i know. i am just sort of optimistic sometimes, because i wonder what this story means and i was hoping you guys would provide me some dialogue to consider. and generally red or cparso or tirk might have something of interest to say. and sabanfan too, but you are always baiting peeps to take them off track. you always have to interject some blame of republicans or take a shot at whoever. no big deal though, i cant win em all. my opinions rarely need extra input to be perfectly formed.
Nah, I didn't blame any Republicans. Actually I don't think I've done that at all recently. I just stated an accurate observation of hypocrisy. That's not even taking a shot. And I would think that you, myth/lie debunker and hypocrite pointer-outer, could appreciate that. I just haven't had the desire or energy to get all involved in a serious discussion. You can choose to ignore me if my baiting and potshots really disappoint you that badly.
In modern times there haven't been many dictators stupid enough to do anything that would pit the whole world against them and make them lose power. I guess you could say Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito, and all of the various Russian leaders would be about it. Most dictators know that having a nuclear bomb is an excellent deterrent and that if they ever used one then they would be swiftly taken care of. However, if they get desperate enough then they will use it, which is exactly why Kim Jong-Il and the Iranian Mullahs shouldn't have nuclear bombs. They are all crazy, maniacal people that would be tempted to use the nuclear bombs. Or it is even possible that they use the bomb on one of their own cities and blame it on the US. Now, I know that is a little far-fetched but who knows crazy people try to do crazy things. I guess what I am trying to say is that I don't really think that Kim Jong-Il would ever use a nuclear bomb unless we invaded or he thought we were gonna invade but letting Kim Jong-Il have a nuclear bomb is like letting a schizophrenic have a machine gun and telling him to do whatever the voices tell him.
Now they want a brand new reactor. That didn't take long, now did it? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169843,00.html
Peace with north korea, russia, china, iran,......not going to happen. We either destroy them or keep our forces at such a strong level of preparedness that no one wants to mess with us. It's worked for years. However, we cannot allow them to obtain a means to destroy us. The mutually assured destruction game got real old during the cold war, and I don't think our leaders want to go through that again. World war is a given conclusion to all of this, it's just a question of when. You might as well throw france in the mix also. They are going to side with whomever offers them the best opportunity to become a world power again. I foresee a WWII like scenario with the muslims replacing the japs and france siding with our foes.
Oh, and by the way, "the United States should not even dream" of Korea giving up its "deterrent" before the reactor is finished. North Korea demands reactor from US Same old story. They give up nothing until after they get what they want. Sure. They have already made this agreement and broken it. They say they need a nuclear reactor for power but will forego building their own if the US builds one for them. Then they turn around and threaten that they will not give up their nuclear deterrent until they have that nuclear power plant. Are we fools? They are never going to give up what they consider to be a deterrent. They can keep blackmailing the Western powers forever if we continue to pay. North Korea may have a few crude atomic bombs but they have a paltry capacity to deliver them and it would be national suicide to do so. They are bluffing loudly. I think we should just let them go hungry in the dark. Sooner or later they will concede or the people will revolt. And if they come south across the DMZ, we will have to hammer them hard with airpower. China will sit this one out. They are not going to risk their burgeoning economic success in a war with the US over North Korea. Of course, they will then expect the US to sit out their invasion of Taiwan.
That's the way I see it. China is really making a push to become an economic and political superpower, and that can't happen without a reduction of US of power. Throw the EU into that scenario as well. What the peaceniks don't seem to understand or take into consideration is that no matter how "advanced" society seems to become, it all boils down to each country or group of counties wants a bigger piece of the pie for itself, economically and politically speaking. Problem is, there's only so much to go around, and the US just happens to have the biggest piece. The muslim element is the wildcard. Their reasons for conflict go beyond the typical political/economic parameter, but I can see their hostility towards the US and Great Britain being used to some advantage by those who wish to see our world influence diminished (France, Russia, China). Look at the patterns of history. This game is always the same, though the players change. The only question I see is time frame. 5 years, 10 years, 20? Who knows, but eventually it will happen.
