I was reading an article on the situation and came across this jewel.
The resolution would still require countries to freeze all assets related to North Korea's weapons and missile programs. But a call to freeze assets from other illicit activities such as "counterfeiting, money-laundering or narcotics" was dropped. So was a call to prevent "any abuses of the international financial system" that could contribute to the transfer or development of banned weapons. full story
So I'm all, "What the heck?". We're not really serious about doing anything concerning the DPRK other than keeping them from attacking South Korea (or whoever). We probably have those measures in place for other countries and groups. Why the exception? Do we *need* more narcotics? Money laundered?
More often I'm getting to the point of, here's a sanction, go ahead and attack. We've got some tactical nukes all fired up and waiting for your million man rush on the DMZ in case you're really crazy enough to try it.
I was reading an article on the situation and came across this jewel.
The resolution would still require countries to freeze all assets related to North Korea's weapons and missile programs. But a call to freeze assets from other illicit activities such as "counterfeiting, money-laundering or narcotics" was dropped. So was a call to prevent "any abuses of the international financial system" that could contribute to the transfer or development of banned weapons. full story
So I'm all, "What the heck?". We're not really serious about doing anything concerning the DPRK other than keeping them from attacking South Korea (or whoever). We probably have those measures in place for other countries and groups. Why the exception? Do we *need* more narcotics? Money laundered?
More often I'm getting to the point of, here's a sanction, go ahead and attack. We've got some tactical nukes all fired up and waiting for your million man rush on the DMZ in case you're really crazy enough to try it.