Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Who Sold Materials to N. Korea to Build Nukes?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:50 PM
Original message
Who Sold Materials to N. Korea to Build Nukes?
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 03:57 PM by stepnw1f
Anybody have knowledge on this topic... please share, since righties are already trying to blame.... ready for it.... Clinton.

Here's what I found relating to Bush's policy on nukes:

U.S. quits ABM treaty
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/rec.bush...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pk_du Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. A.Q.Khan - google that name and its all there... n/t
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 03:52 PM by pk_du
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnieBW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. He's a national hero in Pakistan
You know, our good friends who are hiding Osama, as well as getting F-16's from us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. He also sold his nuke design to Iran
Crazy asshole...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. And much of what Khan had came from Beijing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Also check Federation of American Scientists (FAS.org) to find some....
...of these things out. A pervious poster mentions AQ Khan (sp?) and that matches what I read. North Korea and Pakistan have/had a relationship. Possibly others.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. thank you...
I'm there now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. exactly...
Pakistan exchanged N. Korean "Nodong" missiles for the nuclear technology...its very well known.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. Donald Rumsfeld was on the Board of a company that sold equipment
for nuclear (energy) facilities. I believe the company was ABB. Btw, Nuke energy facilities create by-products that can be used for weapons production. The companies dealing with the equipment, know this (by products issue).

I believe that it was the Clinton administration that brokered a deal that allowed transparency (along the lines of inspections? not sure about that) and required NK to demonstrate it was NOT using the material in a way that paves way for nuke weapons. In 2002 when bush was blustering about the Axis of Evil, and Bolton was throwing fits and hurling threats at NK, the NK leader (reputation as being a wee bit crazy - and thus worrisome) - broke the agreement previously made with the Clinton administration.

I believe what Khan (from Pakistan - briefly jailed, but now free to continue his work) is reportedly the source for the technical expertise (plans) on how to build the nuke weaponry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Oh Man... link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spinbaby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Here's the thread for that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. kick...(nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coalition_unwilling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. He was also Reagan's special emissary to Saddam in 1983 to
normalize relations with Iraq and tilt the U.S. towards Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war. Rumsferatu met and shook hands with Saddam shortly after it was widely acknlowleged that Saddam had used poison gas against the Kurds. But what do facts like these matter in the United States of Amnesia?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. The technology was for Light Water reactors which don't produce a
fissionable byproduct. That's why they were being given the tech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Thank you for the clarification -
at the time the story broke - there were no 'qualificatons' given. Will have to read more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
10. wiki check
On March 12, 1993, North Korea said that it planned to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and refused to allow inspectors access to its nuclear sites. By 1994, the United States believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about 10 bombs with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military air strikes against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the Agreed Framework in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with light water reactors and fuel oil until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require enriched uranium to be imported from outside North Korea, the amount of reactor fuel and waste could be more easily tracked, making it more difficult to divert nuclear waste to be reprocessed into plutonium. However, the United States never built the promised light water reactors and in late 2002, North Korea returned to using their old reactors.


Enriched uranium
With the abandonment of its plutonium program, North Korea began an enriched uranium program. Pakistan, through Abdul Qadeer Khan, supplied key technology and information to North Korea in exchange for missile technology around 1997, according to U.S. intelligence officials.

This program was publicized in October 2002 when the United States asked North Korean officials about the program, <3>. Although the Agreed Framework specifically prohibited then-existing plutonium programs, not uranium, the U.S. argued North Korea violated the "spirit" of the agreement. In December 2002, the United States terminated the 1994 Agreed Framework, suspending fuel oil shipments.

North Korea responded by announcing plans to reactivate a dormant nuclear fuel processing program and power plant north of Pyongyang. North Korea soon thereafter expelled U.N. inspectors and withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

whole story here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_nuclear_weapo...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Sounds like another "bipartisan" clusterfuck. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. "bipartisan"... how so? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-10-06 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. It seems from this record of events that our failure to perform on the
deal we agreed to, was during Clinton's second term. No?

By 1994, the United States believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about 10 bombs with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military air strikes against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the Agreed Framework in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with light water reactors and fuel oil until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require enriched uranium to be imported from outside North Korea, the amount of reactor fuel and waste could be more easily tracked, making it more difficult to divert nuclear waste to be reprocessed into plutonium. However, the United States never built the promised light water reactors and in late 2002, North Korea returned to using their old reactors.


Why we wouldn't carry out our end of a deal that would keep nukes out of NK's hands is beyond me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. The tech. given to them was for light water reactors. Don't produce
a fissionable byproduct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
17. AQ Khan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 23rd 2014, 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC