Hypocrite, Bush and N.Korea Options

[Hellfighter]

So Bush likes to harp on about not negotiating with those he considers on his list of terrorist states... now he's bending over backwards lately to an obviously feigned play from N.Korea regarding bartering fuel resources in exchange for 'de-escalation in their nuke program'.

[Major.Pain]

Isn't it easy to play armchair president from the comfort of our homes with no media present? And no Congress to try and strongarm us?



-Pain

[Ghost Child]

I suspect that this will be another failed attempt at trying diplomacy with evil dictators.

Clinton tried it, and it didn't work then.



Why are we rewarding them for being bad?

[M@ster of Dis@ster]

I suspect that this will be another failed attempt at trying diplomacy with evil dictators.

Clinton tried it, and it didn't work then.



Why are we rewarding them for being bad?

Because war with them would worse and more destructive than your war with Iraq.

Next question.

[THE Mechanic]

Isn't it easy to play armchair president from the comfort of our homes with no media present? And no Congress to try and strongarm us?



-Pain

I'd have to agree with Mr. Pain.It is easy but then again Bush so much as farts these days and there all over him anyway.



From what I hear China is helping this time around squeezing the north Koreans money wise..Making it hard for them to pay off the military that keeps him in power..



And what exactly are they willing trade up for fuel and food?Too shut down there nuke plants,stop refining plutonium,or maybe give up the 10 or so nuke bombs they already have?I dont believe them for a second.. Thier still working on a delivery system for ICBM's once they get the bugs out of that technology then things will really heat up..



Who knows the next thing we hear the "Russains" are good buddies...I think not..Will say hey North korea we'll help you out, no strings attached just to put a wrench into things..



I dont know, I guess we need to hope for the best and see what happens.



"T.M"

[Druid]

The bartering of fuel in exchange of limiting their nuclear ambitions has been in place for 15 years.
There has been a quite but growing belief their most recent interest in a nuclear program had nothing to do with them actually becoming a nuclear power.
The real reason was a way to force more aid to big given to them or worse, to possible sell weapons grade uranium and plutonium to other contries.

[Hellfighter]

You miss my point re: 'armchair President'
The N.koreans are clearly desperate when making offers as they did. Bush is 'too ready' to deal graciously with them. It shows again his lack of diplomatic skill. Whether he's grasping for the swift impression of looking all powerful in the eyes of the world in my opinion he's being too hasty. At other moments in his presidency he should've been more diplomatically savvy but stood instead on obstinate grounds. Yes, he's a hypocrite - otherwise he shouldn't toot his horn about never dealing with terrorist states-especially those he pushed into his
onto his 'axis of evil' agenda like N.Korea.

Hey Druid- great to see you - finally

[Major.Pain]

I didn't miss the point at all. I felt the same as you towards Slick Willie. Fact is, neither of us know what's really going on because we are not privy to all the information. Face it, you just don't like the guy. No problem there as these are only opinions we are expressing.

But you can still get your point across without the name calling, ie. hypocrite. Like it or not, he is still the President. Our President.



-Pain

[-priority(+)target-]

Hipocrit doesn't recognize the complexity of the politics and situation I don't think... he may be, I dunno. Its all positioning to the puppetmasters as far as I can tell.

Seems the US administration is backing down from being the driving force for controlling and eliminating North Koreas nuclear ambitions. As they should. It doesn't make sense for the US to be the driver, when countries most affected by NK's aggressive pursuit of it haven't held them accountable for their actions and their promises.

Frankly the US doesn't need to make this its business. Doesn't mean I think NK should have nukes... The US foreign policy has been so rife with corruption and incredibly poor judgement for decades, it would do better by minding what it has on its plate, rather than widening any tensions unilaterally... which would be a loose loose scenario.

Be nice if the UN would step up and become responsible and the real governor of multination concerns, and not rely on US goodwill to police the world.

[Genocide Junkie]

Be nice if the UN would step up and become responsible and the real governor of multination concerns, and not rely on US goodwill to police the world.

Bingo. This is why we are in Iraq to begin with. I think it's time we let the UN stand on their own without our money, influence, and most of all back bone to hold it up. Until the UN decides to grow some teeth nations like Iran, Iraq, and N.Korea will continue to do as they please ignoring pointless resolutions offered up over and over and over. They have set their precedent and should now have to deal with it. Let France, Germany, Russia, and China go at it for a while.....



Junkie

[Kleerance]

Be nice if the UN would step up and become responsible and the real governor of multination concerns, and not rely on US goodwill to police the world.

Bingo. This is why we are in Iraq to begin with. I think it's time we let the UN stand on their own without our money, influence, and most of all back bone to hold it up. Until the UN decides to grow some teeth nations like Iran, Iraq, and N.Korea will continue to do as they please ignoring pointless resolutions offered up over and over and over. They have set their precedent and should now have to deal with it. Let France, Germany, Russia, and China go at it for a while.....



