Forums | MacLife

That treaty also called for us to build them nuclear power plants, which we did not do. I have no idea whether we were working on that or not, but both parties seemed to be in violation of the treaty (in some respect, though theirs much more blatant) when we pulled out of the treaty.

That treaty wasn't just with the US, but also with South Korea and Japan, and was for fuel oil and food, the nuclear reactors were on the drawing boards and I believe one was under construction. Doesn't really matter as they NEVER STOPPED their nuclear development program...just lied to us about it.

We pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty. Treaties are agreements between nations--they really have no force of law because there really isn't much international law.

The United States did not "pull out" of the ABM treaty we had with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, they went belly-up remember? Hard to keep a treaty in effect with a nation that doesn't exist anymore.

The United States has been very reluctant to agree to any sort of international laws (such as the War Crimes Tribunal).

Mainly because it supercedes and robs US citizens (and soldiers) of their constitutional rights.

I still think the main danger in North Korea's possession of nukes is their ongoing food problem, and their willingness to sell anything to the highest bidder-remember the scuds that were intercepted on the way to Yemen? Unfortunately most everything coming out of NK verbally is a taunt to the US "we would consider that to be an act of war" seems to be their fave rant. At the moment I'm still supporting GWB in his rather passive stance of ignoring their demands, not unlike a few of the posters around here...whining will get you little attention and no sympathy whats so ever.