Subject:
|
Re: Having it both ways W.R.T. DPRK
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 10 May 2003 18:08:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
147 times
|
| |
|
|
Followup to yesterday:
"The two faces of Rumsfeld"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4664678,00.html
2000: 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
Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company
which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea -
a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been
targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts to build
nuclear weapons.
Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering
giant based in Zurich, when it won a $200m (£125m) contract to provide the
design and key components for the reactors. The current defence secretary
sat on the board from 1990 to 2001, earning $190,000 a year. He left to join
the Bush administration.
[snip]
Critics of the administration's bellicose language on North Korea say that
the problem was not that Mr Rumsfeld supported the Clinton-inspired
diplomacy and the ABB deal but that he did not "speak up against it". "One
could draw the conclusion that economic and personal interests took
precedent over non-proliferation," said Steve LaMontagne, an analyst with
the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington.
--------------------------------------------
What exactly is your point again, Lar? That if the work must be given to
someone it might as well be an american company that gets the cash infusion?
A band-aid solution and perspective if there ever was one. What makes you
think that the powers that be think in terms of countries as defining
anything? Country specific borders, economic policy, and law don't mean
anything. The U.S. is merely the doped up dummy state willing to play pointman.
Why not question the basis for some of these weird deals?
I think some of this stuff goes quite far back, say at least as far back as
some of Daddy Shrub's dealings. And let's not forget the "Pax Americana"
thing either (the original site is gone, a mirror that is hopefully accurate
maybe found here: http://www.geocities.com/ppplanet/bookman.htm).
Basically, the powers that be (multi-national corporate america and it's
wildly influential lobbyists and other unknown deal swingers) want economic
control of as much of the world as they can lay their grubby hands on.
I think it's scandalous, just scandalous, that you can't look past partisan
issues seeing as how you are supposedly a Libertarian. I guess you are
actually a Republican in a Libertarian disguise.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Having it both ways W.R.T. DPRK
|
| 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 (...) (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
|
|
|
|
