SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (82049)3/14/2003 12:54:18 PM
From: Jacob Snyder  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
re: N. Korea:

<you know we can't "verify.">

I know we can. The problems of verifying a treaty with N. Korea, are exactly the same as the problems of verifying a treaty with any opponent. We signed treaties with the Soviet Union, detailed specific treaties about what kind, and how many, of various kinds of weapons each side would have. The Soviet Union had a lot more resources, and a lot more places to hide things, that N. Korea does. We were able to do adequate verification.

<The truth is you don't have a viable "other choice.">

I have posted my "other choice" earlier; I can say it again; will you just dismiss it out of hand again?
Just because you don't like my plan, doesn't mean I have no plan.
You keep on saying that the only alternative to the NeoCon Hit 'Em Hard Plan, is to do nothing and await our doom. Again, this is a failure of imagination. Just because I don't like your proposed action, doesn't mean I believe in NonAction.

There are no incompatible demands, in both side's list of core demands. The solution, the Plan Of Action, is:

1. Sunshine. Follow S. Korea's lead.

2. multilateralism. Start listening to China, S. Korea, Japan. Our arrogant dismissal of their concerns and methods ensures that nobody helps us.

3. We demand a treaty that gives us what we want:
A) end to terrorism sponsored/funded/armed/planned by N. Korea
B) no WMD; no development programs for any WMD
C) no sales of WMD, or their components, or the technology to construct them, or the means to deliver them, to anyone else. BTW, we should start doing this ourselves, and try to get the French and Germans and Israelis to start doing it, too. Better late than never.
D) verification procedures for the above, which do not rely in any way on trust.

4. We offer them everything they want (much of this is in our own interest anyway):
A) diplomatic recognition; normal diplomatic relations.
B) non-aggression treaty (if they are not doing WMD or terrorism, why can't we promise not to do Regime Change?)
C) end to economic isolation
D) economic aid, enough to keep N. Koreans from dying of cold and hunger.
E) what we promised and never delivered in 1994
F) withdrawal of all but token U.S. forces from S. Korea. Leave a trip-wire and nothing else.
G) Remove our WMD from S. Korea (this changes nothing, since our submarines and aircraft carriers remain offshore).

The Korean conflict is much more amenable to solution, than the Israeli-Arab conflict. What is so hard, so impossible, about each side giving the other what they want?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext