Oh, a failed nuclear explosion. I feel much better now. How are Brad and Angelina doing?

A tad sketchy:

www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2004580002-2006470207,,00.html

Why can't our intelligence agencies provide this sort of cover? In a world of wheels within wheels, what you say you know is just as important as what you actually know.

The way this blog jumps from platitude to trimphalism to glib dismissal, depending on what's being quoted and which particular argument you're trying to leech from this or that news article, it's hard sometimes to catch your meaning.

So, aside from the wholly unnecessary swipe at the Frogs (original, that), who, after all, have performed more nuclear tests than any other nation beside the U.S. and the Soviets and are therefore worth hearing out on the subject (as opposed to blogs that specialize in copying and pasting), I have to assume this is, excuse me, cheap breast-beating (have to get it where you can when your Islamic "reformation" isn't going so swimmingly, I guess).
So if this is the substance, such as it is, of your post, a failed nuclear test, just like their failed missile test earlier, is still cause for concern as it advances their cause considerably, yielding much needed data.
I don't know if took the opportunity to crow about N.K.'s "failed" missile test (and why would one be so presumptuous to suspect you did?), but if you have taken a moment to read what the experts were saying you know that an initial test firing can be expected to "fail" to some extent. Complete success in initial test firings is almost unheard of.
What this all means they now likely know what was wrong with their designs in the first place; first with the missile and now with the warhead. No matter how far they get without testing they have no way of knowing the integrity of their designs. Mission accomplished, Lt. Bush.

Or is it that you think it doesn't advance the latest case for "regime change" if we view it as failed? Don't worry, there's no chance in hell we're going into N.Korea (might as well say no chance in N. Korea we're going into hell), thank goodness.

I suspect this all just a lot of distraction to keep your readers (and perhaps yourself) from considering just how utterly failed the last five years of Bush policy have been at checking rogue states and their weapons capabilities. How is that axis of evil approach coming along?

And how will you react when, once '08 has passed and McCain or Hilary is safely in office, we are beating a hasty retreat out of a fractured and failed Iraq, and it becomes apparent to anyone who hasn't imbibed of the neo-kool-aid that we hung around three extra years and racked up another thousand or so casualties for entirely political reasons? Have you thought ahead as to how you're going to spin that?

Dennis,
OJ has wanted us out of Iraq and off bombing Iran and NK since '03. You need to stick around and catch up. He's also a McCain backer, though I don't think McCain is who or what you think he is.

Oops. I don't suppose an Emily Latella would do here: "oh, neverrr minddd..."

I also see I missed the joke entirely: "duds" means clothes, or fashion. O for 2. I'm reminded why I rarely comment on blogs.

Iraq is fracturing and failing, with hundreds of thousands of casulties, and the reformation isn't going swimmingly.

He just doesn't know the acme of excellence when he sees it. It must be those Karl Rove wasp larvae: they eat people's brains and make them think that McCain is the great left hope.

Dennis: Let's recapitulate. The U.S. tests their weapons in 1944 and they work. The Soviets shortly follow, along with France -- no failures. Pakistan and India achieve the same thing -- again without failure. Yet North Korea does a test and fails to achieve a significant yield. They are imcompetent.

Retreating from a fractured Iraq will be a victory.

North Korea is a communist regime and as such can neither develop nor deliver nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, we can destroy them at any time. Sooner would be better, but there's no rush except as regards our moral obligations to the people of North Korea.

NK's neighbors don't fear its military might, they fear the strain on their economies from the flood of desperate refugees which would descend on them after the little madman's death or disposal.

We need to help these poor people, but any humanitarian aid must be controlled and distributed by our military, not the U.N. nor North Korean officials. It's really too bad that another Korean will be Secretary General of the U.N. It would have been far better to install someone with proven integrity and leadership skills. Someone like Tony Blair who might have been able to clean up those Stygian stables or at least, send them to Brussels where they'll blend in with all the other useless blathering forums already in place.

BTW - Dennis was so refreshing. Staying away from lefty blogs, the networks, cable TV and the msm media in general, as I do, I'm occasionally nostalgic for a dose of traditional moonbattery. It's reassuring to see that reality hasn't penetrated their mind set even one little bit.

Right thinking people. Whatever your gripes with Bush and GOP spending, etc. get ye to the polls unless you want Dennis et al. back in power.