{"article":{"id":20269,"heading":"Iraq and North Korea","author":"freelance pulitzerer","created":"2002-10-18 15:12:47","modified":"2002-10-20 02:25:37","last_modified":"Sun, 20 Oct 2002 09:25:37","article":"

So let me see if I've got this straight.

North Korea has declared it has an aggressive nuclear weapons program and analysts estimate it has enough plutonium and enriched uranium on hand to produce at least two modern high-yield nuclear weapons. It is also known that North Korea has stockpiled huge amounts of chemical and biological agents, and has the missile systems to deliver these or nuclear warheads at considerable distances. Kim Il Jung is a brutal dictator who has threatened his neighbors, and nearby countries including Japan are expressing the fear of nuclear blackmail. North Korea adamantly asserts it is not bound by the 1994 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and intends to continue stockpiling nuclear weapons. It flatly rejects calls for disarmament and will not allow any outside monitoring of its weapons programs.

Right so far? ... Okay.

Saddam Hussein HAD a nuclear program that was thoroughly dismantled and he has no nuclear material with which to build a bomb. Iraq's supply of chemical and bio-agents was 95% destroyed along with his means of production, and that which remained has by this time degraded into useless material. It is estimated that Iraq may have as many as four Scud missiles hidden away, but these crude short range weapons are no match for modern missile interceptor systems, and proved pretty much a failure the last time he used them. Saddam Hussein has not threatened anyone in many years and denies having weapons of mass destruction or any intention of developing them. He has expressed a willingness to abide by UN resolutions and to allow UN inspectors unfettered access in order to verify this.

Is that accurate? ... Great.

So the US reaction to this situation has been to gently urge North Korea to curtail further weapons development and reconsider its hard stand on the Nonproliferation Treaty, while meanwhile continuing to insist that Saddam poses such an urgent threat to world security that an immediate pre-emptive attack is necessary?

Huh?

Wait a minute, now I'm confused. Are you saying we should attack and destroy a country that clearly isn't a threat and has agreed to follow UN mandates, but deal only in mild diplomatic terms with a country that is not only a real threat to regional security, but has gone out of its way to flex its muscles by declaring itself so?

Yes?

Uhh, okay ... but there seems to be a real contradiction here and a tremendous substantive difference that just doesn't make sense to me ...

Hey, just a second! I think I'm beginning to understand now! North Korea doesn't have any oil, and doesn't stand with Afghanistan as a cornerstone to US hegemony in the world's greatest oil-producing region.

Is that about right? ... Yeah? ... Okay, say no more! Thanks! \n","contact":"","link":"","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/plain","summary":"Reporter's Notebook -- Making sense of US foreign policy\r\n","numcomment":12,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2002\/10\/20269.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[{"id":20270,"heading":"Answer me this:","article":"The US has supported sanctions restricting the sale of Iraqi oil for 11 years.\r\n\r\nRight? With me so far?\r\n\r\nAnd the Left and Iraq has been clamoring to end the sanctions.\r\n\r\nFollowing this???\r\n\r\nBut the US hasn't. . .\r\n\r\nAnd Iraq has twice invaded its neighbors, AND used chemical weapons, AND launched a missile attack on Isreal.\r\n\r\nAND engaging in hostilities with N. Korea entails a risk of provokind the Chinese, which won't be the case in Iraq.\r\n\r\nAND, back in 1991, if we wanted to colonize Iraq, there was no power standing in our way, and yet we didn't.\r\n\r\nHmmm.\r\n\r\nIt seems that maybe there are some other differences between Iraq and North Korea that suggest different approaches. . .\r\n","author":"T-Mex","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-18 15:42:01","modified":"2002-10-18 15:42:01","fileurl":""},{"id":20273,"heading":"Let me see if I've got this straight","article":"This is about oil?\r\n\r\nBalderdash.\r\n\r\nThe US has supported sanctions prohibiting\/limitin Iraqi oil sales for the past 11 years. If we wanted cheap Iraqi oil, we would have lifted the sanctions. (Which the Left has been clamoring for the US to do, by the way.)\r\n\r\nThe US had an army in Iraq 11 years ago, and there was nothing stopping it from just rolling it up like a carpet. Then we could have ensured the flow of Iraqi oil. But we didn't.\r\n\r\nYou say there's no meaningful distinction between N. Korea and Iraq?\r\n\r\nIraq has invaded its neighbors 3 times in the past 15 years (Kuwait, Iran and Saudi). It has USED chemical weapons. It has engaged in an unprovoked attack on Isreal. \r\n\r\nIn addition, there are other differences. One is timing. We've only confirmed North Korea's efforts to make nukes this week. Iraq's conduct has been known for years.\r\n\r\nFurther, Iraq stands alone internationally, with hardly a single ally in the world. Hostilities with North Korea create a risk of Chinese involvement. This further justifies using a different approach for North Korea as from Iraq.\r\n\r\nThe Left is simply obsessed with the concept that US foreign policy is driven by lust for oil, despite copious evidence to the contrary. As usual, the fact that the Left is wrong again and again does not seem to stop it from singing the same song over and over.\r\n\r\n","author":"Me and Julio","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-18 18:51:56","modified":"2002-10-18 18:51:56","fileurl":""},{"id":20278,"heading":"The Left is right again","article":"First of all you should know that major US energy companies have been evading the sanctions on Iraq by hiding behind Euoropean subsidaries. Dick Cheney's Halliburton was notorious for doing that. Could the US have toppled over Saddam and established a cheap flow of oil? Sure. But the US is not as worried as much about prices is it is about control. The reason the United States\/United Kingdom didn't topple Hussein after the Gulf War was made quite clear in declassified government documents as a matter of stability. The U.S. may not like Hussein, but it would be playing with fire if it let the Shii'te population take control of the governemnt and risk the possibility of an Iraqui-Iranian alliance. Nor would the US permit the Kurdish population to take control of the government because Turkey would undoubtely throw a tantrum. So the U.S. had little option than to keep Saddam in power, but decided instead to punish Iraq through brutal economic sanctions, which although has strengthened Saddam, has devestated Iraq economically. \r\n9-11 gave Bush a pretext to pursue US dominance, regrettably throught the use of force in many instances. And with this newly aquired freedom, he has ensured U.S. control over Caspian oil, a greater reliance on Russian oil, an attempted coup'detat in Venezuela to make sure their oil remains in the hands of a puppet regime. Control over world resources is impartitive to any imperial power, and oil is what runs the empire. So...hey it looks like the Left is right on this one too! How about that!.","author":"LeftistOilObsessor","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-18 19:52:24","modified":"2002-10-18 19:52:24","fileurl":""},{"id":20280,"heading":"You Forgot Something","article":"Saddam and his army were supplied with their weapons, chemical, biological, and conventional by good ole Uncle Sam in hopes that they could defeat Iran.\r\nThey were encouraged by our own peace-loving leaders to gas and kill countless thousands.\r\nHow do you expect the very dictatorships that we establish in 3rd world countries not to go power-crazy, with such fine examples from our own ruling class?\r\nThe fact is, the poor working-class are the ones who must suffer, while the rich pursue their own economic and power-driven interests. \r\nWhether the motive is oil-interests for the mega-corps. which dictate our country's foreign policy should not be in question.\r\nWhen our beloved gov't supplied the Indonesian army for their massacre of the East Timorese people, guess what happened?\r\n1. Our media barely mentioned the fact that hundreds of thousands were being murdered. I found out through independent and outside sources such as the Australian press.\r\n2. Chevron has since found oil off the coast of East Timor and I'm sure is preparing to exploit that region.\r\nDon't be so quick to be fooled by mindless flag-waving, unless you are a fan of other fascist groups such as the Nazis or something?","author":"Fuhk Da Govment","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-18 20:00:15","modified":"2002-10-18 20:00:15","fileurl":""},{"id":20286,"heading":"That old stand-by","article":"Anyone who takes the US's side anytime must be a Nazi.\r\n\r\nFor some reason, a lot of young people think that to be a "free thinker" means to hate the US. . . and then many of these young people become automatons for the Left, spouting whatever radical theories they read on the net or here in class, all the while pretending that they are "free thinkers", which by their wierd definition, they are. (Free thinker = anti-American.)\r\n\r\nMost of those young people grow up, some don't.\r\n\r\nWhat is central to this mind set is a wholly American-centric point of view of the world. Everything is seen through the prism of US activity. Its really more egocentric, I suppose, coming from an American.\r\n\r\nIf a squad of soldiers in East Whereever, which receives US aid, kills some civilians, its America's fault. (The actual trigger men are bit players -- America is the great Satan.)