Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-01-2007, 11:18 AM
 
1,736 posts, read 4,744,592 times
Reputation: 1445

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lchoro View Post
It doesn't look like North Korea ever had a working bomb. Their recent test was a complete dud. We're giving them oil and food in exchange for dismantling their reactor. So we're back to the same arrangement that the Clinton administration had negotiated before Bush abandoned the treaty in 2002.
Oil, food and NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY are what Clinton gave them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-01-2007, 11:32 AM
 
1,408 posts, read 4,862,623 times
Reputation: 486
Amen! John Bolton is the man. I loved his famous quote about lopping 10 floors off the UN building (...and it wouldn't make any difference)

I'd like to see him as our next Secretary of State!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Your mind
2,935 posts, read 4,999,825 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC View Post
No that’s not what I mean at all.
The left way of negotiation relies on the other side to stick to the terms of the negotiation and baring the responsibility of verifying that they are in compliance.
The RIGHT way of negotiation is laying out CLEAR consequences of not complying with the negotiation, doing the verification and punishing those that don’t comply.
In your world, maybe... so America got North Korea to (ostensibly) dismantle its nuclear program by threatening to bomb them, invade and try another "regime change?" I'm not sure that's how it happened...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 01:51 PM
 
1,736 posts, read 4,744,592 times
Reputation: 1445
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishmonger View Post
In your world, maybe... so America got North Korea to (ostensibly) dismantle its nuclear program by threatening to bomb them, invade and try another "regime change?" I'm not sure that's how it happened...
In my world….LOL.

No where did I say anything about bombing anyone or anything.

The right way to deal with a dangerous out of control regime is set boundaries as to what is acceptable, establish the consequences for non compliance, monitor their behavior and follow through with the consequences for non compliance.

The left way is set boundaries, that both sides know will never be enforced.
Give them the very weapons you are trying to keep them from having.
Look the other way and when it’s too late to do anything about it, spin it into looking like it’s a good thing that an out of control dictator can destroy his neighbor.
Have the UN impose meaningless sanctions that neither side will ever monitor and tell their followers that all is well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 02:16 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,138,513 times
Reputation: 2908
A "tough" voice of reason is contradictory. Send Bolton to Iran and see how long he lasts.

Edit: No, send his wife and kids first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 03:25 PM
 
9,891 posts, read 10,823,821 times
Reputation: 3108
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
A "tough" voice of reason is contradictory. Send Bolton to Iran and see how long he lasts.

Edit: No, send his wife and kids first.
Yeah , perhaps a tough "rational" voice would have been a better choice of words! why is it libs always want to go after the spouse and children of those they disagree with hmmm?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 03:32 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,476,088 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC View Post
When the left negotiated with N. Korea, N Korea ended up with a nuclear bomb. When negotiations were done the RIGHT way N. Korea is now working on dismantling their nuclear capabilities.
Your representations of the 1994 Agreed Framework and of subsequent related events as between the US and the DPRK are shockingly distorted. This is the sort of thing I would expect to see on NewsMax or some other such node on the right-wing disinformation media network...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 03:52 PM
 
223 posts, read 604,279 times
Reputation: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by silas777 View Post
why is it libs always want to go after the spouse and children of those they disagree with hmmm?
Oh get off your high horse; Cons do it too and you know it...neither side has a monoply on tastefullness when it comes to arguing politics...

Example: Rush Limpballs used to go after Chelsea Clinton constantly
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 03:54 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,476,088 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC View Post
The left way of negotiation relies on the other side to stick to the terms of the negotiation and baring the responsibility of verifying that they are in compliance.
The sealing of sites and the 24/7 presence of the IAEA did not occur?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC View Post
Oil, food and NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY are what Clinton gave them.
Would that be the LWR facilities at Kumho?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2007, 04:05 PM
 
223 posts, read 604,279 times
Reputation: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by bridget72 View Post
That is why France is even on board with us in saying that we cannot tolerate a nuclear Iran.
Oh, so NOW France is an acceptable gauge of of international political situations...pretty convenient

Sorry, you don't get to use France in this argument, your talking heads (Hannity, O'Reilly) forefeited that right when they went ballistic at the time of the Iraq War...

Could it be that France was somehow correct in opposing the attack on a country that was no threat to anyone except itself; because they saw that when a more credible threat arose, the world would be less apt to act quickly beacuse of Iraq?

Or are you going to blame France's refusal to act against Saddam on them having financial ties to Saddam? Go ahead, try that argument....I have 6words for you:

Saudi Arabia and the United States
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:24 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top