NK NUKE TEST IS ANOTHER MASSIVE BUSH FAILURE

[Beetwasher]

Yeah, so what, it will push Foley out of the news, but good grief people, this is bad, bad news all around, for everyone. It is a MASSIVE, EPIC FAILURE. NK has the bomb, definitively and missile tech. Massive, massive fuck up.

[BluePatriot]

1. No kidding

...just an awful sinking feeling in my gut; the true, definitive feeling of the nightmare scenario coming true.

[Monkeyman]

2. CNN is confirmimg South Korea said they did

No confirmed info from U.S intell

[Mr Rabble]

3. Repeat this all day. Another Republican failure.

It happened on Bush's watch.

[vixengrl]

43. Damn right--the Administration knew North Korea was a threat

but failed to continue talks, they blew it and we are less safe through their inaction--

Huh. Just like their inaction from the beginning in re: the Bin laden threat, certified by the CIA early in 2001 as definitely the bloke behind the Cole bombing, the July alarm by Cofer Black and Richard Clark in re: you know, Osama--chatter--immiment attack maybe, the August 6 PDB, the intelligence that Bin Laden was in Tora Bora, you know, they blamed the "previous administration" for "significant intifada" in Israel, but damn that's been a total mess and quite recently, too...hey wait, Iraq also isn't doing too good.

Hey, you suppose maybe the Republicans might actually suck just as much at foreign policy as they do at domestic issues?

Wow. Who knew?

[sandnsea]

4. How long have they known?

Why didn't they tell us? Who did they tell? When? Why didn't they take it to the UN?

Is this another 9/11 where they had intelligence and ignored it??

[Scooter24]

5. Nothing to panic about...

We already knew they had nuclear weapons. This is just simply a test backing up something we already knew.

A couple days from now, it'll be back to the status quo. So for the next few days we'll have to deal with nothing but innuendo from Bush, Rice, and Rumsfeld.

We should keep count as to how many times they try to frame this problem on Clinton.

[Olney Blue]

6. Now what? The chimp will stomp his feet and saber rattle?

[blitzen]

7. Yes, but the Freepers and other sheeple will see it as...

another reason to praise our fearless leader for boldly standing firm in the face of a threat--the threat of "mass death" in the US that Cheney has been talking about. They'll say that we need Shrub to protect us.

[Monkeyman]

8. Rove spin coming Replugs get Foley out of the news

[Rex]

9. Starting to sound like bullshit.

nt

[Gregorian]

10. It really is a weapon of mass destruction.

At the very least it shows how empty their most popular words ring.



The WMD score:

0- Iraq
1- North Korea

[KharmaTrain]

11. So What???

OK...they have a nuclear weapon that probably could ruin a lot of people's days if it full on Seoul, but then what? Besides the fallout that could pour back across the border, the response to such an attack would be swift and massive by not just the U.S., but all other countries in that region.

It's a nice toy but it has no practical value. A nuke is not a defensive weapon...strictly offensive. If anything these nukes are a far grater danger for the North Koreans cause this country's technical abilities are highly suspect and now add to the fact they can't launch a missile right or build a buiding that won't fall, now they have a nuclear arsenal that could blow them off the face of the earth.

If we're to be concerned about Nukes and how it could be used against us...and soon...may I direct your attention to our good "friends" Pakistan and Dr. Khan's lab that sold a lot of the goodies to North Korea, Iran and anyone with cash.

[Beetwasher]

12. Heh?

Err, ok. No biggie to you I guess if Seoul gets nuked? Is that what you're saying? :shrug:

Seriously, this is a big story, as it should be and it's a massive Bush fuckup.

[KharmaTrain]

16. A Bomb On Seoul Is Kim's Last Move...Period

Considering that Seoul sits almost on the border with the North...a nuke that lands on the city could easily blow back and kill North Korean troops ready to pour across the border...or slow down any attack they would try to have in a follow up. Inversely, the country would suffer a massive counter-attack by not just South Korean but also Japan and I wouldn't be surprised if China assisted as North Korean and Kim, in specific, has been a pain in their asses for years. This is one step too far.

I agree...this is a major Boooosh fuck-up cause it wasn't necessary. We had Kim, just like Saddam Hussein, in a box and now it's a PR disaster for booosh's "axis of evil". The interesting thing will be to see how many countries condemn the tests or how many shrug their shoulders and say the Koreans are justified thanks to booosh's actions.

[Jcrowley]

13. Perspective

Complete List of All U.S. Nuclear Weapons

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/Allbombs.html

[Beetwasher]

14. So What?

This is a big story and an even bigger Bush and Repub failure. Feel safer?

[Jcrowley]

19. I've seen the enemy

and he is us.



Keep the people focused on the external threat and they won't see the more real threat coming from within. Keep the bogeyman in the public mind and off they go at the US Military Security Complex.

[Beetwasher]

20. Oh Brother, So Karl Rove Is Directin NK Nuke Policy?

:eyes:

[Jcrowley]

22. Has nothing to do with that

More to do with the mental confusion of the malleable masses.

