Skip to comments.
N. Korea continues to reject U.N. arms inspections
USA Today / AP ^
| 12/10/2002
| Staff
Posted on 12/10/2002 9:41:53 AM PST by ex-Texan
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:40:08 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
SEOUL, South Korea (AP)
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: northkoreannukes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
1
posted on
12/10/2002 9:41:53 AM PST
by
ex-Texan
To: ex-Texan
Where are the War Hawks, calling for an invasion of North Korea?
To: ex-Texan
Let's take out Saddam FAST and then move on to North Korea. This problem could've been stopped in 1994 but Jimmy Clinton prevented it.
To: ex-Texan
I think we should go after Libya or Iran after Saddam, not North Korea.
4
posted on
12/10/2002 9:46:37 AM PST
by
yonif
To: Cacophonous
Where are the War Hawks, calling for an invasion of North Korea?One step at a time. The U.S. probably doesn't have enough resources to crack both nuts at once, the placement of U.N. resolutions allowing war against Iraq is much further along than any equivalent process against North Korea, and North Korea is a much more delicate situation.
Those who demand consistency in foreign policy will get the likes of Jimmy Carter, who is consistently foolish.
5
posted on
12/10/2002 9:51:16 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: ex-Texan
Hey .. maybe the UN can send Jimmy Carter back over there to have another talk with North Korea
6
posted on
12/10/2002 9:54:38 AM PST
by
Mo1
To: dirtboy; Poohbah
You have it right, dirtboy. From what I understand, the North Korans have their nuclear weapons sites buried about 75 to 100 feet down.
The only platforms that could really handle deal with Yongbyon nuclear weapons complex will need at least nine months and possibly longer for reactivation. Possibly a little longer. But they'll do just fine... :D
http://www.usnfsa.com/articles/fsao/fsao14.htm
7
posted on
12/10/2002 9:56:28 AM PST
by
hchutch
To: Mo1
maybe the UN can send Jimmy Carter back over there to have another talk with North KoreaThat threat would normally be enough to make most nations cave, especially if he drags Rosalyn and Amy along (terroristic boredom, anyone?), but the North Koreans are made of sterner stuff - decades of exposure to hard-core Stalinism makes them immune to the inanities of garden-variety American liberal idiocy...
8
posted on
12/10/2002 9:57:20 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: hchutch
The only platforms that could really handle deal with Yongbyon nuclear weapons complex will need at least nine months and possibly longer for reactivation. Possibly a little longer. But they'll do just fine... :DThat is a load of BS...an EGBU-28 will do the job nicely.
9
posted on
12/10/2002 9:57:41 AM PST
by
Poohbah
To: yonif
go after Libya or Iran after Saddam Damascus
To: dirtboy
Hmmmm .. good point
Ok .. how about Al & Tipper Gore and they can sell a few books too
11
posted on
12/10/2002 10:01:15 AM PST
by
Mo1
To: dirtboy
Those who demand consistency in foreign policy will get the likes of Jimmy Carter, who is consistently foolish. Well put!................and my vote for Quote-of-the-Day.
To: Mo1
Ok .. how about Al & Tipper Gore and they can sell a few books tooThe North Koreans would eat those books up ... literally ... seeing that they are reduced to knawing on tree bark, some book soup would probably be a delicacy...
13
posted on
12/10/2002 10:03:13 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: Poohbah
B-2's have a long turnaround time - if the first round fails, we're going to have to wait a while to get a second shot. And we're in trouble then.
F-15Es aren't quite stealthy - we'd have to expect losses. I don't know of anything else that can carry GBU-28s.
We should have built more than 20 B-2s, we could have a second element waiting in case the first element didn't succeed.
14
posted on
12/10/2002 10:07:52 AM PST
by
hchutch
To: dirtboy
Those who demand consistency in foreign policy will get the likes of Jimmy Carter, who is consistently foolish.Well said!
To: hchutch
The problem is that the BBs can't reliably hit targets that deep without being detected as well. Lose some F-15Es...well, that is a problem. Lose a battleship...that's a frickin' disaster.
16
posted on
12/10/2002 10:16:11 AM PST
by
Poohbah
To: Mo1
Just one more stain from the Clinton administration that Dubya will have to clean up.
17
posted on
12/10/2002 10:24:32 AM PST
by
rintense
To: Poohbah
Valid point, but if the pilots eject and the NKs take `em as POWs, we're looking at a disaster of another stripe. I don't think we could pull off a Son Tay-type op to rescue POWs on the Korean peninsula.
We're going to have to figure something out.
18
posted on
12/10/2002 10:34:37 AM PST
by
hchutch
To: hchutch
Valid point, but if the pilots eject and the NKs take `em as POWs, we're looking at a disaster of another stripe. I don't think we could pull off a Son Tay-type op to rescue POWs on the Korean peninsula.Dude, the risk kinda sorta comes with the flight pay...
19
posted on
12/10/2002 10:35:46 AM PST
by
Poohbah
To: Poohbah
Dude, the risk kinda sorta comes with the flight pay... Plus which, we can send in Jesse Jackson to get them out. And, hey, Jess -- while you're at it, can you negotiate a NK arms control agreement for us? ;-)
20
posted on
12/10/2002 10:39:32 AM PST
by
r9etb
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson