Tim Blair

Even John Kerry has to welcome this news, whilst simultaneously decrying it as Bush bullying etc.

As if North Korean promises are worth anything.

OT
hey guys, if you liked Niall then you'll just love link word or phrase">this guy some of us RWDB's have been discovered by.

What an idiot I am!!

http://www.isitwrongtowishonspacehardware.blogspot.com/

There, much easier.

Partly so Moonbat_One. A promise from Kim and his lunatic cabal should definitely not be accepted uncritically.

However, some loss of face was involved in giving such an undertaking. This may indicate the post-Iraq realpolitic has shaken the North Koreans into seriously contemplating the improvement - if not, outright changing - of their ways. Other pragmatic reasons for the new humility include their fear that a starving populace will end up giving Kim the Ceausescu treatment and the fact that their communist 'allies', the Chinese, regard them as dangerous idiots.

This hopeful development joins a lengthening list of achievments in the War on Terrorism: the latest US State Department report showing a decrease in acts of international terrorism; no chance of Saddam using WMD again on his own people and neighbours; the gradual normalisation of Libya's modus operandi; the Taliban decapitated. All of these things have been accomplished in just a few years.

No less than Hillary Clinton conceded recently that George Bush could ende up being judged a visionary by future historians. To my mind, he and his Coalition partners have already been vindicated.

Naturally, this will increase tenfold the extent to which he is hated.

It may be time to turn the pressure up a notch further for the North Koreans - they must really be on the ropes and scared shitless - if a diplomatic solution can be found to de-nuke the peninsular it should be pursued.

Hillary Clinton always tries to beef up her security credentials any way she can - all part of being president in 2009+.

I had heard that during Cheney's last visit to China he basically laid it out for them. Either you ensure the Norks cooperate or we can no longer ensure Taiwan and Japan won't join the Nuke club. It sounded pretty far-fetched to me but then Kim "sneaks off" to China for three days and a few hours after he passes through that train station it mysteriously explodes. And now he wants to deal? Am I reading too much into this? Sure I am. But I'm sure Cheney told the ChiComs "Get the Norks to comply or we won't be friends anymore, we just don't need this shit right now." And Biejing doesn't need this shit right now either. Too many domestic problems w/ their economy about to overheat and SARS season starting. I'd be inclined to agree with CurrencyLad.

"Partly so Moonbat_One. A promise from Kim and his lunatic cabal should definitely not be accepted uncritically... However, some loss of face was involved in giving such an undertaking."

What a fucked up world it is that a country must make a statement like that, and even stranger that doing so results in a loss of "face".

What sort of world leader would even contemplate giving weapons to terrorists, let alone feel shame at promising that he won't do so?

I'll try it myself: "I, Endgame the Barbarian hereby solemnly declare that I will not sell nukes to terrorists shitbags, for fucksake".

Oh, how humiliating! How will I ever look my fellow cult-of-self crazed high-heel-wearing jumpsuit-clad bouffant-haired giant-lazer-on-the-moon-coveting 1960s B-movie villan dictator pals in the eye again!

Kim Il Sung tongjinun han-phyong-saeng inminui ja-yuwa haengbogul wiha-yo modun-gosul da pachisiyot-sumnida.

I don't know if this will interest you, but that's Korean for "Kim Il Sung devoted his whole life to the freedom and welfare of the people," to which the reply might be, "US imperialism is the number 1 target of the world revolution."

Got the phrasebook in Pyongyang.

I think you hit the bullseye there Kerry. The message has finally filtered through that safari suit. However he is still trying to hold on to his nukes but this is end-game. China has tightened the vice on his nuts where else was that fuel train coming from? Must have been sent as a wake up call for the Kimster. Message received and understood chinese overlords! If no negotiate me next.

to be sure the North Koreans do have a habit of streching their word for the sake of an opportunity, but maybe something is sinking into their minds at long last.
I predict that the left will either disparage Kim's word as meaningless (as a hawk might) or somehow claim responsibility for whatever success comes from it.

You've got to think like the enemy Endgame. I agree with everything you say about the weird little shite, Kim. But TO HIM it undoubtedly involves a loss of face to offer an "olive branch to the US" while "calling for Washington's friendship." That's to say nothing of Kim's acceptance of the fact that his almighty, formerly indestructible fantasyland could indeed "suffer the fate of Iraq."

This being so, my point is that the culturally and politically sensitive nature of the concession MAY indicate the North Koreans are more serious then they've hitherto been about rehabilitating themselves in the world's eyes. Not giving nuclear material to terrorists is a very welcome, incalculably valuable bonus.

As you imply, North Korea shouldn't be cheered for doing what's morally right but that's the sad and pitiful world we're living in right now Endgame. We have to plead with the UN to do something about Saddam, we have to plead with the bastions of European liberty to help us, we have to have our shoes checked before boarding a flight. And, tragic to relate, we have to actually be pleased al Quaeda can't pick up some plutonium from the caricature of dictatorial lunacy you so vividly describe.

My one concern about a tentative North Korean 'rehabilitation', however, is that it is a ploy to give the impression that this most insane of polities is becoming a 'rational player' within the nuclear club. This, IMHO, has no chance of ever becoming a reality. In international relations, though, you pursue what's do-able. The overture should be cultivated for its benefits to the War on Terror but with a Volkswagon-sized boulder of salt.

Victory in politics and war come from the mastering of realities, not through irrational emotion.

Humor aside; no Tim, there's an even clearer reason for this change.

Last month, Cheney was in Beijing, and he didn't mince words about our concerns over N. Korean nukes.

US sounds warning on N Korea

Perhaps the Chinese are finally leaning on their client state.

Mark Steyn wrote a piece a while back saying that if you can think of a rational reason for what the North Koreans are doing then, by its very rationality, it is unlikely to be the correct one. Nobody really has any idea what they are thinking or trying to achieve with their statements.

Harry: Eldridge Cleaver in his autobiography mentioned that back in the early 70's when he fled there, the standard response to "Good Morning" was something along the lines of: "Yes, it is a good morning, thanks to the excellent analysis of Our Great Leader Kim Il Sung and the glorious Leadership of the Korean Workers Party". He said after a few months it eventually lost its novelty value, but not its power to bore.

re: the iraqi prison pictures...

saw up close and personal the smirks on the faces of arab intelectos and technocrats the day after 9/11.

they saw that same smirk on my face after the pictures. funny how a number of bravehearts confided in me the fact that the saddam thugs would have split a gut at the wild comparisons made by the main stream press to the "bad old days".

rp

Clem,
Yes, they talk like that the whole time, to talk in any other way being a counter-revolutionary crime. The first couple of times it is hard to believe they are serious.

I was once invited to apply for a job at Pyongyang University. In the job description it said, "Conditions in North Korea are quite harsh. In winter temperatures can reach -20C, and classrooms are unheated." You can get hypothermia in your own classroom!

One day I'll type up the whole thing and put it on my website.

Libya's return to the fold wasn't a response to the US invasion of Iraq! Bloody spin merchants...

Just remembered a story about Christopher Hitchens. When he was in Pyongyang they were doing one of those Communist-style events where everybody sings a traditional song from his country: he gave them "Girls just wanna have fun." He says that since then no audience has held any terrors for him because, "You cannot bomb like you can bomb in Pyongyang."

Well, it sounds great, but isn't this the same tune the North Koreans have been whistling for years? Send out friendly noises, make conciliatory overtures, open dialogue with the South etc. etc. In other words, do just enough to lower the temperature, and then go right on quietly developing nukes and starving their people. Take out the reference to Iraq and this story could have popped up any time in the last decade.

I think CurrencyLad should hold off for just a little while before he adds this to any "list of achievements".

has offered an olive branch to the US by promising never to sell nuclear materials to terrorists

Depends on whom they regard as terrorists. If they mean by that those prescribed by the UN, then it doesn't mean an awful lot. Oh, and they'd better not mean by terrorists the USA, Israel etc.

bleh — Nah, it was the result of twelve years of peaceful dialogue and negotiation without any visible results. It was only a weird coincidence that the rapprochement came about 10 seconds after the US Army crowbar'd Saddam out of his live-in latrine. And certainly Khadafy never admitted as much in his phone call to Berlusconi...

But it was Libya who wanted to return to the fold and renounce (at least in the eyes of the world) all their naughty activities:

Despite much of the commentary on and analysis of Qadhafi's latest move in the mass media, the announcement to renounce Libya's quest for WMD was not a reaction to the war in Iraq as much as it was a continuation of Tripoli's desire to return to the fold. The discussions with Tripoli, conducted through British and American "good offices," have been going on for the past several years. The 19 December announcement has been a component of Libyan policy to graduate from American sanctions that began well in advance of the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Furthermore, these discussions were conducted parallel to the Lockerbie negotiations held between the Washington, London, and Tripoli.2

Following the 2001 terror attacks, Libya was among the first nations to "express its condolences to Washington."3 Colonel Qadhafi further condemned the attacks as "horrifying and destructive," justified American military action as an act of self-defense, called on Libyans to "donate blood" to support the relief efforts in the U.S., and "denounced the use of anthrax attacks as 'demonic.'"4 While illustrative of the seismic geopolitical reorganization brought about by al Qaeda's assault on the American homeland, Qadhafi's public demeanor of support to Washington stems largely from Tripoli's intense desire to normalize relations with Washington.

Foreign Policy in Focus: Libya's Return to the Fold?

"Maybe it was those prison photographs that scared 'em."

Nice to see another patriot supporting torture and sodomy. President Bush, and your mom, must be busting thier buttons with pride.

Maybe they're afraid of us. Mostly, I think they're just lying.

This is with the prospect of Kerry being elected in November. If Bush wins, watch NK, Iran, and Syria all start sending fruit bakets with "I'm Sorry" notes to the White House.

If Bush wins in November, especially if he wins big, you can expect NK, Iran, etc. to continue making overtures to the US out of fear of Bush.

If Kerry wins you can expect these same countries to intensify their adversarial efforts against us. These countries are not afraid of Kerry at all. I mean, NK plays Kerry's speeches they like him so much.

It's funny how the only people who like Kerry's speeches are our enemies...first, the North Vietnamese during the early 70's, and now NK during this time.

Electing Kerry would be tantamount to national suicide.

You've all been had. Go read anything that Selig Harrison, our NoKo interpreter du jour, has said on the crisis with North Korea. Basically, his position since at least 2002 is that the crisis was precipitated by the United States and that now we should buy our security from the NoKos under conditions similar to the Agreed Framework of 1994. IMHO, Mr. Harrison has bought access to the NoKo officials that we have suddenly heard from in this FT piece, bought with his willingness to be a NoKo mouthpiece himself. This sudden turn, on the apparent advice of Mr. Harrison, is calculated brilliantly to rally the rest of the world into opposing any pressure the US might bring against the NoKo dictatorship. "Look, they're willing to negotiate," and we'll have an el Baradei UN pantomime for several more years while the NoKos build more nukes and probably sell them to the highest bidder. It plays into the desires of the SoKos for a "sunshine policy" and it removes some heat from China, and it will make the US look like the bad guy for demanding that the NoKos live up to their past agreements.

A good argument could be made that NoKo, Iran and OBL *want* Bush reelected, because he's so bad at diplomacy and so good at inciting their adherents.

Iraq is now a huge Al Queda training camp and recruiting poster.

"Nice to see another patriot supporting torture and sodomy."

Gosh, Eve -- Tim's just trying to make fetishists like you comfy, and what does he get? Complaints.

By the way, the above comment from "jeffs" is from a different person than the "JeffS" that usually comments here. Of course, I am waiting for the jeffs2 to tell us all how Bush should be, diplomatic-wise, as well as telling us how he knows so much about the membership of Al Qaeda.

To paraphrase the above post: "The anal rape of juvenile prisoners in Iraq is justified because it serves as a powerful warning to Kim Jong Il."

I dunno.. I think Kerry would have no problem carrying on the American legacy that defeated the illiberal regimes of the last century...

Peace as a preferred basis for relations between countries, democracy as the optimal way to organize nations, and free markets as the vehicle for the creation of wealth.

One thing that I think that he wouldn't do is stubbornly continue to listen to advisors who have made countless mistakes and have clearly led the nation down the wrong path.

Somehow I think that the soldiers in the photos depicting abuse of prisoners lost sight of some core American values. And their apologists, the author of this post and many of whom have made posts above, aren't much better.

I guess you're saying that torture and sodomy is good if it helps defeat NK?? That's un-American.

DIDN'T ANYBODY HERE ACTUALLY READ THE ARTICLE THAT TIM LINKED TO?

The opening paragraph is a prime example of sloppy journalism, and "saying it does not want to suffer the fate of Iraq" was taken way out of context:

"North Korea, probably the world's most secretive and isolated nation, has offered an olive branch to the US by promising never to sell nuclear materials to terrorists, calling for Washington's friendship and saying it does not want to suffer the fate of Iraq."

Read the article and you will find what they really want to do as a result of not wanting "to suffer the fate of Iraq":

"Mr Kim rejected the notion that North Korea would never give up nuclear weapons. He argued that Pyongyang - branded by Mr Bush as part of the "axis of evil" - was developing nuclear weapons purely to deter a US attack. "We don't want to suffer the fate of Iraq," he told Mr Harrison."

So as a result of the example set by the US in Iraq, NORTH KOREA WANTS TO HANG ON TO THEIR NUKES, NOT GET RID OF THEM.

And not just that, there's more:

"Kim Yong-nam, deputy to North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, said in a two-hour interview: "We're entitled to sell missiles to earn foreign exchange.""

"Mr Kim told Mr Harrison he thought Mr Bush was delaying resolution of the North Korean issue because of the war in Iraq and the US presidential election later this year."

"But he said: "Time is not on his side. We are going to use this time 100 per cent effectively to strengthen our nuclear deterrent both quantitatively and qualitatively.""

And yet the misleading opening paragraph is touted of an example of Bush pursuing a good policy re. North Korea...

As Glenn Reynolds is fond of saying: READ THE WHOLE THING.

An extremely dishonest post by Instapundit has conned Tim and others. The linked Financial Times article specifically says that North Koreans, "does not want to suffer the fate of Iraq" SO IT CONTINUES TO DEVELOP NUCLEAR WEAPONRY! Nowhere is an NK source quoted as saying that NK will EITHER reduce weapon sales OR make other concessions out of fear. Yeesh! Learn to read!

Yo, jeffs2!

How about some links for your implications about Saddam style prisoner abuse? Last I heard, all of the allegations were for humiliation and non-Saddam style abuse. You know, when you said "Nice to see another patriot supporting torture and sodomy"?

My log on name is not copyrighted, but, hey, I have my standards. If you're going to be a troll calling yourself "jeffs", at least be an intelligent troll.

Ahem, sorry! Preview is your friend, let me do this again.....

Yo, Eve! [not jeffs2]

How about some links for your implications about Saddam style prisoner abuse? Last I heard, all of the allegations were for humiliation and non-Saddam style abuse. You know, when you said "Nice to see another patriot supporting torture and sodomy"?

[ignore last paragraph in my earlier post]

Yo, jeffs2!

A good argument could be made that NoKo, Iran and OBL *want* Bush reelected, because he's so bad at diplomacy and so good at inciting their adherents.

Iraq is now a huge Al Queda training camp and recruiting poster.

A good argument? Not really, especially if you look at history, and realize that those fine people all hated the US of A years before Bush was President. At most, President Bush merely brought this festering sore into the open, so that it could treated properly.

My log on name is not copyrighted, but, hey, I have my standards. If you're going to be a troll calling yourself "jeffs", at least be an intelligent troll, and show some evidence of being open minded.

so, you honestly believe that the rape of children and sexual humiliation of other prisoners is an example? a good thing?
wow
disgusting
amazing how the "moral" right has lost its humanity.
don't even begin to talk to the rest of us about ethics or religion.

W Action and blacker64 are correct. For those of you that didn't bother reading the whole article, read it. Then read this post.

Curious to see if Blair bothers admitting his mistake.

blacker64:

I just read the article again. Dude, you are quoting from it out of context. Naughty, naughty!

Specifically:

In Mr Harrison's first-hand report, published in Tuesday's FT, North Korean leaders explicitly condemn al-Qaeda, and categorically reject US accusations that they would be willing to transfer nuclear technology to the Islamist terror group - or to anyone else.

Kim Yong-nam, deputy to North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, said in a two-hour interview: "We're entitled to sell missiles to earn foreign exchange.

"But in regard to nuclear material our policy past, present and future is that we would never allow such transfers to al-Qaeda or anyone else. Never."

The emphasis is mine. But you see that they are toeing a line, which is a major change from their past behavior.

Now, on the whole, you're right, North Korea is not backing off on their paranoia. That would be similar to the sun rising in the west and setting in the east.

But North Korea has said that they are worried about a US invasion. I believe that they started that talk right after the truce was signed back in the 1950's. There's nothing new there.

Tim points out -- quite correctly -- that North Korea is changing their song. That may turn out to be hot air (with NK, that's the safe bet), but to even say it is a loss of face, especially for that country.

joe in oklahoma:

I asked Eve for links, not screeching. Preferably, these links should go to official web sites or major media sources, not to private blogs with more screeching and hand wringing. Evidence, in other words, even in electronic format.

That's a simple cut-and-paste of a URL. Can you handle that?

I bet Joe in Oklahoma wasnt outraged when Saddam was raping thousands of women a year and torturing hundreds of thousands of people until they died.

So yeah you keep harping some isolated cases. The left is the one that lost its morality by refusing to help 50 million people become free and have a chance at democracy. The left has lost its morality by wanting to trust the the UN after its disaster in Rwanda and with the Oil for Food program that ALONE has probably killed over 2 million people.

