PDA

View Full Version : the man who let nk build a nuke says we're in deep doo doo



wardd
04-10-2013, 11:58 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/dick-cheney-north-korea_n_3051930.html

Arizona Bay
04-10-2013, 12:05 PM
Really??? Would you believe anything Dick cheney says? :p

LeeG
04-10-2013, 12:39 PM
Old Dick is just itching, WMD, WMD, WMD

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I

Durnik
04-10-2013, 12:48 PM
Really??? Would you believe anything Dick cheney says? :p

Well, some thing he's good at is creating deep doo doo.. which leads to - recognizing deep doo doo.. ;-)

The question is, why is he now stating it? Machiavelli never had so apt (nor evil) a student as our Dick.

peace
bobby

S.V. Airlie
04-10-2013, 02:47 PM
How about if the OP poster shows some proof that Chaney let the NK build nukes, or is the usual crap from the left.

Mrleft8
04-10-2013, 03:05 PM
How about if the OP poster shows some proof that Chaney let the NK build nukes, or is the usual crap from the left.

Lon Chaney let the North Koreans build nukes?
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRV2DzxU6P0eXGkhuWidbcbeUF4dvn51 pKODtGuw21HXHQ94s_Y

Chip-skiff
04-10-2013, 03:17 PM
I wish Smilin' Dick Cheney would shut up and learn to do something useful. . .

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-BoF961kRGIo/UVh8YRmdzDI/AAAAAAAAD8w/xGBXehchRhw/s408/Cheney%253ATetons.jpg

. . .like ride a horse.

ccmanuals
04-10-2013, 03:36 PM
Jimmy Carter was on Jon Stewart last night talking about the agreement that he brokered with NK over nukes. He want on to say that the Bush administration basically threw the agreement in the waist can and labled NK one of the axis of evil states. Was all down hill from there.

S.V. Airlie
04-10-2013, 04:19 PM
Good! Blame Carter for once. At least you all are picking on someone else. Please tell us what the agreement Carter made with NK? Then you can bring up Bush/Chaney allowing the NKs to build nukes.

peb
04-10-2013, 04:28 PM
Jimmy Carter was on Jon Stewart last night talking about the agreement that he brokered with NK over nukes. He want on to say that the Bush administration basically threw the agreement in the waist can and labled NK one of the axis of evil states. Was all down hill from there.

Well that's complete BS. The Clinton Admin was backed into the agreement by Carter, they never liked it. The Clinton Ambassador to South Korea ( and Obama special rep to North Korea) said : "The Agreed Framework was a political orphan within two weeks after its signature"

It was never fully supported by Clinton Admin, as it was a bad deal. It was structured to "suspend" weapon development, with nothing put in place to make it difficult for NK to resume work right where they left off. And it likely was ignored by the North from the beginning.

skuthorp
04-10-2013, 04:38 PM
I think the old fashioned word was 'appeasement'. But then no one wanted to provoke a resumption of the war or tug the tiger's tail.
We may get away with this or we may not. It depends a lot on what the alternative is, and a US ally, and maybe US personnel on China's border is not an alternative that China can live with. And then there's the prospective refugee problem on their border if NK falls over.

wardd
04-10-2013, 04:39 PM
How about if the OP poster shows some proof that Chaney let the NK build nukes, or is the usual crap from the left.

who was in office at the time?

Mrleft8
04-10-2013, 04:40 PM
Good! Blame Carter for once. At least you all are picking on someone else. Please tell us what the agreement Carter made with NK? Then you can bring up Bush/Chaney allowing the NKs to build nukes.

You blame Carter! She may be little, but she'll bite yer knee caps and leap up and snap your nose off if yer not careful!

Chris Coose
04-10-2013, 04:56 PM
Really??? Would you believe anything Dick cheney says? :p

Republicans

purri
04-10-2013, 05:22 PM
Sounds like the intelsats had other things to do...

peb
04-10-2013, 05:24 PM
I think the old fashioned word was 'appeasement'. But then no one wanted to provoke a resumption of the war or tug the tiger's tail.
We may get away with this or we may not. It depends a lot on what the alternative is, and a US ally, and maybe US personnel on China's border is not an alternative that China can live with. And then there's the prospective refugee problem on their border if NK falls over.

As to the potential end of the North Korean regime:

I think China knows that the US would certainly agree to keeping any troops on the southern tip of Korea. But the concern of millions of North Koreans flooding over the border to China is the big stumbling block right now. If it want for that, China would happily give up the North Korean satellite to a reunified Korea controlled by the South.

There may be some old farts in the Chinese communist party who would oppose it on principle, but they would not hold the day.

But China doesn't want the refugee nightmare. So that has to be solved, likely through massive foreign humanitarian aid.

And then there is the ever so slight problem of getting the North power base to go quietly into the night. China holds the strings, but any trade embargo (70% of NK trade is with China) or elimination of food ( China like supplies well over half of NK's food supply) would cause massive starvation. They Lille won't go there, and NK knows it.

Mrleft8
04-10-2013, 05:47 PM
As to the potential end of the North Korean regime:

I think China knows that the US would certainly agree to keeping any troops on the southern tip of Korea. But the concern of millions of North Koreans flooding over the border to China is the big stumbling block right now. If it want for that, China would happily give up the North Korean satellite to a reunified Korea controlled by the South.

There may be some old farts in the Chinese communist party who would oppose it on principle, but they would not hold the day.

