This press conference was 14 weeks ago. Even with his time at the Crawford Ranch, he could have maybe looked into this. Sure, wingnuts, he's making the US safer. If only we had spent trillions of dollars on a missle defense program like Reagan wanted... (oops, we did spend that money on missle defense and in Iraq)

Q It’s increased is nuclear capabilities. It’s abandoned six-party talks, and it’s launched these missiles.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q Why shouldn’t Americans see the U.S. policy regarding North Korea as a failed one?

THE PRESIDENT: Because it takes time to get things done.

Q What objective has the U.S. government achieved when it comes to North Korea? And why does the administration continue to go back to the same platform process if it’s not effective in changing North Korea’s behavior? Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: Suzanne, these problems didn’t arise overnight, and they don’t get solved overnight. It takes a while. Again, I think if you look at the history of the North Korean weapons program, it started probably in the ’80s. We don’t know — maybe you know more than I do — about increasing the number of nuclear weapons. My view is we ought to treat North Korea as a danger, take them seriously. No question that he has signed agreements and didn’t stick by them. But that was done during — when we had bilateral negotiations with him, and it’s done during the six-party talks.

You’ve asked what we’ve done. We’ve created a framework that will be successful. I don’t — my judgment is, you can’t be successful if the United States is sitting at the table alone with North Korea. You run out of options very quickly if that’s the case. In order to be successful diplomatically, it’s best to have other partners at the table. You ask what we’ve done. We got the six-party talks started. And that’s a positive development. It’s a way to solve this problem diplomatically.

That reporter is now in Guantanamo.

Well Bush, we can confirm North Korea has one less nuclear weapon today.

"we ought to treat North Korea as a danger, take them seriously"

hahah ohhh mercy *whipes a tear*

He called her on it like he knew better, then realised he didnt.. then spent 2 minutes spouting random crap and adjusting his collar.

Why is it such a problem that the US is the only one at the table? Why not invade when you are sure they have WMD's?
Is it because they aren't muslim? Can't beat a well armed nation? Kim Jong Il is clearly crazy in my books.

Priorities, priorities. There is no Texas Tea in North Korea.

This afternoon, Tony Snow will blame this issue on the Clinton adminstration.

"We don’t know — maybe you know more than I do — about increasing the number of nuclear weapons."

glad to know that reporters know more about other country's nuclear power than our president. what a f*cktard!!

My cat knows more about North Korea than the president does, LadyBug.

Oh, and WumpusVote!

*giggles @ theo* good one!

oops! and it looks like bush can't invade iran anymore because they may PLAN to develop WMDs when it's now known that north korea actually has them! what a conundrum he's in!??!?!

Well, we went to war to get Osama & al-Qaiyda and since they were in Afghanistan, we invaded Iraq.
Therefore, we want to pre-emptively attack countries with Nukes like NK, so we invade Iran.

He's the decider. No conundrum to big for... Deciderman.

*covers mouth laughing* too funny, joe!

See, thats the thing about North Korea, we just dont know. Unlike 9/11, we know we were attacked here at home. Now you're not supporting what happened on 9/11 are you?? OK then.

N. Korea won't do sh;t with their nukes, since it has something coward osama & friends don't: a permanent return address.

It was Cigar Clinton and Maddy Al-not-so-bright and their "Agreed Framework Treaty" which allowed North Korea to "cheat" and enrich uranium.

Only victicrats could fail to imagine a murderous communist regime wouldn't keep their word when it comes to building nuclear weapons.

But since Bush is in office, let's blame him. I already blame him for falling gas prices.

"I already blame him for falling gas prices."

because they've been cheap the other 5.8 years he was in office?

This is painful to watch. I actually feel sorry for this guy for being such a fool.

Iraq used to have a return address.. till someone blew up the mailbox.
Wasn't the case for invading Iraq based entirely on the possibility that Saddam had nukes? wait I must be crazy.

Is a victicrat something like an islamofacist? I like taking 2 completely non related words and mashing them together to prove my point... like moonbat!

I'm not a big fan of Clinton, but using him as a scapegoat everytime someone points the finger at Bush is getting old quantum.

I am more and more convinced 'shroomy is just a liberal plant trying to make wingnuts sound as stupid as humanly possible, but still being able to type on a computer.

I love the 'i live in a bush-mentality bubble' types. Reality doesn't matter, just their impression of what they read on Rush's blog and freepress. How would anyone think that NK would not use a nuke if they had one. (a) what do they have to lose? heck, jim jung probably would like some civilian casualties, that would be less mouths to feed. I mean seriously millions of desperate starving people. It's a miracle he is still in power. (b) he lobbed a missle towards Japan that could have hit hawaii. Sure it didn't but it could have landed in Japan, west coast USA, who knows... But that didn't stop him from just launching it in our direction.

Maybe everyone in the US will become victorycrats when tax cuts are repealed, and 9/11 commission recommendations are implemented, and student loan rates are halved. That should take victorycrats about 2 weeks to do.

In case you missed this.. Rumsfeld sat on the board of ABB when they sold two nuclear reactors to North Korea in 2000 which enabled NK to develop 8 nuclear bombs.

Please tell me we are not trying to blame this one on Bush. Again, I am not a supporter of Bush... but let's put the blame exactly where it belongs... On the Chinese.

Look, diplomacy even going back to the Clinton administration, has only landed us with the polar opposite of what it was intended to do. As long as the old time commies stood together (China and Russia) in their misplaced sense of loyalty towards their little brother, the path down this road continued. As long as that threat of veto lingers, there will not be any true action to fix this. But this time might be different.

Blaming Bush for this, would be like me blaming Clinton, because the DPRK was working secretly on uranium enrichment during his adminstration. The logic does not fit.

Lets just hope that the Chinese will follow through with their tough talk towards the DPRK now, and not just fall back in their comfort zone.

The Chinese government has been putting on a balancing act of having the understanding that the DPRK has gone nuts, but they must keep up their longstanding propagandist thoughts to the people, by siding with their little brother while vilifying the US. The only problem, is this time it can have some results that they did not intend, like a full nuke Japan... that's not what they really want.

This week, the Chinese gov. is finally seeing how hard it can be to reign in this monster they have created in the 1.3 billion peoples minds, of the US being the instigator of all evil in the world.

Trying to do a quick turn around, while keeping the people from questioning the actions of the CPC, is going to be tough for them.

*length=2:31

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 2:31 - length declared by bareboards2.