2 Million FRIGGIN PEOPLE!!???!!??! WHERE IS YOUR OUTRAGE FOR THEM???? Thats what i thought you dont give damn.

"Maybe it was those prison photographs that scared 'em" -- Tim Blair

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche

What have we become!

Funny that they claim to seek nuclear weapons as an American deterant while nuclear ambition is the one thing that will initiate a American attack. Funny that the only real use for nuclear technology is its sale.

North Korea is not changing their song, and if you or Blair knew anything about North Korea's song, you wouldn't look like the idiots you now appear to be.

North Korea has said numerous times over the last few years that they have no intention of exporting nuclear material, and they've also said that they fully intend to export ballistic missiles.

Their tune hasn't changed a bit, and a private statement by a senior official does not involve any loss of face.

For those that believe this is some sort of diplomatic victory, please explain how a quote in the FT has changed ONE SINGLE THING?

Answer: It hasn't. Just like all rhetoric coming out of North Korea, it's useless and doesn't signify ANYTHING no matter how hard Blair or Instapundit would like it to.

And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you.

Less philosophy. More Marines.

Less philosophy. More Marines.

Megalomanic. You probably deserve all of the pain that's been in your life.

For those who truly believe that scenes of state-sanctioned torture, rape and degradation make for effective foreign relations - grab a camcorder, find some soldiers or federal officials, and offer your body to the cause. Or are you yellow??

Ahh, lefty trolls and sarcasm...always an explosive combination, as evidenced by this thread. So, for the sarcasm-challenged:

Photographing humiliated prisoners and threatening them with torture was an extremely stupid and wrong thing to do, and guess what, it's been condemned by pretty much every sane person around (including Tim Blair), and the military is investigating the matter and will punish the perpetrators.

Nevertheless, perhaps we can keep some perspective here? These threats of torture, which were most likely a one-off occurence, are being made out by certain people to be the worst event in recorded history since the killing of Christ, nevermind the actual torture and murder routinely carried out for decades by the regimes of Saddam and Kim Jong Il (and his father).

Now, I won't claim to know what Tim was thinking when he wrote, "maybe it was those prison photographs that scared 'em", but I'm pretty sure he did not mean, "oh okay, if these pictures had an effect on Kim, then I guess they're okay." If your first reaction upon reading a potentially sarcastic statement is to ascribe that point of view to its writer, perhaps you ought to take off your partisan reading glasses.

I dare say his actual point might have been that Kim Jong Il likely didn't give a shit about those pictures and just might have been influenced by things that count for a wee bit more in this war, like the combined U.S. firepower evidenced in Iraq and the military's success in killing terrorists in large numbers.

The matter of those pictures will be resolved by punishing the people responsible, steps will likely be taken that something like this won't happen again, and that will be that, end of story; the military results of the Iraq War overall will leave a more lasting impression. You know, keeping things in perspective and all.

"What have we become!"

A bunch of cliché-spouting all-caps using lying cretins, it looks like -- or at least, it looks like "A Voice," "J Black," the fake JeffS, and all the other trolls who posted here have become that -- if they were ever anything else to begin with.

PW: I don't think that the trolls will be able to read that much -- those logs in their eyes impede vision.

DIDN'T ANYBODY HERE ACTUALLY READ THE ARTICLE THAT TIM LINKED TO?

Sure I read it, you bloviating tool, but I was kind of distracted by Tim's smug, moronic, ignorant comment. I think a lot of us were.

You people are sick. Get help.

"R F Cheney", at IP address 216.100.133.213 -- you're one to bluster of cowardice, commenting here from behind a fake name and fake email address. Your IP resolves to Antioch, California, incidentally. I wonder if that's where you really are?

IP addresses of our other trolls:
Eve Arden: 66.44.107.114 -- Washington DC
J Black: 220.73.165.11 -- Seoul, S. Korea (Incidentally, do you go around to blogs searching out posts with the subject "north korea" all the time? Just wondered.)
A Voice Crying in the Suburbs: 161.114.64.75 -- Nashua, New Hampshire
joe in oklahoma: 68.97.12.105 -- really does seem to be in Oklahoma, at or near someplace called Norman, actually
the "other" jeffs: 24.151.96.78 -- New Milford, Connecticut (why am I getting a sudden vision of a trust-fund baby who goes to an Ivy League school?)
The other "Tim": 148.129.74.43 -- he seems to be in Upper Marlboro, Maryland. Is that you, Dunlop?
blacker64: 213.94.140.137 -- "New York City! Get a rope..."*
W Action: 209.159.204.9 -- no exact location, but he's using Black Hills Fivercom, in Rapid City, South Dakota, so he can't be far -- there being not much in that area that is near anything.

Ah, fun with website IP lookups. Any more trolls?

*That's an old El Paso salsa commercial. So you can untwist your knickers now.

Ooh, I'm slow -- I missed Concerned Poster GB, who is worried about our health. GB's IP is 65.50.89.164, which seems to be in or near Toronto, Ontario. How's the weather up in Canada, GB? You seem cranky. Why? To me 46 degrees (Fahrenheit) seems a bit cool but it must feel almost like summer to you guys. At least it's partly sunny today!

Andrea: What, I'm a troll for pointing out that the quote this post is based on is misleading and way out of context?

Or am I troll because I don't hold the exact same opinion you do? Is that your definition of troll, somebody who disagrees with you? Which part of my post did you disagree with?

No, blacker64, you are a troll because you are twisting the facts by quoting out of context.

And then you were pointing the "sudden" fear of the "imminent" invasion of North Korea by the USA, when NoKo has been using "American aggression" as a fear stick to keep their people in line for 50 years.

And then you ignored those points, and complained about being called a name. Sorry, you don't like names? Well, my momma always told me, "Sticks and stone may break my bones, but trolls will always whine!"

Keep it in mind.

And now I have to change my log on name.....I've been "touched by a troll".

Is there some sort of cybernetic cleansing ceremony for this condition, or should I drown my sorrows with ethanol?

We need to invent a Troll Drinking Game. Like:

Take a drink when the first what-about-the-tortured-Iraqi-POWs comment appears on a post only tangentially connected with the War in Iraq (like this one)

Take two drinks if Miranda logs with a pointless insult.

Take a shot of tequila with a beer chaser if she uses the term "blogmire."

Take a drink if someone cyber-squeals about "censorship!" if I ban a particularly obnoxious and comment-hijacking troll.

And so on -- come on guys, you like to make up games with rules: go at it. (Input by trolls will be ignored.)

Real Jeff,

"you are a troll because you are twisting the facts by quoting out of context."

I suppose that makes the Financial Times, Tim Blair and Glenn Reynolds trolls too, huh? At least Glenn Reynolds had the balls to apologize.

"And then you were pointing the "sudden" fear of the "imminent" invasion of North Korea by the USA, when NoKo has been using "American aggression" as a fear stick to keep their people in line for 50 years."

Where did I do that?

"Sorry, you don't like names? Well, my momma always told me, "Sticks and stone may break my bones, but trolls will always whine!""

What are you, in junior high?

Quoting out of context is wrong when the context impacts the point I was pursuing by quoting in the first place. What I was getting at was that the NoKo's are leaving open the option to trade as they're asserting their right to do so even while touting their supposed choice not to do so. Given the NoKo's track record, the assertion of that right speaks pretty loudly - their claim not to want to sell nuclear technology to any third party not so much.

"Funny that they claim to seek nuclear weapons as an American deterant while nuclear ambition is the one thing that will initiate a American attack."

Funny how if we'd thought Saddam actually had nukes, we never would have attacked him.

"Funny how if we'd thought Saddam actually had nukes, we never would have attacked him."

Uh -- duh, smart guy. Tell me something -- do you have to take off your socks to count to twenty?

Run along there, Andrea, if you can't think of a rebuttal.

err blacker64 its Andrea`s domain if you don't like its you that should Run along son.

blacker64:

"And then you were pointing the "sudden" fear of the "imminent" invasion of North Korea by the USA, when NoKo has been using "American aggression" as a fear stick to keep their people in line for 50 years."

Where did I do that?

Right here:

Read the article and you will find what they really want to do as a result of not wanting "to suffer the fate of Iraq":

"Mr Kim rejected the notion that North Korea would never give up nuclear weapons. He argued that Pyongyang - branded by Mr Bush as part of the "axis of evil" - was developing nuclear weapons purely to deter a US attack. "We don't want to suffer the fate of Iraq," he told Mr Harrison."

Now, true, you didn't use "imminent". I was wrong about that. But your tone was, "Wow! We are threatening North Korea!" My response remains, "North Korea has been saying that for 50 years". In other words, nothing changed there.

Now for:

"Quoting out of context is wrong when the context impacts the point I was pursuing by quoting in the first place. What I was getting at was that the NoKo's are leaving open the option to trade as they're asserting their right to do so even while touting their supposed choice not to do so. Given the NoKo's track record, the assertion of that right speaks pretty loudly - their claim not to want to sell nuclear technology to any third party not so much."

Well, I'm glad you clarified yourself. I really am. I've been called on this problem before. So has Tim -- have you checked the update note on this post?

But I am not satisfied with your explanation. See, you just right over several paragraphs without noting that omission, and your response above is not understandable.

Yes, I agree, North Korea is likely full of hot air. The article says so, and I said so in my first reply to you. But your quoting out of context was an error, period. You hold Tim to this standard. Do so to yourself.

So stop being sactimonious -- you've made your point. Learn from your mistakes.

As far as my educational level goes, next time, don't complain about the crushing of dissent when your behavior is less than sterling. FYI, that's a warning flag for trollish behavior (as per your reply to Andrea). Adults would say, "Excuse me, but I was not trying to offend. My point is.......", and not snarl about being labeled something unpleasant. This provokes a fight or flight reflex even in cyberspace.

I can help you "run along," blacker64, if you are having some trouble doing it yourself.

And you know, you're a troll because you came here and, however justified you may think you were or may indeed have been, you were unpleasant and combative from the first. If you really believed in your viewpoints more than you believed in the importance of attacking those who don't think like you, you'd be more measured and polite in your rebuttals. Internet anonymity is no excuse for impoliteness, and no one has to take your shit.

Jinx!

Heh heh -- oh yeah, blacker64, and as to your "rebuttal" nonsense -- I'm sorry, was I too subtle there? I don't waste my time "rebutting" sheer idiocy.

"I asked Eve for links"

Sorry, Sweetie. I mistakenly assumed the Big Brains here might have heard of The New Yorker. It's a magazine. Obviously not one read by the mouth breathers here. You can look up thier website yourself, assuming you know how to use a search engine.
You can also go to msnbc.com and read Gen. Taguba's report. How 'bout THAT name! Taguba!!! HAHAHA.
Wouldn't you like to bugger him!
Asshole.

Wow, that Eve...from ordinary troll to brain implosion in two posts. Impressive.

Considering that you didn't mention where you had gotten your information at all, how the fuck was anyone supposed to know you were referring to some New Yorker article? Asshole?

And oh, how I'd like to ban you. And I have! I guess you'll have to go back out on the streets for your nightly buggering. Charge half price and offer a hand-job while you're at it, you might actually get what you're looking for this time.

Well, gosh darn it! Eve has been banned! I feel so depressed........NOT!

Actually, I have heard of the New Yorker. I've even (GASP!) read it. I just didn't think that "Eve Arden" was at that reading level.

Jesus, quite a site you've got going here Andrea. Anyone that dare disagree with big tim gets branded a troll and has their IP posted.

You'll notice Kevin Drum outed Blair and Glenn as being 180 degrees dead wrong on their reading of that quote in the FT, and at least Glenn had the half-balls to admit he was half-wrong.

Blair's response? He sicks Andrea on those with the gall to point out his bullshit and punishes them by posting their geographical locations.

What do we get if we all break out our little tim flags and wave in agreement on an issue that he's obviously ignorant of? Will you send us a nice email for being sheep in the blair flock?

Blair hasn't a clue about North Korea. If I'm a "troll" for pointing out that obvious fact, I'm proud to be one.

"You'll notice Kevin Drum outed Blair and Glenn as being 180 degrees dead wrong on their reading of that quote in the FT, and at least Glenn had the half-balls to admit he was half-wrong." --J Black

Did you read the update and what is you sauce that "He[Tim] sicks Andrea on those with the gall to point out his bullshit".

Hmmm, I've came back today to discover I didn't earn a response to my criticism of Tim's post? Should I have been more trollish? Or, should I just assume that it's ok to fabricate "wins" in the War on Terror, like those homicidal Macedonian security officers..?

When I was a kiddy, if someone cracked the shits, they'd take their bat and ball and go home. Seems around here when Andrea cracks the shits, she takes someone else's bat and ball and sends them home.

By the way my IP address is whatever it is, and I'm in Hobart, Tasmania.

Did that help, Andrea?

North Korea can not be dealt with militarily. Only a fool would think that it could be. Nuclear capabilities aside, they have over 10,000 pieces of artillery in range of Seoul and could level the city with shells easily. Also, if the U.S. decided to attack, where would the troops come from? Our forces are already stretched thin in Iraq, and that situation is growing worse, not better. Make no mistake, (P)resident Bush's policy has made us weaker, not stronger. North Korea has less to fear from we the toothless tiger than it used to. The only reason I could see for them to fear us more is the unpredictability and irrationality of Bush's foreign policy. Perhaps they worry that our 'dear leader' doesn't care about the repercussions of his actions and is willing to destroy them here and now no matter what the cost.

It occurs to me that Kim has the same problem Saddam had. If people decide that you're too unpredictable, they give up on deterrence in favor of regime change.

Swade it Andrea`s "bat and ball" to do with as they wish.

Oh dear. Andrea Harris is just depressed about the fact that she doesn't get to torture naked Iraqis. It's the only action she'd be likely to get.

hey blah, don't sully the bleh family's name by association, please!

"...(P)resident Bush's policy has made us weaker, not stronger. North Korea has less to fear from we the toothless tiger than it used to. The only reason I could see for them to fear us more is the unpredictability and irrationality of Bush's foreign policy. Perhaps they worry that our 'dear leader' doesn't care about the repercussions of his actions and is willing to destroy them here and now no matter what the cost.

Posted by: the cow at May 5, 2004 at 06:18 PM"

WOW! The "stolen" election, Bush's alleged insanity (what, not his stupidity? Or is he insane on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, and stupid the other days of the week), and the stunning inferiority of the US armed forces all in one run-on! I love you, "the cow!" Keep those home fires burning!

its nice to see mature, responsible people in charge here!

oh, and im in Edison, NJ, and im not sure what my IP is, but I dont really care.

Have fun!

Oh so Americans have begun to find prison photos have become scary eh?

I sincerely hope that the Iraqis are able to rape/torture/abuse some white American females and take photos and send them over here so that Whitey stops invading other countries to steal their resources.

Dear people,
Are you all so stupid and ill informed? To the right wingers: Bush is an idiot and a madman. He is highly delusional and is being used as the front man for a gang of corporate thugs. Its time to wake up right wingers. You are not benefitting by the US occupation of Iraq your deluded and sadly misplaced ideals of America's "global mission" is nothing but the self delusions and rationalizations of people who are in denial. The despots that "threaten" modern society are the products of right wing foreign policy so get off your lazy simple minded asses and demand more from your politicians.
To the left wingers: you all can kiss my ass with your ill-informed, reactionary, childish, cry-baby bullshit. You haven't a clue of what it takes to truly run an even remotely successful government let alone the most powerful nation on earth. So get over it. Go back to school and study politics and history and throw in a good dose of sociology and human psychology and then see if you can still be so high-minded and naive about the way the world is "supposed" to be.
It is only by relinquishing our delusions, no matter how safe or comfortable that they may be, that we are going to move beyond the current stalemate of geo-politics. and this, people, is the only way that we as a race are going to survive to see the turn of the next millenia.

Libya did not cave because of our "strong stance" against Iraq...Libya gave up their weapons program because we promised to lift some sanctions. It had very little if anything to do with Iraq but was the result of diplomatic negotiations.

Also, to say the prison photos had any good results merely justifies torture.

Good lord, I haven't seen this many retards come out of the woodworks since that time I said this poem of Harold Pinter's sucked the chrome off the tailpipe of a rebuilt 1957 Buick. I especially love the way you asspackers come back to the same post again and again, like dogs going back to where they had vomited and licking it up until every last morsel is gone.

This is hilarious. Do keep attempting to be both macho ("oooh, this is where I live, I ain't afraid of no girl!") and witty ("I'm going to use 'i luv andrea' as a really devastatingly ironic sock puppet name! That'll show her! And then I'll make a creepy joke about prison photos and raping white women, to show I've got real balls.")

Spencer: The sanctions were lifted because Lybia offered to negotiate their way out of the untenable situation they had gotten themselves into over the years. The offer was made once Afghanistan - state sponser of terror - had fallen and it was clear that the U.S. and the Brits were serious about invading Iraq. The last straw was the U.S. capture and imprisonment of Saddam. This signalled that Khadaffi's previous position - state sponser of terror - absolutely would not hold with the U.S. He knew that he had to give up and so he did.

Spindrifter: THE BUSHITLER IS ANTICHRIST...YOU ARE ALL IGNORANT...CAPATALIST PROFIT IS GREAT SATAN...RUN FOR THE HILLS...THE ARAB STREET...MUSLIM OUTRAGE...LEFTIST SYMPATHIZERS GETTING ANGRY TOO...NOAM CHOMSKY SAID!!!!!!

Where are you from? What are you on? You really should get out more. Get some sun man, take a walk, stop cannabalizing your own brain.

Andrea, you come across as pretty juvenile yourself. I'd ask how old you are, but I'm sure you'd feign offence if I did, so I won't. ;)

Spencer, got any links, quotes, references for that info? It's new to me, that's all.

Whoops, that request should have been addressed to 'Kerry Is Unelectable'.