[Beetwasher]

23. No Confusion. Very Simple.

Do you feel safer now? Can they protect your children? Can they protect you from NK?

This is a disaster, all around. There will be no confusion among "the masses" about this.

[Jcrowley]

24. I assure you

the people in Venezuela, Iraq, Morocco, France, Guatemala, the entire world etc. are not worried in the least about nukes from N. Korea but are very concerned about another "rogue" nation and it's nukes. The Pentagon is infinitely more of a threat to me and my children than N. Korea, infinitely in innumerable ways. My eye is clearly on the ball.

[Beetwasher]

25. I Never Said Differently

But that doesn't mean NK w/ nukes is any less of a Bush failure, or that it diminishes the significance of this development in any way. Or, in fact, has anything to do w/ the main points of my OP.

[Singular73]

15. MSM: I'll see your a pervert, and raise you one with nukes.

[Beetwasher]

17. Exactly. They Can't Protect Your Children And They Can't Protect You From

NK either.

[mb7588a]

18. ...Oktober SSurprise?

[Beetwasher]

21. Unless You Think Rove Is Directing NK Nuke Policy

Then this ain't no Oct. Surprise, it's shit hitting the fan. It's a massive failure.

[truthisfreedom]

26. well yeah, it's october, and it's surprising. 8^) but it wasn't engineer-

ed by KKKarl rove, and it wasn't meant as a distraction from Foleygate.

another massive bush failure is RIGHT.

[Beetwasher]

30. Wait, Wasn't Foley Gate Supposed to be the Distraction?

I can't keep my distractions straight anymore. :freak:

Seriously, if this is supposed to be a distraction from Foley, it would have been more effective on day 2 of the scandal. I shouldn't even have to say that though, but the idea that this was somehow engineered by Rove or that this is no big deal, or the disinfo flowing from certain posters that maybe NK is faking this, is PRECISELY the type of spin I WOULD expect Rove to float to distract from what huge failure this is for Bushco. and to muddy the waters.

Watch, Repubs will start saying this is no big deal, or try to cast doubt on whether the test was real or not.

[Marie26]

27. Dumb question

We already knew that North Korea had an arsenal of nuclear missiles, right? So how does this test change anything? Is it that they now have a nuclear bomb, as well?

[Beetwasher]

31. Who Said It Necessarily Changed Anything?

It's still a big story and evidence of massive failure on the part of Bush and Repub foreign policy.

But I DO think it DOES change things. There may now be an escalating arms race in that part of the world, for one thing.

[Marie26]

37. Nobody

My question was - did North Korea have nuclear missiles before this point? Did they have a nuclear bomb before this point? I'm trying to understand why this is big news. It is an innocent question, not some sneaky effort to imply that this isn't bad for Bush. The test clearly violates the UN resolution, but NK just tested missiles a few months ago, as well, w/o many repurcussions.

[Beetwasher]

39. Why Is This A Big Story??

Well for one, it highlights yet another massive foreign policy failure. The world is more dangerous. We were never really certain of NK's nuke capabilities. A successful test is a big, big story. Especially for a member of the "axis of evil".

[Marie26]

41. So, so far

I've gotten some ridicule, sarcasm, and exclamation points, but still no answer to my question. Typical DU.

[Beetwasher]

42. Uhh, Do You Read?

"Well for one, it highlights yet another massive foreign policy failure. The world is more dangerous. We were never really certain of NK's nuke capabilities. A successful test is a big, big story. Especially for a member of the "axis of evil"."

That's just some reasons. I'm sure if you read the news you can educate yourself a bit more on why this might be a big story.

Oh, sure, maybe you're right. Not a big deal. Let's just drop it. :eyes:

[Marie26]

44. The questions:

1.) Did North Korea have working nuclear missiles prior to this point?

2.) Did North Korea have a working nuclear bomb prior to this point?

I swear, sometimes people just come here to insult. Do you truly think that people at DU are all just eager to minimize this to make Bush look good? Are you that paranoid? Seems so.

[Beetwasher]

45. Um, Read More Better Good

"We were never really certain of NK's nuke capabilities."

Unless you know something I don't, there's your answer. We didn't know for sure (as far as I know), now we do.

[Marie26]

46. Thanks a bunch

In the meantime, I just googled the topic and actually learned helpful information. You, sir, are going on my ignore list.

"As of February 2005 Defense Intelligence Agency analysts were reported to believe that North Korea may already have produced as many as 12 to 15 nuclear weapons. This would imply that by the end of 2004 North Korea had produced somewhere between four and eight uranium bombs (on top of the seven or eight plutonium bombs already on hand). The DIA's estimate was at the high end of an intelligence community-wide assessment of North Korea's nuclear arsenal completed in early 2005. The CIA lowballed the estimate at two to three bombs, which would suggest an assessment that the DPRK either had not reprocessed a significant amount of plutonium from the 8,000 spent fuel rods removed from storage in early 2003, or had not fabricated a significant number of weapons from whatever amount of plutonium had been reprocessed. The Department of Energy's analysis put North Korea's stockpile somewhere in between, which would be consistent with the roughly 7 or 8 plutonium bombs that could be produced from all existing plutonium stocks, with no uranium bombs.

