Bush, Putin warn Iran, N. Korea - GoFuckYourself.com

theking · 06-02-2003, 02:34 AM

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia -- U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday urged North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions and expressed concern over Iran's nuclear program.

"We strongly urge North Korea to visibly, verifiably and irreversibly dismantle its nuclear program," Bush told a joint news conference after the two leaders met privately for 45 minutes inside Konstantin Palace.

"We are concerned about Iran's advanced nuclear program and urge Iran to comply in full with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty."

Bush said both the United States and Russia were "determined to meet the threats of weapons of mass destruction."

Same article pertaining to WMD's

When asked about the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Bush said: "We've discovered weapons systems, biological labs, that Iraq denied she had, and labs that were prohibited under the U.N. resolutions."

Earlier this weekend, Bush pointed to two mobile laboratories found in Iraq which U.S. intelligence concluded were probably designed to produce biological weapons, The Associated Press reported. However, both the Pentagon and U.S. weapons hunters have said the labs do not constitute arms.

Putin did not offer any opinion on whether weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq.

But British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in an interview with Sky News, said he had "no doubt whatever that the evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction will be there. Absolutely."

Blair said he had already seen plenty of information that his critics had not, but would in due course.

"Over the coming weeks and months we will assemble this evidence and then we will give it to people," he said. "I have no doubt whatever that the evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction will be there."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe...ope/index.html

Mr.Fiction · 06-02-2003, 02:36 AM

North Korea is about as scared of the US as the US is of them.

That's a stalemate.

iroc409 · 06-02-2003, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction
North Korea is about as scared of the US as the US is of them.

That's a stalemate.

yeah, but throw in a bunch of crazy russians and you have quite the tea party

theking · 06-02-2003, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction
North Korea is about as scared of the US as the US is of them.

That's a stalemate.

There is not a stalemate. The US will not allow North Korea to build a nuclear arsenal...or build ICBM's. If North Korea cannot be negotiated with...it will be delt with militarily. North Korea cannot do any harm to the Continental USA and its destructive power is pretty much limited to the Korean Peninsula.

I am satisfied that plans are in the works for a pre-emtive strike. I saw a discussion among some of the retired Generals and they all stated that a pre-emtive strike can be done and would greatly limit the destruction and loss of life that North Korea can impose. They all agreed that there would still be very significant destrcution and loss of life in South Korea.

PicturesContent · 06-02-2003, 02:52 AM

Never heard our President warns someone...
Fucking journalists...
Bush warns everyone, Putin just keeps silence as a normal well educated person

theking · 06-02-2003, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by PicturesContent
Never heard our President warns someone...
Fucking journalists...
Bush warns everyone, Putin just keeps silence as a normal well educated person

Huh?

FillmoreSlim · 06-02-2003, 10:14 AM

'George Bush is being childish'

War rifts cast a long shadow over the Evian meeting

Monday June 2, 2003
The Guardian

New York Times Editorial, June 1
"Never mind African development, weapons proliferation and global trade ... The reason people will be tuning into this year's G8 summit meeting in France is to see whether George [Bush] will laugh at Jacques [Chirac]'s jokes, slap Vladimir [Putin] good-naturedly on the back, or even speak to Gerhard [Schröder]. Or whether he will simply hang out with his good pal Tony [Blair] while grumbling at the others.

"Bush aides have pondered how best to punish France. Ignoring Germany while forgiving Russia is also part of the plan ... Now, even as Germany is eager to make amends, the White House seems intent on downgrading ties with Berlin. This is not in America's best interest ... President Bush should be seeking to mend these alliances ... [He] must take advantage of the Evian gathering not to hold grudges, but to move on."

Sunday Telegraph Editorial, June 1

"While Mr Bush will no doubt be polite to his French hosts, there can be little doubt that his interests are engaged elsewhere ... The shuttle diplomacy of the president and [Mr Blair] in the past few days has also shown how differently they view the world. Mr Bush is happy to work with the French - but not at any cost ... [America] is happy for European countries to assist in the multi-faceted campaign to end terrorism in the Middle East ... But that campaign is not dependent upon the approval of Mr Chirac and Mr Schröder. The prime minister, meanwhile, has spent much of his trip defending his continued enthusiasm for EU integration."

Nico Fried Süddeutsche Zeitung, Munich, June 1

"Mr Bush booked a meeting with Mr Putin and Mr Chirac during his European tour [but] Mr Schröder is not on the agenda ... But their paths might cross ... They might exchange a few words around the G8 summit table. As nothing much is expected of the conversation, the length of the meeting, the strength of the handshake and the intensity of the smile will all be factors used to measure the temperature of German-American relations.

"Mr Schröder deserves credit for making efforts to heal the rift with Washington his highest priority ... One German diplomat noted that relations 'were improving'. Only the personal relationship between the two leaders remains a problem ... The German side has made an effort ... [but] the American president is ... being childish."

Le Monde Editorial, Paris, June 1

"This G8 summit is not like the others ... This year, [it] will undertake a 'wider dialogue' with the heads of 13 African, Middle Eastern, Latin American and Asian countries, chief among them China, India, Brazil and Nigeria. This opening-up bears the stamp of Mr Chirac. Mischievous tongues claim that the president wants to 'borrow' the themes of the parallel summit on alternatives to globalisation. Other, equally wicked tongues maintain that [Mr Chirac] is seeking to isolate the US, whose relationship with France is still frosty after the the Iraq crisis. Both camps are wrong. The truth is that for a long time, Mr Chirac has held a world view that is largely devoid of the usual western ethnocentrism. That he's never managed to translate it into concrete acts is another problem altogether ...

"Still, if the G8 is about intelligent economic debate in the globalisation era, then Mr Chirac can be said to be displaying good sense and simple realism."

NBDesign · 06-02-2003, 10:18 AM

We're all going to die!

rooster · 06-02-2003, 10:22 AM

http://www.newsmax.com/weasels/98.shtml my new deck of cards

PicturesContent · 06-02-2003, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Huh?

Yep.

Nothing personal. This is the way things are.

FillmoreSlim · 06-02-2003, 10:25 AM

Recruitment for new Iraqi military to begin by month's end, United States says

BAGHDAD, Iraq, June 2 ? Recruitment for the New Iraqi Corps, the American-installed replacement for Saddam Hussein's military, will begin by the end of the month, the U.S. civilian administrator said Monday.
L. Paul Bremer also said thousands of demobilized enlisted men from Saddam's army would be hired next week to clean up sites that would be used for the training of the new military.
The moves come more than a week after Bremer dissolved Saddam's military and, in the process, threw thousands of career soldiers out of work.
''We expect to begin recruiting members of the New Iraqi Corps before the end of this month,'' Bremer said at a news conference. ''We are looking at other ways to stimulate the economy.''
Bremer also painted a positive picture of life in the Iraqi capital, saying the city of 5 million was now receiving increasing amounts of electricity.
Security is a prime concern of the U.S.-led occupying force, and a new military would help that situation ? both by creating a homegrown security force and by taking young, out-of-work men off the streets.
An organized Iraqi military has not existed in actuality since mid-April.
Bremer repeated that officers who held the rank of colonel or above in Saddam's army would be barred from the new military.
Saddam's regular army was believed to number between 300,000 and 400,000 troops.
Most of the armed forces' manpower consisted of conscripts who served between 18 months and 2 1/2 years. But an estimated 150,000 members were officers, noncommissioned officers, professional soldiers or civilians employed by the Defense Ministry.
Bremer said he was ''fully aware'' of the difficulties facing former members of Saddam's army who are now unemployed.
''The purpose of our policy is not to punish people,'' he said.
But he stressed that while members of the former army who had no ties to the former regime would be readmitted, ''I do not expect there will be many exceptions for senior army officers.''

Nysus · 06-02-2003, 10:25 AM

Uhm.. Maybe they are making nuclear weapons to be able to protect themselves? Just like why the US has nuclear weapons. How about the US dismantle all of their stuff - I'm sure the world would feel much safer and less hostile towards the US.

Cheers,
Matt

NBDesign · 06-02-2003, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nysus
Uhm.. Maybe they are making nuclear weapons to be able to protect themselves? Just like why the US has nuclear weapons. How about the US dismantle all of their stuff - I'm sure the world would feel much safer and less hostile towards the US.

Cheers,
Matt

I agree... Either everyone should have them... or none of us should have them... Shit... None should have them! It does not take a brave man to push a button or pull the trigger....

Let's go back to the old days with swords and spears... those were REAL MEN!

ADL Colin · 06-02-2003, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nysus
Uhm.. Maybe they are making nuclear weapons to be able to protect themselves? Just like why the US has nuclear weapons. How about the US dismantle all of their stuff - I'm sure the world would feel much safer and less hostile towards the US.

Cheers,
Matt

What do you guys mean by "should"? Why should the US act in the interest of "fairness" rather than self-interest?

donnie · 06-02-2003, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

There is not a stalemate. The US will not allow North Korea to build a nuclear arsenal...or build ICBM's. If North Korea cannot be negotiated with...it will be delt with militarily. North Korea cannot do any harm to the Continental USA and its destructive power is pretty much limited to the Korean Peninsula.

I am satisfied that plans are in the works for a pre-emtive strike. I saw a discussion among some of the retired Generals and they all stated that a pre-emtive strike can be done and would greatly limit the destruction and loss of life that North Korea can impose. They all agreed that there would still be very significant destrcution and loss of life in South Korea.

What about 40,000+ americans in South Korea?

mule · 06-02-2003, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

There is not a stalemate. The US will not allow North Korea to build a nuclear arsenal...or build ICBM's. If North Korea cannot be negotiated with...it will be delt with militarily. North Korea cannot do any harm to the Continental USA and its destructive power is pretty much limited to the Korean Peninsula.

I am satisfied that plans are in the works for a pre-emtive strike. I saw a discussion among some of the retired Generals and they all stated that a pre-emtive strike can be done and would greatly limit the destruction and loss of life that North Korea can impose. They all agreed that there would still be very significant destrcution and loss of life in South Korea.

preemptive
speedbump

directfiesta · 06-02-2003, 11:47 AM

On CCN now: "Inside the war room " .

A bunch of generals in combat attire in a room planning the invasion of Iraq...
TheKing, you should watch that : to you, it will give you a hell of a hardon... A bit a " military porn video" to you...

LOL

loverboy · 06-02-2003, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NBDesign
We're all going to die!

lol

SleazyDream · 06-02-2003, 11:52 AM

tell the north koreans we're gona install a speedbump on their major highway.

mule · 06-02-2003, 11:52 AM

What is Evian spelt backwards?

