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: Ilaine who wrote (99333)	5/28/2003 9:59:34 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<arguing that North Korea is somehow the victim here is probably the apotheosis of victimology> But I didn't say that the N. Korean government is the victim. Just because I can criticize the U.S. government, doesn't make me an apologist for Kim Il Sung. My opinion on the N. Korea-U.S. conflict, is similar to my opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Both sides, in both conflicts, have acted in bad faith. Both sides reflexively, habitually, use force, and the threat of force, to achieve their goals. Both sides haven't kept past promises. Both sides have created an elaborate Myth, for domestic consumption, that holds themselves blameless. Maybe, no matter what we did, N. Korea was going to break the agreement, and develop nuclear weapons. But maybe, this whole problem could have been avoided, if we'd just done what we promised to do. If you read the original agreement, and then examine the history, the factual record, the only possible conclusion is that the U.S. government broke every promise it made, except for the fuel oil shipments. As detailed in Message 18708522 and the links in that post. You don't like the conclusion, but you have nothing to say about the facts that lead, inexorably, to that conclusion.