| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2004/10/4-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33918 Activity:high |
10/4 GOP convention in a nutshell
http://home.earthlink.net/~houval/gopconstrm.mov
\-"The only thing I hate more than fags and communists
are terrerists." --W
\_ That's pretty funny.
\_ Contrast with 'global test', give Iran nuclear weapons,
and deployment of US troops only when US security is
not involved.
\_ *whew* thank god your interpretation has nothing to do
with reality!
\_ *This is the consequence of what Kerry said*
\_ Let him drink his kool aid. You can't save him.
\_ I think you guys are the ones with the green kool-aid
tongue here. Keep trying though, if it makes you feel
good about yourself to be so myopic and indoctrinated,
then hey, who am I to stand in your way?
\_ Thank you for adding nothing.
\_ There's 2 ways of interpreting it. Your interpretation is
that he said we need approval from the UN. My
interpretation is that he's saying we need to be able to
prove our case. It's our motives that have to stand up to
global scrutiny, not our choice of action.
\_ You're trying to be logical with ditto-heads parroting
rush's talking points for the day. Why waste your
breath?
\_ Why post content free drivel?
\_ Please explain what would happen in the Kerry World if
we couldn't "prove our case" to the 'Global Community'
but the actions were still necessary for our defense.
\_ Kerry said no nation can veto a preemptive American strike.
Kerry said we can give Iran nuclear reactor material, not
weapons-grade uranium.
Kerry and Bush said we should go through the UN in Africa.
\_ Kerry said "..., but" dozens of times, also. Including,
a "... but it must pass the test, the global test". Iran
doesn't want Kerry's non-weapons grade material. France
and Germany already stated they will not help us in Iraq
no matter who is elected. Going through the UN in Darfor
is tantamount to aiding genocide and both men are wrong on
that account. 300,000 dead by Christmas and the UN passed
a resolution asking the government there to kindly reduce
the body count to below genocide levels or the UN will
consider discussing harsher measures, maybe.
\_ Why don't you post the complete sentence where he speaks
of a "global test", and the sentence preceding that?
Also, please provide a credible URL where it says (a)
the U.S. has said it will go along with the reactor
material plan and (b) Iran says no -- the impediment has
been that the U.S. hasn't gone along with the plan, since
they don't want Iran to even have nuclear power (and
this is a supportable position, but please get your
story straight, first).
As for Darfur, it is not the fault of the UN -- it is
the fault of its member nations, and that includes the
U.S.
U.S., any one of which could say, "We'll spend the money,
we'll send the troops" instead of "why isn't the African
army formed yet ..."
\_ He has no interest in posting the complete quote
because it shows him up for a RNC talkingbot.
because it shows him up for being an RNC talkingbot.
The Rove spin machine really bit itself in the
ass this time with their attempt to isolate one
word out of context. I think it is because all of
America saw the statement and knew that they were
wrong..
misstating what Kerry meant.
\_ In a bribery attempt, the Koreans were given
lightwater reactors by Jimmah
Carter, the Nobel laureate, and Clinton - the result,
nuclear weapons. Not to mention the free money and oil.
It worked so well in N. Korea Kerry wants to repeat the
strategy with Iran. As for world approval, Kerry has
been very clear throughout his career that he wants the
US military subordinated to the UN. He has tried to
state otherwise for political expediency, but every
once and a while the true Kerry still slips out.
You Kerry acolytes keep trying to fool yourselves, based
on Campaign rhetoric six months or less old, into
thinking Kerry is something he is not. He is the most
liberal Senator, a leftist, an appeaser and
a pacifist.
\_ MOST LIBERAL SENATOR! KEEP REPEATING!!!
\_ Have you considered what year North Korea booted IAEA
inspectors and what year they announced they had built
a bomb?
\_ N. Korea has probably had a few bombs since the late
1980's or early 1990's. Here is a useful summary
of newpaper articles on the subject:
http://alamo-girl.com/0091.htm
And yet, with the proliferation of ICBMs and
nuclear weapons, Kerry is against bunker
busters and missile defense.
\_ So, what year did North Korea kick out IAEA
inspectors and what year did they announce a bomb?
\_ 1992, how is this relevant as the IAEA is
completely useless. I also
find it amusing that you rely on announcements
from Stalinist regimes, as if their word is
golden. I especially like how N. Korea
announces its ICBM tests. We still don't
know definitively if they have a weapon because
they have never undergone a comprehensive
inspection.
\_ Are you sure 1992 was the year North Korea
kicked out IAEA inspectors?
\_ Which time?
\_ Are you sure IAEA inspectors were
kicked out of North Korea more than
once?
What year(s) did North Korea kick out
IAEA inspectors, and when did they
announce a bomb? Why can't you
answer a simple question?
\_ It is really easy to find out
for yourself. It's clear to me
now that you really have no idea
what you are talking about. For
you history starts with the election
of George Bush. This is a
waste of time, good day.
\_ Doh! I think I got trolled!
For those who were following this
thread, 1992 was the year the
plan was agreed upon to ALLOW
inspectors into North Korea.
The inspectors were KICKED OUT
in 2002. The announcement of a
bomb came after that. Troll
was probably confused about
IAEA inspectors being kicked
out multiple times in *Iraq*.
-liberal
\_ a cursory search
would reveal your comment
as false.
\_ a cursory search would
reveal your comment as
false.
\_ How irresponsible of him to oppose technologies
that make it easier for us to use nukes!
\_ Right, one could shoot down a nuclear tipped
ICBM heading for LA. A definite no-no. |
| 5/24 |
|
| alamo-girl.com/0091.htm China wants the US out of Asia, and will continue to upgrade and enhance its military capability to acc omplish that goal, according to a senior congressional policy analyst. Dana Rohrabacher, R-CA, and an analyst at the American Foreign Policy Council, believes current administration policies toward China of so-called "constructive engagem ent" are "worse than appeasement," and will further jeopardize US nati onal security in the long run. Santoli told WorldNetDaily that whil e he believes the issue of Taiwan is currently the most contentious betw een the US and China, he also indicated that a threat is emerging in t he South China Sea because of China's claim of sovereignty over a small collection of islands. For years China has continued a military buildup in the Spratly Islands, adding a three-story structure and completing wo rk on multiple helicopter pads and communications facilities all within the past 60 days. Critics have denounced the opinions of Rohrabacher and Santoli as alarmist, but both men say their concerns are based on first -hand observations. Santoli is an expert in the area of Asian foreign po licy and the California congressman has personally visited the Spratly I slands twice in the past several weeks. Not only are new structures comp lete on portions of the island chain, but they added that more projects are already underway that will be completed over the next several months . The additional capabilities will put China in the best position to mak e good on their claim over the islands -- reportedly rich in natural gas and oil -- which will result in a likely foreign policy nightmare for t he United States... Santoli also questioned China's budding new relation ship with Russia, calling it "a danger for us, but one that will end up being a mistake for Russia." He predicted that "they (the Chinese) will turn on Russia after they get what they want from them and after they de al with us," and he dismissed recent attempts by Russia to include India in any future coalition with China as unworkable. "India just doesn't t rust the Chinese, and they aren't enemies of ours -- nor do they want to be." Finally, Santoli said he was not "quite as worried about Chines e aggression" during the final years of the Clinton administration as he is in the years immediately following the expiration of Clinton's term. He believes the Chinese know the window of opportunity to access US t echnology will close soon, but he believes "they'll have already perfect ed several new weapons systems and will be much more enhanced strategica lly by then," he said. I can hardly overstate my concern about North Korea,'' CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Armed Services Commit tee. Crime and a lack of discipline, even i n military ranks, are more common and citizens are more likely to blame North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, for systemic problems. This column has steadily warned for th e last five years of the growing threat from North Korea. In mid-January , I reported North Korea was fast acquiring capability to deliver nuclea r warheads to North America by means of a new, long-range, three-stage m issile. Tenet said, "I can hardly overstate my concern about North Kore a," adding, "the situation there is more volatile