Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Defiant N. Korea Vows to Confront U.S.
AP via Yahoo! ^ | January 1, 2003 | By PAUL SHIN, Associated Press Writer

Posted on 01/01/2003 8:20:50 AM PST by Momaw Nadon

SEOUL, South Korea - Showing no willingness to ease tensions over its nuclear weapons program, North Korea vowed Wednesday to build an army-based "powerful nation" and defy pressure from the United States.

North Korea said it fears a possible U.S. military attack, but President Bush said he was confident the North's nuclear issue can be resolved through diplomacy.

"This is not a military showdown. This is a diplomatic showdown," Bush said Tuesday.

North Korea, in its New Year's Day message, called on its people to unite under "the banner of the army-based policy" and build a "powerful nation" to counter a possible U.S. invasion. The reality is that North Korea is impoverished and dependent on outside food aid, much of it supplied by the United States via the U.N. World Food Program.

"The United States is now becoming all the more frantic in its moves to stifle (North Korea), openly clamoring about a preemptive nuclear attack on it," said the message, carried on the country's foreign news outlet, Korean Central News Agency.

The English-language message did not mention rising international concern over Pyongyang's decision to reactivate its nuclear facilities at Yongbyon, but stressed the importance of uniting around the country's military.

In an apparent effort to take advantage of an upsurge in anti-U.S. sentiment in South Korea, the message urged "all the Koreans in the North and the South and abroad" to join in confronting the United States.

"It can be said that there exists on the Korean Peninsula at present only confrontation between the Koreans in the North and the South and the United States," it said.

U.S. and South Korean officials say their alliance is strong, though North Korea often has tried to drive a wedge between them.

Some South Koreans worry that the nuclear dispute could trigger armed conflict on the Korean Peninsula, the world's last Cold War frontier. More than 2 million troops are massed on both sides of the Korean border, while about 37,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea.

South Korean President-elect Roh Moo-hyun, who won a Dec. 19 vote partly because of surging anti-U.S. sentiment among his people, on Tuesday warned against "blindly following U.S. policy."

"The United States should consult fully with South Korea, rather than making a decision unilaterally and then expecting South Korea to follow it," said Roh, who begins a five-year term in February.

Roh supports outgoing President Kim Dae-jung's "sunshine" policy of engaging North Korea. They believe dialogue is the only viable way to resolve the North's nuclear issue peacefully.

South Korea sent a senior diplomat to Beijing on Wednesday to try to win Chinese support in persuading North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions. Lee Tae-sik, South Korea's deputy foreign minister, will meet Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing on Thursday, South Korean officials said.

U.S. and South Korean deny a rift is developing between the two close allies over the nuclear dispute.

But in the past two days, both Roh and Kim have expressed concern that Washington might impose heavy economic pressure on Pyongyang to give up its nuclear ambitions, and this could backfire and harden the North's stance.

U.S. State Department spokesman Philip T. Reeker said, "I don't think anybody has suggested at this point imposing sanctions."

Anti-U.S. sentiment was evident on the streets of Seoul on New Year's Eve, when about 22,000 South Koreans gathered near the U.S. Embassy to protest the deaths of two teenage girls accidentally killed in June by a U.S. military vehicle.

Two U.S. soldiers whose vehicle killed the girls were cleared of negligent homicide charges in U.S. military courts last month.

Some protesters shouted for an end to the U.S. military presence in South Korea.

Tensions over North Korea's nuclear ambitions intensified Tuesday when Pyongyang expelled two U.N. inspectors monitoring its nuclear facilities and signaled it might pull out of the global nuclear nonproliferation treaty.

North Korea's ambassador to Moscow, Pak Ui Chun, told Russian news media Tuesday that his country intends to free itself from its last legal obligations under the international nuclear nonproliferation treaty, which seeks to confine nuclear weapons to the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China.

In recent weeks, North Korea removed monitoring seals and cameras from nuclear facilities at Yongbyon that were frozen under a 1994 deal with the United States. It says it is willing to resolve concerns over its nuclear program if the United States signs a nonaggression treaty, but Washington rules out any talks before the North changes course.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: confront; northkorea; nuclear; pingpong; pyongyang
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last
FYI and discussion

Happy New Year!

1 posted on 01/01/2003 8:20:50 AM PST by Momaw Nadon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
North Korea vowed Wednesday to build an army-based "powerful nation"

That's what they've been doing for the past 50-odd years isn't it, except without the "powerful" part? They're an economic basket case. All resources go the military while the people starve.

North Korea's best days, such as they were, are behind her. It's all downhill from here.

2 posted on 01/01/2003 8:33:54 AM PST by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
Some protesters shouted for an end to the U.S. military presence in South Korea.

I say pull our guys out.

3 posted on 01/01/2003 8:34:42 AM PST by NC Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
bump
4 posted on 01/01/2003 8:36:13 AM PST by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
I think Bush is playing this perfectly!

The N. Korean government is much more tricky to take out than that of Iraq, and we'll be in a better position to focus on it once we have secured Iraq. N. Korea's selected now to distract us from that.

I think Bush's public statements favoring a diplomatic solution are as sincere as his statements that Islam is a peaceful religion, and both are intended to divide his opposition. How can Bush be a war-mongering cowboy when he's promoting diplomacy in N. Korea?

5 posted on 01/01/2003 8:37:39 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
Of course, against the backdrop and in the context that KCNA (Pyongyang) and Pyongyang Broadcasting, as well as Rodong Shinmun, have been talking this way for the last 600 months. They threaten war on the United States in nearly every newspaper issue and broadcast. Nothing new (their propaganda at least).

What of course is more interesting to me than their tired rhetoric that now borders on humor, is what is going on underground and on the ground. Much more interesting.

Thanks for the post.

6 posted on 01/01/2003 8:38:47 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
Secure Iraq! Ah...the hubris of international social engineers. We are going to be mired there for the next few decades in futile and very expensive nation-building and military occupation (e.g. forcing the Kurdish and Shi'ite lambs, to lie down with the Sunni lions).
7 posted on 01/01/2003 8:40:02 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Even 22,000 (make that more like 1 million) scraggly, disgusting communist flag waving 'Americans' turned out and occupied the streets of Washington, D.C. in the late 60s calling on Johnson/Nixon to stop the war....but that did not make ALL the Americans opposed to stopping communism.

The loudmouths get all the attention. I for one think the spector of anti Americanism has now somewhat peaked. It was mostly a carnival atmosphere anyway, led by communist students and more than like agents of the North Korean state security apparatus that had infiltrated the south's educational and press system.

8 posted on 01/01/2003 8:41:40 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
I say put an economic siege on North Korea. Since they have no natural resources to think of, it will be just a matter of time before they give in. The Commies can build all the guns they want but that means nothing if the soldiers starve.
9 posted on 01/01/2003 8:47:39 AM PST by nypokerface
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
Ah...the hubris of international social engineers. We are going to be mired there for the next few decades in futile and very expensive nation-building and military occupation

While neither agreeing nor disagreeing with your assertion, I am interested to know why you believe your point of view to be superior to others. Indeed, the exaggerated pride in your own opinion is eye-opening in the absence of explanation...

10 posted on 01/01/2003 8:53:50 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nypokerface
Japan and Europe (not nececessarily their governments, but their unsupervised private companies with key technologies being scouted out by North Korean agents at trade shows and then purchased/shipped through third countries), will get around it or look the other way.

This academic exercise of 'economic embargo' that the Administration is thinking about is only doomed to failure, IMHO. It will be as porous as the slices of Swiss cheese I snacked on earlier today. But let's let them try it for awhile at least until we can judge the results and move on to the next options....

The only things that will work w/ North Korea and Gen. Kim Jong il probably are as follows:

--Assassination/Coup d'etat and regime change by purely internal elements but supported to external forces

--A stream of N. Korean refugees into China into UNHCR refugee camps causing internal collapse in Pyongyang

--A propaganda campaign of hijacked N. Korea TV/Radio frequencies and balloon drops with leaflets/food to reach the people directly

--And finally, a strategic strike on N. Korean nuke plants and missile production/launch facilities, with probably a larger invasion war.

11 posted on 01/01/2003 8:57:45 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
Does anyone think this timing is just happenstance or just the N. Korean's deciding that it is the optimum time? I would love to see a study showing the timing of international cash flows from Iraq to N.Korea (one of the puppets) in this Kukla, Fran, and Olli performance.
12 posted on 01/01/2003 8:59:46 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nypokerface
I think we got a Cold War brewin'...........
13 posted on 01/01/2003 9:00:19 AM PST by LiveFreeOrDie2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
"Secure Iraq! Ah...the hubris of international social engineers. "

Actually, the only people making statements about the ease of rebuilding Iraq are the anti-globalist naysayer fringe who repeat it in order to argue against it.

We may be tied down there for a generation, but it wont be a safe haven for our enemy. And the heart of our military will be free to engage in the next battle.

14 posted on 01/01/2003 9:01:28 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Principled
"Superior!" Little ole' me.......but since you asked.

What facts do I have? Well...let's see. What are the perils to "securing" Iraq? First, Iraq is an artificial mess, created out of the remnants of the Ottomen Empire. The Iraq people are a multi-religious/ethnic stew who hate each other and have no common tradition.

Second, Iraq has *no* democratic tradition to build on. At least, the folks in Japan and Germany had relatively recent democratic memories. Third, Bush has promised not to "walk away" once Saddam is toppled....thus nation-building, courtesy of already overextended American troops and taxpayers, is almost inevitable.

Finally, the U.S. has a poor recent record in nation building and "securing" democracy e.g. the abject failures in Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo and Somalia. We have not even come close to finishing the job of "securing" Afghanistan, better described as Kabulistan. Outside of the capital the warlords (now busily restoring Sharia) continue to rule and guerrilla forces are launching new attacks against U.S. troops. Perhaps before we start having delusions of grandeur in Iraq, we should clean up the mess up in Afghanistan first!

Better yet, let's concentrate on something that is manageable: "securing" building up the defense of the U.S. rather than overextending ourselves in futile and expensive world policing.

15 posted on 01/01/2003 9:07:35 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
What enemies are talking about? Attempts to prove close links between the secularist Mussolini wannabe Saddam Hussein and the Saudi dominated Islamist Al Queda have come to naught. As to safe havens, perhaps we should finish the job first in Aghanistan (better described as Kabulistan) where the war lords rule outside the capital and U.S. troops are under increasing attack. I hope that you aren't using Kabulistan as your example of a safe haven.
16 posted on 01/01/2003 9:13:21 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
I mean to say, the script is so rushed that the news agencies are walking on the previous revelation while reporting yet another revelation.
17 posted on 01/01/2003 9:20:20 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001
"Cold War" possibilities??

Wow. Wake up. It's already here! ;-)


18 posted on 01/01/2003 9:21:42 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
The Iraq people are a multi-religious/ethnic stew who hate each other and have no common tradition.

I agree with this 100%. IMHO this is what will be the ongoing problem.

Iraq has *no* democratic tradition to build on

IMHO this will have little to do with anything. Why would it?

Third, Bush has promised not to "walk away" once Saddam is toppled....thus nation-building, courtesy of already overextended American troops and taxpayers, is almost inevitable.

Where to start....why is "not walking away" nation building? You omitted that part.

Nevertheless, I agree that the infighting in Iraq will cause great grief- not nearly to the extent you predicted ("decades long quagmire" or something)- but far more than is being predicted by the admin.

19 posted on 01/01/2003 9:32:32 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
I wonder if N.Korea is trying to help Saddam by trying to draw some of the fire. Hoodlum nations stick together.
20 posted on 01/01/2003 9:34:33 AM PST by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalebert
Saddam to Kim:


Kim baby... did you get that little envelope from us?

Yeah thanks we really needed it...

Well Kim, tell your octogenarian generals, there is another one on the way, if you hurry up the expulsion of the inspectors, so we can point to the American hypocracy.
21 posted on 01/01/2003 9:47:12 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dalebert
I wonder if N.Korea is trying to help Saddam by trying to draw some of the fire. Hoodlum nations stick together.

If we did not believe this to be true, then our whole concept in the first place of an AXIS OF EVIL would be devoid.

Of COURSE, they are coordinating. They are an AXIS. Nazi Germany, Teikoku Japan and Fascisti Italy all coordinated.

We tell it like it is (e.g., they are in cahoots) and then some are surprised when they actually do what we suspect and accuse them of doing.

We will have to deal with all three within the next two years, IMHO.


22 posted on 01/01/2003 9:47:19 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
North Korea has very little to sell outside of some technology. I mean how many scuds can a country like Yemen buy. It would be a lot easier to get this sort of technology somewhere else if there was an embargo put on the North Koreans. And I don't see other countries that surround them helping. They are just as worried as we are that the Koreans have a nuke. If done properly, an embargo could work. Just look at Cuba and Libya. I will grant you that these dictators are still in power, but their countries have been crippled.
23 posted on 01/01/2003 9:49:06 AM PST by nypokerface
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Principled
The Bush administration (especially Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld and company) have talked about creating a "Democratic Iraq." This is almost an impossible job in great part because Iraq has no democratic tradition to build on. When I brought this up I was thinking of those who confidentally point to the the German and Japanese models of U.S. democracy building.

If "not walking away" is not the same as "nation building," then what is it? When Dubya said this, he was not just talking about military occupation but something more. If it wasn't nation building that he had in mind, what was it?

Having said that, I do not believe that defeating Saddam's forces in the initial stage will be that difficult. In fact, his generalis will probably overthrow him as soon as the troops cross the border IMHO. I am far more worried about the long-term occupation. In my view, it will indeed take a decades long pacification and military occupation througout Iraq....for the simple reason that the Iraqis have little to hold them together.

Then again....nothing in certain in such matters. All the more reason, in my view, to prudently and firmly concentrate on the defense of U.S. borders rather than plunging into the darkness in an ancient hell hole half way around the world. <{P> Happy New Year

24 posted on 01/01/2003 9:50:24 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: Momaw Nadon
Discussion?

No, no discussion. Kim Il Jong and his people wish they could eat cake. (ala Marie A.)

If the people in Tokyo have potassium iodidine (sp), then 20 minutes out of Minot will solve the problem.

5.56mm

26 posted on 01/01/2003 9:55:24 AM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dollylolly
It is getting to be complicated though I sense a certain weariness from some conservatives. How many wars do the armchair world policeman think that they fight at the same time? One would have hoped that conservatives would have learned more from the failures in Kosovo, Haiti, and Somalia.....but apparently many of them continue to think (like the liberals do on welfare) that "it can work this time if we do it right!"
27 posted on 01/01/2003 9:58:12 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
South Korean President-elect Roh Moo-hyun, who won a Dec. 19 vote partly because of surging anti-U.S. sentiment among his people, on Tuesday warned against "blindly following U.S. policy."

Move our troops south, well away from the border.

Tell the dog-eaters that this is Step One of a plan to vacate the country completely.

Let's see how "anti-U.S." they remain. And if they call our bluff, so be it. Let's pull out.

Let them eat dogshit.

28 posted on 01/01/2003 9:58:46 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OReilly
I have been thinking for quite a while that the North Koreans and Iraq did a conference call and decided to pull this stunt.

This only benefits Saddam and no one else..

29 posted on 01/01/2003 10:16:53 AM PST by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
"This is not a military showdown. This is a diplomatic showdown," Bush said Tuesday.

Uhhh...yyyeah.

Is anyone buying that story?

30 posted on 01/01/2003 10:17:49 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright

The Iraq people are a multi-religious/ethnic stew who hate each other and have no common tradition.

Sounds like a harvard elitists Nocturnal Emission doesnt it. Gee, Multiculturalism is a big success dont you think?

Second, Iraq has *no* democratic tradition to build on. At least, the folks in Japan and Germany had relatively recent democratic memories.

Japans tradition was a genetic imperial monarchy and Germany had the Kaiser before WWI was considered a tyrannical emporer... the Germans chafed under the democracy imposed by the League of Nations. And didnt Iraq just have a 'democratic' election that voted for Saddam as the Supreme Generalissimo by a 100% Margin? No Democratic tradition indeed!

Finally, the U.S. has a poor recent record in nation building and "securing" democracy e.g. the abject failures in Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo and Somalia.

Where is the United Nations when you need them?? Oh yeah, too busy passing Resolutions Condemning the Isrealies for defending themselves against Al Quedan Hizbullah and Arafats Fatah Murderers. Those Bloodthirsty isrealies. Not to mention the all important and thinly veiled effort to cripple the Economy of the world with a myopic agreement trying effect a negligible reduction in CO Emissions.