\r\n\r\nIf we withdraw aid and people starve, well, that's America's fault too.\r\n\r\nMeanwhile, if some Leftist guerillas slaughter civilians, well, its America's fault. After all, they are fighting against an American sponsored regime! Again, the triggermen are blameless, America is the great Satan.\r\n\r\nWhen we send aid to a country, the US is portrayed as being responsible for everything that happens there. If we attempt to control the countries affairs, we are portrayed as Colonialists. If we ignore the country. . .\r\n\r\nConsider Afghanistan. They are invaded by a brutal dictatorship which makes the practice of religion a crime.\r\n\r\nWe help them repel the invaders. \r\n\r\nDo we then start treating the Afghans as our colony? No.\r\n\r\nWe leave them alone to manage their own affairs.\r\n\r\nBut then, when the ingrates support terrorists who slaughter Americans, what do we hear?\r\n\r\nThe Americans "walked away from Afghanistan!"\r\n\r\nExcuse me? We didn't blow up their roads bridge and hospital!! The Soviets did. Do we hear "the Soviets walked away from Afghanistan"??? \r\n\r\nSometimes its worse than that. In fact, the United States is responsible for $50 billion (yes billion) worth of food shipments to Iraq in the "Oil for Food" program which Woody Harrelson obviously hasn't heard of, or a guarantee of 2,475 calories a day for every Iraqi man, woman and child. This generosity was undoubtedly a mistake. It strengthens Saddam and doesn't do a thing for the rest of the world. Better to have smashed his disgusting regime a long time ago and killed the sonofabitch in his bed. \r\n\r\nBut the Left runs around screaming that America has killed 1 million Iraqis. Not Saddam, who builds palaces and weapons with no regard for his people's welfare. No, America, the country that is actually sending food to these people.\r\n\r\nIt really is pathological in a sense.\r\n\r\nBut in another sense, it is similar to the way adolescents rebel against their parents. During that period of moratorium and defining oneself as an individual, many adolescents unfairly portray their parents as sick demented losers. As they mature, they begin to see their parents in a different light. \r\n\r\nOf course, not everyone matures.","author":"T-Mex","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-18 21:41:58","modified":"2002-10-18 21:41:58","fileurl":""},{"id":20296,"heading":"Good point above","article":"among many others, but don't have time now.\r\n\r\nQUOTE:\r\nHow do you expect the very dictatorships that we establish in 3rd world countries not to go power-crazy?\r\n\r\nFor that matter, how can we expect our own government not to?\r\n\r\nFace it "T-Mex", we're being ruled by a bunch of tyrants. Believe it, or don't - I couldn't care less - but remember it when they drag YOU off as soon as their agenda and yours no longer coincide. It's happened in every revolution and societal upheaval in history - today's ally, tomorrow's enemy of the state.","author":".","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-19 02:12:28","modified":"2002-10-19 02:12:28","fileurl":""},{"id":20297,"heading":"reply to the post above","article":"1. The Carter Administration provoked the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 in order to give the Russians "their own Vietnam War." His former National Security Adviser has admitted this, rather unapologetically.\r\n\r\n2. While there is no shortage of selfish proxies for the US elites to take advantage of, and they certainly do have greedy, homicidal motives of they're own this does not mean that the actions of their backers should be ignored. Yes, it is sad to see the greater left movement portrayed as a bunch of posing teenagers. But some of us are more principaled than others. \r\nExample: I am from mexico. I recognize that the EZLN will sell out the indigenous people of chiapas the second it has a chance. Indeed, they are not revolutionaries, just reformists. there, testimony that in the face of fashionable "radicalism", a teenager can resist peer pressure and marketing.\r\n\r\n3. isn't funny how quickly these things get so quickly off topic?","author":"prole","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-19 02:24:46","modified":"2002-10-19 02:24:46","fileurl":""},{"id":20314,"heading":"One thing","article":"we agree on is that it is funny how things go "off topic".\r\n\r\nBut I find your suggestion that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and killed a million Afghans because of something Carter did to be just the sort of ludicrous argument the Left always makes to make everything the Americans fault. \r\n\r\nThe Soviets send 19 divisions in to Afghanistan and start slaughtering civilians? Carter made them do it.\r\n\r\nPlease.","author":"T-Mex","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-19 14:30:03","modified":"2002-10-19 14:30:03","fileurl":""},{"id":20315,"heading":"OneEyedMan","article":"She-Mex-BushBlower...your ignorance is astouding...the documents relating to this period in history clearly show that the Carter Admins intention was to provoke Russia into a military response in Afg. This is a known fact...I would not go as far as to say the deaths of millions was "Carter's fault", but surely US foreign policy bears some responsibility in that fiasco...well, I guess it wasn't a fiasco from the foreign policy experts point of view...it was a resounding success!","author":"KPC","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-19 14:41:32","modified":"2002-10-19 14:41:32","fileurl":""},{"id":20321,"heading":"exactly","article":"the Carter Administration is, of course, not completely to blame, but they can be implicated in a major way. and it can be argued that, yes, Carter did make them do it. but the degree to which the Soviets carried out they're brutality was they're own doing. neither party can be absolved. not the US or the USSR or the Mujahadeen themselves.\r\n\r\ni think its kind of a shame how the anonymity(did i spell that right?) of message boards leads to such unnecessary rudeness. this, i think, was intended to be a forum for productive dialogue. who ever Mr. T-Mex is blowing is his own business and should be left completely outside the realm of discussion. ","author":"prole","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-19 19:45:02","modified":"2002-10-19 19:45:02","fileurl":""},{"id":20322,"heading":"OneEyedMan","article":"...I just thought she was a gardener of Mexican nationality...\r\n\r\n","author":"KPC","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-19 20:24:33","modified":"2002-10-19 20:24:33","fileurl":""},{"id":20332,"heading":"Ryan","article":"Please plug "North Korea" and "oil" into google. I have seen estimates of up to 60 billion barrel reserves on their west coast.","author":"Ferris","parent_id":20269,"mime_type":"text\/plain","created":"2002-10-20 02:25:37","modified":"2002-10-20 02:25:37","fileurl":""}]}