Article

2005-03-20 China-Japan-Koreas

US Deliberately Misled Allies re: NORK weapons exports

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by too true 2005-03-20 8:00:01 AM|| || Front Page|| [11144 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 "In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies."
- - - Winston Churchill

"The truth has never been of any real value to any human being--it is a symbol for mathematicians and philosophers to pursue. In human relations kindness and lies are worth a thousand truths."
- - - Graham Greene

"There are only two ways of telling the complete truth--anonymously and posthumously."
- - - Thomas Sowell

"It is a fine thing to be honest, but it is also very important to be right."
- - - Winston Churchill

Posted by Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-03-20 8:32:40 AM|| [http://www.slhess.com] 2005-03-20 8:32:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Yeah, I know. But two things bother me.

(1) We're going to be in the GWOT for years, maybe a generation, and the other countries whose help we need aren't convinced of the threat. This sort of deception makes them less willing to work with us and trust us.

(2) A government that convinces itself that the ends *routinely* justify the means is one that won't have any scruples about infringing my own liberty either.

Posted by too true 2005-03-20 9:06:01 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:06:01 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Maybe a better way to say it is this:

Churchill had a clearly defined war. He could justify deceipt because he was confident that everyone would know when the conditions that made deceipt possible were over and the rules of ethical behavior applied again.

Not so clear in the GWOT. So while I cut our leaders a bunch of slack, they don't get a blank check from me on this. I don't want them to be comfortable using deceipt routinely -- and I know how easy it is to rationalize bad behavior.

Posted by too true 2005-03-20 9:09:23 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:09:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 too true-
They could clone a hundred genius minds like yours and ya'll wouldn't do nearly as well. Let's have a little humility and better spelling.

Posted by sea cruise 2005-03-20 9:13:33 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:13:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Doom...

Good quotes there.

Posted by sea cruise 2005-03-20 9:14:51 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:14:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 "...according to two officials with detailed knowledge of the transaction..." Uh, huh. So, two disgruntled CIA agents are leaking classified information, which automatically gives them better credibility than the administration. I wonder if they are still employed by the CIA, or if they were recently fired as part of its elimination of corrupt, incompetant, and questionable personnel?

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-03-20 9:26:23 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:26:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 sea cruise, I'm not saying I could do better - and I'm sure not saying I'm a 'genius mind'.

It's not a question of genius. It's a question of not losing our moral compass while we do what we need to do in this fight. It's a question of effectively fighting the Islamofascist bastards without becoming like them any more than we need to.

Remember, it's Islamacist doctrine that justifies routine lying to achieve ends.

Posted by too true 2005-03-20 9:39:59 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:39:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 PS: I never could spell well .... LOL

Posted by too true 2005-03-20 9:41:17 AM|| 2005-03-20 9:41:17 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 ..so far I read this as a W. Post story. many possibilities....just one>person/s with an ax to grind leaks version 101 'Intel' with spin to embarrass...but of course it's difficult to refute (sources & methods) but conveniently will have ready-made drag with MSM.

Posted by R 2005-03-20 10:06:53 AM|| 2005-03-20 10:06:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 I support the GWOT and this Administration, but I'm increasingly uneasy at the way they manipulate the press and the truth.

Left to its own devices, do you think the press would do a more responsible job of telling the "truth"? I've seen no reason to believe that.

It's a question of effectively fighting the Islamofascist bastards without becoming like them any more than we need to.

That's a old argument, deserving of retirement. We aren't "like them", regardless of our actions. Our society, our ability, and our prosperity proves that. We're simply dealing with our enemies in the manner in which they need to be dealt with, and if dealing with treacherous Islamofascists requires a bit more ruthlessness in the process, I say have at it.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-03-20 2:34:28 PM|| 2005-03-20 2:34:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 We aren't "like them", regardless of our actions.

REGARDLESS???? Are you saying anything goes in the name of protecting our way of life?

Because while I'm quite willing to explore where the boundaries are in an asymmetrical war against non- and quasi-state enemies, at some point we will become "like them" if we don't make a point of staying true to what makes us different.

There's a reason that every cadet at West Point studies the ethics of warfare - and it's not just out of historical curiosity.