Better yet, let's concentrate on something that is manageable: "securing" building up the defense of the U.S. rather than overextending ourselves in futile and expensive world policing.

World's too small for isolationism....

Look... either lead, follow or get out of the way... but lets get with the program.

31 posted on 01/01/2003 10:21:01 AM PST by Samurai_Jack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: elfman2
The N. Korean government is much more tricky to take out than that of Iraq, and we'll be in a better position to focus on it once we have secured Iraq.

And that's precisely why No. Korea isn't going to wait for us to take care of business in Iraq before they make their move, which could be anything from the quick manufacture of literally dozens of nukes to even invading South Korea. If the latter is the case our 37,000 troops will be sitting ducks for the North Koreans million man army now poised on the southern border.

33 posted on 01/01/2003 10:23:19 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
When I brought this up I was thinking of those who confidentally point to the the German and Japanese models of U.S. democracy building.

Yes, different than Japan/Germany in that respect. Along those lines, what traditions of democracy existed in Japan/Germany when they were "rebuilt"?

If "not walking away" is not the same as "nation building," then what is it?...If it wasn't nation building that he had in mind, what was it?

Yes, that is the question. Your guess is as good as mine.

I do not believe that defeating Saddam's forces in the initial stage will be that difficult. In fact, his generalis will probably overthrow him as soon as the troops cross the border IMHO.

It will be interesting to see how much fighting we actually have to do to ensure the end of the WMD regime. I'm with you that this initial phase will be quite short.

...the Iraqis have little to hold them together.

Yes I believe this will be the problem that haunts us. But I don't think that it will be only the US helping.

All the more reason, in my view, to prudently and firmly concentrate on the defense of U.S. borders ...

I couldn't agree more! But there are differing opinions on the best way to do this. Some say close borders and bring all soldiers home from foreign lands. Some say put soldiers in every village in the world. While I am neither of those, each group has the best interest of the US at heart... just that they have different ideas on how to do it.

IMHO we need to severely restrict borders AND actively seek out and destroy known terrorist enemies...JMHO.

34 posted on 01/01/2003 10:28:26 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't both candidates in the last election both espouse anti-American views? I was under the impression that both of them were bashing the current agreement that keeps our troops there, etc.
35 posted on 01/01/2003 10:28:38 AM PST by Guillermo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OReilly
Does anyone think this timing is just happenstance or just the N. Korean's deciding that it is the optimum time?

Obviously the former. They know our downgraded military (thanks to Clinton) would be hardpressed to fight two wars simultaneously. We essentially have three options at this point, and each is disconcerting, to say the least:

1) Pre-emptive strike on North Korea's nuclear facilities. Of course, we can't be sure that such an action will not provoke them to invade the South.

2) Economic pressure combined with a military blockade of their export of missiles (to Iraq and Syria). This is risky because of the unliklihood that their gov't will collapse peacefully.

3) Let them joing the nuclear club (which includes dangerous Pakistan), and rely on nuclear deterrence. The message this would send is a very dangerous one -- that mere possession of such weapons buys one international respect, and is unlikely to result in any punitive action against the possessors.

36 posted on 01/01/2003 10:36:50 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dog
I have been thinking for quite a while that the North Koreans and Iraq did a conference call and decided to pull this stunt.

Hmmmmm and maybe we vacuumed up that call and finally traslated it, and everyone wondered where Bush was coming from in the state of the Union Speech a year ago, when he said we have an Axis of Evil?

And then some decided to use Bush's Axis of Evil term against him politically?

I hope we can get some more Clintonites on the record, talking about the cowboy diplomacy of Bush. It will make for some great exit polls in Nov 04.

37 posted on 01/01/2003 10:37:56 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OReilly
In my post #36, I meant "obviously the latter," not the "the former."
38 posted on 01/01/2003 10:41:41 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Principled
We probably agree more than disagree. I have to run but briefly, Germany had a democratic tradition with the Weimar Republic which (had it not been for the depression) would have survived. Even under the Kaiser, Germany had a tradition of elections (including opposition parties in parliament) and a relatively free press.

Japan also had a democratic/free market tradition though much weaker than Germany's. As Milton Friedman has pointed out, Japan's initial economic development in the late ninteenth century was modeled on the British free market model of gold standards and free trade. After the turn of the century, it also had parliamentary elections and, for a time, a series of relatively democratic prime ministers, and a fairly cosmoplitan middle class.

This tradition was quick weak, however, when compared to Germany. During the 1920s and 1930s, the militarists were able to seize power through coups and assasinations. Nevertheless, Japan had *more* of a tradition of democracy than Iraq which has literally nothing to build on.

39 posted on 01/01/2003 10:43:36 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Rye
In my post #36, I meant "obviously the latter," not the "the former."

I knew what you meant, but I didn't phrase it very well. I don't think it is either, happenstance or just N Korea by it self. They have rushed this up so fast, they are walking on their own threats. I say they haven't given up their night job, but they found a new part-time way to earn some hard currency from Saddam.

40 posted on 01/01/2003 10:51:36 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: Austin Willard Wright
I love how you took "liberal" failures ( Kosovo, Haiti, Somalia ) and gave it to the "conservatives" to learn from. Very cute, very transparent.

What we have learned from all these things is that a "liberal" can do NOTHING right in the real world. Everything they think of ends up a dismal failure. Why? Because they base their ideas on a reality that does not exist.

If you are sensing a weariness from anyone, it would be the liberal disruptors that join FR pretending to be conservatives. Kind of like trying to hide a cow under a table napkin. I believe we tolerate them because they provide comic relief. I simply like playing with their minds.
42 posted on 01/01/2003 10:54:30 AM PST by myself6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
North Korea is simply capitalizing on the recent South Korean elections and trying to drive a wedge deeper between South Korea and the United States. The new South Korean president may be far less harsh about US-Korean relations in private than he is in public. If he and his government were really insistent about fundamentally altering the relationship to deemphasize the US component to Korean security I believe Bush would accomodate them.

It's really the UN's armistice anyway. Let Kofi Annan take it over. While we're at it, let's move UN Headquarters to Seoul and let it make Jimmy Carter its next Secretary General. He can hold the North Korean artillery at bay with a simple scolding and self-righteous lecture, I'm sure.

43 posted on 01/01/2003 10:55:09 AM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rye
I fully expect the next scene will open with some of those 80 year old generals, with medals on both sides of their uniform (I don't know how they stand up) playing Richard Rogers' "Slaughter on Tenth Avenue" on their war drums.

44 posted on 01/01/2003 10:57:22 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
”What enemies are talking about? Attempts to prove close links between the secularist Mussolini wannabe Saddam Hussein and the Saudi dominated Islamist Al Queda have come to naught.”

What attempts were those? Why would we need a link to al-Queda “proved” after Saddam attempted to assassinate Bush senior. Why would you not consider such an anti-American, unstable, genocidal, harborer of international terrorist (al-Queda or not), WMD constructing, oil rich personality not to be our enemy during a war on international terror.? Why would we want to prove anything prior to rebuilding our ability to replace Saddam?

45 posted on 01/01/2003 11:03:04 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rye
”could be anything from the quick manufacture of literally dozens of nukes to even invading South Korea .”

I trust our administration to decide what is possible in this regard, and what our timing should be.

46 posted on 01/01/2003 11:04:41 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: nypokerface
Yeah, after all our economic ebargoes on Cuba and Iraq have been so successful...

Scouts out! Cavalry Ho!

47 posted on 01/01/2003 11:12:59 AM PST by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Rye
the next scene will open with

This is the Kukla, Fran, and Ollie show...

48 posted on 01/01/2003 11:15:58 AM PST by OReilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
”Perhaps before we start having delusions of grandeur in Iraq, we should clean up the mess up in Afghanistan first! ”

I suspect Afghanistan could not be secured enough to meet your criteria so you’re really just promoting a near total withdraw from world affairs.

But to want that, you’d have to believe that malevolent forces wouldn’t fill the vacuum of our absence and we wouldn’t be facing them strengthened at our boarders or within our borders soon. That argument failed to win support in the cold war for the same reason it would fail here. Being the unofficial policemen of the world has some benefits, but it’s also a large burden as you recognize. Then again, evil only exists when good men do nothing.

49 posted on 01/01/2003 11:16:21 AM PST by elfman2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
I once saw an itty-bitty chihuahua yapping at a great dane. This article kinds of brings that to mind.
50 posted on 01/01/2003 11:25:20 AM PST by LibKill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-104 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson