Subject:
|
Re: Having it both ways W.R.T. DPRK
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 10 May 2003 07:16:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
99 times
|
| |
|
|
Why should the U.S. engage in these activities in the first place?
The fact that people placed highly in goverment are probably reaping some
kind of on/offshore monitary benefit only makes it worse.
I am also non-patisan on the issue -- Clinton doing wildly stupid and
possibly selfish things is no better than Shrub doing similar things. It's
still a gross misappropriation of U.S. taxpayer money.
The govt. would be so much better sticking to its fundamental purposes
instead of spreading U.S. money abroad and thereby bolstering the bottom
line of a select few U.S. companies.
Some other stuff you said was too crytpic to follow...
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Having it both ways W.R.T. DPRK
|
| Followup to yesterday: "The two faces of Rumsfeld" (URL) director of a company which wins $200m contract to sell nuclear reactors to North Korea 2002: declares North Korea a terrorist state, part of the axis of evil and a target for regime change (...) (22 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Having it both ways W.R.T. DPRK
|
| The agreed framework ((URL) was a bad idea when the Clinton administration put it forth, and it continued to be a bad idea all along. How bad an idea indeed, we know now, since the DPRK was apparently violating it all along. But under the terms of (...) (22 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
