Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (82808)	3/16/2003 9:44:24 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

And that's the NeoCon bottom line. Pre-emptive Regime Change using unlimited violence, is the only solution, to this and every other problem. All negotiations are appeasement. This is the kind of thinking I'd expect from survivalist groups polishing their Bowie knives in the mountains of Idaho. The fact that it's coming from the intellectual wellspring of the U.S. government, the AEI, is profoundly frightening. It's beginning to look as if that's correct. Well said.

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (82808)	3/17/2003 12:22:37 AM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<<The word for this is "diplomacy". What does it cost us, to be polite? >>> Saddam and alligators do not respond to 'polite' In the case of Saddam we had to take on the appearance of a bigger gator merely to slow him down a bit It had to be an act so real that everyone is convinced. When this one is over (in a few days) I hope we can cover close the mouth, cover the teeth, and smile again. Sig

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (82808)	3/31/2003 9:15:51 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The word for this is "diplomacy". What does it cost us, to be polite? Y'mean pulling our nukes out of S. Korea isn't being polite? We gave up something and gained nothing as a result. Why doesn't North Korea remove all of those 10,000 artillery pieces, all of which are capable of shelling Seoul?? But as the article that Lindy posted describes.. you're in the real world now... Where people don't play fair, and bad people will con, promise, and intimidate more naive countries into giving up the advantages they have... That's because they rule through sheer force of will, not through any sense of fair play... In the eyes of a tyrant, the "meek shall inherit the sh*t".. Hawk

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (82808)	3/31/2003 9:20:06 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Although the 1994 Agreed Framework obligated the consortium to complete construction of both light water reactors by 2003, years passed without any action other than building the infrastructure needed to support the construction project. The U.S. calculated that North Korea would not long survive its economic difficulties, and that if construction of the reactors could be delayed long enough, they need never be built. Newly elected President Bush openly expressed his disdain for the 1994 Agreed Framework. It was only in August 2002 that cement was finally poured for the foundation of the first reactor, at Kumho on the eastern coast. The author conveniently forgets that N. Korea had to take some steps before construction on the light water reactor - and N. Korea did not live up to its part of the bargain (I believe inspections were involved). Clark