Comments on: Things that make you go read

By: Bryan

Bryan — Wed, 18 Oct 2006 00:12:24 +0000

Pacepa is a national treasure in two countries–Romania and the US.

By: Entelechy

Entelechy — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 22:05:27 +0000

Bryan, thank you so much for featuring my countryman, Ion Mihai Pacepa. His defection to the U.S. in 1978 was a real big deal and a huge blow to communism. He was an invaluable resource for the CIA. From this, also a very interesting article by him:

On Christmas Day of 1989, Ceausescu and his wife were sentenced to death at the end of a trial where most of the accusations had come almost word-for-word out of Pacepa’s book Red Horizons.

Things moved within days in Romania and there were very few deaths. It's all a matter of where the top generals stand. The soldiers are the relatives of the North- and South-Korean people and will follow the orders. Hoping against all hope that China wises up, for itself and the world. It also needs to clean up its own act in order to be followed as a global leader. Russia hasn't so far been able to define itself either - does it wish to be good or evil. That's the simple and yet so complex question. It takes a 'grand' man to decide.

By: Lehuster

Lehuster — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:48:40 +0000

the Bush administration apparently even broached the subject with Beijing at least once–only to be rebuffed by a Chinese study concluding that it didn’t have the speed to invade North Korea in a way that would preserve Seoul from North Korean artillery or keep Kim from launching all kinds of nastiness on his way out. The talk about Chinese capabilities is beside the point, since they have no intention of invading North Korea. North Korea is a useful proxy for them in many ways, and they're not going to give it up. So, of course they argue that they're "too slow" to invade. If their interests were seriously threatened, they'd be on the DMZ in a jiffy. Hell, they pretty much walked from the Yalu to Seoul in eight weeks in 1950. I think they could do better than that today, if they put their minds to it, especially because they wouldn't be under US air attack this time.

By: natesnake

natesnake — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:46:01 +0000

I originally thought that a civilian rebellion would be be a good way to overthrow Kim. The fact is that the lives lost would be too great and it would allow Kim the time to unleash some of his more hazardous aresenal before going down.

I too believe that China is the key to solving the current NK situation. Military action (by any agent) would become bloody. Replacing Kim is China’s best option.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:11:57 +0000

We can rehash this into infinity, but Zarqawi was operating in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Richard Clarke worried that if we drove al Qaeda out of Afghanistan that they would just boogie to Baghdad. The two Abus of terrorism, Abu Nidal and Abu Abbas, turned up in Baghdad. Saddam paid off Palestinian suicide bombers and tried to kill Bush 41.

To assume that Saddam had no interest in working with al Qaeda, when his own documents report meeting with bin Laden’s agents several times, and when the Clinton administration bombed that Sudanese pill factory on the suspicion that it was a dual-use plant making chemical weapons of Iraqi design for al Qaeda, is far more charitable a reading of him than he has ever deserved. But liberals are charitable where Saddam is concerned, and all-fired angry at Bush 24/7. It’s just the way they are.

By: E L Frederick

E L Frederick — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:05:58 +0000

There’s a difference between being a terrorist nation or sponsoring terrorist acts and actively supporting AQ, which is the issue

That’s a very fine line in the sand. I think your picking nits, just to pick nits.

That’s akin to saying, you can support Hezbollah and still be a good dictator, but if you support Al Qaeda, you’ve crossed the line…

By: “7.62mm Justice” » North Korea: Pipedream Idea

“7.62mm Justice” » North Korea: Pipedream Idea — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:01:36 +0000

[...] However, it appears that regime change has been broached by the White House with the Chinese. (Hot Air) Since that time, the WSJ has written about China taking out the trash and the Bush administration apparently even broached the subject with Beijing at least once–only to be rebuffed by a Chinese study concluding that it didn’t have the speed to invade North Korea in a way that would preserve Seoul from North Korean artillery or keep Kim from launching all kinds of nastiness on his way out. The North Koreans reportedly have half a dozen chem and bio weapons in their arsenal in addition to any crude nuclear weapons they might have, and they have missiles capable of hitting Chinese, South Korean and Japanese cities. A slow invasion would get a lot of innocent people outside North Korea killed. [...]

By: NPP

NPP — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:59:54 +0000

There’s a difference between being a terrorist nation or sponsoring terrorist acts and actively supporting AQ, which is the issue. The document doesn’t tell us anything new – Iraq has long supported and commited acts of terrorism, but there still is no evidence that Saddam had any sort of alliance with AQ.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:58:37 +0000

And that kind of comment gets us dubbed “shoot the Mexicans” types. Thanks.

By: msplitt

msplitt — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:55:04 +0000

My guess is China won’t even need a fence. They’ll probably just line up and shoot North Koreans as they approach the border. Kind of like a carvival game. Wouldn’t mind seeing that on our border.

By: The Colossus

The Colossus — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:40:20 +0000

Border Security: Old School…

Building a wall . . . UPDATE: Maybe China is beginning to understand . . . UPDATE 2: Bryan at Hotair has much more . . …….