PicturesContent · 06-02-2003, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NBDesign

I agree... Either everyone should have them... or none of us should have them... Shit... None should have them! It does not take a brave man to push a button or pull the trigger....

Let's go back to the old days with swords and spears... those were REAL MEN!

Real Men are those with brains!
Not with weapons in every hole.
No matter what that weapons are and how many people can one kill with that weapons at a time.

theking · 06-02-2003, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by directfiesta
On CCN now: "Inside the war room " .

A bunch of generals in combat attire in a room planning the invasion of Iraq...
TheKing, you should watch that : to you, it will give you a hell of a hardon... A bit a " military porn video" to you...

LOL

I watched it in its entirety yesterday.

theking · 06-02-2003, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

What about 40,000+ americans in South Korea?

Some will die if that is what you are asking about.

NBDesign · 06-02-2003, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PicturesContent

Real Men are those with brains!
Not with weapons in every hole.
No matter what that weapons are and how many people can one kill with that weapons at a time.

So you are saying our leaders are no real men? They are the one who command the ones with the weapons.

If you are, then I agree with you.

volante · 06-02-2003, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

There is not a stalemate. The US will not allow North Korea to build a nuclear arsenal...

Donald Rumsfeld obviously had different ideas when he was on the board of directors of the company that built a nuclear powerplant in N Korea - the same powerplant that the US is concerned will supply the weapons grade plutonium required to build such a nuclear arsenal...

Mr.Fiction · 06-02-2003, 01:12 PM

It is a stalemate. The U.S. is not going to do anything that's going to get 100,000 people, many of them our allies, killed.

The only way to "win" against North Korea is the same way that the U.S. "won" against Russia. Put economic and political pressure and wait for them to go broke or to have a revolution within. You know how long that took with Russia.

directfiesta · 06-02-2003, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

I watched it in its entirety yesterday.

Jokes aside, it was interesting. I will probably catch all the upcoming segments...

theking · 06-02-2003, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by directfiesta

Jokes aside, it was interesting. I will probably catch all the upcoming segments...

One thing that was interesting to me is that the War Room was seconds away from being struck by an incoming missile...when a Patriot Battery took it out. This could not be reported at the time as it would have provided intel to the Iraqi's.

donnie · 06-02-2003, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Some will die if that is what you are asking about.

Exacly! So why the fuck should you go to war and die beacuse of some BS reasons that idiot Bush is talkong about. N. Korea is NOT threatening USA, Iran is NOT threatening USA and Iraq wasn't threatening USA. They can't even protect them self! It is YOU and other stupid or poor people that are going to die. Bush and his family are all going to be fine and just get richer.

But I guess you are just too stupid to understand all that...

theking · 06-02-2003, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

Exacly! So why the fuck should you go to war and die beacuse of some BS reasons that idiot Bush is talkong about. N. Korea is NOT threatening USA, Iran is NOT threatening USA and Iraq wasn't threatening USA. They can't even protect them self! It is YOU and other stupid or poor people that are going to die. Bush and his family are all going to be fine and just get richer.

But I guess you are just too stupid to understand all that...

The whole point to understand is that the USA will not allow North Korea or Iran to develop weapons and delivery systems that can be a threat to the USA...and rightfully so. FYI the Korean Conflict has not ended...only a truce was signed in 1953.

donnie · 06-02-2003, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

The whole point to understand is that the USA will not allow North Korea or Iran to develop weapons and delivery systems that can be a threat to the USA...and rightfully so. FYI the Korean Conflict has not ended...only a truce was signed in 1953.

And offcourse Bush have the "proof" that Iran and N. Korea are developing this weapons

The whole point is that you and other stupid people are going to war to get killed beacuse of some rich idiot agenda.

"Fear is just like the stray, You feed it once and it is allways there..."

Serge_Oprano · 06-02-2003, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin

What do you guys mean by "should"? Why should the US act in the interest of "fairness" rather than self-interest?

Colin, asking MORONS the smart questions is NOT prudent
;-)))

theking · 06-02-2003, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

And offcourse Bush have the "proof" that Iran and N. Korea are developing this weapons
The whole point is that you and other stupid people are going to war to get killed beacuse of some rich idiot agenda.

"Fear is just like the stray, You feed it once and it is allways there..."

North Korea has stated that they are producing nukes...and they have already tested short range delivery systems.

iroc409 · 06-02-2003, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

And offcourse Bush have the "proof" that Iran and N. Korea are developing this weapons

good god, where have you been? NK IS developing a nuclear program, and they have an untested system that could deliver a payload to washington or oregon...

donnie · 06-02-2003, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

North Korea has stated that they are producing nukes...and they have already tested short range delivery systems.

yes on delivery systems, no on producing nukes. Never stated and probably never will even if they are producing them.

Fuck it. There is no point to discuss this with you...

theking · 06-02-2003, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

yes on delivery systems, no on producing nukes. Never stated and probably never will even if they are producing them.

Fuck it. There is no point to discuss this with you...

By kid.

directfiesta · 06-02-2003, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

yes on delivery systems, no on producing nukes. Never stated and probably never will even if they are producing them.

Fuck it. There is no point to discuss this with you...

Bingo! now you understand....

donnie · 06-02-2003, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

By kid.

By idiot

Herb Kornfield · 06-02-2003, 02:57 PM

Why dont we all just get along and stop the global pissing contest.

