• If you would like to get your account Verified, read this thread
  • Check out Tickling.com - the most innovative tickling site of the year.
  • The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

North Korea Told to Renounce Nukes

ShiningIce

3rd Level Green Feather
Joined
Feb 14, 2002
Messages
4,702
Points
36
WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States and South Korea (news - web sites), stung by North Korea (news - web sites)'s admission that it has a secret nuclear weapons program, are calling on Pyongyang to reverse course and abide by promises to renounce development of these armaments.


AP Photo

N. Korea Told to End Nuclear Weapons Program
(AP Video)



The startling disclosure, announced Wednesday night by the White House, changed the political landscape in East Asia, setting back hopes that North Korea was on the road to becoming a more benign presence in the region.


Japan expressed "grave concern" about the North Korea's nuclear revelation.


The disclosure adds to the administration's list of foreign policy headaches, coming on top of a possible U.S. attack on Iraq and the overall U.S. war on terrorism.


A senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said North Korea acknowledged having "more powerful" weapons. U.S. officials have interpreted that statement as an acknowledgment that North Korea has other weapons of mass destruction. However, the same officials say they are unsure whether North Korea actually does possess biological or chemical weapons.


Any administration inclination to try to confront North Korea, which President Bush (news - web sites) has labeled as part of an "axis of evil" with Iraq and Iran, could be tempered by a desire not to become overextended internationally.


Presidential spokesman Sean McCormack said North Korea was guilty of a serious infringement of a 1994 agreement with the United States under which Pyongyang promised to be nuclear-free in return for economic assistance.


"The United States and our allies call on North Korea to comply with its commitments under the nonproliferation treaty and to eliminate its nuclear weapons program in a verifiable manner," McCormack said.


U.S. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said North Korea told U.S. diplomats that it was no longer bound by the anti-nuclear agreement.


In Seoul, South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Tae-sik, said South Korea has consistently pursued the de-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula in line with international agreements. Japan and South Korea are treaty allies of the United States.


"We urge North Korea to abide by its obligations," he said.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said late Wednesday the United States had been ready to offer North Korea economic and other benefits if Pyongyang agreed to curb missile programs, end threats and change its behavior in other ways.

"In light of our concerns about the North's nuclear weapons program, however, we are unable to pursue this approach," Boucher said.

For a time, North Korea had seemed ready to shed Bush's "axis of evil" designation. Pyongyang was carrying out capitalist reforms and reaching out to both Japan and South Korea. It also resumed talks with the United States earlier this month.

It is not clear what steps the Bush administration may have in mind now for North Korea.

Also unclear is just how far along the North Korean nuclear program is.

Both U.S. and South Korean officials, however, have said that North Korea also maintains vigorous programs to build large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. Last November, South Korea's defense minister said that North Korea kept between 2,500 tons and 5,000 tons of biochemical weapons in six different facilities and had the capability to wage germ warfare.

As McCormack made the announcement, Undersecretary of State John Bolton was flying to East Asia to consult with allies on the changed situation.

William Triplett, a defense writer and East Asia expert, said the North Korean admission means Pyongyang now has or will soon have the ability to export nuclear warheads along with the long-range missiles it is already exporting to the Middle East and South Asia.

The new development is certain to have an impact in Japan, which may now feel vulnerable to potential nuclear blackmail by North Korea. There may also be increased challenges in Japan to the country's postwar commitment to pacifism.

Political tremors also are likely in South Korea, where President Kim Dae-jung (news - web sites)'s rule is best known for his incessant search for a more amicable relationship with his neighbor.

North Korea is certain to be a major element in political campaigning in South Korea for December presidential elections.

Under the 1994 agreement, in return for renouncing nuclear weapons, Pyongyang was to receive two light water nuclear reactors to replace the country's plutonium-producing reactors.

Groundbreaking for the new reactors, which were supposed to have been completed by 2003, just took place in August, with a State Department official on hand.

The two countries had just resumed high-level security talks less than two weeks ago for the first time since October 2000. It was during those discussions that North Korea informed the United States of its nuclear activities.

The United States has been suspicious about North Korea's nuclear intentions for some time despite the 1994 agreement. A CIA (news - web sites) report in January said that during the second half of last year, North Korea "continued its attempts to procure technology worldwide that could have applications in its nuclear program."

"We assess that North Korea has produced enough plutonium for at least one, and possibly two, nuclear weapons."

That has been a U.S. concern dating from before the 1994 agreement. International inspections were supposed to clear up that mystery but the North never permitted them despite a commitment to do so.

The North Korean revelations apparently refer to more recent nuclear development activities, possibly encompassing the period when former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (news - web sites) visited Pyongyang in October 2000. President Clinton (news - web sites) thought seriously about making a visit as well before leaving office.

North Korea may have foreshadowed the sudden souring of relations 10 days ago when, after Kelly's departure, it called the U.S. diplomat "high-handed and arrogant."

It also vowed to maintain a high military vigilance unless Washington changes its policy.

___
 
I don't understand how this could have happened. We gave them money, we donated food,.........

I wonder how the guys from the Pueblo are seeing this.
 
Actually, almost every politically unstable country in the world has nukes. It's not like they're expensive anymore.. Is attacking everyone who has nukes and an unstable leader a good idea?

