Bush policy lead to N. Korean nuclear test!

[Damocles]

In short,

-Clinton found out about N. Korea's plutonium enrichment activities (which must have begun under the Bush 41 and Reagan adminstrations) in 1994 and put a stop to it. I don't recall Clinton or his supporters ever blaming poppy bush or reagan for letting korea embark on a plutonium program.

-Bush 43 found out about N. Korea's uranium enrichment program (another and separate path to the bomb - done with the help of the Pakistanis) in 2002, and Bush failed to put a stop to it.

Bush worked to get those same multilateral talks. I don't believe that N. Korea was really interested in stopping. I know I would not have been were I their leadership.

I'm always interested in why people think that another nation would actually stop because of things like this when it is evident that they don't? They worked to find help in the background while we paid them not to. They got that help and knew they were closer than ever. I don't think there was one thing we could do to stop them at that point.

 

[Cypress]

In short,

-Clinton found out about N. Korea's plutonium enrichment activities (which must have begun under the Bush 41 and Reagan adminstrations) in 1994 and put a stop to it. I don't recall Clinton or his supporters ever blaming poppy bush or reagan for letting korea embark on a plutonium program.

-Bush 43 found out about N. Korea's uranium enrichment program (another and separate path to the bomb - done with the help of the Pakistanis) in 2002, and Bush failed to put a stop to it.

Its very telling that Clinton and his supporter didn't bloviate a bunch of hot air, blamiing Poppy Bush for allowing a plutonium bomb program to be launched in Korea under the watch of Poppy. The clinton's dealt with the plutonium program, and to this day its been on ice.

In contrast, Bush and his fans blame clinton, after finding out in 2002 about n. korea's uranium enrichment program.

Faliure is like that: blame somebody else.

 

[Damocles]

I blame the policy that allowed them to continue in the background while taking our money and crops to not work toward military nuclear capability...

Attempting to only blame the other side when they worked toward it during that supposedly successful policy years and found their solution during it! Come on! That really is directly disingenuous, as I pointed out earlier.

By the time they found out about it they had reached the point where they needed material, they were not going to stop at that point.

 

[Prakosh]

Bush wored for the multi-lateral talks as a way to cover his ass and to give him breathing space in order to go to war in Iraq and toi do other things that are at least as reprehenisble as North Korea continuing to seek nuclear technology and the bomb, in order to gain some recognition from America. Had Bush recognized him and talked to him dirctly he might saved the world from some of this now. I certainly can't speak to this issue with the certainty of some here because I don't know. But we think we know that Kim has now tested a nuclear weapon, something that Saddam Hussein only dreamed of doing...So evidently Bush had his priorities all screwed up...if in fact he was worried about threats. Other than Saddam's bringing a stilll untested a bomb to New York in a Piper Cub that is.

 

[Cypress]

I blame the policy that allowed them to continue in the background while taking our money and crops to not work toward military nuclear capability...

Attempting to only blame the other side when they worked toward it during that supposedly successful policy years and found their solution during it! Come on! That really is directly disingenuous, as I pointed out earlier.

By the time they found out about it they had reached the point where they needed material, they were not going to stop at that point.

Would it have been nice, if Clinton knew about the Pakistanis helping North Korea with a uranium enrichment program, and including uranium enrichment in the 1994 treaty? Yes. It would be nice if presidents had a crystal ball and could see into the future. As it is, Clinton dealt with what we KNEW north korea had: a plutonium program that must have started at least on Poppy Bush's watch. Noboby spent time blaming Poppy bush.


Now, Bush's responsibility was to deal with the uranium enrichment once he found out about it, years ago.

He failed.

 

[Damocles]

I'm not saying the Bush policy was successful, clearly it wasn't. However pretending the Clinton policy was when it was during that policy they found their solution and got help? That made it clear that they worked behind the scenes while we gave them payola not to? Come on. Even Prakosh has got to realize that it isn't successful when we pay them and they still do what we are paying them not to.

