So if we went off half ass cocked and bombed the crap out of them to stop their nuke development and the NK invaded SK and took over the entire country under their control, you would be one of the first out their blaming GW. You are a clown.
How am I a clown? Because I don't support the actions of the current administration on this issue? Typical FR BS. Like I mentioned a while ago, if anyone criticizes any action of the Bush admin on FR they are humped by a pack of wild dogs. This is also the reason nothing can get done in Washington because rational debates are a thing of the past. If a Rat even appears to look at a Republican he is crucified. If a Republican criticizes the admin he's labeled a clown.
Notice that I said nothing about bombing or war so thanks for putting words in my mouth. Tougher action does not automatically mean war. Apparently, to you and others, tougher action means watered down UNSC resolutions that some countries decide they are not going to follow. Funny, however, that was given as a reason to go to war in Iraq by the current admin and now China's doing the same thing.
Also, where did all the talk about preemptive strike go? "We have to strike them before they strike us." If the admin is going to go down that path it must not pick and choose. Iraq didn't even have the capability to test a nuke and we put a quick end to Saddam's yearning to do so. I guess that doesn't apply to the current, much more serious WMD problems the world is facing.