"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
How many have during Bush's watch?


NOYB wrote:
Bush didn't give N. Korea $4 billion in aid in exchange for an empty
promise.


Got any proof it was just an "empty promise"?

Looks to me (and the rest of the world) that their promise was good...
they didn't build nukes until well after President Bush came into office
and kicked over the applecart.


How do you know the promise was good? They didn't allow inspectors in to
verify during Clinton's Presidency. Then Bush announces that he's going to
push for inspections, and Voila! N. Korea claims they have nukes and plan
on reconstituting there nuclear program. Sounds like a case of the hand
caught in the cookie jar.




How many do you think will?


I don't believe Bush will give any aid to Kim...so the question is moot.


Then why is Condi making offers? So as to make another hollow gesture at
diplomacy?



She's not making offers. She said that she doesn't believe aid to N. Korea
would hurt the negotiation and inspection process.

Or Iran?


I think it's more likely that Israeli or US forces will strike suspected
Iranian nuke sites than inspect them. The Iranians don't appear to be
willing to cave on the nuke inspection issue.


The option of making strikes at Iranian facilities must be kept on the
table until we're certain they're not building warheads... or even dirty
bombs... but they're smart enough to've put key facilities far underground
in hard-to-find places... even if you wouldn't have thought of it. Got
any idea how big a country Iran is? Remember Libya? Think they haven't
learned anything, just because you haven't?



Or Libya? And why do you think any inspection teams *have* to be led by
an American?


Led, accompanied by, whatever. The point is inspection teams with US
representatives on them.


That's better. But the point is that the inspection teams see everything
and come away with *real* assurance that no weapons are being produced.


The "protocols" change from administration to administration. Clinton
believed in appeasement

Says you. Whatever Clinton did, it worked. Proven.


... Bush believes in pre-emption.


Hard to say what Bush believes in, he's done everything from make promises
to making empy threats to actually invading countries that present no
threat to us.


He's just continuing with the long-established Presidential policy of
"intentional ambiguity".