Iraq vs. North Korea

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    April 12, 2013 10:09 a.m.

    In regard to my previous post. The answers to questions 1-5 are NO.

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 11, 2013 5:15 p.m.

    Yes, the Repubs always want to bomb; like Truman and the A-bomb and his little "police action" in Korea (with 55,000 US deaths it's still not a war), JFK and Johnson's initiation of military intervention in Viet Nam, Clinton's sending dozens of cruise missiles to bomb empty tents after the African embassy attacks and Obama's surge in Afghanistan and sending drones with bombs to kill those on his hit list. No one has been able to negotiated with Iran and the Korean war is still technically on. N. Korea and Iran made both Clinton and Bush look foolish and now they're doing the same to the president.

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 11, 2013 2:03 p.m.

    It's convenient to forget that the Democratic leadership (Pelosi and Clinton included)also believed the intelligence reports of WMD in Iraq. Both parties were wrong, not just Bush or Powell. Years later and with hindsight, everyone has become much smarter, but not more honest. The Middle East is just as eager to predictable sell oil as we (the EU, US, Japan, India, China) are to have a stable oil supply to purchase. We want their oil just as much as they want our money. After all, Al Gore's private jet doesn't fly on carrot juice. It is not as though the Allied countries have stolen or commandeered Middle East oil, we pay them market price just as we do to North Dakota or Venezuela.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 11, 2013 10:46 a.m.

    Why do Republicans always want to bomb other countries into submission?
    Why is their solutions always contingent of the use of military force?

    Who was it that said they'd reign with blood and horror on this earth?

    America has crossed over to the dark side - led by the GOP.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    April 11, 2013 7:43 a.m.

    Because Dick Cheney is no longer in power and Haliburton won't make enough profit invading North Korea.
    Also, No Korea isn't sitting on vast oil reserves.
    Plus we can't fabricate a connection between 9/11 and No Korea.
    But never fear, if we put a repub in the White House the bombs can start dropping.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    April 11, 2013 6:56 a.m.

    After reading the comments on this article I have a few questions.

    1) At the time of the invasion did Iraq have an active chemical weapons program and vast stock piles of chemical weapons? Sources?

    2) At the time of the invasion did Iraq have an active nuclear weapons program? sources?

    3) At the time of the invasion did Iraq have an active biological weapons program?

    4) Was the comment "Iraq could deploy battle field biological weapons in the field in 45 minutes" truthful?

    5) Were the accounts and pictures of "mobile biological weapons productions facilities" truthful?

    Just some questions from my viewpoint that the answers might be helpful

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:55 p.m.

    Denise Pluhnk "Why aren't we carpet-bombing already?"
    The quickest resolution would be to cut the head from the snake. We track terrorists by satellite and kill them with remotely controlled drones. The leader of North Korea is another terrorist that we are tracking. Push too far, and he will meet a drone.

    It is quite concerning that you favor carpet bombing. How many North Korean people must perish because of their dictator's threats?

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    April 10, 2013 11:22 a.m.

    The Iraq War was a crime, the use of public resources to benefit private entities (i.e., big oil), although the criminals, Cheney et al, will never be held accountable for this. A war against NOK might actually be a good war, liberating a truly enslaved people and eliminating a very real WMD threat to us as well as our allies.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 10:37 a.m.

    We "thought" Iraq had chemical weapons beause WE gave them to them back in the 1980's when Saddam was doing us a favor and fighting Iran.

    No wonder Bush was quoted as being so surprised not to find them after we got there.

    The real question now becames -- Where did they go?

    The US sent a bunch of WMDs to the Middle East, and now we have NO idea where they are.

  • UT Brit London, England
    April 10, 2013 10:06 a.m.

    Simple, NK does have weapons of mass destruction, that's why there will be no invasion.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    April 10, 2013 9:49 a.m.


    Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs found no evidence of concerted efforts to restart the program since 1991.

    Duelfer's report is the first U.S. intelligence assessment to state flatly that Iraq had secretly destroyed its biological weapons stocks in the early 1990s. By 1995, though, and under U.N. pressure, it abandoned its efforts.

    Duelfer's report said that no chemical weapons existed and that there is no evidence of attempts to make such weapons over the past 12 years.

    Iraq'sOne of the reasons the intelligence community feared a chemical weapons arsenal was that U.N. inspectors said Iraq had not fully explained missing chemical agents during the 1990s. The report determined that unanswered questions were almost certainly the result of poor accounting.

    Iraq's responses to U.N. inspectors regarding chemical weapons appear to have been truthful, and where incomplete, with differing recollections among former top officials, mostly the result of fading memories of when or how stockpiles were destroyed. Those were the identical reasons Iraq offered to U.N. inspectors before the war.
    (Washington Post)

    Don't let the facts deter you.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:49 a.m.

    LDS? lib
    Syria has no oil?

    I guess you missed the following, published in the DN.

    Syria oil industry buckling under rebel gains
    By Bassem Mrque
    Associated Press
    Published: Saturday, April 6 2013 10:12 p.m. MDT

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:38 a.m.

    Same reasoning could be applied to Bush's other "axis of evil" villians...

    North Korea

    So far, the only country we bothered to invade so we could right from wrong just so happened to also be the most OIL laden, and had once been our own puppet regime - until he turned and went rouge on us.

    BTW - I'm guessing that if Romney had been elected, we'd somehow have boots in Iran by now...[even though Syria needs the humanitarian relief, but since they don't have any OIL...]

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:14 a.m.

    Seoul, South Korea is 30 miles from the North Korean border. You might not care about the South Koreans but others do.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 10, 2013 9:14 a.m.


    The Real Maverick
    Orem, UT

    Nailed it 110%

    Perfect commet.


    Oh and one other thing:
    sands springs/tulsa, OK

    Do YOURSELF a big favor. Stop perpetuating other peoples lies.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    April 10, 2013 8:36 a.m.

    No oil on the Korean peninsula.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    April 10, 2013 8:29 a.m.

    For those who are more than willing to go to war with North Korea I have a couple of questions for you. South Korea has had 60 years to build a military large enough to protect themselves from those pesky neighbors to the north. Why do we need to continue to have a huge military presence there? At some point doesn't South Korea need to assume responsibility for their own protection? The second question is - are you willing to go yourself or send your sons and daughters to fight and possibly die for South Korea, or do you just expect someone else's sons and daughters to do that for you?

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    April 10, 2013 8:30 a.m.

    A good point. But the answer is obvious. China. It is the reason the Korean War ended in a stalemate in the first place. Nobody wants to poke the dragon.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    April 10, 2013 8:02 a.m.

    Why? 4 things:

    #1 We wanted to insert a Democratic government in the heart of the middle east.
    #2 Oil oil oil!
    #3 North Korea hadn't directly attempted to assassinate Bushie's daddy.
    #4 A war in North Korea would make Iraq seem like a walk in the park.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    April 10, 2013 7:50 a.m.

    tlee, let's see some solid documentation of your claims.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 10, 2013 7:50 a.m.

    "By implying that Iraq did not have WMD's you are perpetuating "an inconvenient lie" that the national socialist media and Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs has tried to cram down our throats since the Iraq war."

    No need to imply anything. Lets go to the most knowledgeable source on the planet concerning WMD

    in his own words, President Bush said

    "No one was more shocked and angry than I was when we didn't find the weapons," he writes.
    "I had a sickening feeling every time I thought about it. I still do."

    Why do you believe that Pres Bush is trying to "cram that down our throats"

    Liberal agenda I suppose.

  • Res Novae Ashburn, VA
    April 10, 2013 3:45 a.m.

    Because another war on the Korean peninsula will make Iraq look like a skirmish, for one thing.

  • tlee86 sands springs/tulsa, OK
    April 10, 2013 2:29 a.m.


    Your statements that our leaders "thought" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and might use them is both regrettable and unfortunate. Have you ever heard of sarin gas, mustard gas? Those are weapons of mass destruction. And they were found in abundance in Iraq. In barrel's and artillery shells. By implying that Iraq did not have WMD's you are perpetuating "an inconvenient lie" that the national socialist media and Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs has tried to cram down our throats since the Iraq war. These WMD were used against our troops in Iraq. Have you ever heard of "Gulf War Syndrome". Over 250,000 vets suffer from this disease. Incurable symptoms usually leading to cancer and death for thousands of Vets. These vets suffer from GWS because of the WMD's that were used against them. And our sad government has known about this but denied it for years. Do yourself and your readers a big favor. Stop perpetuating other peoples lies.