Junkie

Personally I admire US for their foreign policy. They got guts and determination (we leave diplomatic skills out ) They are the police of the world and we need them to be (not in everyone's opinion I know). In Balkan UN talked an talked - US took action and restored the situation! They have used power to stop Libya creating nuclear weapons (if they had not who knows what would have happened.) And in Israel, how do you think the situation would be like if it wasn't for the support from US. Besides, US have an obligation to support Israel since they were the instigator of this nation, and it's therefore important to sustain a stable situation in the region. And I think this is a partial cause why many muslim states hate US so much......unforunately.

However, to Junkie: You cannot blame other countries to deal with a situation created by US (and partial UK). Remember how the invasion in Iraq almost created a diplomatic crisis because US had no backing from the rest of UN to invade Iraq. Still they did. (Germany and France disagreed in a large scale on this issue.)

I think it's time we let the UN stand on their own without our money, influence, and most of all back bone to hold it up.

Just to clarify about UN. US is a part of UN (UN is named by Roosevelt), so it's not just they and us. US have a total debt to UN to 526 million $ (80% of UN's total debt), and I guess some payback of US debt would be a nice start.

One may have many opinions about the UN policies, but to suggest that UN have to clean up a mess they didn't start is a bit out line in my opinion.

[Hellfighter]

I didn't miss the point at all. I felt the same as you towards Slick Willie. Fact is, neither of us know what's really going on because we are not privy to all the information. Face it, you just don't like the guy. No problem there as these are only opinions we are expressing.

But you can still get your point across without the name calling, ie. hypocrite. Like it or not, he is still the President. Our President.



-Pain

Slick Willie was on my hated list during the Lewinsky drama after he bombed the Sudan... I didn't know at the time -despite the flak thrown up by his opponents over 'I did not...' he was still making efforts to get Bin Laden who he knew to be a predominant growing threat-something that Bush wasn't active in doing pre-9-11.
Now Bush is doing all the right moves in the wrong places. A complete route of the Taliban in Afghanistan should've been the focus.
Let me say first- as a 'normal person' I like Bush alot-he seems fun to be around and respectful and not a bully -one on one with other humans.
However, other than that.....
Whether it was crooked Cheney's deceiving him into his foreign policy blunder's like Sauron's Master Ring, or he got a high when his first term obstinate personality won him popularity for not being a typical political bend with the wind type, this is why I don't like him "as a President". Hypocrite is not name calling- it's a statement/word of fact. In a democracy you don't have to rally behind your leader when its your right and privilege to call him into question. Worse terminology than the word hypocrite have been thrown at Bush by Americans dems/repubs.
Regarding the point is being missed. He doesn't represent the the goodwill of the majority of Americans -in fact he's ignoring the majority consistently .... 70% of Americans disagree with his Iraq policy. It was he who grand-standed for years about not negotiating with 'terrorist' states. If he's got a deal going with North Korea he shouldn't boldly announce it as a victory - all it is, is a deal... that nuke program is just on hold until they want more bargaining chips.

In my opinion, The neo-cons really screwed the US regarding foreign relations. I've always stood up for US interventions in most cases except where tyrants and dictators were propped up and voted leaders of nations were underhandedly vanquished. But the last 4 years the neo-cons have prodded Bush to thumb his nose at the fellow nations and Americans that weren't aboard his choo-choo train. They [neocons] even mocked the tiny nations that left the current coalition in Iraq -well there's gratitude. Well its all backfiring now. Anyway I think most folks in democratic nations are aware its not an america policy underfire. They clearly know the distinction that its the Bush [admin] Foreign Policy at work.

So.... where do I stand, - I see Bush as a person in a social setting at the other end of the spectrum as to Bush the foreign policy maker -post invasion Afghanistan to be precise.


This post has been edited by Hellfighter: 02/22/07 11:05am

[Major.Pain]

I don't take stock in anything 70% of Americans have to say. Let's face it, a zillion flies can't all be wrong. But they still hover around feces. I listen to all sides and make my decision based on the knowledge I have at the time. Unfortunately, I'm only privy to a small portion of the facts today. Maybe 6 months from now more will be let out due to national security. And I'm ok with that for 2 reasons. One, life is too short to worry about something I have very little control over. And two, at some point I have to trust that whoever is in charge will do what's best in my interest since I'm not there. That may sound a bit naive but my options are quite limited.



-Pain

[Hellfighter]

.....One, life is too short to worry about something I have very little control over........

If Frodo thought that way we'd never have been blessed with the Lord of the Rings trilogy


This post has been edited by Hellfighter: 02/23/07 9:52am

[Major.Pain]

Quite right...I stand corrected.



-Pain