We need a nice happy cup of decaf for all........

Gutterboy · 06-02-2003, 03:00 PM

Why not just turn N. Korea and Iran against each other? We can hook the Shah up with a few medium range nukes & russia can do the same with Kim Jong Il.

In a couple of days you'd be able to fit the entire population of both countries into a medium sized ashtray. Problem solved.

FillmoreSlim · 06-02-2003, 03:05 PM

The Unseen War
By Michael Massing
1.
The Coalition Media Center, at the Saliyah military base in Doha, Qatar, seems designed to be as annoying and inconvenient as possible for reporters. To get there from the center of town, you have to take a half-hour ride through a baking, barren expanse of desert. At the gate, you have to submit your electronic equipment to a K-9 search, your bags to inspection, and your body to an X-ray scan. You then have to wait under the scorching sun for a military escort, who, after checking your credentials, takes you to the press bus. When the bus is full, you're driven the two hundred yards to the media center. The bus lets you off in a concrete courtyard surrounded by a seven-foot-high wall topped by barbed wire. If you stand on a ledge and look out, you'll see two rows of identical warehouse-like buildings?the offices of General Tommy Franks and the US Central Command.

Journalists, though, never get inside these buildings, for they're restricted to the windowless media center, which is sixty feet long, brightly lit, and heavily air-conditioned. Inside the front door is a large space with long counters at which reporters for second-tier news organizations work. Extending out from this area are three corridors housing the offices of the TV networks, wire services, and major newspapers. Along the back wall is the door to the UK press office. Knock on it and moments later an officer in fatigues will appear and field your request. By contrast, the door to the US office, to the right of the main entrance, opens onto an empty corridor, and if you knock on it no one will answer. Instead, you have to phone the office and leave your request with the officer on duty. If you're lucky, someone will come out and speak with you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the war, many of the reporters crammed into the center would dial the US number, seeking to check facts, get some background information, or ferret out a bit of news. Usually, they'd be disappointed. Getting confirmation for even the most basic facts filed by reporters in the field would often prove difficult. Occasionally, a senior press officer would emerge to speak with a reporter, and within minutes a ravenous mob would surround him, desperately seeking to shake loose something even remotely newsworthy.

The daily briefings were even less helpful. Held in a large conference hall with the now-famous $250,000 stage set, the briefings were normally conducted by Vincent Brooks, a tall, erect, one-star general who is impeccably polite, unflappable, and remarkably uninformative. Each briefing would begin with a few choice videos ?black-and-white clips of "precision-guided" missiles unfailingly hitting their targets, and color shots of American troops distributing aid to grateful Iraqis. No matter what was taking place inside Iraq, Brooks would insist that the coalition remained "on plan" and that morale remained "sky high." Sometimes the general offered outright misinformation. When, for instance, the Palestine Hotel was hit by a US tank shell, which killed two journalists and wounded several others, Brooks asserted that US forces had come under fire from the hotel. This was denied by the journalists on the scene, and the commander of the unit that fired the shell, in an interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, made no mention of being fired on from the hotel. Still, Colin Powell, citing no evidence, later repeated the claim that "our forces responded to hos-tile fire, appearing to come from" the hotel.

The Coalition Media Center is managed by Jim Wilkinson, a fresh-faced, thirty-two-year-old Texan and a protégé of Bush's adviser Karen Hughes. Wilkinson made his mark during the 2000 presidential election when he spoke on behalf of GOP activists protesting the Florida ballot recount. To run the media center in Doha, Wilkinson, a member of the naval reserve, appeared in the same beige fatigues as the career officers working under him. Nonetheless, the center had all the earmarks of a political campaign, with press officers always "on message." Many journalists, accustomed to the smoothly purring Bush political machine, were struck by the heavy-handedness of the Doha operation. A week into the war, journalists began writing their own "media pieces," as they called them, com-paring the briefings to the infamous "Five O'Clock Follies" of the Vietnam War.

Rarely, though, did those stories examine how well the press, radio, and television themselves were doing, and that was unfortunate. For, with more than seven hundred registered journalists, the Coalition Media Center offered a superb opportunity for observing how reporters of different nations approached the war, and for understanding the many shortcomings in their coverage.

2.
So stingy is Centcom with information that, at the daily briefings, the questions asked were often more revealing than the answers given. Those posed by European and Arab journalists tended to be more pointed and probing than those from the Americans. The Europeans and Arabs would ask about the accuracy of US missiles, the use of weapons containing depleted uranium, the extent of civilian casualties. The Americans would ask questions such as: "Why hasn't Iraqi broadcasting been taken out?" "Is Iraq using weapons prohibited by the UN?" "Can you offer more details on the rescue of Jessica Lynch?" One US network correspondent told me that she was worried that, if she pushed too hard at the briefings, she would no longer be called on. Jim Wilkinson was known to rebuke reporters whose copy he deemed insufficiently supportive of the war; he darkly warned one correspondent that he was on a "list" along with two other reporters at his paper.

After each briefing, correspondents for the major satellite networks would stand up in back and give a live report before a camera. Sometimes I took a seat nearby and listened. The British correspondents invariably included some analysis in their reports. After one briefing, for instance, James Forlong of Sky News observed that Tommy Franks had left the briefing to his "fourth in command" (i.e., Brooks), and that "very little detail had been provided." Referring to a question about a friendly-fire incident, Forlong noted that Brooks had little to say other than that the incident was "under investigation." CNN's Tom Mintier, by contrast, would faithfully recite Brooks's main points, often with signs of approval. "They showed some amazing footage of a raid on a palace," he said when introducing a clip that had been shown at the briefing, one of many that CNN aired.