 

[Cypress]

Would it have been nice, if Clinton knew about the Pakistanis helping North Korea with a uranium enrichment program, and including uranium enrichment in the 1994 treaty? Yes. It would be nice if presidents had a crystal ball and could see into the future. As it is, Clinton dealt with what we KNEW north korea had: a plutonium program that must have started at least on Poppy Bush's watch. Noboby spent time blaming Poppy bush.


Now, Bush's responsibility was to deal with the uranium enrichment once he found out about it, years ago.

He failed.

And from a technical standpoint, plutonium is easier and faster to weaponize than uranium.

Without the 1994 agreement, most experts today say that north korea could have dozens of plutonium bombs.

 

[Prakosh]

Bush worked for the multi-lateral talks as a way to cover his ass and to give him breathing space in order to go to war in Iraq and to do other things that are at least as reprehenisble as North Korea continuing to seek nuclear technology and the bomb, in order to gain some recognition from America. Had Bush recognized him and talked to him directly he might have saved the world from some of this now. I certainly can't speak to this issue with the certainty of some here because I don't know. But we think we know that Kim has now tested a nuclear weapon, something that Saddam Hussein only dreamed of doing...So evidently Bush had his priorities all screwed up...if in fact he was worried about actual and real threats to the U.S. and not some of his father's unfinished business. Because other than Saddam's bringing a stilll untested a bomb to New York in a Piper Cub, it appears that Kim was a more threatening character and Bush, being the delegator, chose to foist him off on the others in the region to take care of, which left him free to pursue the real threat to his father, Saddam Hussein....

 

[Prakosh]

I'm not saying the Bush policy was successful, clearly it wasn't. However pretending the Clinton policy was when it was during that policy they found their solution and got help? That made it clear that they worked behind the scenes while we gave them payola not to? Come on. Even Prakosh has got to realize that it isn't successful when we pay them and they still do what we are paying them not to.

Ignoring a threat while you run off to kick the ass of someone who isn't a threat is hardly ever sucessful or wise. Both things (success & wisdom) that Bush will never be known for. I don't think we actually know when N. Korea got what from whom yet. If your scenario is accurate then Bush is even more of a fool than he appears, that is, if they got the technology and other necessary equipment and knowledge before his election. We don't really know much except that they seem to have it now. I don't think if they had the technolgy before 2000 they would have taken so long to test the bomb. But if they did, then Bush is a really a foolish and dangerous fellow isn't he...

 

[Damocles]

Ignoring a threat while you run off to kick the ass of someone who isn't a threat is hardly ever sucessful or wise. Both things (success & wisdom) that Bush will never be known for. I don't think we actually know when N. Korea got what from whom yet. If your scenario is accurate then Bush is even more of a fool than he appears, that is, if they got the technology and other necessary equipment and knowledge before his election. We don't really know much except that they seem to have it now. I don't think if they had the technolgy before 2000 they would have taken so long to test the bomb. But if they did, then Bush is a really a foolish and dangerous fellow isn't he...

According to earlier posts in this thread by Ds, they got the stuff from Pakistan in 1998, two years before Bush even started to run for President. Hence the reason I asked how the Governor of Texas was supposed to stop that from happening. So, if you want to pretend otherwise talk to your friend.

 

[uscitizen]

How do we know that NK had or had not built a bomb under clowntoons watch ?
Links please.

 

[Prakosh]

According to earlier posts in this thread by Ds, they got the stuff from Pakistan in 1998, two years before Bush even started to run for President. Hence the reason I asked how the Governor of Texas was supposed to stop that from happening. So, if you want to pretend otherwise talk to your friend.

How does what you say here make what I said less legitimate. If N. Korea had the stuff when Bush became president in 2000 then Bush is an even a bigger fool than previously suspected isn't he? If from late January 2001 until 9-11 2001 his administration not only ignored two separate warnings about the threat posed by bin Laden and al Qaeda, one on July 10th another on August 6th, but they also ignored the threat posed by Kim as well, aren't they even more inept, incpmpetent and dangerous than previously suspected????.

I guess Bush really is the three monkeys: hear no evil, see no evil, and speak no evil (well almost, maybe the last one is tenuous), all rolled into one. What a guy!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Damocles]

Right. But you'll pretend that the person who created the cover for their getting the Uranium technology from Pakistan as "successful". It's all okay, Prakosh of the "You'll never see me defending Democrats" post. You just keep defending away...

