Can someone please shoot Kim Jong Il? This fucker is helping the GOP

[Ignacio Upton]

Our deranged dictator is receiving help from another deranged dictator. I'm a cynic about how the public reacts to these sorts of things. I'm afraid that this will take the Foley story right off the front pages and people will blindly rally to the GOP again, IN SPITE of evidence that shows what a cluster-fuck Iraq has become, and the fact that Bush PROVOKED Kim Jong Il into doing this.
Now, while Kim is deranged, I'm sure he knows that we have the Congressional elections in less than a month. I'd like to beat the shit out of that fucker because of his oppressive regime, and now doing something that may help Bush only gives me another reason for hating Kim Jong Il.

[greyl]

1. It's not helping the GOP to make them look impotent. nt

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ignacio Upton]

15. That pic is fucking gross!

[Cronus Protagonist]

16. I agree, but the truth is nothing to be ashamed of...

[greyl]

19. What'd I miss?

I'm curious, Pm it to me, please?

[Cronus Protagonist]

20. Gross Out WARNING

http://www.bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=224

[Duppers]

22. I totally agree!

We should be on the attack on this point, giving them on ground.

[MADem]

2. Read this article, helps to explain WHY the idiot made his big boom

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/10/09/news/UN_GEN_U...

It's all about Kofi's successor, not the Monkey. And South Korea is speculating that the big boom might have been a conventional weapon.

Attention seeking behavior, anger at not having a countryman in the spotlight on the world stage.

[Ignacio Upton]

5. That seems plausible

But I'm still worried that the public will rally around Bush in a 9/11-style fashion.

[MADem]

10. They are speculating that it might have been a faked test

550 tons of TNT...even the White House statement is very restrained.

Or, as some comedian noted, it could have been the entire population jumping up at the same time, clapping and yelling BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!

[Rex]

3. Ugh. No. Please DON'T shoot Lil Kim. It will cause a mess like Iraq.

Granted Saddam ain't dead yet...just give it time. All I can say to Kim is welcome to the next level of Hell. You don't get any power-ups on this level and no extra lives.

[Ignacio Upton]

6. Ok, then I favor China invading and taking out his little ass

It would be like when Vietnam invaded Cambodia and got rid of Pol Pot.

[Rex]

8. Actually all China has to do is turn off the power.

I'm really surprised China puts up with what goes on in NK. Then again, they have a tenuous relationship with most of their neighbors. No one is friendly in that area. China really doesn't need a buffer-zone between NK and SK. America gives China billions a day. We are no longer enemies.

Not that I would trust China.

[Ignacio Upton]

11. We also fought against China during the Korean War

When MacArthur had gotten close to the Chinese border, China decided to send its tropps over to repel the U.S.-U.N. advance. However, back then we didn't even recognize the PRC government as China's legitimate government, whereas now we do.

[Rex]

14. Yeah and MacArthur recommended nuking China and Russia

working our way towards Europe. In some ways he saw what was going to happen and didn't want to fight countries with the same nuclear weapon we had. Times sure do change. It is impossible to control the world unless you really control the world. The BFEE would LIKE to control the world, but that is impossible and maybe the reason they are all insane like Kim.

[gulfcoastliberal]

18. China and NK do a lot of business together. The last remaining communist

states tend to tolerate if not outright support each other. The August National Geographic "Chian Risisng or some title like that) had a random picture of a business meeting between Chinese and NK businesspeople. It was easy to spot which ones were the the North Koreans - the realllly skinny guys.

[David__77]

21. China does support N, Korea for several reasons.

First, it genuinely supports the leadership of N. Korea. They are both ideologically related. While China's leaders implement capitalism, they do so with a strategic view of transcending it ultimately. N. Korea is simply where China was some time back, to an extent. Second, China does indeed want a buffer between it and US bases. China does not want to be "encircled." N. Korea does in fact serve to stabilize northeast Asia by contributing to inertia in military balance of power.

[shadowknows69]

4. Not if people are reminded of the truth

that early in Bush's reign NK started waving the nuclear flag and if we had a real leader he would have dealt with it then. Saddam was going to attack in 45 minutes however and we got sidetracked for three fucking years.

[aquart]

17. Bush never had the guts to deal with a real threat.

He's a schoolyard bully and they are all cowards.

[Oilwellian]

7. It will ooze GOP incompetence

The public knows we're less safe thanks to those in power, and the corruption has been gutwrenching.

[lvx35]

9. Yep. That's EXACTLY how it works.

It crossed my mind earlier: the only one who can make this evil prick look good is an eviler prick. Without that, Bush would collapse entirely on his own.

[peacetalksforall]

13. Helping our using Rev Moon as the middle man? Where is Bill

Gertiz on this. Didn't his Pentagon sources warn him so that he could tell us how to be afraid. I can't operate without the warning analysis of Gertz.

[ellacott]

23. If we could get this info out.....

...it will help us. I don't know why this isn't out there. Where are our spokespersons?
********************

Wednesday, 3 April, 2002, 12:06 GMT 13:06 UK
US grants N Korea nuclear funds


Pyongyang threatened to pull out of the nuclear deal

The US Government has announced that it will release $95m to North Korea as part of an agreement to replace the Stalinist country's own nuclear programme, which the US suspected was being misused.
Under the 1994 Agreed Framework an international consortium is building two proliferation-proof nuclear reactors and providing fuel oil for North Korea while the reactors are being built.

In releasing the funding, President George W Bush WAIVED the Framework's requirement that North Korea allow inspectors to ensure it has not hidden away any weapons-grade plutonium from the original reactors.

President Bush argued that the decision was "vital to the national security interests of the United States".

Deal under threat

North Korea has repeatedly threatened to withdraw from the agreement in recent weeks.


The row has heightened tensions on the peninsula


It has been angered by President Bush's accusation that Pyongyang was part of an "axis of evil" producing weapons of mass destruction.

This annoyance was compounded by Washington's decision to withhold this year's certification that North Korea is keeping its side of the Agreed Framework.

It has systematically refused to allow International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors into its nuclear facility at the Yongbyon research base north of the capital.

Delayed

Pyongyang has justified its refusals by pointing out that the reactors are way behind schedule.

They were originally expected to have been completed next year, but now construction is not expected to even begin until August.

Another issue is the different interpretations of the inspections' timing.

According to the Framework, North Korea should be fully compliant with IAEA safeguards when "a significant proportion" of the project is completed.

The builders say that will be around May 2005, and given the inspections will take at least three years, this means that North Korea should start admitting inspectors now.

But Pyongyang believes that they should only allow the inspections to start, rather than finish, by that date.

The head of the Non-proliferation Policy Education Centre in Washington, a critic of the Agreed Framework, has warned that even when the new reactors are completed they may not be tamper-proof.

"These reactors are like all reactors, They have the potential to make weapons. So you might end up supplying the worst nuclear violator with the means to acquire the very weapons we're trying to prevent it acquiring," Henry Sokolski told the Far Eastern Economic Review.