Hi All, I've got to disagree with Sam:
> This is because the North Korean leaders are not thought of as > being as psychopathic as Sadam Hussein. Really? Sadam, until not to long ago, was one of the best good-old-boys in the entire region--both armed and supported by the US. If he hadn't gone off-side in the Kuwait thing, he'd still be Washington's buddy. The only reason that the US wants to snuff him now is that he is seen as a threat to Israel. Given the treatment his Moslem brothers are receiving from Israel, and given that they are the ones who hold Washington's leash, it isn't surprising that he hates them. But, so far, he has not attacked them (Israel), or ANY other country (except Kuwait), until AFTER war has been waged against him. To date, he has only used his 'weapons of mass destruction' on his own people, and on nations that are at war with him. Sure, he's a butcher, but that has never been a problem for the American government, has it? So far, there is not the slightest reason to believe that Sadam has any intentions of starting a war that he couldn't possibly win. Even if he does have WOMD (like Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, etc.) there is no doubt in my mind that he won't use them *until*he*is* *attacked* -- and then why shouldn't he? Every rule of international law says that an attacked nation has the right to defend itself in any way it can. The psychopath of the piece is GWB, who should be tried as a war monger who would make the Fuhrer blush. The sane thing to do is to let Sadam be until when and if he tries something; then making war on him would be both legally and morally justified. > The Bush administration > thinks they can be reasoned with and negotiated with and possibly > even bought off. Although the North Koreans even admit to having > some nukes, we do not believe they have any ideas about actually > using them against nearby countries, at least not in the immediate > future. Their corner of the world is not anywhere as troubled as > the Middle East. I think the North Koreans are producing the nukes > not to start a war, but only to increase their bargaining power at > the negotiating table when dealing with countries which don't want > them to have them. The North Koreans are now in a stronger position > than the one they held before they had the nukes. They can offer to > stop producing and to dismantle their nukes in exchange for some > concessions and better treatment by the countries they don't get > along with very well. I think the North Koreans and the rest of the > world can work out a peaceable and positive outcome for everyone > concerned. Now, Kim Il-jong ... there is a nutbar. Unlike Sadam, this guy boasts about having nukes, and about the fact that he's about to start making more. He also boasts about having missiles that can deliver them, and about the fact that he is making even better delivery systems as we speak. In contrast to the Iraqi's he has just thrown UN inspectors out of the land. He is still, technically, at war with the US, and North Korea engages in almost non-stop military provocation against the South. Kim even says, out loud, that if he is embargoed, he will consider it an act of war! Sadam is Mother Theresa by comparison. Just my 2 cents worth :-) Ray Andrews, Vancouver, Canada -- Arachne V1.71;UE01, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
