Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

Beyond that, it was because NK was already building

Posted on: April 10, 2017 at 11:08:37 CT
Badird MU
Posts:
8826
Member For:
9.60 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
enormous reactors capable of producing weapons-grade nuclear material.

The deal was in response to that. Giving them small reactors was the only way to continue nuclear non-proliferation.

Like I said, this is all eerily similar to our (failed) playbook in Iran.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

If NK is so dangerous, why did Bill Clinton give them nukes? - SuperTone MU - 4/10 10:39:05
     The Clintons have only cared about one thing - MIZ45 MU - 4/10 11:15:29
     RE: If NK is so dangerous, why did Bill Clinton give them nukes? - sarasotatiger MU - 4/10 11:08:38
          that it is but light water is still very useful - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:11:29
               RE: that it is but light water is still very useful - sarasotatiger MU - 4/10 11:16:03
                    If only Trump were here earlier - Mormad MU - 4/10 11:22:11
                         that would have been too sensible.(nm) - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:24:16
                              We'd have to have given it to them - Mormad MU - 4/10 11:27:15
          It sounds like Clinton had Carter - Sal KC - 4/10 11:10:55
               more like a "faux" deal. They included a lot of extras - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:12:10
     More lies from ST (nm) - MrBlueSky MU - 4/10 10:53:49
          You should probably research this. Even NYT has stories - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:00:17
               You should probably stop your dishonesty (nm) - pickle MU - 4/10 11:05:55
                    you still don't even know what dishonest means. - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:15:26
                    you first(nm) - MizSecZou MU - 4/10 11:14:11
     The Russians gave them nukes, moran - Badird MU - 4/10 10:47:49
          bill gave them 2 reactors. keep searching.(nm) - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:00:33
               reactors =/= nukes. Be honest (nm) - pickle MU - 4/10 11:05:34
                    oh yeah, that was it. just two reactors. no technology - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:10:49
                         You said Clinton gave them nukes. He didn't - pickle MU - 4/10 11:23:50
                              Nukes isn't a weapon specific term you dolt. - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:26:05
                                   Lol (nm) - pickle MU - 4/10 11:27:38
                                        since you don't get out much - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:29:07
                                             "nuke-powered" =/= nuke - pickle MU - 4/10 11:30:35
                                                  it is also in no way referencing a weapon, right?(nm) - SuperTone MU - 4/10 11:31:45
                                                       nuke-powered is an adjective. nukes is a noun - pickle MU - 4/10 11:34:52
                    Beyond that, it was because NK was already building - Badird MU - 4/10 11:08:37
     He didn't. Why can't you be honest? (nm) - pickle MU - 4/10 10:46:52
          You are such a liar. Bill arranged 2 new reactors for NK.(nm) - SuperTone MU - 4/10 10:59:55
               1. That's not giving them nukes - pickle MU - 4/10 11:04:58
     Because he is stupid... - Salty Dog MU - 4/10 10:40:33




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard