US 'cannot allow' nuclear N Korea

[acmejack]

The US will not accept a North Korea armed with nuclear weapons, a top US envoy has said, a day after Pyongyang announced plans for a nuclear test.

North Korea must choose either to have a future or to have nuclear weapons "but it cannot have them both", top US negotiator Christopher Hill said.

He did not specify how the US would respond if a nuclear test took place.

The US wants allies to present a common front against the test plans, but talks at the UN have been inconclusive.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5408246.stm

[BattyDem]

1. North Korea must choose either to have a future or to have nuclear weapons

:wow:

We're not even subtle anymore! Do as we say or we'll blow up your country! :grr:

[acmejack]

4. That statement totally freaked me out!

The headline was mundane enough, but that! These people are totally over the edge.

[saigon68]

18. We'll NUKE YOU then invade

Wonder if the Chinese will just "Sit this One Out"?

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Actually NK will have both.

And that is just the start. The PNAC failure blowback includes the nuking up of just about everyone else on the planet who can possibly afford to do so in order to protect themselves from the predatory american kleptocracy.

[woodsprite]

3. Sounds like our October surprise is that we all get

"Raptured" before the next election.

I cannot believe what these guys have done to our country.

[Megahurtz]

17. They truly think they WILL get Raptured.

I seriously think that they're even trying to push it by igniting more Wars.:crazy:
But keep it up and they're just going to create one Big Giant Mess:nuke: and we'll all have to suffer for their stupidity.
The only good thing about that is that they will still be here to suffer their own fate. Oh Whoopee!

God, just isn't there any stopping them? :scared:

[Phredicles]

5. As with Iran, can we really do a freakin' thing?

Shrub and Dick's Excellent Adventure in Iraq: the gift that keeps on giving.

[ckramer]

6. Either invade or shutup

Simple like that.

Most likely it's a shutup.

[daleo]

7. That sounds like an existential threat

"North Korea must choose either to have a future or to have nuclear weapons "but it cannot have them both", top US negotiator Christopher Hill said."

No wonder North Korea feels like it must have nuclear weapons. Like Israel, they need nuclear weapons as a deterrent against countries that threaten their very existence.

[Redneck Socialist]

8. They already have nukes

I thought it was pretty well established that they already have nukes.

[sutz12]

9. Republican talking points....

If you want nukes, we'll send you some of ours. :evilgrin:

If only it were :sarcasm: :shrug:

[patrick t. cakes]

10. what are we going to invade with

our r.o.t.c. wow these guys are nuts.:crazy:

[ShockediSay]

11. Funny but sad - * names 3 in the "axis of evil" and he goes after the 1

...he goes after the 1 w/ no chance of nukes

[MilesColtrane]

12. This must be why U.S. military command is moving south...

...out of Seoul, out of DPRK artillery range.

But, apparently, we will have no problem watching ROK forces and the civilian population get pounded after our air strikes.

Nice.

[HuffleClaw]

13. i expect it won't be long before those remarks are 'clarified'

kim jong-il will get some real mileage from them in the meantime.

[NOLADEM]

14. But it's already done been alloweded

[acmavm]

15. Didn't we threaten them before the last tests too? And didn't

NK just go ahead anyway?

What part of this am I missing? Because somehow I just don't think Kim gives a fat rat's ass.

[Mika]

16. Links to N. Korea's nuke tech purchases.

1-Arm-->2-bomb-->3-rebuild-->1-arm-->2-bomb-->3-rebuild-->goto 1


Rumsfeld's involvement with sales of nuke tech to N Korea

[geek tragedy]

19. They already have nukes. What's the US going to do,

sacrifice Seoul?