jex

"no i think yes it does matter, not allowing the n korean governemtn the technology because they might would just make them go behind your back...."

So it would have been ok to sell saddam this technology?

__________________
Jex

DudeMan

right, sadam is a different issue, look at the political climate, obviously we should not be reckless and we have not been because checks were put on the reactors. how do you think that they have come to hear of the conversions. through stringent checks.

you misread my intentions . we dont just hand them out in case they go behind our back, but we hand trhem out to try to help and to ensure they dont go behind our back. neuclea fule could have boosted the economy by endless amounts in korea. but instead they want to makje bombs....

i dont doubt that with hiensight it may have been a nad thing to do. but in the time and situation i dont see any harm being committed. it took a concious decision buy the koreans to convert them and it is them we shall blaim not the people who sold it to them hoping they would do the smart thing and use it for fuel.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

jex

So if it is OK to sell reactors to korea - why are there thousands of US troops stationed along it's borders? What you're saying makes no sense to me.

leejo

What Clinton did makes no sense to me.

DudeMan

thats the essence though isnt it, i will admit i dont know alot about the current situation but i started my iniial anmalogy with the fact that rumsfeld probably couldnt have stopped the deal anyway so why blaim him... the clinton admin are to bgalim... not people looly linked.

Wolfie

Okay, something is not jiving here....

You said the reactors were sold to NK in 2000, however, the deal was struck in 1994 and KEDO was the organization in charge of supplying and building the reactors for NK. So ABB did not sell NK the reactors.

http://www.kedo.org/

If you want to blame someone for agreeing to give NK nuclear reactors, look for the guilty parties in 1994, Clinton's administration. Also, as head of the ABB company, it wasn't Rumsfield responsibility to established foreign policy, it was his job to obtain contracts for the company. If the US government said it was okay to sell reactors to NK, then the fallout of such a sale should not fall upon Rumsfield but instead on those who said it was okay (i.e. Clinton).

It is also noteworthy that ABB is not an American company but instead was an European company.

And what the hell does a non-executive director do exactly? This sounds like a position where a person is given a right to speak their mind but have no power to approve/disapprove any contracts/laws/decisions/etc....

I did find an article about ABB and Rumsfield

http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,952289,00.html

Though I thought this point was interesting.....

Bush did not end the policy. NK's admittance to having nuclear weapons ended the policy/treaty.

DudeMan

WELL PUT.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

jex

I'm not calling into question his position at the time, I'm calling into question his character and his associations. The man's been in many administrations. Saying that he wasn't part of the clinton admin doesn't really wash with his connections.

You also need to re-read this;

"Just months after Mr Rumsfeld took office, President George Bush ended the policy of engagement and negotiation pursued by Mr Clinton, saying he did not trust North Korea, and pulled the plug on diplomacy. Pyongyang warned that it would respond by building nuclear missiles. A review of American policy was announced and the bilateral confidence building steps, key to Mr Clinton's policy of detente, halted."

It clearly says that bush did end negotiations and korea's response in return is that they would build nukes. I can't find anywhere that it says they already had nukes?

__________________
Jex

CingularDuality

What you typed may clearly say that, but for some reason, Wolf's recollection/quote of what happened seems a bit closer to the truth to me.... (Not that they had nuclear weapons, but that they had the program.)

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

jex

I can only go on what is written. To do otherwise would be speculation would it not?

__________________
Jex

Benny_

He can only go on the quote given Cing.

From my understanding, Rummy was on the board and declines to remember whether he saw the Korean contracts.

The deal was the US would provide the light water reactors in return for Korea stopping it's nuclear program. Rummys company won the contract and sold 'em the reactor.

I also believe it has since come to light that the program was not stopped, although Korea are, if you'll ecuse me, full of ****, so you don't know how much is posturing and how much isn't.

I think the point is Rummy had a conflict of interest in being a part of that company and should be doing the decent thing and holding his hands up. He wasn't to know Korea would blag the states.

The underlying issue under all of this, and most of the other threads is........WHY AREN'T THE COALITION GOING TO GET THE OTHER BAD GUYS?

Wolfie

I will see if I can find some good sources tonight but this is what I recall happened....

NK admitted to an American official that they had nuclear weapons

The American government brought this issue to the world's attention and everyone got concerned.

NK retracted their statement and said they didn't but that America was preparing to attack them.

US brought issue to Security Council and began negotations with SK, Japan, Russia, and China concerning this issue.

All of a sudden, NK does have nuclear capability almost overnight to go along with their ballistic missile program (which there was no reason for this to continue testing if they had given up their WMD as they promised to do).

KEPO halted construction of the light water reactors until this issue could be settled and all the facts were brought forth.

NK withdrew from the NPT treaty and threw out the IAE inspectors from NK.

US stopped shipments of fuel oil to NK.

NK began processing spent fuel to build nuclear bombs.

I am not positive on the order of events so I will see what I can find tonight.

Wolfie

Because right now the coalition has obligations in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with supply aid to various other countries to rebuild (i.e Librya).....

Wolfie

How could he have had a conflict of interest? He did not make the decision to sell the reactors to NK in the first place.

As a member of the board, it was his job to increase profits for the company, not established foreign policy. Even if he disagreed with the foreign policy, it wasn't his job to do so. His job at the time was to take care of the company.

As for whether or not he saw those issues, that is something one can only speculate. Alot of times, information does not get passed or digested in a company. So while it may be true that this information was passed on to all the board members, there was no guarantee that they read it (trust me on this one, I have first hand experience in this).

leejo

Jex, saying that Bush ended negotiations with N. Korea and they in response built nukes is similar to a man divorcing a woman for having an affair while he was away at sea and a month later she had a baby to get back at him.

Neither N. Korea nor anyone else can yank a nuclear weapons program out of their wazoo in 2 years. Bush ended relations with N. Korea, I suspect, because he knew about their program and chose not to look the other way.

And Lo! N. Korea is gradually responding to the pressure. Saddam Hussein never did respond in a positive manner to international pressure, hence his removal.