Such differences in style were apparent in the broadcasts themselves. Switching stations in my hotel, I often found myself drawn to the BBC. With two hundred reporters, producers, and technicians in the field, its largest deployment ever, the network offered no-nonsense anchors, tenacious correspondents, perceptive features, and a host of commentators steeped in knowledge of the Middle East, in contrast to the retired generals and colonels we saw on American TV. Reporters were not afraid to challenge the coalition's claims. When an anchor asked Paul Adams, a BBC defense correspondent, whether Iraqi fighters were using "quasi-terrorist tactics"?a common Centcom charge?he said it was more appropriate to speak of "asymmetrical warfare," i.e., the use of unconventional tactics by forces that were badly outgunned. At the same time, the BBC presented many stories about the horrors of Saddam's rule. In one chilling piece, it had an interview with an Iraqi woman in London whose family members had been murdered, raped, or tortured by the regime.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16293

donnie · 06-02-2003, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by iroc409

good god, where have you been? NK IS developing a nuclear program, and they have an untested system that could deliver a payload to washington or oregon...

Offcourse they do. And Iraq had thousands of tons of biological weapons and hundreds of robots with nuclear warheads.

Try to find some independent source of news or move out off USA. Than you will see all the lies you are being told by your government

Gutterboy · 06-02-2003, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

Offcourse they do. And Iraq had thousands of tons of biological weapons and hundreds of robots with nuclear warheads.

Try to find some independent source of news or move out off USA. Than you will see all the lies you are being told by your government

Uh.. you are aware that Kim Jong Il admitted (not so much admitted as boasted in fact) to having a nuke a couple of months ago?

They also made it clear they've reactivated a previously shut down reactor which produces weapons grade plutonium.

I just hope Kim has the balls to use it when the US decides to invade.

SexySarah · 06-02-2003, 03:13 PM

Who fucking cares.

Kisses,

SexySarah

donnie · 06-02-2003, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

Uh.. you are aware that Kim Jong Il admitted (not so much admitted as boasted in fact) to having a nuke a couple of months ago?

They also made it clear they've reactivated a previously shut down reactor which produces weapons grade plutonium.

I just hope Kim has the balls to use it when the US decides to invade.

All they admitted was starting up reactors that could produce plutonium for warheads. But according toi N. Korea they only did this because they need energy after USA stoped oil delivery.
I am not saying they are not producing weapons but who knows? Definitely not Bush

volante · 06-02-2003, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy
They also made it clear they've reactivated a previously shut down reactor which produces weapons grade plutonium.

Funny how the US didn't seem to mind when a US company (with Donald Rumsfeld on the board of directors) got the contract to build the reactor in the first place, knowing full well that it could be used to produce weapons grade plutonium.

Place a large enough pile of cash in front of a politician, and there's a lot of things they don't seem to mind...

SexySarah · 06-02-2003, 03:27 PM

Found any WMD's in Iraq yet?

Kisses,

SexySarah

donnie · 06-02-2003, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by volante

Funny how the US didn't seem to mind when a US company (with Donald Rumsfeld on the board of directors) got the contract to build the reactor in the first place, knowing full well that it could be used to produce weapons grade plutonium.

Place a large enough pile of cash in front of a politician, and there's a lot of things they don't seem to mind...

And offcourse they knew everything about Iraqs weapons of mass destruction! Rumsfeld still have all receipts

Wilbo · 06-02-2003, 04:12 PM

Did anyone see the segment on North Korea on 60 Minutes a few months back? The North Koreans are starving to death. They said that mothers there poison their children rather than have them die a slow painful death by starvation. The only thing they have in great quantities is cheap rot gut liquor that keeps the masses happy. They said all the North Koreans love their leader cuz it's been drummed into their heads that he is a good guy looking out for their best interests. I know everyone here doesn't believe a word put out by the U.S. press, but I thought I would just throw this into the mix.

theking · 06-02-2003, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by donnie

All they admitted was starting up reactors that could produce plutonium for warheads. But according toi N. Korea they only did this because they need energy after USA stoped oil delivery.
I am not saying they are not producing weapons but who knows? Definitely not Bush

Nuclear Weapons Program
Current Status, Updated 4/24/03
In a roundtable discussion with the United States and China in Beijing on April 24, 2003, North Korean officials admitted for the first time that they possessed nuclear weapons. Furthermore, North Korean officials claim to have reprocessed spent fuel rods and have threatened to begin exporting nuclear materials unless the United States agrees to one-on-one talks with North Korea.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html

North Korea admits nuclear arsenal

N Korea missile technology has alarmed neighbours

North Korea has said for the first time that it has nuclear weapons.
A commentary broadcast on state radio said North Korea had developed "powerful military counter-measures, including nuclear weapons" to cope with what it called mounting nuclear threats from the United States.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2485829.stm

You are now dismissed.

