Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Rascal who wrote (110546)	8/8/2003 10:01:17 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) of 281500

"I have trouble separating "appeasement" from negotiation and diplomacy. I know that regime change means war.I know I don't want this again!" Ditto for me. But what if appeasement allows them to clandenstinely build nukes that will threaten us big time some time in the near future? Thats not good appeasement at all. But if it guarantees their regime for 10 years with aid (whether kim or post kim), and verifies destruction of nukes, that is a different thing all together. And whats wrong with multilateral talks. Normally this is what you would want--multilateralism. I chided you in saying that you would be for multilateral talks if thats what the NK wanted and bush objected. I think the blind hatred you folks have for everything bush has clouded your vision. No one could be that bad. Thats what you told the right about clinton, no??? mike

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next