myopia kills.

But I'm also uncomfortable with Dubya doing Texas-style leanin' on "Ill" Jong. He can't Daddy Hill a nutcase. I'd rather see the dude taken out covertly. Because if we do nothing, chances are he'll use nukes down the road, and if we push him, he'll use nukes sooner. Either way, he'll use nukes. So, this is a case where the moderatespoon says have him assasinated.

Ridiculous. I don't think that anyone, including the United States, has the right to WMDs. I don't have any illusion, either, that this is the greatest nation in the history of nations, that this nation is the arbiter of the trajectory of human history, but rather that it is an amazing, young, powerful, and often foolish nation pulled every which way in its policy by the swiftly shifting currents of political whim.

My feeling on this front can be allied with the political views voiced by T. H. White in his work of "children's literature," The Once and Future King. Those views are boiled down by me to suggest that any nation formed via "Force Majeur" is doomed to yield nothing but destruction. The shape of the 20th century, and how it led us through postmodernism to what we are now does not suggest anything to me but continued entropy.

I am not going to be bound by any archaic nationalist illusions, as we americans broke free from our bonds to "god, king, country" quite a while ago.

As far as I see it (it being this terrible little debate re: N.K.), we knew that they had WMDs, and they (crazy little country they are) want bilateral talks with the big dog of american imperialism. I am not really certain why, but even this revelation that they have what we knew that they have is tied into wanting talks. Maybe we should talk.

In the meantime, our foreign policy isn't encouraging anyone to give up their guns - which is good only for the arms manufacturers.

maybe you should tell OPA...

Damn. I missed this shit. Some odd bedfellows in this thread. Excuse me while I jerk off in the corner.

I do believe that there is a pretty good segment of people, especially on this board, for whom GWB can do no right. If he were to save a black baby drowning in the Anacostia, I'm sure it would be attributed to some elaborate scenario cooked up by the evil genius Karl Rove.

I do not believe it would be a good thing for North Korea to possess nuclear weapons.

To believe that North Korea only wants nuclear weapons to defend its homeland is foolish. It was Kim Il-Sung, with backing from Stalin who invaded South Korea in 1950. North Korea has also done a fair amount of saber rattling since the cease fire.

That is also not to say that North Korea wants the weapons to bomb Japan or South Korea. DPRK doesn't have a lot of backing worldwide, and I'm doubtful the Chinese could get behind such a bold move. Yes, the Chinese have loomed large in any potential Korean conflict, but their growing economy is too eager to soak up lots of dollars from American consumers and other developed nations.

Even after dedicating an estimated one-third of the GDP on military expenditures including research and construction of a nuclear weapon, I'm still not certain they have the capabilities to produce one weapon, let alone an arsenal capable of either withstanding a significant military counterstrike from the U.S. or annihilating enough turf to completely deter a counterattack.

This is the nation that boasts some of the world's largest structures, if only for bragging rights. The world's largest stadium. They even have one of the world's largest highways, yet it lays empty for days at a time since only a handful military leaders and successful athletes actually own private cars.

Kim Jong-Il was been reared to follow in The Great Leader Kim Il-Sung's footsteps. The elder Kim cemented himself as the deity that oversees the nation, even to the point of recreating his own birth with a divine theme, then planting his image and Juche, the official North Korean ideology in the hearts and minds of his people. Of course, all the Korean people fell right in line, assuming you believe every word of Korean texts.

The younger Kim is just asserting himself and his proper place in the world as the son of The Great Leader Kim Il-Sung. The elevated shoes and permed hair is just the tip of this not-so-statuesque iceberg. If Kim posesses nuclear weapons to accompany his sizeable army, then his leadership has elevated the North Korean people to the top tier of world politics.

It is Juche: autonomy in ideology, independence in politics, self-sufficiency in economy, and self-reliance in defense.

The little shit is posturing. He's not willing to go down with the ship. If he uses them, he's fucked. He's interested in selling the technology however, which is a problem. Problem is, that society is so insulated it's gonna be damn hard for us to stop them helping others attain the knowledge. I may be wrong, but I just don't think it's gonna be as easy to uncork a nuke successfully as it was for McVeigh to load a truck with fertilizer.

With respect to many of our terrorism fears, I think too often we are hearing the sound of hooves and looking for zebras, not horses.

that's fucking EXACTLY what this is about.

you can take that thumb and go fuck yourself.

way to bring things down a few notches after that cogent post from cory.

Yes, but the problem with "this little shit asserting himself" is that he was horribly abused by his father and he has turned out to be astonishingly mentally unstable. There's more going on here than Jong-Ill just being cruel and despotic and playing the Mouse That Roared. He's also deranged biochemically and is apt to make nuclear decisions based on whatever his little voices tell him is the right decision to make.

Corey's salient post was what I think I was trying to say, but I kinda agree with Dalen.

That's the where I fall. I vote and support Dems over Repubs and America Uber Alles. I really do believe we have a right to tell rogue states what to do.

and be the bigger rogue state? or am i wanting us to pass a "global test"? oh, for shame.

But my question is, who exactly has a right to possess weapons of mass destruction? Quite frankly, if I was head of a country and was being threatened by a nuclear nation for whatever reason, I'd probably want to cook up some nukes myself. The neoconservatives are dead serious about invading any country they can, especially the ones mentioned in the so-called "axis of evil," and I hear Richard Perle talk about his desire to invade North Korea all the time. It is possible to not want North Korea to have nukes but at the same time understand why they would want them as a deterrent.

And yes, I think almost everything Bush does is wrong because I don't think the people around him represent most conservatives or liberals. The neoconservatives are a different breed of people entirely. The reason I voted for Kerry was not just because he was at least somewhat competent as a human being, but mostly to get the neocons out of the white house. I don't expect my ultra liberal candidates to become president, but I do find it very frustrating how the crazies on the right are so popular. Kucinich was in the single digits during the primaries, and since the country is supposed to be composed mostly of moderates, Bush should have been polling in the single digits during his presidential campaigns as well.

We are the tetherball king and the pole is ours, man.

Quite frankly, nations with the ability to beat the shit out of countries who dare to possess "weapons of mass destruction."

There's no reason for any country at the top, weapon wise to allow another country to have the chance to compete with them at that level. That's just betrayal to it's own people.

It's a bit daunting to post a view after reading these pages, and since most of my own thoughts have been expressed by either side of this discussion The Fair Senator LooGar summed up my most exacting sentiment.



When it comes to Nukes it is not Nationalism it is National Interst.

I don't mind telling rogue states what to do or using pursuasive diplomacy to pacify them. However, when we tell our enemies to "Bring it on!" or preemption by force is at our behest, well, I think that gives the notion to these rogues that they better get a bigger gun. [Now stay with me here] So, the scared little adolescents go researching on how to get a bigger dick and I think we totally have the right to say,"Hey, you don't know how to use that. You will upturn the balance of power to merely be pummelled immeasrably into oblivion for a zero end game."

Its geopolitics, the balance of powers. I don't like Bush. I think he kind of got us here with confonting Iran and N Korea; but, I also think any current standing Pres. would say similar to NK and their ilk just maybe a bit less cowboyish.

I agree with that. We have the right to express our opinion in the international community even if it means telling a country that it should not develop nukes. However, I also say that one can understand why a country would try to develop nukes if a nuclear nation is threatening them. That isn't the same thing as approving or supporting their decision to build nukes. I simply believe that a lot of our policies today are forcing countries into a position where they have to build nuclear weapons or face invasion. Diplomacy is not part of the plan for neoconservatives. In a perfect world, I'd rather have the United States be the only country in the world with nuclear weapons.

Being a voting democrat, 'crazies on the left' (AKA you) scare me as much as crazies on the right.

you little whiner.

go find 30 more anti-bush stories to post.

Like I said, you don't have to worry about my candidates ending up president.

Well, yeah. If one country has to be the "big dog" on the block, I'd want it to be the U.S.

Steve

I usually avoid posting in political threads, but I just want to go on record as stating that time and time again, Cory (KFR) has proven to be the most intelligent, rational, and level-headed Obnerinian on these matters. If he were ever to run for public office, I would pledge my full support to the cause.

The main reason I am a straight-down-the-middle moderate, who is equally put off by BOTH extreme conservatism and extreme liberalism, is because it has become painfully obvious to me that the reality of the situation -- both domestically and internationally -- lies somewhere in between. But an increasingly significant reason for my refusal to drift too far left OR right is the fact that neither side is ever willing to accept even a fraction of the other side's reasoning for their beliefs.

There just is absolutely no willingness to co-exist whatsoever. The left are convinced everything wrong with the world today is because of the right, and vice-versa. And more than anything else, it is that refusal to respect the beliefs of those with whom you do not agree that is the REAL problem with the world today...NOT the actual beliefs held by each of the opposing ideologies.

CORY IN '08!!!

pretty well said FT; I fucking hate that I missed this thread yesterday because there are at least 4,672 factual faux-pas. If I get some time later I'll pull some documents and respond. Right now, I have laundry and yard work to do.

Big Saturday, Goin to Home Depot for some wallpaper and some flooring and then maybe to Bed, Bath and Beyond......

you little homemaker you.

i'm doing the same thing today.

Oh, FT. Thanks for the kind words. I'm a history buff, though not to the level that I wish to be, and I think there are many parallels and precedents to seek for advice.

As for political theory, I like to believe I'm pretty laissez-faire in most respects.

Maybe I'm naive, and I can be as big a blockhead as the next guy, but I like to think that many of the issues that confront us not just as Americans but as human beings or neighbors can be resolved more amicably by the parable that follows:

The sun and the wind were having an argument as to which was the more powerful. The sun said, "I am the greater power. I give light and warmth to the entire planet. Without me, nothing could live." The wind said, "I am greater. When I blow, rocks crash, trees are uprooted and houses collapse. Against me, nothing can stand."

Just then a farmer came out into his field and began ploughing the ground. The sun proposed a test. "Let us see which of us can part the farmer from his jacket." The wind agreed. It began to blow, gently at first, and then with increasing force. But the more it blew, the more tightly the man held on to his coat. Eventually the wind gave up, exhausted. Then the sun came out from behind the clouds. Feeling the warmth, the farmer removed his jacket. The gentle heat of the sun did what the raging wind could not.

And I have to wait until 2012 to throw my hat in the Presidential ring. That still won't give me time to clean all these skeletons out of my trunk.

But then again, maybe I could earn the votes of those who followed my idear on how to not only defeat an anti-homosexual marriage amendment but also to increase tolerance for homosexual singles and couples nationwide. That's still a pretty short timeframe for that though, and another thread entirely.

/thread