Unsuccessful policy is unsuccessful even when Dems are in office. And pretending that he got the stuff in 1998 and it was somehow Bush's fault is disingenuous silliness that is beyond laughable.

 

[Prakosh]

Right. But you'll pretend that the person who created the cover for their getting the Uranium technology from Pakistan as "successful". It's all okay, Prakosh of the "You'll never see me defending Democrats" post. You just keep defending away...

Unsuccessful policy is unsuccessful even when Dems are in office. And pretending that he got the stuff in 1998 and it was somehow Bush's fault is disingenuous silliness that is beyond laughable.

From Woodward's Book: "Bush asked 'Why Should I Care About North Korea?'…"

Gotta run..

 

[Damocles]

From Woodward's Book: "Bush asked 'Why Should I Care About North Korea?'…"

Gotta run..

Once again. I haven't worked to defend Bush. It is you who attempt to use it to defend another, amazingly another who wasn't in that office when they got the boost from Pakistan.

 

[Damocles]

Truly a "see no evil" policy as they attempt to obfuscate the failures of one by pointing out the supposed failure of another. When one failure actually extends from the previous failure, it takes a special "see no evil" to pretend it is the fault of only the secondary.

 

[LadyT]

Now that we've assigned blame. What do you think we should do about the situation?

- I for one think that we need to sit this one out and give nothing more than verbal support to our Asian allies who are clearly stead fast against this, namely Japan and South Korea. NATO and the UN can head up talks. Let the French do something for change.

- If however our intelligence dictates that they are direct threat to us (Yeah....I know I can't even type it without rolling my eyes), I would support a covert operation to destroy all known facilities and infrastructures that created this. And then lie lie lie lie lie and lie about having anything to do with it. Hell, I'd even suggest doing an OJ and vow to find the persons responsible.

 

[Damocles]

Now that we've assigned blame. What do you think we should do about the situation?

- I for one think that we need to sit this one out and give nothing more than verbal support to our Asian allies who are clearly stead fast against this, namely Japan and South Korea. NATO and the UN can head up talks. Let the French do something for change.

- If however our intelligence dictates that they are direct threat to us (Yeah....I know I can't even type it without rolling my eyes), I would support a covert operation to destroy all known facilities and infrastructures that created this. And then lie lie lie lie lie and lie about having anything to do with it. Hell, I'd even suggest doing an OJ and vow to find the persons responsible.

I've actually thought we should let our Asian allies handle it from the beginning. We mostly get in the way. Support we need to give, we should give strongly. And direct help that is asked for should be given as well.

 

[bob]

Now that we've assigned blame. What do you think we should do about the situation?

- I for one think that we need to sit this one out and give nothing more than verbal support to our Asian allies who are clearly stead fast against this, namely Japan and South Korea. NATO and the UN can head up talks. Let the French do something for change.

- If however our intelligence dictates that they are direct threat to us (Yeah....I know I can't even type it without rolling my eyes), I would support a covert operation to destroy all known facilities and infrastructures that created this. And then lie lie lie lie lie and lie about having anything to do with it. Hell, I'd even suggest doing an OJ and vow to find the persons responsible.

well what intales a direct threat ?

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Right. But you'll pretend that the person who created the cover for their getting the Uranium technology from Pakistan as "successful". It's all okay, Prakosh of the "You'll never see me defending Democrats" post. You just keep defending away...

Unsuccessful policy is unsuccessful even when Dems are in office. And pretending that he got the stuff in 1998 and it was somehow Bush's fault is disingenuous silliness that is beyond laughable.

It is beyond laughable, indeed. This is why I said, they must be going after the "ignorant vote" with this one, it's the only thing that would explain such ignorance, completely void of logic.

Is this really the kind of irresponsible leadership America is looking for? The kind of people who will make such a blatant policy mistake, then try to cast the blame for complete failure onto someone else, who wasn't even in office at the time? I think people better start thinking about their vote seriously, and understand what the consequences are for allowing Democrats to control our Congress at this time.