Interesting Artwork from North Korea!

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 15, 2003, 6:46 pm

Kyoukan,

More accurately, ONE of the incentives did not materialize. Sounds like congress screwed the pooch on that one, although I am not happy that accord was ever signed to begin with.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 6:48 pm

Uhh yeah. the one missing incentive being TWO 1000 MEGAWATT POWER PLANTS.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 15, 2003, 7:02 pm

That we CAN'T EVEN GET BUILT ON HOME SOIL DUE TO THE ANTI-NUKE LOBBY!

There, does that satisfy the caps requirement for the thread, or should we throw some more down?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 7:05 pm

I don't think they were planning on building them in the states and running power lines over to korea, stupid.

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » January 15, 2003, 7:07 pm

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 15, 2003, 7:07 pm

**swoosh**

That one went right past you, I guess.

Senators cannot secure funding to build plants here in the United States because of the frothing lunatics who oppose nuclear power of any type.

Add to them the ones that bitch about money leaving our shores and those who would strangle North Korea on principle, and no elected politician in his right mind would push forward or vote for budget funding of this type of thing.

Clearer?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 7:09 pm

no, because the money was already approved and the project started without complaint from anyone until the republicans took over and kyboshed it.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 15, 2003, 7:24 pm

The US administration, however, has said it can make no contribution to the construction cost as Congress has not appropriated the necessary budget.

The President can promise you sixty billion dollars three years from now.

If the Congress won't make the appropriation in teh budget year the expenditure is to occur, he is fucked.

Sort of like buying something on a 90 day pay plan, then getting fired. No money, no pay.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 7:28 pm

yes congratulations on making my point again.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 15, 2003, 7:30 pm

Yes, congratulations on missing the point again.

It was s stupid fucking thing to sign, because political climate in this country for the last twnety years at least guarantees there would be problems with the appropriation.

It

Should

Not

Have

Been

Signed

Should have subbed in a larger form of some other type of assistance.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 7:35 pm

yeah the 300-400 million wasted on building those reactors would have been waste compared to the same amount multiplied by 10 in order to start another arms race with a communist country.

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » January 15, 2003, 7:57 pm

You still don't get it.

The anti-nuke lobby means it wouldn't matter a damn if it were five cents to produce unlimited power. The appropriation still wouldn't happe. Voting for it would be political suicide.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 9:34 pm

oh yeah the GOP really has a reputation of bowing down to that massive juggernaut that is the "anti-nuke lobby"

masteen · Post by **masteen** » January 15, 2003, 9:57 pm

AFAIK, N. Korea has been a more trustworthy nation than USSR/Russia was/is. Bush needs to stop taking a hard line with them and let the diplomats and negotiators go and do their jobs. We agreed to build them nuke plants, and so we should.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » January 15, 2003, 10:56 pm

Kylere wrote: Nuclear Power Plants can be used as a source of Enriched materials. Enriched materials and a second rate machine shop=nuclear weapons capability

what are you even yabbering about by the way

Mak · Post by **Mak** » January 15, 2003, 11:59 pm

Kyoukan,

According to this article in the NYT, it was actions by NK that halted the agrrement you have been talking about. It's been a month or so since I read it, but I recall it was a fairly thorough account of NK's nuclear program, and it's ties to Pakistan.

The pertinent part:

But within three years [1996], Kim Jong Il grew disenchanted with the accord and feared that the nuclear power plants would never be delivered. He never allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency to begin the wide-ranging inspections required before the critical parts of the plants could be delivered.

Ultimately, there's probably rocks that can be thrown at both sides, but to assert that the US is completely to blame is incorrect.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » January 16, 2003, 9:11 am

http://www.theonion.com/onion3901/index.html

Top Story.

Teh Onion

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » January 16, 2003, 9:19 am

The_Onion wrote:"North Korea has a full-scale nuclear program underway, one which may even now have the capability of striking the western U.S.," Bush said. "Even more alarming, Iraq is actively trying to scrounge up enough money to buy something nuclear on the black market, ideally something that can fly through the air."

ROFL

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » January 16, 2003, 9:22 am

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » January 16, 2003, 10:12 am

Just to see if I'm straight on this...'cause this is my take on it:

-Treaty signed
-Defectors speak about breech of treaty
-Japan and South Korea still doing their part for reactors
-September 11th, 2001
-US does not want to approve a budget because we spent the money elsewhere.

I think I got it right. Look, not to bring up old wounds here, but many things have happened since the time we were expected to show up with an approved budget and money to build said reactors. I can't help but think that the US spent a lot more money on mobilization of our armies in the recent year and a half and now congress is tightening up on what they would feel are "unnecesary costs".

In the end, I still look at it like this: North Korean defectors identify that the nuclear program NEVER stopped...North Korea is in breech of the agreement...so why should the US/South Korea/Japan continue to be bound by the agreement??