does not elaborate on the detainee's U.S. connection, but says he arrived in Afghanistan via Bahrain and Iran (news - web sites). He was "present at Tora Bora," crossed the Afghan border into Pakistan in December 2001, and surrendered to Pakistani authorities, the document says.

The detainee also was arrested by Saudi authorities for questioning in the 1996 terrorist bombing of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 members of the U.S. Air Force, the document says.


Don't ya feel real safe now?
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:43 am
au1929 wrote:
Bush cares about Bush and little else.


not fair, au. bush does care at least a little bit about his corporate buddies. and national security is a priority. as long as it doesn't interfere with that cheap labor from southa tha border...

let's just keep givin' 'em rope and soon he'll have enough. :wink:
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 09:59 am
Maybe, just maybe, some republicans are waking up from their stupor because of the flip-flop Bush is doing on the Terri Schiavo case. There's always hope.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:27 pm
man oh man, i hope so. the dems aren't the only ones that need to nudge their party back towards center around here.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 12:34 pm
Republicans wake up. If the Bush supporters on a2k are any indication that would seem to be far fetched.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:03 pm
au, True. Did you see my post on Buchanan today? He's equating what our doctors and judges have done in Florida to Hitler.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:03 pm
They've all gone bonkers. God help us!
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:24 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
They've all gone bonkers. God help us!


god hates us moderates, progressives and liberals.

guess ya didn't get the memo... Laughing
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:36 pm
Get a lot of spam, but missed that one. Wink
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 01:48 pm
Who was it that allowed NK to get those nukes ... let me see ... I'm having trouble remembering ... anybody remember?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:00 pm
Tico, You mean GHW Bush?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:05 pm
Quote:


http://www.cdi.org/nuclear/nk-fact-sheet.cfm
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:47 pm
Do you see the difference between having processed plutonium and having nuclear weapons?

Quote:
Although North Korea signed the U.S.-North Korea nuclear pact 1994, Kim Duk Hong, one of the regime's most senior defectors, says that North Korea resumed the development of its nuclear weapon program as soon as the treaty was signed. Hong also stated that North Korea gained much of its expertise from Pakistan, and that only the death of Kim Jong Il and the destruction of his regime will stop North Korea's nuclear weapons program. [1]


Quote:
On March 12, 1993, North Korea said that it planned to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refused to allow inspectors access to its nuclear sites. By 1994, the United States believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about 10 bombs with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military airstrikes against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the Agreed Framework in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with light water reactors and fuel oil until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require enriched uranium to be imported from outside North Korea, the amount of reactor fuel and waste could be more easily tracked making it more difficult to divert nuclear waste to be reprocessed into plutonium.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_nuclear_weapons_program
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:49 pm
Well, I see the difference; you can't build the weapons unless you were allowed to get the processed plutonium in the first place, can you?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:49 pm
Appeasement at work .....

Quote:
North Korea Nukes Clinton Legacy

Charles R. Smith
Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2003

Asian Arms Race Result of Appeasement Policy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Axis of Evil and Friends

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

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

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

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

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

Missiles for Nukes

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

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

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

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

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

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

U.S. Pressure on Asian Allies

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/7/164846.shtml
0 Replies
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Mar, 2005 02:55 pm


Like father, like son...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Does Bush Really Care about National Security?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 11:50:45