If one assumes that the DPRK produced sufficient plutonium for eight bombs, and expended one of these bombs in a test in Pakistan in 1998, then as of 2005 their plutonium bomb inventory would be seven weapons. Taking the mid-point of the DIA's estimate of between four and eight uranium bombs, the plausible uranium bomb stockpile as of early 2005 would be six weapons, increasing at a rate of one bomb every two months. Thus the early 2005 stockpile would be 13 weapons, growing to about 20 weapons by the end of the year."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke.htm

[Beetwasher]

47. LOL!

Umm, and now it's confirmed, for sure. Big story. How does what you posted change anything? What you posted supports what I said. We thought and believed they had weapons, but no one knew anything for sure about their capabilities. Now we know for sure that they DO have weapons and they work. Big story.

Oh, I guess you missed this part:

"It is estimated that North Korea has completed the nuclear fuel cycle from acquisition to reprocessing of nuclear fuel and is on the threshold of a nuclear weapons capability. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether it has actually produced or possesses nuclear weapons due to difficulties in developing detonation devices and delivery vehicles, which require high-tech and precision technologies."

And this part:

"Publicly available evidence does not permit an assessment of the extent of the uranium program, and there is a considerable range of uncertainty. It is generally agreed that North Korea has attempted to acquire technology related to uranium enrichment from sources in several countries, including China, Russia and Pakistan. It is also generally agreed that, compared to the plutonium program, the precise status of the uranium program would be difficult to assess using sources such as satellite imagery. In contrast to the large and distinctive plutonium production reactors, a uranium enrichment program could be dispersed and hidden underground."

Now we know for sure.

Buh bye.

[lumberjack_jeff]

28. It's a catastrofuck

This is not good news for Bush. He'd be better off if the country was still talking about Foley.

[badgerpup]

32. What TERRIFIES me is how Bush et al is going to react to this...

...after all that bluster about "We will not tolerate a nuclear N. Korea." :puke:
Bluff's been called...now what?
I don't like this game...don't like the players, don't like the stakes. :scared: :hide:

[lumberjack_jeff]

50. There isn't enough time before the election to recall the carrier groups

from the shores of Iran.

After the election, it is my hope that a new congress won't rubberstamp furious george's every whim.

[Ignacio Upton]

48. Depends on the spin

I'm afraid that the public will blindly rally around Bush, even though he PROVOKED NORTH KOREA into doing this.

[lumberjack_jeff]

51. I wouldn't quite say "provoked"...

I would say "ignored the situation, and promoted the conditions where their reaction became predictable".

"provoked?" Oh what the heck, maybe that's close enough.

[survivor999]

29. Fear is all they got.

They'll probably try to make it look like we are on the verge of a nuclear war.

[Spider Jerusalem]

33. Okay...

so, were India and Pakistan getting the bomb Clinton's failures, since those happened on his watch? Hm? Is the United States supposed to be omnipotent and control the actions of EVERY country on the planet? The nuclear genie's been out of the bottle for a while now; any country that has the resources and determination can somehow obtain enough weapons-grade fissile material to make a bomb. The Soviet Union did it, China did it. South Africa and Israel did it, and the aforementioned India and Pakistan (and the mightly US wasn't able to stop any of them doing it, either); if North Korea is to be added to that list, that doesn't really change very much in the larger picture. North Korea daren't USE nuclear weapons aggressively; NO country would. To do so would be suicidal. Everything north of the 38th parallel and south of the Yalu River would glow in the dark for centuries.

[Beetwasher]

35. And That Makes This LESS Of A Failure?

Heh. Maybe we should just drop the issue? :eyes:

Feel safer?

[Spider Jerusalem]

36. I don't feel any LESS safe for the news of North Korea having nukes.

But then I'm not paranoid and overly excitable. Which you certainly seem to be.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lumberjack_jeff]

52. India, Pakistan and North Korea did their things for different reasons.

Pakistan and India are in a long-term faceoff with periodic incursions of one against the other. They each felt that their survival was dependent on a nuclear deterrent. (Granted, Pakistan found their nuke program to be a nice little profit center eg AQ Khan)

North Korea did it because they are starving and the crazy leader feels it's the only way to get attention of the outside world.

Had Bush continued the Clinton framework, this would never have happened. Unlike Pakistan and India, this was easily avoidable.

(besides, India tested their bomb back in Ford's day)

[radwriter0555]

34. Why shouldn't they have nukes? Bush declared them an enemy on his first

frickin' day in office. They have the right to defend themselves.

Yes, it's a republican failure, but NK will only be reactive, not proactive toward US "policies", crap that they are.

[zaj]

38. HUGE FUCKING PROBLEM FOR BUSH AND THE WORLD!

[GeorgeGist]

49. Bad Opera...

'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'"

-Senior Bush Advisor

[Beetwasher]

53. Yeah, Kinda Sucks When Real Reality Comes-a-Knockin'

I think NK just nuked their created reality.