We firebombed Dresden in WWII and that was probably the correct choice - but it was still a moral wrong. The lesser of two wrongs, but wrong nonetheless. I'm glad we did it, but God help us when we start arguing it was a good thing to do.

One of the things that makes us not "like them" is that our civilization, however 'post-Christian' in the eyes of many, is still informed by the doctrine of original sin and by the fallibility of even those who embrace redemption. The day that we, like the Nazis and the Islamofascists, are convinced that our cause justifies all actions taken in its name is the day we are already lost.

Posted by Robin Burk 2005-03-20 2:52:46 PM|| 2005-03-20 2:52:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Robin Burk -- Easy there... I appreciate what you said, but let's clarify... Have you ever been on a battlefield during war? Commanded troops from the rear during war? Been responsible for any
aspect of conduct during war? Did B-a-R say what you've so quickly taken offense to?

Methinks not. Slowly re-read along with me...

"We're simply dealing with our enemies in the manner in which they need to be dealt with, and if dealing with treacherous Islamofascists requires a bit more ruthlessness in the process, I say have at it."

Hmmmm. That does not have a single thing in it which designates it as good or bad -- just that it is (apparently) sometimes necessary in war.

Your hair-trigger moral stance and sensitivity is noted. If you're merely worried, then point taken - we're all with you, I'd wager. We are not lost. If you say B-a-R implied more than he actually said, and we are in need of your moral oversight, well then, Thank you. HAND.

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 3:07:29 PM|| 2005-03-20 3:07:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 We firebombed Dresden in WWII and that was probably the correct choice - but it was still a moral wrong. The lesser of two wrongs, but wrong nonetheless.

On this basis is ther anything in combat that is morally correct?

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-03-20 3:08:24 PM|| 2005-03-20 3:08:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 .com, BaR did indeed seem to me to be suggesting that we could "deal with them in the manner they need to be dealt with", without reference to any limits on that manner. If he wasn't then we agree on that and could argue (or not) about where to draw those limits.

I don't think you all are "in need of my moral oversight". I do have an opinion on the issue of what guidelines we should set for ourselves in this extended war we're fighting around the world and I think it's a topic that matters a lot to the future of our country.

Mrs. D., IMO there's a big difference between killing a combatant in - or out of - uniform, OTOH, and the indiscriminate firebombing of civilian populations OTOH. The former is a whole lot easier to justify than the latter. I understand why Churchill ordered the attacks on Dresden, including his stated desire to break the back of German morale. I'm scarcely alone among supporters of the Allies in that war to think that there was real guilt associated with that decision, even if it arguably was the least bad course of action he could take.

And just to be clear, I'm not second guessing our troops and the decisions of our officers on the battlefield. Y'all ought to know me better than that by now. (smile)

Posted by Robin Burk 2005-03-20 3:37:27 PM|| 2005-03-20 3:37:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Lol. Okay, I'll play another round...

Sorry, but I have NO idea who you are - sorry - nor would that impact my comments in this case.

You introduced the word "limits" and I don't recall B-a-R having tossed that notion aside... lessee... nope, didn't say anything either pro or con in that regard. Now comes the fun part. The PC part. The touchy-feely assumption that such must be addressed as an a priori presumes something not present: that limits unaddressed = limits discarded. Bullshit. You brought it up. so it's a point in question in your eyes, in your estimation, in your opinion. Sure, okay, fine: state that you agree with limits. You just went ahead and created a cliff and jumped the fuck off. Had zip to do with what B-a-R wrote. I still say you should take your trigger assembly to the gunsmith, heh.

I feel no need for direction from an external source regards conduct on the battlefield... given my age, it would be 35 years too late, anyway, you see.

How's that, Robin Burk that I've never heard of? We cool?

:-)

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 4:00:22 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:00:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 .com, you are certainly cool. I OTOH am a geek but I'm cool with you ;-)

Posted by Robin Burk 2005-03-20 4:19:57 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:19:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 There are an awful lot of suppositions about who knew what and what motivated whom here. There is only one important fact that the US misled China and the SKors on Pakistan's role. If true and I am sceptical it is, not least because Japan has taken a much harder line with the Norks recently and there is no indication they feel they have been mislead, then the US is under no obligation to tell China everything it knows.

