Bush said back in the 2004 election that a nuclear North Korea was not acceptable, and the best way to prevent this was with the six party talks. Well, his policy failed. North Korea has nukes, and we are left with almost no options except to arm Japan.

Good one Bush!

Republican'ts blame Clinton - who last served in the oval office six years ago, and try to absolve the sitting president for the last six years in the process.

Gee, I'm suprised. Great prediction Kim.

Good call Kim, Right on, These 2 crackpots are exhibit number 1 of the lefts everything is Bushs fault cult of no personality.

Prediction: When the dems lose this November, the dems will scream bloody murder voter fraud! Even though they are the one's who have been caught time and time again trying to steal elections..Bank on it

When you have no agenda for America you have to jump on something to con the simple minded of America. The democrats have became experts at slime and slander but don't have a single item out front to better life or safety for the American people. This has to be the first, actually the second election cycle in history that one party has no plan at all for the country. "We can do it better is not a plan", it's a statement of insanity. I guess like Hanoi John Kerry they're all holding their plans in secret until they are elected.

"Democrats count on the electorate either being stupid or inattentive."

No, Democrats are counting on the continued support of the American people as we all, together, find a way to put this country back on track.

The Republicans keep repeating that it isn't an election issue. Well, wake up folks -- the safety and security of our nation and the rest of the free world is very much at issue in the upcoming election. The Republican'ts just wish that wasn't so...

Yes, Madeline Albright danced with Kim Jong Il after the Clinton administration successfully gave North Korea the technology on the promise it was just for energy.
This problem was created in the Clinton administration and all the idiots that support his legacy (Governor Richardson, Albright, etc.) are out there yelling it wasn't their fault, if Bush would just talk nice to the little dictator he wouldn't be throwing a fit and testing nuclear weapons.
The Bush administration needs to continue working for 6 party talks. China needs to step up and reign in their dangerous neighbor. UN sanctions and a complete naval blockade are needed.
The blame for North Korea's nuclear enabling belongs only to the Clinton administration.

As I stated in the previous post. All that North Korea has, the nuclear bomb and the missiles to deliver them are compliments of the American taxpayers. Slick Willie provided them with billions of dollars of your money. The didn't feed they're people, they purchased the materiel to build a bomb and the means to deliver it. I looks like Dimmy Carters plan to talk to the insane leader NK was also a failure. The democrats rants to take it to the U.N. has failed every time it has been tried. What has the U.N. did to stop NK, talk them to death, give them a time out, and threaten to talk to them some more.
This is a documented fact that even Lee should be able to read and understand. Somewhere it's documented on the level of a third grader since that was all the Slick administration had, people with the mental capacity of a third grader.

WELL AT LEAST NOW cLINTON FINALLY HAS SOMETHING BESIDES A BLUE STAINED DRESS TO CALL A LEGACY.

OK, quick!

What was the democrats' better idea?

RIGHT!

They have none!

Geez, you guys should be ecstatic. Carter got a Nobel Peace Prize for Failure.

I thought that the 1994 agreement solved all this.

No?

No, Democrats are counting on the continued support of the American people as we all, together, find a way to put this country back on track.

Oh, Lord, more pablum.

What exactly is that way?

Not-Bush is NOT a policy.

I have heard Pelosi celebrate the Democrats' inability to agree on an Iraqi policy. They have NOTHING. They desperately need scandal to keep the voters from that realization.

Since Bush wont attack NK, I am sure that he will find a suitable nearby contry to invade. I say Mongolia.

Barney

Mongolia is not nearby. You did not pass Geography 101 did You?

So much for the national security agenda, conservative asshats.

Yeah, Thanks Clinton/Gore.

Since the 1994 Agreed Framework failed the moment it was signed, I gather from these posts the left would approve of a premptive strike against NoKo. I agree.

Bush has been cleaning up the messes the crats left since day one when the departing staff wrecked the offices and stole all the "W" of the keyboards. Since then it's been a recession and the terrorists. Tax cuts took care of Clinton's recession and we trying to clean up the terrorists but the crats keep tying our hands behind our backs to make us fail.

So what's one more mess?

I think even Clinton had doubts about sending "Peanut" Carter to NoKo, but figured he couldn't screw up too bad. Boy, was he wrong...I still remember those toasts between the pot-bellied pig dictator and the ever-so-attractive madame Albright.....What a freaking nightmare.

"It's Bush's fault!"
"It's Clinton's fault!"

Come on people, there is only one person to blame for North Korea's nuke program and that is Kim Jong Il. The guy REALLY wants the bomb. For God's sake he is willing to starve his entire population to death for it.

It doesn't matter who the President is, some people just aren't open for negotiation whether it's 2 party talks, or 6 party talks.

Kim wants the bomb! He has wanted the bomb since before Clinton was President and before Bush was President. He has done everything he could to get the bomb despite the best efforts of Democrats and Republicans to stop him.

We can waste our time pointing fingers at each other, but Kim's going to continue as long as he is in power.

The simple fact is we have limited options to stop this psychopath.

Bush 5/23/03
"We will not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea. We will not give into blackmail. We will not settle for anything less than the complete, verifiable, and irreversible elimination of North Korea's nuclear weapons program."

So Mr. President, how is that working out?

914

As usual you're blowing smoke out your arse. Momgolia is about 500 miles from N. Korea. I doubt you eeven took geography...or took the same class as the Boy Emperor.

Let's see Barn, I guess Bush could follow the Clinton Doctrine of Appeasement and just give NK working nukes since it seems the unmonitored reactors maybe aren't going as well or as quickly as planned. Or he could continue to refuse to 'negotiate' with a nutcase that violates every 'agreement' he makes and instead deal through the UN like everyone keeps telling him to do. Or we could nuke NK. Which is the better option?

Of course, the Dems will conveniently forget that it was Bill Clinton and Co. who bought Crazy Kim's no nuclear weapons promise. And the nutroots will insist that President Bush forced Crazy Kim into testing the nuke because he refused to sit down with him in bilateral talks.

And the Reps will conveniently forget that Bush has been president for 6 years! Anything he thought Clinton did wrong, he had plenty of time to do his way instead. Any promises he didn't believe, he could have acted on them. If he thought the 1994 Agreed Framework failed, he could have redone it his way. Why is he not responsible for his own actions or inactions?

Seriously, Bush comes in and dismantles existing policy, then six years later NK tests a nuke, and it's Clinton's fault?!

Eric:

Thank you for the most reasonable thing said in this thread so far.

The libs screamed that Bush shouldn't act unilaterally, so he pushes for the 6 member talks, since they are in the most vunerable position if Lil Kim decides to set off a nuke for New Year's or his birthday celebration.

Japan, S Korea, China, and Russia have more to worry about in the short term, and it is in their best interests that they have their say in the negotiations.

But nooooo. Liberals now say that the talks should be only between the US and Lil Kim, and the heck with the rest of them. I mean, it worked sooo well with the Carter-Clinton-Albright deal.

"It's Bush's fault!"
"It's Clinton's fault!"

Come on people, there is only one person to blame for North Korea's nuke program and that is Kim Jong Il. The guy REALLY wants the bomb. For God's sake he is willing to starve his entire population to death for it.

I agree with you but who are the miscreants out there who blame everyone except for Kin JOng Il?

The frigging Democrats!

McConnell is right. Those twits attack Bush as though he's the bad guy and Kim is Sants Claus.

If a damned Korean bomb went off in LA tomorrow the stinking Democrats would blame Bush.

They suck.

Once again the left displays the simptoms of BDS. One idiot stated the Clinton plan was working. Yes it was. It worked will for the North Koreans. Given that they were cash and fuel short, with the inability to make enough electrical power, Clinton gave them all of that. They, for their part were to observe the nonproliferation treaty. With the South Korean Capital within easy range of N. Korean Artillery, any military act by the U.S. would surely spark a resumption of the Korean Conflict. Clinton and Carter did nothing more than support an enemy who gave false promises. Had Clinton held a hard line against North Korean, that government may have fallen. But BDS rears its ugly head when the left refuses to take responsiblity for their own actions, again. America has little influence with North Korea. They want to counterfit our money. Those are the sanctions they want us to lift. What else is there to talk about. They lie about everything else. If Muirego, Lee, Hugh, Brian and Barney ever touched heads, the implosion would be larger than the supposed nuke the madmen in North Korean set off.

That comment was down right nice of you Rags. Glad to see you know who are your superiors.

Well,

It's sad to say, but if indeed North Korea succeeds in developing nuclear weapons, it will be, at least in large measure, George W. Bush's fault.

For the last 6 years, we have known this day was coming, and we did nothing about it. We engaged in 6-party diplomacy - historically the worst way to proceed if you want to prevent a rogue country from developing nuclear weapons. I mean, you can't get six fucking people to agree on what they want for dinner, for crissakes.

So, what should Bush have done:

1) Well, for the last 6 years, we could have interdicted much of the shipping that goes to and from North Korea with very little in the way of risk. Sink one or two merchant shipping containers, and the Greeks would just stop fucking taking that business. Much of the technology that gets into and out of North Korea comes by sea, as land routes simply don't exist. Bush chose not to interdict North Korean ships. That was a strategic decision that directly increased the North Korean's ability to develop these weapons.

2) For the past 6 years, we could have demanded that the DMZ be enlarged. This option isn't on the table, but should be. The DMZ is only 2.5 miles wide. We should be demanding that it be 100 miles wide to provide an adequate defense to South Korea. In return for this concession, we would agree to not conventionaly bomb Pyongyang back into the fucking stone age next Friday. The simple fact is that we don't put enough options on the table that are unpalatable to this dictatorship, and the reason we don't do it is that we aren't thinking creatively.

3) For the past 6 years, we could have relied on a strategy that didn't JUST include bluffing. The United States either has, or does not have, a strategic interest in seeing to it that North Korea stops its nuclear activity. As long as our responses include seeking condemnations at the fucking UN, nobody should take us seriously. The UN is the LAST place we should be today; phrases such as "we condemn this provocative action" are diplospeak for "there's nothing we intend do about this."

4) In the past 6 years, we could have doubled the size of our military, just by cutting domestic spending here and there and truly eliminating waste in government. Our military is too small, to fight a war in BOTH Iraq and do a bombing campaign in North Korea and that's George W. Bush's fault. Why is it Bush's fault? Because he's the fucking Commander in Chief, that's why.

5) We could have starved the North Koreans to death. Sounds pretty harsh, but we could have done it. We chose not to. Now they are threatening to destroy American cities with nuclear bombs. I guess after Los Angeles goes up in a big fucking mushroom cloud, starving the North Koreans will be an option we might consider. Too bad 250,000 Americans will have to be incinerated before we grow some balls.

Is it George W. Bush's fault that the North Koreans have nuclear weapons? Well, if the buck stops on his desk, then yes, it is his fault.

Hugh, you are inferior in mental capacity to paramecium. (Look it up). You are not nor will you ever be capable of being equal to my bodily waste, which smells better, no doubt. Hugh, you serve no purpose, go away.

rightnumber, inderdicting ships is an act of war.

So, you think we need another war, this time with no allies?

Wow. Brilliant.

Mitchell,

That's it? that's the extent of your criticism?

Look, if we do ANYTHING ... that's an act of war, right?

What do you suggest we do? Do you have any BETTER ideas? If so, let's hear them.

Because everything we've done so far has led us to where we are now!

The demacrtic donkey still the most stupid animal in the poltical field

Uhh have I mentioned asskissing, bootlicking, appeasing, bend over, nutcase, wacko, please talk to me, I will give you,----hmmm maybe I have.