But China doesn't want the refugee nightmare. So that has to be solved, likely through massive foreign humanitarian aid.

And then there is the ever so slight problem of getting the North power base to go quietly into the night. China holds the strings, but any trade embargo (70% of NK trade is with China) or elimination of food ( China like supplies well over half of NK's food supply) would cause massive starvation. They Lille won't go there, and NK knows it.
Rand Paul, Jim Demint, Mitch McConnell, James Inhofe..... Oh..... Wait..... That's the U.S. Republican Party.....

peb
04-10-2013, 06:07 PM
Rand Paul, Jim Demint, Mitch McConnell, James Inhofe..... Oh..... Wait..... That's the U.S. Republican Party.....

Any dissolution of North Korea that would require us troops to stay on south side of the Pennisula would have wide spread support by both parties in US. It's a no brainer.
no one wants troops on the Chinese border
The problem might be the South Koreans, who may want a stronger US presence in the north, but I don't think so.

wardd
04-10-2013, 07:52 PM
When North Korea acquired nuclear capability? It took 5 decades.

NK began its quest for nuclear capability when Eisenhower was President.

Lyndon Johnson was President when NK first lit off a nuclear reaction in a power plant.

When evidence first came to light that NK was attempting to build nuclear weapons, Reagan was President.

When a team of inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency announced that it believed NK was producing weapons grade plutonium, Bill Clinton was President.

When the US gave NK two new nuclear power plants and other energy and economic support, Clinton was still President.

When NK launched a missile over Japan that IAEA inspectors believed to be a test of an inter continental ballistic missile, Clinton was still President.

When NK finally admitted that they had been operating a nuclear weapons program, President G W Bush, and his Vice President, had been in office for about a year and a half.

Does that answer your question?

yup, it was bush that let them light one off

S.V. Airlie
04-10-2013, 08:22 PM
You blame Carter! She may be little, but she'll bite yer knee caps and leap up and snap your nose off if yer not careful!Oh brother! I blame Billy for GD awful beer.:)

S.V. Airlie
04-10-2013, 08:25 PM
who was in office at the time?Your smart supposedly wardd. Figure it out. Read a book..You do know what a book is I hope.

ccmanuals
04-10-2013, 08:30 PM
Well that's complete BS. The Clinton Admin was backed into the agreement by Carter, they never liked it. The Clinton Ambassador to South Korea ( and Obama special rep to North Korea) said : "The Agreed Framework was a political orphan within two weeks after its signature"

It was never fully supported by Clinton Admin, as it was a bad deal. It was structured to "suspend" weapon development, with nothing put in place to make it difficult for NK to resume work right where they left off. And it likely was ignored by the North from the beginning.

The point he was trying to make was we were talking to NK and it was a basis for further talks. When Bush declared them part of the axis of evil all diplomatic relations ceased. That was Bush's view of the world. Either you were a good guy or a bad guy. jeez

Tom Hunter
04-10-2013, 08:59 PM
I don't know if Cheny is wrong or right, but I do know any solution he will propose to the problem will cost a trillion dollars and maybe a few thousand American lives. So I would like to try every other possible option and hold his ideas in a file if we need a fallback plan.

Gerarddm
04-11-2013, 02:08 AM
I am sorry he was eligible for that heart surgery.

DanSkorupka
04-11-2013, 05:16 AM
There isn't really any way to make a country stop building a nuke.
Not all nukes are created equal and not all nukes are equally difficult to create.

They aren't going for compact megaton weapons.

Flying tampers and neutron mirrors and external initiators are all common knowledge, any civilian with a right to talk nuclear policy knows it.
Hardly any bomb in stockpile has anywhere near one spherical critical mass.

That in itself is worrying, but what if you count dry boosted composite bombs (sloikas scaled down to the low kt range).
What if you talk U233 or reactor bred plutonium.

What if you talk pure fusion weapons.
I have some real interesting ideas for them. I intended to take them to the grave but made an intentionally incomplete disclosure without an illustration last year.
I felt the need to debunk claims vastly overstating the ease of production, compactness of size, and power of them.
There was someone with millions of views on his blog telephoning congress and news organizations about (truly impossible) softball sized megaton range weapons, and claiming that the enemies of America had them in large numbers.
People listened and believed and it became clear people would use this information to decide who to vote for so I reluctantly acted.
I came up with the working mechanism for a crude, but easily build able low yield H Bomb entirely on my own when I was in middle school.
If I can think it up that means someone else already has and isn't talking about it, this doubtless includes people with malicious intent.

Any vocational school that deserves to exist is going to have several large good metal lathes, hundreds of computers, multi megabit per second internet on each computer, a chemistry lab that can work with some really toxic stuff the list goes on.

Plenty of homeowners have these things (albeit in smaller numbers) in their backyard.
Imagine a handful of sociopaths with a better lathe than I have, who are willing to risk a horrible death to the extent of one pot meth lab operators, but are sober and clean and organized and out for blood.

Lets face it your local high school probably has nuclear latency.

The only thing we can do is to make people not want to use nuclear weapons.

As for other supposedly lesser WMD's...

There is rumored to be a superincendiary codenamed "green magenta".
A superoxidant, doesn't burn and transfer heat, you are the fuel, reacts hypergolically with human flesh. It is also supposedly able to truly detonate.
Just a rumor?
I knew youtube pyros were getting crazy but I think this may be crossing a line.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCD-T7b53Ug