Besides, I'm really more upset about N. Korea's kidnapping of Japanese citizens in the 1970's - they still won't tell the families of some of the victims where they are, and there's evidence that they're only telling Japan about a few of them.
 
actually as soon as i posted that i came up with something useful...


Actually, almost every politically unstable country in the world has nukes. It's not like they're expensive anymore.. Is attacking everyone who has nukes and an unstable leader a good idea?

Well...are they capable of actually launching them from afar? Although it's easy to get nukes, from what little i know about the topic, I think it's more difficult to actually launch them great distances, right? And we can shoot them out of the sky, right? Please, feel free to say something reassuring, because until you do, I'm building a mattress fort underneath my desk.:wow:
 
Scooby has...

hit the proverbial nail on its head. The major difference and largest source of concern is the fact that unlike Iraq, N Korea actually HAS a delivery system capable of accurate long range travel. Joking aside, this yet another area of the world that WILL be addressed shortly. The media makes much of "overextending" our resources, but it's more of an allocation and timing problem. We need to shift a lot of our emphasis away from the rapidly crumbling ex-Soviet shards of empire and redeploy those assets into spots where we have more current concerns. I believe this process is happening as we (speak/write), and will continue at an accelerated pace due to events such as this in Korea. Q
 
Scooby has hit the proverbial nail on its head.

*gulp* ...I have?

Just because I do not know a whole helluva lot about the situation...I just want to ask a few questions...

do you think this is a direct concern? Or are we more worried about Japan getting nuked (again) than us?

How big are the nukes we are talking about?

Lastly, do you think this will affect our approach on Iraq? As much as I'd like to have sodamn insaney's head on a stick, do you think north korea would take precedence?

Sorry I ask so many questions...just a curiously concerned Scooby Doobie Doo
 
I really, honestly don't think that N. Korea will nuke anyone, much less the U.S.

I'm dating myself here, but I see similarities to the cold war when everyone was building nuke shelters in their backyards and carrying gas masks in the car. We had them when I was a little girl.. Gas masks, canned food in the basement, air raid sirens. I really don't want to revisit paranoia land.
 
I don't think Japan would would necessarily be North Korea's target. South Korea's independence has been a thorn in the North's side for decades,and the North has been pulling stunts the whole time since the Korean War.

Another consideration is the same as one with Iraq,in that the North may not fire at anyone,but sell their nuclear stock to others who would have no problem doing s😵ne look at the North's past conduct will validate this concern.

Recently,the US Navy has successfully tested an anti-ICBM defense system.An ICBM was shot down over the ocean by a warship with such a system,and further development is under way.
 
I strongly doubt that N. Korea has any interest in nuking the U.S. What could they hope to gain from doing so? They might be lucky enough to take out a single city, but in return our government would literally wipe them off the map. Of much greater concern are those countries who have (or so we've been told) nuclear capabilites and see it as a duty to god to sacrifice themselves in a holy war. I agree with Phoebe that after growing up during the cold war with the constant threat of nuclear war hanging over our heads, I'd like to see the world's governments ban all nuclear weapons including ours!
 
"Deterrence", Cold War style, works against a rational enemy. The Soviets never tried to nuke us because they realized that they would be destroyed too. That's my take on NK.

Our best response would be to step up our watchful waiting, and at the same time halt all forms of assistance to the NK regime. That includes "humanitarian" aid, because starving kids don't get the food, NK apparatchiks and soldiers do. That's how the Supreme Leader ensures the survival of the regime. If the aid goes away, the regime will collapse within a year. (The kids will be a tragedy, but they would have starved anyway.) Until that happens, we have plenty of nukes to deter the NK's, and plenty of aircraft and submarines to deliver them if needed.

As for the others, past behavior of the Chinese and Russians shows that they are rational, so no worries there. The Indians and Pakis won't use their nukes - they deter each other. And no Westerner need concern himself over Israel's nukes, any more than we do over French or British nukes.

Iraq- that's another story, because Saddam isn't rational. But that's a topic for another thread.

Strelnikov
 
shark said:
Another consideration is the same as one with Iraq,in that the North may not fire at anyone,but sell their nuclear stock to others who would have no problem doing s😵ne look at the North's past conduct will validate this concern.

Maybe not so much selling their nukular stock to other countries, but having it stolen and smuggled out. Wasn't there a thing a little while ago where some border guards stumbled on some guys sneaking a few kilos of uranium out of Turkey? And Turkey's an ally, so they wouldn't be selling it. There's just no way you can guard all that stuff.

Biggles
 
Theft is definitely another problem,as groups like the Russian mob can resell what they get away with.Just as US street gangs have ready
access to military equipment,I'm sure other countries have the same problem with their stockpiles.
 
Right shark. There are a lot of old Russian Kalashnikovs and hand guns on the German black market, all remnants from the former Soviet occupation forces in East Germany. Even Yugoslavian hand-grenades and anti-tank guns are available there, from the recent Balkan wars. All sold for food or vodka or prostitutes (lots of Russian, Serbian, and Albanian mafia are controlling the red light business here today). Disgusting! :sowrong:
 
I don't think there's much hope of North Korea ever renouncing nukes. I guess their attitude is, "if you want to play with them, then so do we!" This is gonna be a more than delicate problem.
 
What's New

2/6/2025
You can become a verified member By sending Jeff a note, and doing a quick video interview.
Door 44
Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top