Forums

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky What is so important about the Plutonium and Uranium distinction.

Read CRS stuff like that which you linked to. Plutonium builds a more dangerous bomb, and you need a lot of centrifuges doing a lot of work to get the enriched uranium you'd need to do something with.

If it is true how can it be stupid? The country has limited resources. If they focus their resources on a nuclear program, they can't focus it on other places, like perks for communist members, which will destabilize their regime. If we send them resources, they don't have to make the choice.

Since Kim Jong Il is one of the most lucrative customers for Hennessy cognac, you might as well blame the North Korean nuclear program on France.

You keep saying that Bush's actions prodded them into making the bomb. I am saying they have always wanted one and have always been working on one.

I hardly suggested it was a necessary cause.

He got rid of Papa Doc and the Death squads didn't he? Haiti may still suck but it is better off than it was under Papa Doc isn't it?

I don't recall that Clinton deserves credit for that, but you could persuade me.

You realize we just went in their to set up Cheney's pipeline. The whole thing was a setup.

If you say so.

No I am not. This is the only thing I have critisized Clinton for (when it comes to foreign policy). Clinton got suckered by Carter, and went against his better judgement. Until 9-11 the US public did not have the stomach for the invasion of Afghanistan, which was what was needed to deal with Al Queda. I don't blame Clinton or Bush for 9-11. The only other thing I don't think Clinton did well was pulling out of Somalia. But it was really hard for him to stay with the Repubs screaming that he had to pull out, so I understand it.

Unlike you, I'm really not interested in defending or attacking Clinton. I'm just offended that Republicans are trying to cover for Bush's total lack of a Korea policy by trying to pin things on Clinton.