Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rascal who wrote (63420)	12/29/2002 7:24:05 PM
From: Ed Huang	Respond to of 281500

Hi Rascal, Regarding the N. Korea nuclear issue, I tend to agree with your "The U.N. is irrelevant" opinion. This issue can be presented to the U.N. Security Council, but does it work that way? I think not. U.N. security council works only when all its members share the same interest on a particular issue. It doesn't mean China and Russia want to see N.Korea own or continue to produce Nuclear weapon. But stripping N. Korea from nuclear power or even have a military action on the country the U.S. wanted is not in China and Russia or even S Korea's interests. The only way the U.S. should do is to continue discussing this matter with China, Russia, S. Korea and Japan to find out a feasible solution for the issue rather than through U.N. meetings, IMO. On the other hand, on the international stage, the U.S. is quickly losing its moral leadership and allies in the recent years due to its Middle East policy, double standard on human right issues and the current decision of "preempt strike" on a much weaker country Iraq(excuse me to those who doesn't agree). And BTW, it's natural to believe that the U.S. policy and its action only make more smaller countries think about having nuclear arms for self-defence under the new situation. Obviously, losing moral leadership also means losing respects from the other nations as well. Which make it more difficult for the U.S. to deal with the international issues like the N. Korea one... One of the new prices to pay, I'm afraid... >>Why does this administration repeatedly need to blame Clinton for any little thing that doesn't go their way? (This is why everybody perceives a blame game. When the Administration blames everything on Clinton it forces logical thinkers into rebutting the position regardles of their political affiliation.)<< I hear you. The above is just my general reasoning regarding the N. Korea nuclear issue. Hope that helps the discussion a bit.