Hello guys,

Check out an article about recent policy of the EU and the U.S. toward North Korea which resulted in militarization of the communist regime. It is an analysis of numerous mistakes of European and American decision-makers made over several last years, beginning from Clinton Administration through the Bush Administration.

A direct link to the article is here:
http://europeancourier.org/NorthKorea_06_22_06.htm

Any comments and views warmly welcomed.

The North Koreans have technology to drop a nuke onto Los Angeles. To the lunatic in charge, that constitutes "survival" for his psychotic regime.

Should we let him nuke L.A. to prove liberals are wrong? Are the Dems so dense that only annihilation would convince them?

No wonder Hollyweird contracts so much work up in Canada --- continuation of government, in the event of attack.

Oh yeah. Here's a real bargain for the Cold War buffs.....

http://www.ccmusic.com/item.cfm?itemid=BCD160652

Check the contents list on the left of the page. A mere $212 for your very own fallout shelter! Sing the Duck and Cover song, leftists --- and bye-bye, La-La Land!!!

__________________
Delivering tasty bite-sized Clues to liberals since 1965.

Whats with that wingnut obsession with liberals and Democrats? Just who in thehell is running this country? I'm more concerned with how the US govt is responding to this korean crisis 6 years with 2 more to go into dubya's term.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

If it makes you feel better, the only guy I've heard suggesting a preemptive strike on the missle is... one of Clinton's old cabinet.
Cheney says that's a bad idea.

Frankly from what I've heard on this issue over the course of a day, it seems the evidence that NK can hit our country is scant. But contrary to what the ex-Clinton guy says, Cheney might be right. If taken the wrong way, a preemptive strike could lead to a massive nasty war in the Koreas, killing several of our troops.
The ex-Clinton guy says by giving the threat ahead of time and making it clear, we might be able to avoid that... But I don't know.

What we do know is that NK has a history of putting on shows for our satellites. It's like the kid who cuts his wrist a thousand times, but never deep enough to hit the artery.
We need to find a way to do a few things at the same time:
bring NK to the table so that they have a stake in the world and stop being so antisocial.
stop rewarding their "cries for help" and demand that they start bringing up communication in a less disturbing manner
Investigate to see if there's even anything to be afraid of

Personally I think it's a load of $&%* that we don't have bilateral talks in addition to 6-party talks. The other countries involved do.
Problem is that we can't start doing it now as a result of this scare tactic... not until they give up the missile scare (it is a scare. They cannot miniturize nuclear technology to the point that it fits in the warhead of one of their primitive missiles).

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

He wants money and aid and he thinks this will move that along. It's economic (like far more conflicts than people think).

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.