Otherwise, not true's comments about misleading the press are completely irrelevant. This was a secret briefing to a non-friendly state China.

Posted by phil_b 2005-03-20 4:24:00 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:24:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Lol - and I started out a mere thug, then advanced to nerd - now I'm definitely a happy geek, too. Here are a few relevant WAV files to prove the point, lol! Apologies if you (and everyone else) has them all, already, heh.

nerdgeek
data processing
cybertub
forehead (a favorite, heh)
duckjob
mansong

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 4:30:33 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:30:33 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 .com, she's this Robin Burk. They sure do make it hard to out some folks.

RKB, to me the choice of the least immoral thing among a set of immoral choices including inaction renders the alternatice chosen moral.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-03-20 4:43:22 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:43:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 I suspect that one point that's been lost in all of this discussion is whether or not the Washington Post's report is true to begin with.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2005-03-20 4:48:44 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2005-03-20 4:48:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Well, in that case, don't listen to duckjob.wav, heh.

Lol! Didn't realize I was talking to a femalian. Apologies, if offended - with the wav files, lol!

You would have had a very hard time in Vietnam, Robin Burk. Surviving the ButterBar period took a skill not well known to occifers: listening to the enlisted folks. Those who were already Bird level - or who would make it to Bird - never figured it out. One of my best buds was an Arty Major (2 hearing aids, of course, lol!) who used to hit the Michelin plantations whenever asked by recon teams who found themselves trapped by phreakin' battalions of VC. $98 per rubber plant destroyed, heh. And I recall telling a 3-Bird panel to, pretty please, go fuck themselves with all due speed, after paying due respect to their rank, of course, back in those bad old days before you could trust the Occifer Corps. What I wouldn't give for a chance to be part of THIS US Military. Sheesh. Jealous kudos to you, heh.

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 4:55:09 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:55:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Mrs. D., I understand where you're coming from. And I never want us to flinch from the hard decisions or the tough actions.

I just don't want us to lose the ability to know when it should be a hard decision.

I think we're on the same page here.

Posted by Robin Burk 2005-03-20 4:58:34 PM|| 2005-03-20 4:58:34 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 PhilF - Given the Wash Roast source, that is a problematic question.

According to The Modern Populist, old Dafna Linzer broke the US using UAVs to probe Iran for a year story... If that was an intentionally "leaked" story, perhaps Dafna (can I make fun of this, please?) is a good whatever. If not, then old Dafna (please?) is a typical Wash Roast asshole Staffer, no?

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 5:00:56 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:00:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 .com, if I have any common sense at all it's because my uncles who stayed in for 20+ after WWII were all NCOs.

Yeah, I'm fortunate to make whatever little contribution I can in my current job. And even more fortunate to commute most days w/ my husband.

Posted by Robin Burk 2005-03-20 5:10:18 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:10:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Psssst, Mrs D - she's an RB Editor! Shit! I'm screwed!

Before I go I'd like to get just one last screed in. I know I'm about to be sink-trapped. I can feel it! The walls are closing in! I'm beginning to spin (CCW, of course)! Its' speeding up! I'm being swallowed by an inky darkness! I feel my life flashing before my eyes! Hey, wait a minute! That was too fast! Overs! I'm melting!

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 5:11:03 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:11:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 PD can I have you pictures sincer you're obviously dead meat?

Posted by Shipman 2005-03-20 5:31:04 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:31:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 ROFL!!!

I'm trying to rehab myself here, Ship!

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 5:33:46 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:33:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 "I suspect that one point that's been lost in all of this discussion is whether or not the Washington Post's report is true to begin with."

Given that it falls into the "Bush lied" genre, I'm extremely skeptical-- and I mean EXTREMELY. Anymore, after all we've been through, when the question comes down to "is Bush lying, or is the media?" my default presumption is that the media is the one doing the vast bulk of the lying. That presumption is rebuttable, but only with great effort.

Am I worried about the Administration playing fast and loose with the facts? Yeah, a little-- and that's all. I am VERY worried about our future, though, if our media doesn't rapidly start getting a helluva lot more honest than it's been throughout most of my lifetime; anymore, I consider the entire MSM a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party and so partisan that they will do ANYTHING-- including lying and inventing news stories-- to damage the Democrats' opposition.

So when I read something like this, my first suspicion is that it's a steaming load of bullshit-- a pile of carefully crafted propaganda designed to create a false impression for political purposes.

If the story develops further, and I start hearing heretofore-stalwart allies making VERY loud and VERY public complaints about being deceived by Bush & Co., then I might start thinking otherwise; but until I do, this is just another tall MSM tale.

Posted by Dave D. 2005-03-20 5:50:46 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:50:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 Hear, Hear!

Posted by .com 2005-03-20 5:55:27 PM|| 2005-03-20 5:55:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 Much more of this and I'm going to look very carefully at how I vote in 2006 and 2008

Yeah. Get so upset with what our government tells foreign nations in an attempt to defend us that you'll vote for the party that refuses to defend us for any reason.

And as others pointed out, the press is about as trustworthy as the propaganda arm of a hostile nation.

Which, as far as I'm concerned, many of them are.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2005-03-20 6:03:35 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-03-20 6:03:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 Tempest, meet teacup.

Assume that the WaPo is a credible news source (as opposed to what they actually are: Pravda to the DNC's Politburo) and that everything in the article is true. The complaint then boils down to the fact that the administration did not use the term "Pakistan" when briefing parties to the 6-way talks.

The administration says they indicated that the materials were passed to Libya via A.Q. Kahn's nuclear black market (single sentence near the end of the article). The leakers claim that the administration didn't say "Pakistan". Those aren't mutually exclusive perspectives. Does anyone here actually believe that any of the representatives who were briefed are actually stupid / uninformed enough to fail to recognize that: 1. Kahn is a Pakistani; 2. Kahn operated with at least the indifference and likely the knowledge & approval of the Pakistani government; and 3. Pakistan must therefore be involved if A.Q. Kahn transferred nuclear materials to Libya? Me either.

The Chicom & SKor threats to withdraw are standard operating procedure. The SKors genuflect before their large expansionist red neighbor and before internal anti-US popular opinion while the Chicoms try to save their only lever against US interests in the region. Yawn, sound like business as usual to me.

One of the tip-offs that this is nothing more than a hit piece is the WaPoâs careful selection and blending of sources. E.g., omissions noted in retrospect in Porter Gossâ (presumably) public testimony before Congress versus rumors from those allegedly privy to the content of (presumably) classified briefings to parties to the 6-way talks.

The most disturbing aspect of this story is that the American pressâ collective desire to undermine our current administration is so strong that theyâll meddle in matters as serious as the proliferation of WMD in an attempt to embarrass Bush & Co. The sad thing is that the WaPo got the desired reaction even from some here.

Posted by AzCat 2005-03-20 7:52:38 PM|| 2005-03-20 7:52:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 So Duby & America "lied" again, which is why foreign Govts/Intel, and espec the NOrkies themselves, admit to NK having nukes! The WOT and Radical Islam is ultim about saving Communism and Communist World Order/Socialist WOrld Order - its no longer enough for America and its Allies to merely "contain" the enemies of democracy.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2005-03-20 9:29:01 PM|| [http://n/a] 2005-03-20 9:29:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 One war at a time, Joe. One war at a time.

Posted by Pappy 2005-03-20 10:33:07 PM|| 2005-03-20 10:33:07 PM|| Front Page Top

03:45 stickyour democracyinyourarses
23:57 Bobby
23:32 Anonymoose
23:27 Anonymoose
23:27 phil_b
23:19 Sock Puppet Oâ Doom
23:12 Bomb-a-rama
22:56 Bomb-a-rama
22:50 Bomb-a-rama
22:46 .com
22:39 AzCat
22:35 Robert Crawford
22:33 Robert Crawford
22:33 Pappy
22:26 AzCat
22:17 Bomb-a-rama
22:14 Bomb-a-rama
21:35 Barbara Skolaut
21:29 JosephMendiola
21:17 Michael Sheehan
21:11 .com
21:04 .com
20:57 .com
20:55 Frank G