So? Nobody has a perfect record. If you want to make a big deal of this,
let's list all the major policy blunders committed by President Clinton
due to bad intel (or wilfully ignoring intel that didn't agree with his
preconceptions); and stack them up next to President Bush's.

My advice to you is to be a little more quiet on this subject.


NOYB wrote:
What's really interesting is how easily you dismiss poor policy decisions by
Clinton when the the decisions were the result of poor intel, but are so
quick to chastise Bush for acting on intel failures.


Well, look at the results: did Clinton launch a major war, and throw
away the goodwill & cooperation of almost the entire rest of the world,
based on bad intel? Did Clinton run up a record deficit? Did Clinton
spend tens of millions of dollars, and tens of thousands of valuable
man-hours, hunting for a boogey-man that doesn't exist? Did Clinton turn
his back on the perpetrator of the most deadly attack on the U.S. in
history?




No, the spy-eye is good at spotting the rasioactive plume emitted as fuel
is enriched.


Hogwash. We don't have near the ability you think (and hope) we have
regarding the ability to spot nuclear fuel enrichment.

And we should all take your word for it, you who are not sure what
enriching nuclear fuel involves or how it's done.


... Why do you think we
have been pushing so hard for boots-on-the-ground inspections in Iran.

Because they already have a supply of enriched fuel and some very large,
very fancy facilities for carrying on sophisticated procedures which
would be harder to spot.



One or two produced in the early 1990's! And we're supposed to believe
that Kim agreed to quit building them because Clinton handed him $4
billion and asked "please"?

Umm, not exactly.


"Not exactly" what?

Pay attention.

... N. Korea did "not exactly" develop nukes in the early
90's?

You're the one who said they did, in other words accusing Bush Sr of
letting it happen while blaming Clinton, and simultaneously accusing me
of being a hypocrit.




Or Hillary did "not exactly" write an article talking about those
nukes.


Perhaps if you gave up on lies & distortion, you might realize how sensible
the program was... if the Clinton Administration believed that the North
Koreans had already built nukes on Reagan and Bush Sr's watches, then the
options were either 1- a premptive strike to take them away or 2- give
solid incentive to get back on the Non-Proliferation bandwagon.



Option 1 would have stopped the continuation of the program. Option 2 ended
up funding the very program that it was trying to abate! Talk about irony.
Kim probably gets hyterical with laughter every time he thinks about it.


The money was to be handed over in smaller sums, over a period of years,
subject to verification that the N. Koreans were abiding by the
Non-Proliferation rules.


The N. Koreans never abided by the rules yet still collected the money.
Some program!



Whoa. Wait a minute. If N. Korea developed a nuke in the early 90's
during Clinton's watch, and that was Reagan and Bush Sr.'s fault, then
why aren't nukes built in 2003 (Bush's first term) the fault of the
administration that preceded Bush? You're being quite the hypocrite
here, Doug.

Not at all. First of all, N. Korea only announced that they were
re-activating their nuke program after Bush Jr had been in office for some
time,


Yeah, yeah...sure, whatever. N. Korea realized that Bush cut them off from
Clinton's gravy train. With nothing more to gain by concealing the nuke
program, they felt they had nothing to lose by revealing it.




and given them a ration of ****. Bush Jr has been in office now going on
five years


Whoah. Wait a minute. The N. Koreans talked about restarting their nuke
program only a year or two into Bush's first term.


But that was definitely during Bush's term... if they had nukes in the
"early 1990s" then clearly they were working hard on them before Clinton
took office in 1993.



... He allowed the N. Koreans to keep what
they already had, and then gave them funding which helped expand the program
even further.

Any proof of that statement? Other than your wild fantasy, that is?


I guess there's no difference between less than one year and more than 4
1/2 years, is there?


How about 8 years?

That wouldn't be "the early 1990s" then, would it?


The N. Koreans announced the same exact thing early on in Clinton's
presidency.

Really? When?


The only difference is that Clinton acquiesced...and Bush did not.

No, the difference is that Clinton put into place a workable prgram to
deter the North Koreans from building nukes. Obviously they didn't or
they'd already have them by now.

Another key difference is that Clinton kept open channels with them, and
worked actively at diplomacy, while studying ways to destroy the N.
Korean program. The JCS recommended against it as too uncertain and too
risky. President Bush antagonized and insulted the North Koreans, and
gave them no incentive... and they are building (possibly have already
built) nuclear warheads.

And you call this a Bush success... please explain further.



No, those two things are pretty much the same, arent't they?


They *were* the same.

No, obviously they *weren't* the same. Water flows down hill, NOBBY.

... The only difference was the response from each
administration...and the ensuing response from Kim to each of those
responses.

Yep, the North Koreans response: building nukes while President Bush
went on vacation, *not* building nukes while Clinton was President.

QED


Does this mean that you support the 'body count' concept of going after
'terrorists' and feel that as long as we're killing them faster than
they're killing us, we're winning?


Absolutely. As long as the numbers are in the neighborhood of 1000 to 1 or
more.

And if they can recruit new terrorists & insugrants faster than that?

... I'd like to see closer to 10,000 to 1, but that would require the use
of nukes...which is something that I favor in *some* circumstances.

In other words, you want to fight Viet Nam all over again? Great idea.

DSK

Rice mentioned aid packages in an interview last year, in return for good
behavior. I suspect she informed the idiot that she was going to mention
aid.


NOYB wrote:
Actually, she mentioned them last week. But you can bet that if the Bush
administration enters into any agreements with Kim, it will be on more than
a spit and a handshake...and it will be subject to inspections of N. Korea
by the US and other countries.


In other words, very similar to Clinton's successful policy.

DSK

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

per capita, Israeli men use more prostitutes than any other group.

I knew there was a statistical loophole to your original statement!




But they are still the main channel of importing, exporting them, ignoring
any capita.


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...062297,00.html


The report, issued annually, said some 10,000 such women currently reside in
about 300 to 400 brothels throughout the country. They are traded for about
USD 8,000 - USD 10,000, the committee said.

The U.S. State Department ranks Israel in the second tier of human
trafficking around the world, saying the Jewish State does not maintain
minimal conditions regarding the issue but is working to improve them.

Israel passed a law in 2003 that would allow the state to confiscate the
profits of traffickers, but watchdog groups say it is rarely enforced.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Rice mentioned aid packages in an interview last year, in return for good
behavior. I suspect she informed the idiot that she was going to mention
aid.


NOYB wrote:
Actually, she mentioned them last week. But you can bet that if the Bush
administration enters into any agreements with Kim, it will be on more
than a spit and a handshake...and it will be subject to inspections of N.
Korea by the US and other countries.


In other words, very similar to Clinton's successful policy.


Really? How many U.S.-led inspection teams travelled to Pyongyang during
Clinton's watch?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 15:12:03 +0000, NOYB wrote:


More fuel for the anti-Semetic fire...

What's anti-Semitic about discussing sexual slavery in Israel? It
clearly
exists there, as here. It's a disgraceful practice that isn't taken as
seriously as it deserves, here or there.

Some people believe that if you're Jewish, you're perfect, and any
negative remarks are anti-Semetic.

I'm not Jewish, and many of the Jews who I know are far from perfect. So
now how does your logic apply?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

As much as I admit to support the Bush administration, I have a
problem
with Israel. My issue is that they lead the world in slave sex
trade and
no one seems to really care.

Slave sex trade???



I've never heard anything about the prowess of Israel in the slave
sex
trade.

Really? Are you BLIND??? Here's a place to start, then do a google
search. Try Israel sex slave.

http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/israel.htm

Your link says that as many as 1000 women are brought into Israel
each year.

I can find statistics that show that anywhere from 15,000 to 50,000
women are brought into the US each.

So Dan's statement that Israel "leads the World in slave sex trade"
is a bit far-fetched, no?



Who do you think brings them?

You mean after you place your order on the internet?

http://www.volgagirl.com/

I suppose it could be DHL, UPS, or Airborne.

I'll take Luisa, please.

Before or after the Israeli men have their way with her?



Only the freshest here.

Massengill fresh?

Actually, she mentioned them last week. But you can bet that if the Bush
administration enters into any agreements with Kim, it will be on more
than a spit and a handshake...and it will be subject to inspections of N.
Korea by the US and other countries.


In other words, very similar to Clinton's successful policy.



NOYB wrote:
Really? How many U.S.-led inspection teams travelled to Pyongyang during
Clinton's watch?

How many have during Bush's watch? How many do you think will? Or Iran?
Or Libya? And why do you think any inspection teams *have* to be led by
an American?

Do you know anything at all about the accepted non-proliferation
protocols? Do you care, since you appear to be hopping from one tub of
mud to the next, flinging away in the hopes that something will stick to
the other guy sooner or later.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Actually, she mentioned them last week. But you can bet that if the
Bush administration enters into any agreements with Kim, it will be on
more than a spit and a handshake...and it will be subject to inspections
of N. Korea by the US and other countries.


In other words, very similar to Clinton's successful policy.



NOYB wrote:
Really? How many U.S.-led inspection teams travelled to Pyongyang during
Clinton's watch?

How many have during Bush's watch?

Bush didn't give N. Korea $4 billion in aid in exchange for an empty
promise.


How many do you think will?

I don't believe Bush will give any aid to Kim...so the question is moot.


Or Iran?

I think it's more likely that Israeli or US forces will strike suspected
Iranian nuke sites than inspect them. The Iranians don't appear to be
willing to cave on the nuke inspection issue.



Or Libya? And why do you think any inspection teams *have* to be led by an
American?

Led, accompanied by, whatever. The point is inspection teams with US
representatives on them.


Do you know anything at all about the accepted non-proliferation
protocols?

The "protocols" change from administration to administration. Clinton
believed in appeasement and Bush believes in pre-emption.


Do you care

Not really.

Scooby Doo wrote:

sherwindu wrote in
:



Scooby Doo wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote in
:

Who - the Israelis? I thought they only used missiles on people in
wheel chairs?

What, terrorists can't ride around in wheel chairs? That should help
us narrow our search for these crazies. Only wheel chair incident I
recall is when the Arabs pushed a Jewish man in a wheel chair off a
cruise boat. Now that's a brave thing to do.

Yes, "The Arabs" did that. Everyone of them, via their elected
representatives and officially inducted military. Oh, wait, no, it was
just a couple of nuts. It's the elected representatives and officially
inducted military of *Israel* that kills, maims and bulldozes innocents.

No, the Israeli army protects it's citizens. Unfortunately the 'couple'
of nuts you mentioned is the pervasive mentality of the Palestinians.
For many years, their goal was to kill all Jews or push them into the
Mediterranean. I think that now they realize that cannot happen and
hopefully they will reach some kind of accomodation with Israel.



And bulldozers on pacifists with bullhorns.

I keep hearing this story about the poor pacifist who put herself in
front of a bulldozer. Not a very smart thing to do. This ranks with
people who step in front of speeding trains.

As for statistics about deaths on both sides, the Israelis do kill
Palestinians who are firing on them or throwing molotov cocktails, but
that does not compare with people who sit around and plan for weeks in
advance how to kill innocent civilians.

The death toll for Palestinian CHILDREN is FOUR TIMES that of Israelis.

Much of that is because the terrorists use children as human shields.



Some of Israel's security
measures, like building walls, may seem extreme to some people, but
try and imagine yourself living there under a constant threat of
terrorist attack.

Try living for 38 years under military occupation. At this point, it's
EVERY DAY OF THEIR LIVES FOR A MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION.

There are all kinds of military occupations. Certainly the USA occupation of Japan
and Germany was not the same as the German and Japanese occupation of the
countries they occupied. The Palestinians who obey the law and do not engage in
terrorism do not fear for their lives. Their biggest problem is economic. Their rich
cousins in the Gulf states send meager amounts of money that seem to always wind
up in Yasser Arafat's Swiss Accounts, or go to buying weapons.



Until the Palestinians
can show they have control of their own population, there is no
trusting them on security issues.

How many investigations of espionage and treason involving the
Palestinians have been conducted or are underway?

A lot more than any investigations the Palestinians are doing of
their terrorists.

There is one piece of information that is being left out of this thread
concerning slave trade in Israel. It is something called 'The Law of
Return'. This law says that any Jew or spouse of a Jew must be allowed
into the country, for obvious reasons. That makes it difficult to keep
out certain undesirables, as in other countries with stricter immigration
laws. There are many cases of people falsifying their backgrounds to
get out of Russia. Under these difficult circumstances, I am sure the
Isreali authorities are doing everything they can to clean up this problem,
although truthfully, I did not even know it existed until I started reading
this thread. Well, at least Israel doesn't have the problem like in the
USA, where people are smuggled in cargo containers, or thrown off
boats close to our shores, etc.

Sherwin D.

"Dan J.S." wrote:

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

per capita, Israeli men use more prostitutes than any other group.

I knew there was a statistical loophole to your original statement!




But they are still the main channel of importing, exporting them, ignoring
any capita.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...062297,00.html

The report, issued annually, said some 10,000 such women currently reside in
about 300 to 400 brothels throughout the country. They are traded for about
USD 8,000 - USD 10,000, the committee said.

The U.S. State Department ranks Israel in the second tier of human
trafficking around the world, saying the Jewish State does not maintain
minimal conditions regarding the issue but is working to improve them.

Israel passed a law in 2003 that would allow the state to confiscate the
profits of traffickers, but watchdog groups say it is rarely enforced.