-------------------- All post are my opinion. Do your own DD. Who's clicking your buy/sell button!? Posts: 7800 | From: Virginia | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
He has Rice to guide him, just like she did Powell in 2000 when Powell was ordered to stop speaking to North Korea about stopping nuclear bomb development.
Wouldn't have looked good at all for the Country to still be making agreements with a membar of the "Axis of Evil"
Gotta keep those guys looking evil, ya know....
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A North Korean nuclear test has long been a nightmare scenario for China.
Beijing is one of the North's few remaining allies, and a major supplier of energy and financial aid to the secretive regime in Pyongyang.
China wants stability on the Korean peninsula; the last thing it wanted was an international crisis right on its doorstep.
It has condemned the claimed test on Monday, saying it resolutely opposes North Korea's actions, and that the test has damaged relations between the two countries.
That anger is also mixed with embarrassment, because Beijing repeatedly urged the North Koreans to abandon their plans for a test.
The fact that the North went ahead regardless appears to be an indication that there are limits to the influence that China's leaders have in Pyongyang.
Balancing act
But the situation is more complex than that. China fears that if it uses what leverage it does have, by stopping aid to North Korea, the regime in Pyongyang might collapse.
That could send a flood of refugees over the border into China - something that Beijing wants to avoid at all costs.
China urges UN action
So China is reluctant to use the powers it has, worrying about the possible consequences of pulling the plug on Pyongyang.
The resultant limits to what Beijing can achieve were demonstrated earlier this year, when North Korea carried out a series of missile tests despite Chinese pleas not to go ahead.
Beijing condemned the tests and approved a UN Security Council resolution imposing weapons-related sanctions on North Korea.
But despite international pressure, it did not cut aid to North Korea, preferring to work through multi-national institutions.
China has repeatedly urged North Korea to return to the six-nation disarmament talks involving the two Koreas, Japan, China, Russia and the US.
But those discussions broke down last year, and the nuclear test means any speedy resumption is unlikely.
That leaves many observers wondering how China will respond this time.
What next?
Beijing has already said that the UN Security Council must take what it has called "appropriate action" against North Korea.
So far, though, China says it is still considering what exactly that response should be.
There is little doubt that Beijing will be in regular contact with other countries in the region - especially South Korea and Japan - as well as the US.
They will be working together on a unified response to the test, that will then go to the UN Security Council.
There's likely to be considerable negotiating in the days ahead, as the various countries involved try to reach a resolution that will be acceptable to everyone.
In the past China has always opposed tough international action against North Korea.
But there is no doubt that Beijing is extremely angry about this nuclear test - and Pyongyang may be about to find out that there are limits to China's patience.
-------------------- "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication" Posts: 4005 | From: Shaolin | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rimasco: What are the chances that China is acting as a deterrent?
I think China will make a great deterrent, afterall, they are the head of the Axis-of-Wal- Mart. The Axis-of-Wal-Mart wields supreme control over the Axis-of-Evil.
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
considering China is way bigger then Korea and Korea really looks like a Turd coming out of China's ass.. I would say North Korea will not f*uck with China and back down eventually lol
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: When dubya took office, we had reached an as yet informal agreement that would have stopped North Korean development of nuclear weapons.
Colin Powell, the newly appointed Secretary Of State, said he would continue those talks and formalize the treaty, but was ordered to stop. Thereafter, Dubya announced that we would not speak directly to North Korea again and started describing them as evil and terrorist.
Another wonderful success of this diplomatic genious we have in office.
I like how you leave out facts and twist the story to make it fit the Liberal Party line.
The truth is, NK killed the deal because they broke thier side of the agreement.
NK expelled inspectors in 2002 after evidence was discovered for unaccounted Plutonium. This was only shortly after the Bush Admin approved $USD 3.5M to keep Clinton's "light-water reactor" deal going.
Not only that, NK withdrew from the NPT in 2003, because they knew the cat was out of the bag. It no longer became a question if NK was building a nuke. Kim Jong came out and admitted that he was.
From that point on, it was pointless to use diplomacy because Kim Jong could not be trusted. I'll say it for Bush since he obviously cant:
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Im sorry, but IMO anyone who thinks some sort of deal can be made with Kim Jong is either an idiot or a fool.
Dems, go ahead and elect a liberal for the next president and broker your little deal with the devil..... I want nothing to do with it and will do everything in my power to stop it.
GL,
NR.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
For some strange reason, the liberal Dems think that these derranged dictators will actually listen to them and follow their commands lock, stock, and barrel? I don't understand this kind of delusional thinking.
The Dems are always getting played by people like Jong. I guess the Dems are just easily duped. All those tea parties Jong had with Albright did nothing to stop his drive to nucleur supremecy while his own people die in the streets from starvation. Another liberal success...
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nirvana: For some strange reason, the liberal Dems think that these derranged dictators will actually listen to them and follow their commands lock, stock, and barrel? I don't understand this kind of delusional thinking.
The Dems are always getting played by people like Jong. I guess the Dems are just easily duped. All those tea parties Jong had with Albright did nothing to stop his drive to nucleur supremecy while his own people die in the streets from starvation. Another liberal success...
You can't blame them really. A normal peaceful human being always wants to use words and talk things out. Problem is IMO, libs either don't understand, or refuse to believe that in the real word, there are people who don't give a rats *$$ about words and understand or respond to only one thing.
Force.
Sucks, but such is the nature of life.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: When dubya took office, we had reached an as yet informal agreement that would have stopped North Korean development of nuclear weapons.
Colin Powell, the newly appointed Secretary Of State, said he would continue those talks and formalize the treaty, but was ordered to stop. Thereafter, Dubya announced that we would not speak directly to North Korea again and started describing them as evil and terrorist.
Another wonderful success of this diplomatic genious we have in office.
I like how you leave out facts and twist the story to make it fit the Liberal Party line.
The truth is, NK killed the deal because they broke thier side of the agreement.
NK expelled inspectors in 2002 after evidence was discovered for unaccounted Plutonium. This was only shortly after the Bush Admin approved $USD 3.5M to keep Clinton's "light-water reactor" deal going.
Not only that, NK withdrew from the NPT in 2003, because they knew the cat was out of the bag. It no longer became a question if NK was building a nuke. Kim Jong came out and admitted that he was.
From that point on, it was pointless to use diplomacy because Kim Jong could not be trusted. I'll say it for Bush since he obviously cant:
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Im sorry, but IMO anyone who thinks some sort of deal can be made with Kim Jong is either an idiot or a fool.
Dems, go ahead and elect a liberal for the next president and broker your little deal with the devil..... I want nothing to do with it and will do everything in my power to stop it.
GL,
NR.
I quote,
"The truth is, NK killed the deal because they broke thier side of the agreement."
Now where did you get that bit of spun wool over you eyes. Fat Rush the Doper? BillO? Lord Lardbottom Hannerty?
The truth is that the deal was broken when the White House, under the new President Bush ordered the Secretary of state to break the deal.
All the rest of that is exactly the arguement YOU used to justify invading Iraq and it is just a much BS and fabrication now.
Have you no ability to learn that that line of stuff is lies, just like they were when they were used to justify invading Iraq.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
And what is it far right wing war mongers believe?
Reality proves there were no WMDs in Iraq and the right wingerw were 100% wrong.....about the WMDs, about the ties to AlQaeda, about the chemical weapons. about the biological weapons, about Saddam having sponcered 9/11. about it being easy, about being viewed as liberaators.......
Don't you learn from bad experiences?
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
I guess you conveniently forgot about the 1992 deal NK broke in 1993 that started this whole mess.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I inconvieniently remember it was Bush that broke the agreement in 2000 and cannot make myself lie and say it was North Korea that did it.
I also inconvieniently remember that it is Bush that has refused to so much as talk to North Korea and Seria and Iran, while threatening each with invasion.
Is it any wonder they think they need a nuclear deterant?
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example. Posts: 2430 | From: CA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Who the hell is talking about Iraq? You keep saying the Clinton administration made no deals with NK, then you go on about how Bush broke "the deals" with NK.
Either you have the reasoning skills of a 2 year old or your head is far up your ass you can't string together a coherant dialogue when it comes to fact and fiction.
Go back to biting your pillow and let those of us with intelligence and intellect discuss the issues and disseminate fact from fiction.
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"You keep saying the Clinton administration made no deals with NK"
I didn't say anysuch thing and Bush did break agreements promised to North Korea.