06-02-2003, 02:34 AM	#1
theking Nice Kitty Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: The good old USA!!! Posts: 21,053	Bush, Putin warn Iran, N. Korea ST. PETERSBURG, Russia -- U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday urged North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions and expressed concern over Iran's nuclear program. "We strongly urge North Korea to visibly, verifiably and irreversibly dismantle its nuclear program," Bush told a joint news conference after the two leaders met privately for 45 minutes inside Konstantin Palace. "We are concerned about Iran's advanced nuclear program and urge Iran to comply in full with its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty." Bush said both the United States and Russia were "determined to meet the threats of weapons of mass destruction." Same article pertaining to WMD's When asked about the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Bush said: "We've discovered weapons systems, biological labs, that Iraq denied she had, and labs that were prohibited under the U.N. resolutions." Earlier this weekend, Bush pointed to two mobile laboratories found in Iraq which U.S. intelligence concluded were probably designed to produce biological weapons, The Associated Press reported. However, both the Pentagon and U.S. weapons hunters have said the labs do not constitute arms. Putin did not offer any opinion on whether weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq. But British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in an interview with Sky News, said he had "no doubt whatever that the evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction will be there. Absolutely." Blair said he had already seen plenty of information that his critics had not, but would in due course. "Over the coming weeks and months we will assemble this evidence and then we will give it to people," he said. "I have no doubt whatever that the evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction will be there." http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe...ope/index.html __________________ When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me! FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

06-02-2003, 10:14 AM	#7
FillmoreSlim Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: streetz Posts: 1,236	'George Bush is being childish' War rifts cast a long shadow over the Evian meeting Monday June 2, 2003 The Guardian New York Times Editorial, June 1 "Never mind African development, weapons proliferation and global trade ... The reason people will be tuning into this year's G8 summit meeting in France is to see whether George [Bush] will laugh at Jacques [Chirac]'s jokes, slap Vladimir [Putin] good-naturedly on the back, or even speak to Gerhard [Schröder]. Or whether he will simply hang out with his good pal Tony [Blair] while grumbling at the others. "Bush aides have pondered how best to punish France. Ignoring Germany while forgiving Russia is also part of the plan ... Now, even as Germany is eager to make amends, the White House seems intent on downgrading ties with Berlin. This is not in America's best interest ... President Bush should be seeking to mend these alliances ... [He] must take advantage of the Evian gathering not to hold grudges, but to move on." Sunday Telegraph Editorial, June 1 "While Mr Bush will no doubt be polite to his French hosts, there can be little doubt that his interests are engaged elsewhere ... The shuttle diplomacy of the president and [Mr Blair] in the past few days has also shown how differently they view the world. Mr Bush is happy to work with the French - but not at any cost ... [America] is happy for European countries to assist in the multi-faceted campaign to end terrorism in the Middle East ... But that campaign is not dependent upon the approval of Mr Chirac and Mr Schröder. The prime minister, meanwhile, has spent much of his trip defending his continued enthusiasm for EU integration." Nico Fried Süddeutsche Zeitung, Munich, June 1 "Mr Bush booked a meeting with Mr Putin and Mr Chirac during his European tour [but] Mr Schröder is not on the agenda ... But their paths might cross ... They might exchange a few words around the G8 summit table. As nothing much is expected of the conversation, the length of the meeting, the strength of the handshake and the intensity of the smile will all be factors used to measure the temperature of German-American relations. "Mr Schröder deserves credit for making efforts to heal the rift with Washington his highest priority ... One German diplomat noted that relations 'were improving'. Only the personal relationship between the two leaders remains a problem ... The German side has made an effort ... [but] the American president is ... being childish." Le Monde Editorial, Paris, June 1 "This G8 summit is not like the others ... This year, [it] will undertake a 'wider dialogue' with the heads of 13 African, Middle Eastern, Latin American and Asian countries, chief among them China, India, Brazil and Nigeria. This opening-up bears the stamp of Mr Chirac. Mischievous tongues claim that the president wants to 'borrow' the themes of the parallel summit on alternatives to globalisation. Other, equally wicked tongues maintain that [Mr Chirac] is seeking to isolate the US, whose relationship with France is still frosty after the the Iraq crisis. Both camps are wrong. The truth is that for a long time, Mr Chirac has held a world view that is largely devoid of the usual western ethnocentrism. That he's never managed to translate it into concrete acts is another problem altogether ... "Still, if the G8 is about intelligent economic debate in the globalisation era, then Mr Chirac can be said to be displaying good sense and simple realism." __________________ New and Improved Chameleon Submitter 2.0 - Submit to TGP and MGP sites - GET YOURS TODAY!

06-02-2003, 10:18 AM	#8
NBDesign Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: The other side of Hell Posts: 5,814	We're all going to die! __________________ Use Lensman's program and get the most for your hard earned traffic. Get Heidi for your site Here. Lots of sets to choose from. She makes a great Addition to any site. Grab one Grab All.

06-02-2003, 10:25 AM	#11
FillmoreSlim Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: streetz Posts: 1,236	Recruitment for new Iraqi military to begin by month's end, United States says BAGHDAD, Iraq, June 2 ? Recruitment for the New Iraqi Corps, the American-installed replacement for Saddam Hussein's military, will begin by the end of the month, the U.S. civilian administrator said Monday. L. Paul Bremer also said thousands of demobilized enlisted men from Saddam's army would be hired next week to clean up sites that would be used for the training of the new military. The moves come more than a week after Bremer dissolved Saddam's military and, in the process, threw thousands of career soldiers out of work. ''We expect to begin recruiting members of the New Iraqi Corps before the end of this month,'' Bremer said at a news conference. ''We are looking at other ways to stimulate the economy.'' Bremer also painted a positive picture of life in the Iraqi capital, saying the city of 5 million was now receiving increasing amounts of electricity. Security is a prime concern of the U.S.-led occupying force, and a new military would help that situation ? both by creating a homegrown security force and by taking young, out-of-work men off the streets. An organized Iraqi military has not existed in actuality since mid-April. Bremer repeated that officers who held the rank of colonel or above in Saddam's army would be barred from the new military. Saddam's regular army was believed to number between 300,000 and 400,000 troops. Most of the armed forces' manpower consisted of conscripts who served between 18 months and 2 1/2 years. But an estimated 150,000 members were officers, noncommissioned officers, professional soldiers or civilians employed by the Defense Ministry. Bremer said he was ''fully aware'' of the difficulties facing former members of Saddam's army who are now unemployed. ''The purpose of our policy is not to punish people,'' he said. But he stressed that while members of the former army who had no ties to the former regime would be readmitted, ''I do not expect there will be many exceptions for senior army officers.'' __________________ New and Improved Chameleon Submitter 2.0 - Submit to TGP and MGP sites - GET YOURS TODAY!

06-02-2003, 11:47 AM	#17
directfiesta Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Montreal, Quebec Posts: 29,681	On CCN now: "Inside the war room " . A bunch of generals in combat attire in a room planning the invasion of Iraq... TheKing, you should watch that : to you, it will give you a hell of a hardon... A bit a " military porn video" to you... LOL __________________ I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT ! But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....

06-02-2003, 02:36 AM	#2
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	North Korea is about as scared of the US as the US is of them. That's a stalemate.

06-02-2003, 02:52 AM	#5
PicturesContent Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: You guess lol Posts: 286	Never heard our President warns someone... Fucking journalists... Bush warns everyone, Putin just keeps silence as a normal well educated person

06-02-2003, 10:22 AM	#9
rooster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 2,384	http://www.newsmax.com/weasels/98.shtml my new deck of cards

06-02-2003, 10:25 AM	#12
Nysus Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,817	Uhm.. Maybe they are making nuclear weapons to be able to protect themselves? Just like why the US has nuclear weapons. How about the US dismantle all of their stuff - I'm sure the world would feel much safer and less hostile towards the US. Cheers, Matt

06-02-2003, 11:52 AM	#19
SleazyDream I'm here for SPORT Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phone # (401) 285-0696 Posts: 41,470	tell the north koreans we're gona install a speedbump on their major highway. __________________ This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog! Now read without the word dog.

06-02-2003, 11:52 AM	#20
mule Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: hamsterdam Posts: 6,085	What is Evian spelt backwards? __________________ Converting like a mofo

06-02-2003, 01:12 PM	#26
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	It is a stalemate. The U.S. is not going to do anything that's going to get 100,000 people, many of them our allies, killed. The only way to "win" against North Korea is the same way that the U.S. "won" against Russia. Put economic and political pressure and wait for them to go broke or to have a revolution within. You know how long that took with Russia.

06-02-2003, 02:57 PM	#39
Herb Kornfield Is on the 1 Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Philly Burbs Posts: 4,996	Why dont we all just get along and stop the global pissing contest. We need a nice happy cup of decaf for all........

06-02-2003, 03:00 PM	#40
Gutterboy So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Dis Posts: 4,751	Why not just turn N. Korea and Iran against each other? We can hook the Shah up with a few medium range nukes & russia can do the same with Kim Jong Il. In a couple of days you'd be able to fit the entire population of both countries into a medium sized ashtray. Problem solved.

06-02-2003, 03:05 PM	#41
FillmoreSlim Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: streetz Posts: 1,236	The Unseen War By Michael Massing 1. The Coalition Media Center, at the Saliyah military base in Doha, Qatar, seems designed to be as annoying and inconvenient as possible for reporters. To get there from the center of town, you have to take a half-hour ride through a baking, barren expanse of desert. At the gate, you have to submit your electronic equipment to a K-9 search, your bags to inspection, and your body to an X-ray scan. You then have to wait under the scorching sun for a military escort, who, after checking your credentials, takes you to the press bus. When the bus is full, you're driven the two hundred yards to the media center. The bus lets you off in a concrete courtyard surrounded by a seven-foot-high wall topped by barbed wire. If you stand on a ledge and look out, you'll see two rows of identical warehouse-like buildings?the offices of General Tommy Franks and the US Central Command. Journalists, though, never get inside these buildings, for they're restricted to the windowless media center, which is sixty feet long, brightly lit, and heavily air-conditioned. Inside the front door is a large space with long counters at which reporters for second-tier news organizations work. Extending out from this area are three corridors housing the offices of the TV networks, wire services, and major newspapers. Along the back wall is the door to the UK press office. Knock on it and moments later an officer in fatigues will appear and field your request. By contrast, the door to the US office, to the right of the main entrance, opens onto an empty corridor, and if you knock on it no one will answer. Instead, you have to phone the office and leave your request with the officer on duty. If you're lucky, someone will come out and speak with you. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- During the war, many of the reporters crammed into the center would dial the US number, seeking to check facts, get some background information, or ferret out a bit of news. Usually, they'd be disappointed. Getting confirmation for even the most basic facts filed by reporters in the field would often prove difficult. Occasionally, a senior press officer would emerge to speak with a reporter, and within minutes a ravenous mob would surround him, desperately seeking to shake loose something even remotely newsworthy. The daily briefings were even less helpful. Held in a large conference hall with the now-famous $250,000 stage set, the briefings were normally conducted by Vincent Brooks, a tall, erect, one-star general who is impeccably polite, unflappable, and remarkably uninformative. Each briefing would begin with a few choice videos ?black-and-white clips of "precision-guided" missiles unfailingly hitting their targets, and color shots of American troops distributing aid to grateful Iraqis. No matter what was taking place inside Iraq, Brooks would insist that the coalition remained "on plan" and that morale remained "sky high." Sometimes the general offered outright misinformation. When, for instance, the Palestine Hotel was hit by a US tank shell, which killed two journalists and wounded several others, Brooks asserted that US forces had come under fire from the hotel. This was denied by the journalists on the scene, and the commander of the unit that fired the shell, in an interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, made no mention of being fired on from the hotel. Still, Colin Powell, citing no evidence, later repeated the claim that "our forces responded to hos-tile fire, appearing to come from" the hotel. The Coalition Media Center is managed by Jim Wilkinson, a fresh-faced, thirty-two-year-old Texan and a protégé of Bush's adviser Karen Hughes. Wilkinson made his mark during the 2000 presidential election when he spoke on behalf of GOP activists protesting the Florida ballot recount. To run the media center in Doha, Wilkinson, a member of the naval reserve, appeared in the same beige fatigues as the career officers working under him. Nonetheless, the center had all the earmarks of a political campaign, with press officers always "on message." Many journalists, accustomed to the smoothly purring Bush political machine, were struck by the heavy-handedness of the Doha operation. A week into the war, journalists began writing their own "media pieces," as they called them, com-paring the briefings to the infamous "Five O'Clock Follies" of the Vietnam War. Rarely, though, did those stories examine how well the press, radio, and television themselves were doing, and that was unfortunate. For, with more than seven hundred registered journalists, the Coalition Media Center offered a superb opportunity for observing how reporters of different nations approached the war, and for understanding the many shortcomings in their coverage. 2. So stingy is Centcom with information that, at the daily briefings, the questions asked were often more revealing than the answers given. Those posed by European and Arab journalists tended to be more pointed and probing than those from the Americans. The Europeans and Arabs would ask about the accuracy of US missiles, the use of weapons containing depleted uranium, the extent of civilian casualties. The Americans would ask questions such as: "Why hasn't Iraqi broadcasting been taken out?" "Is Iraq using weapons prohibited by the UN?" "Can you offer more details on the rescue of Jessica Lynch?" One US network correspondent told me that she was worried that, if she pushed too hard at the briefings, she would no longer be called on. Jim Wilkinson was known to rebuke reporters whose copy he deemed insufficiently supportive of the war; he darkly warned one correspondent that he was on a "list" along with two other reporters at his paper. After each briefing, correspondents for the major satellite networks would stand up in back and give a live report before a camera. Sometimes I took a seat nearby and listened. The British correspondents invariably included some analysis in their reports. After one briefing, for instance, James Forlong of Sky News observed that Tommy Franks had left the briefing to his "fourth in command" (i.e., Brooks), and that "very little detail had been provided." Referring to a question about a friendly-fire incident, Forlong noted that Brooks had little to say other than that the incident was "under investigation." CNN's Tom Mintier, by contrast, would faithfully recite Brooks's main points, often with signs of approval. "They showed some amazing footage of a raid on a palace," he said when introducing a clip that had been shown at the briefing, one of many that CNN aired. Such differences in style were apparent in the broadcasts themselves. Switching stations in my hotel, I often found myself drawn to the BBC. With two hundred reporters, producers, and technicians in the field, its largest deployment ever, the network offered no-nonsense anchors, tenacious correspondents, perceptive features, and a host of commentators steeped in knowledge of the Middle East, in contrast to the retired generals and colonels we saw on American TV. Reporters were not afraid to challenge the coalition's claims. When an anchor asked Paul Adams, a BBC defense correspondent, whether Iraqi fighters were using "quasi-terrorist tactics"?a common Centcom charge?he said it was more appropriate to speak of "asymmetrical warfare," i.e., the use of unconventional tactics by forces that were badly outgunned. At the same time, the BBC presented many stories about the horrors of Saddam's rule. In one chilling piece, it had an interview with an Iraqi woman in London whose family members had been murdered, raped, or tortured by the regime. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16293 __________________ New and Improved Chameleon Submitter 2.0 - Submit to TGP and MGP sites - GET YOURS TODAY!

06-02-2003, 03:13 PM	#44
SexySarah So Fucking Banned Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 1,076	Who fucking cares. Kisses, SexySarah

06-02-2003, 03:27 PM	#47
SexySarah So Fucking Banned Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 1,076	Found any WMD's in Iraq yet? Kisses, SexySarah

06-02-2003, 04:12 PM	#49
Wilbo Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,082	Did anyone see the segment on North Korea on 60 Minutes a few months back? The North Koreans are starving to death. They said that mothers there poison their children rather than have them die a slow painful death by starvation. The only thing they have in great quantities is cheap rot gut liquor that keeps the masses happy. They said all the North Koreans love their leader cuz it's been drummed into their heads that he is a good guy looking out for their best interests. I know everyone here doesn't believe a word put out by the U.S. press, but I thought I would just throw this into the mix.