George Bush takes North Korea off the "state sponsors of terror" list

[Misty]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_nkorea;_ylt=AkNxjY4pQhUiox75jUoR9lms0NUE

This is a really, really controversial move in foreign policy circles - a lot of conservatives think this could basically let North Korea off the hook, and even liberals aren't very trustworthy of North Korea. The problem is that NK has not been forced to discuss its possible uranium program, nor its activities with Syria. There are a lot of open questions here; whether this becomes a problem remains to be seen.

 

[Misty]

okay let's try this topic again

 

[the gadfly]

Should I give you an infraction for double posting?

Honestly, G.W. Bush is looking for some way to enhance his legacy in the remaining months of his presidency.

Remember his "axis of evil"? Iraq was a disaster. Subsequently, diplomacy was the choice for dealing with North Korea. There's been some success on that front. Iran? Threaten military action against their nucleat facilities.

Bush has no clue about diplomacy.

 

[Misty]

Strangely, in this way, Bush's presidency has paralleled Bill Clinton's - Clinton, too, was looking for ways to enhance his legacy in the wake of Monica Lewinsky, and he plunged headfirst into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the North Korean nuclear program. Unfortunately, Clinton was a lame duck too (Democratic gains in 1998 were mostly attributed to discontent with Newt Gingrich), and his accomplishments were about equal to Bush's now.

 

[the gadfly]

Clinton, too, was looking for ways to enhance his legacy in the wake of Monica Lewinsky, and he plunged headfirst into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the North Korean nuclear program.

Unlike Bush, Clinton tried to negotiate a treaty between Israel and the Palestinians by hauling both their butts here into the USA. He also negotiated an agreement with North Korea to shut down their nuclear program.

Both efforts failed.

Is it better to have tried and failed or to have never tried at all?

Unfortunately, Clinton was a lame duck too (Democratic gains in 1998 were mostly attributed to discontent with Newt Gingrich), and his accomplishments were about equal to Bush's now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the Republicans in charge of both houses of Congress from 1994 until 2006?

 

[Misty]

yes

 

[the gadfly]

to what?

 

[Misty]

to the last one

 

[Amewsment]

Clinton's attempted were amazing and it was due to Yassir Arafat that it failed (never in history have the Israelis offered the Palestinians so much).
The efforts regarding North Korea are a positive development but it can hardly be attributed to Mr Bush and his comments on the axis of evil basically added added fuel to the flames. They escalated the situation even further than the paranoid Mr Kim would have, I think the current developments are a positive turn of events.

 

[Kat Katraine]

Bush is a desperate man who will sell his soul to the Devil, if it will get McCain elected to keep the Bush Status Quo policies going, long after he (Bush) is out of office.

 

[Amewsment]

Rice meets North Korean envoys in Singapore and is continuing to push them to validate and verify an actual end to the nuclear program.

Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/22/nkorea.nuclear.ap/index.html#cnnSTCText

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/23/us.koreas.nuclear.ap/index.html#cnnSTCText

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7519159.stm

 

[Jeff]

Unlike Bush, Clinton tried to negotiate a treaty between Israel and the Palestinians by hauling both their butts here into the USA.

Yeah, all the Bush administration did was haul theirs and several other butts into the US to discuss a treaty.

Also, not everyone sees Iraq as a "disaster". In fact, some people see the removal of Saddam Hussein and continued stabilization of the country thanks to the surge as a good thing, go figure.

 

[Misty]

Iraq was a disaster thanks to the staggering incompetence of Donald Rumsfeld, no matter how you put it. The surge was basically a way of fixing the horrendous damage that everyone did prior to the 2006 elections.

 

[Terra Force]

Bush is such a dumbass! Seriously!

 

[Kat Katraine]

Well if McCain gets elected, prepare for the invasion of Iran where thousands of more lives will be needlessly lost.

 

[Otter Mii-kun]

election distraction

This is nothing more than a election year stunt to distract attention to Iran. All the mainstream warmongering talk lately implies that we MUST go to war in Iran or else "we'll have another 9-11"! (Just like we were told over and over that we'd have another 9-11 if we didn't invade Iraq!)

Well if McCain gets elected, prepare for the invasion of Iran where thousands of more lives will be needlessly lost.

I'm not expecting anything different with Obama either. Again, like I said, the mainstream political establishment is beating the "Invade Iran NOW" drum harder and faster

 

[Amewsment]

North Korea halts nuclear reactor disablement

* Jonathan Watts, east Asia correspondent
* guardian.co.uk,
* Tuesday August 26 2008 14:09 BST

A satellite image of North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear complex shows the reactor's cooling tower (circled), which was demolished. Photograph: Reuters


Moves to denuclearise the Korean peninsular hit a brick wall today as North Korea halted the disablement of its nuclear facilities and accused the United States of reneging on a disarmament agreement.

The foreign ministry in Pyongyang said it would consider rebuilding its reactor and cooling tower in Yongbyon because the US had not lived up to a promise to remove it from a list of nations that sponsor terrorism.

In a statement carried by the Korea Central News Agency, the ministry said the US was insisting on extra inspections that would infringe upon its sovereignty.

"The US is gravely mistaken if it thinks it can make a house search in DPRK as it pleases just as it did in Iraq," said the statement, using the acronym for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. "We have decided to immediately suspend disabling our nuclear facilities."

The statement is a blow to hopes for an easing of tension on the peninsular after a landmark agreement last year that committed North Korea to dismantle its facilities in return for energy supplies and a lifting of sanctions and its pariah status.

Optimism was high in June when the US began the 45-day process to remove Pyongyang from a list of nations that sponsor terrorism after North Korea blew up the cooling tower in Yongbyon and handed over a declaration of its nuclear programme.

But the inventory is short of US estimates, does not include nuclear weapons and makes no mention of a uranium enrichment program - which Washington has repeatedly accused Pyongyang of developing.

Earlier this month, the United States said it would not take North Korea off the terrorism blacklist until it was satisfied that a verification protocol is in place. Other nations involved in six party talks to resolve the issue called on the two sides to break the impasse.

South Korean officials lamented the North's move. "It's regrettable that this announcement came at a time when each side has been trying" to move the process forward, said Kim Sook, Seoul's chief nuclear envoy. "I hope North Korea will resume disablement measures at an early date."

But today's statement may indicate that Pyongyang has given up on the Bush administration and is now waiting to see whether the next president will pursue a different policy.


This article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Tuesday August 26 2008. It was last updated at 14:09 on August 26 2008.
* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2008

Source

 

[Ben Cousins]

I cant wait until we take 'George Bush' off the 'current US president' list soon. ;-)

 

[$aturn¥oshi]

Yeah, but his mug will still be plastered on those posters, etc. that show all the Presidents...