(I take real offense at people claiming I said things i didn't, so please learn to be careful.)
"Either you have the reasoning skills of a 2 year old or your head is far up your ass you can't string together a coherant dialogue when it comes to fact and fiction."
Hahahaha
Typical reaction of the far righters, you can't justify your beliefs, so you resort to insults and name calling in place of debate, imagining that emulating Bill O'Reily and Fat Rush the Doper makes you believable and sound intellegent.
No, It doesn't. It just makes you as disgusting and as dishonest and ill-informed as they are.
Poor pitiful things.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here are you comments on this exact thread:
10/8/06:
When dubya took office, we had reached an as yet informal agreement that would have stopped North Korean development of nuclear weapons.
Absolutely!!!!
You have no reason to believe he wouldn't honor the deal, there being no record of him ever breaking a treaty.
(We can't award that respect for dubya, he breaks treaties at will.)
You have to be the biggest moron on the planet to now claim you never said deals/treaties were made by Clinton and were broken by Bush. That is EXACTLY what you have been saying.
You can't even keep your story straight. You are delusion and mentally unstable. You can keep lying and make yourself look like a fool. What a joke...
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
By the way, you need to use quotation marks when you quote, if you expect to have your insults recognized as yours.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're not even enough of a mental challenge to be halfway interesting. This is like the special olympics competing against the international olympics...
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your pathetic reality is oozing through the Internet again. Give it up, dude. You couldn't even drop knowledge if you threw an encyclopdedia off the side of the Grand Canyon.
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nirvana: You're not even enough of a mental challenge to be halfway interesting. This is like the special olympics competing against the international olympics...
speaking of special olympics?
this statement was made by Bush on live TV today...
this is a complete paragraph from the whitehousedotgov...
Obviously, I'm listening very carefully to this debate. I can remember the time when it was said that the Bush administration goes it alone too often in the world, which I always thought was a bogus claim to begin with. And now all of a sudden people are saying, the Bush administration ought to be going alone with North Korea. But it didn't work in the past is my point. The strategy did not work. I learned a lesson from that and decided that the best way to convince Kim Jong-il to change his mind on a nuclear weapons program is to have others send the same message.
bogus claims? if they were bogus? (is that a presidential word?) why does he admit they were correct, and he learned from his mistake in the same paragraph....
the sad part? he also emphatically denies he made ANY mistakes in the same press conference
i'm sorry folks, but this guy isn't pretending to be simple.. he just is....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol, I gotta agree, I get to praying each time I see he's going to speak. "oh please, dear Father, just let him say Abu 'what's it?' correctly this time.
Posts: 889 | From: Corona, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nirvana: You're not even enough of a mental challenge to be halfway interesting. This is like the special olympics competing against the international olympics...
speaking of special olympics?
this statement was made by Bush on live TV today...
this is a complete paragraph from the whitehousedotgov...
Obviously, I'm listening very carefully to this debate. I can remember the time when it was said that the Bush administration goes it alone too often in the world, which I always thought was a bogus claim to begin with. And now all of a sudden people are saying, the Bush administration ought to be going alone with North Korea. But it didn't work in the past is my point. The strategy did not work. I learned a lesson from that and decided that the best way to convince Kim Jong-il to change his mind on a nuclear weapons program is to have others send the same message.
bogus claims? if they were bogus? (is that a presidential word?) why does he admit they were correct, and he learned from his mistake in the same paragraph....
the sad part? he also emphatically denies he made ANY mistakes in the same press conference
i'm sorry folks, but this guy isn't pretending to be simple.. he just is....
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- Benjamin Franklin Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
MADISON, Wis. More than 60 state lawmakers are urging the University of Wisconsin-Madison to fire an instructor who has argued that the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
A letter sent Thursday and signed by 52 Assembly representatives and nine state senators condemns a decision to let Kevin Barrett teach an introductory class on Islam this fall.
UW-Madison Provost Pat Farrell launched a review after Barrett spoke last month on a talk show about his views that the terrorist attacks were the result of a government conspiracy to spark war in the Middle East. After the review, Farrell said Barrett was a qualified instructor who can present his views as one perspective on the attacks.
"I still have every expectation this will be a very positive educational experience for our students," Farrell said Thursday. "Some are upset about Mr. Barrett's viewpoints on 9/11 and don't want to pay much attention to what makes for a quality educational experience."
Republican Rep. Steve Nass said the lawmakers' letter, which called Barrett's views "academically dishonest," sends a strong message to top UW leaders.
"When 61 legislators condemn a decision by UW-Madison and demand the dismissal of Kevin Barrett, the leadership of the UW System operates at its own peril if it continues to ignore views of the taxpayers," Nass said in a statement.
Barrett has said Nass was "only interested in name-calling and witch hunting."
The state Assembly last week refused to take up a proposed resolution supported by Nass calling on university to fire Barrett, who will get $8,247 as a part-time instructor this fall.
In Colorado, another professor has been under fire for an essay likening white-collar victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to Nazi official Adolf Eichmann, a key planner of the Holocaust.
University of Colorado officials concluded that ethnic studies professor Ward Churchill could not be fired over the essay because of free speech protections, but they launched an investigation into allegations of academic misconduct. A faculty committee concluded he committed research misconduct and university officials said last month that he should be fire. Churchill has appealed to keep his job.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
MILWAUKEE A university instructor who came under scrutiny for arguing that the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks likens President Bush to Adolf Hitler in an essay his students are being required to buy for his course.
The essay by Kevin Barrett, "Interpreting the Unspeakable: The Myth of 9/11," is part of a $20 book of essays by 15 authors, according to an unedited copy first obtained by WKOW-TV in Madison and later by The Associated Press.
The book's title is "9/11 and American Empire: Muslims, Jews, and Christians Speak Out." It is on the syllabus for Barrett's course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, "Islam: Religion and Culture," but only three of the essays are required reading, not including Barrett's essay.
Barrett, a part-time instructor who holds a doctorate in African languages and literature and folklore from UW-Madison, is active in a group called Scholars for 9/11 Truth. The group's members say U.S. officials, not Al Qaeda terrorists, were behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
"Like Bush and the neocons, Hitler and the Nazis inaugurated their new era by destroying an architectural monument and blaming its destruction on their designated enemies," he wrote.
Barrett said Tuesday he was comparing the attacks to the burning of the German parliament building, the Reichstag, in 1933, a key event in the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship.
"That's not comparing them as people, that's comparing the Reichstag fire to the demolition of the World Trade Center, and that's an accurate comparison that I would stand by," he said.
He added: "Hitler had a good 20 to 30 IQ points on Bush, so comparing Bush to Hitler would in many ways be an insult to Hitler."
Moira Megargee, publicity director for the Northampton, Mass., publisher Interlink, said the book is due out at the end of November and the editing isn't finished.
"It is not final and for all we know that essay may not be in the book or may be edited," she said.
The university's decision to allow Barrett to teach the course touched off a controversy over the summer once his views became widely known.
Sixty-one state legislators denounced the move. One county board cut its funding for the UW-Extension by $8,247 the amount Barrett will earn for teaching the course in a symbolic protest, even though the course is unrelated to that branch of the UW System.
Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle and his Republican challenger, Mark Green, have both said they believe Barrett should be fired.
One essay Barrett is requiring students to read is entitled: "A Clash Between Justice and Greed," and argues that conflicts between Islam and the western world were made up after the "collapse of the Soviet Union to justify U.S. 'defense' spending, and to provide a pretext of controlling the world's resources."
The author of another essay, "Interpreting Terrorism: Muslim Problem or Covert Operations Nightmare?," contends some western intelligence agencies are commiting acts of terrorism to make them look like the work of radical Islamics.
The university's chief academic officer, Provost Patrick Farrell, decided to retain Barrett for the course after reviewing his plans and qualifications. He said Barrett could present his ideas during one week of the course as long as students were allowed to challenge them.
He later warned Barrett to stop seeking publicity for his personal political views.
Farrell said he has not seen the essay, but faculty can assign readings that may not be popular to everyone.
"I think part of the role of any challenging course here is going to encourage students to think of things from a variety of perspectives," he said.
Posts: 889 | From: Corona, CA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are these UW schools public or private? If they are private, this idiot can espouse anything he wants to. He should not be censored even if he is off his nut. It's up to the school to decide whether they want to keep him or sack him.
The great thing about America is that even the wackiest 'tards can speak their opinions...
Posts: 348 | From: Amsterdam | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
