BMEWS
 

Don’t bet on it

 
 

I don’t buy it.



Posted by Drew458    United States   on 02/25/2008 at 12:29 PM   
 
  1. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again.  North Korea is the Chicomm doormat, and it is also the number one Chicomm proxy and cat’s-paw against the West. 

    If you view the North Korean nuclear controversy as Beijing probing with its cat’s-paw for weaknesses in the West, the entire scenario becomes much more sensible. 

    blank stare

    Posted by Tannenberg    United States   02/25/2008  at  01:28 PM  

  2. Peiper, the Philharmonic is playing there tonight. That’s part of the article too, but I didn’t bother to quote that part.

    You bet Tannenberg. The Chicoms own them lock, stock, and barrel. Well, let’s just say that if China even thinks about sneezing NorK catches the avian flu.

    Posted by Drew458    United States   02/25/2008  at  01:32 PM  

  3. Taking down the reactor or not, they’ve got their plutonium.  They’re working on a serious missile program to deliver the plutonium wherever they want.  Are they still working on counterfeit “Super Bills”?  Drugs?  Selling missiles to pisant countries who shouldn’t be allowed to own cap guns?  Whether or not that reactor is running, I don’t see any reason to make their lives any easier until they are no longer a problem. 

    How can these guys manage to have any sort of a sympathetic world image?  How can they say we’re doing bad things to them when that sawed off little psycho lets his people starve?  If he weren’t jacking with his own economy, they probably be doing just fine.  They key point about Communism is that in the end, it just doesn’t work.  Every version of it has been a failure in every country that has tried it. 

    South Korea seems to be attempting to open channels of communication and travel with them.  I can understand their desire to be reunited, but that doesn’t mean I feel good about it.  Can the reunification be handled as it was in Germany, when the wall came down?  That wouldn’t be too bad because essentially the South would be taking over the North.  China won’t like - oh well.

    Posted by Dr. Jeff    United States   02/25/2008  at  05:45 PM  

  4. Dr. Jeff, I fear that when Korea is reunited, it is because the glorious People’s Red Army is marching through it on their way somewhere else.

    China has never given up believing that Korea is theirs.  After all, they owned it for centuries until Japan came in and took it (annexed 1910).  They saw Japan use it as the road to Manchuria (or Manchukuo, as it was called), whereupon Manchuria became the road to Mongolia and the north China plain.  The trouble with roads is that they run both ways, and South Korea’s little one-way street sign isn’t worth two cents without backing from outside powers.  We saw that proved all too clearly in the Korean War.

    The time may soon come when it isn’t worth two cents with anyone’s backing.

    blank stare

    Posted by Tannenberg    United States   02/25/2008  at  07:24 PM  

  5. "And let’s ignore that it’s uranium that gets used for an atomic bomb, while it’s plutonium that gets used for the much more powerful hydrogen bomb.”

    No.  Both U-235 and Pu-239 can be used in atomic bombs. In fact, Fat Man, the second atomic bomb dropped in Japan was a plutonium bomb. Pu-239 is created by bombarding U-238 with neutrons.  U-238 is MUCH more common than U-235. 

    And both can be used as triggers in a hydrogen bomb.

    Posted by bikerbob    United States   02/26/2008  at  08:31 AM  

  6. The real trick is the deuterium and tritium for the H-bomb.

    Posted by Macker    United States   02/26/2008  at  11:19 AM  

  7. 2/26/08:  Seems as if the NY Philharmonic has made a big splash over there, and commentators are twittering hopefully about how it might help to “warm” relations between China’s well-scuffed doormat and the West.

    Some of us may remember the 1959 NYP tour that included a 20-day tour of the USSR.  That tour also received all sorts of rave reviews, and again, the pundits were twittering hopefully about a “thaw” in relations, etc. etc. etc.

    Seems to me that within a very few years, we had the Cuban missile crisis on our hands.

    The moral of the story is, of course, that our enemies simply have no taste…

    LOL

    Posted by Tannenberg    United States   02/26/2008  at  06:55 PM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Well ... fine.

Previous entry: NAUGHTY CIA MUST ANSWER TO amnasty intl. and civil rights groups.

<< BMEWS Main Page >>