and unpredictable." This column does not have the CIA's $26 billion annual intelligence budget, but it came to the same conclusion, only five years before Langl ey. Other US intelligence sources confirm North Korea has resumed secr et production of nuclear weapons, adding to the two or three devices it already has. Tenet's dramatic testimony confirms the total failure of President Bill Clinton's Korea p olicy. When confronted in 1994 by incontrovertible evidence North Korea was building nuclear weapons and delivery systems, Clinton chose to brib e rather confront Pyongyang. He dragooned South Korea and Japan into joi ning Washington to offer North Korea an amazing US$46 billion in oil, f ood and light-water nuclear reactors in exchange for its promise to halt building nuclear weapons and producing plutonium. By contrast, Clinton chose to repeatedly bomb Iraq, which offered almost no threat to anyone, while bribing extremely dangerous North Korea. Of course, there was no domestic lobby in the US demanding the destruction of North Korea, as there was for Iraq. " Diary Assurances that North Korea has given up its nuclear weapons program According the 6/98 reports from Ken Bacon at the Pentagon, North Korea's No Dong missile is operational and has a range of about 1,000 kilometers . Pakistan and the DPRK had ballistic missile contracts, engineers and a dvisors from both countries worked on Iranian missile programs. Hong Kong Standard 7/11/98 "North Korea yesterday blasted the United Stat es for saying its troops should remain in South Korea and demanded the i mmediate withdrawal of its forces. " StratFor Intelligence Briefing 7/28/98 "South Korea's Yonhap News Agency reported on Saturday, July 25, that the South Korean military is current ly attempting to uncover at least two of seven identified North Korean i nfiltration tunnels. The agency cited military investigators as saying t hat North Korea was digging 21 tunnels along the Military Demarcation Li ne, and that the army has roughly located seven tunnels with the assista nce of a defected North Korean soldier, aerial reconnaissance photograph s, and examination of explosions recorded along the border. The more tha n two-meter wide tunnels can reportedly handle the passage of 15,000 sol diers per hour. Yonhap reported that South Korean forces are drilling te st holes in the areas of the seven suspected tunnels, and military autho rities allegedly expect to confirm two of the tunnels by the end of the year." It said these co untries are using huge underground laboratories and factories to make an d test missiles. Mr Nicholson, who has been touting a missile shield on radio and in signed opinion columns in newspapers, said Democrats are f ilibustering a bill that would begin development of such a shield. NY Times David Sanger 8/17/98 "US Intelligence agencies have detected a huge secret underground complex in North Korea that they believe is the centerpiece of an effort to revive the country's frozen nuclear weapons program, according to officials who have been briefed on the intelligen ce information. The finding has alarmed officials at the White House and the Pentagon, who fear that the complex may represent an effort to brea k out of a 4-year-old agreement in which North Korea pledged to give up its nuclear weapons program in exchange for billions of dollars in Weste rn aid. " Washington Post 8/20/98 Jim Hoagland "Count among Bill Clinton's victims this week his secretary of state, his national security adviser and his foreign policy at large. President Clinton has undermined his people and his policies with a recklessness and a disregard for America's standing in the world that is monumental and unpardonable.. But Clinton's tardy and grudging admission of wrongdoing in the Oval Office and of his menda city converts weakness in foreign policy into potential disaster. Clinto n has erased the large margin of error he has assigned himself in dealin g with threats and challenges abroad. His plight will encourage rogue re gimes in Baghdad, Belgrade, Pyongyang and elsewhere to test his attentio n to their depredations and his resolve in deterring or punishing those acts. It will encourage allies to resist even more strongly US pressur e to do things they do not see as in their interest. On the day Clinton spent four hours dueling with prosecutors over the salacious details of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, it was disclosed that the Looney Tunes government of North Korea has been cheating on its 1994 accord wit h Washington to stop working on nuclear bombs. It was a telling coincide nce, pointing up the misallocation of presidential and national attentio n and energies the Lewinsky affair has spawned. " 8/31/98 Reuters/MSNBC/AP "Catching military analysts off guard, North Kor ea test fired a new ballistic missile into open seas between Russia and northwestern Japan on M... |