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: GST who wrote (106689)	7/20/2003 3:30:47 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

True enough, the 'axis of evil' soundbite was fantastically stupid, it sold well within the US but had rather less productive effect elsewhere ... it wouldn't hurt for Bush to 'clarify' the statement, to take back the neocon power to write blank cheques on people elsewhere that is inherent in it However, as it stands, from what little i've read on the situation, the north koreans are being invited by the US to talk all they want, just as long as neighbours are included in the discussion .... the south koreans, the japanese, the chinese all have vital interests in what goes on here, i can see no valid reason for one-on-one US-NK talks to be held secret from them .... were it the US saying we will talk only with one at a time, that would appear a tich dodgey, sneaky, you'd wonder what they had to hide from the others, why go behind their backs There is undoubtedly a lot more to it than i understand, or that anyone's brought up here, but generally speaking multi- is more honourable and straight-up than uni- when you start up with the -lateralism, and on the facts presented so far, i think it's clear that Hawk is right on this point, that the US should stand firm, stay open to open talks, and say no backroom deals thank you It's a strategy that would have worked better for them with Iraq, if they'd talked straight with the independent democracies before shoving the troops into Kuwait and subjecting themselves to pressure from seasonality and face-saving et cetera .... for which it wouldn't hurt for them to apologise, but failing that, a tendency to move to the above-board and get this stuff out of the back rooms is at least something

To: GST who wrote (106689)	7/20/2003 10:05:32 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

We threatened North Korea, We did? Bush didn't make any overt comments regarding potential military action until February of this year, AFTER N. Korea ADMITTED they had been continuing their nuclear program. But he didn't threaten N. Korea with invasion. He didn't say what form any threat might take, but quite likely it would be the bombing of the nuclear reactior where the processing is being accomplished. But that's also quite unlikely. I don't see Bush doing that without it being in conjunction with a major military operation to decapitate N. Korea's government, so it's an empty threat. Kim Jong Il is running scared. Word is out that he apparently was hiding for some 40 days during the Iraq war, afraid that the US would use the same GPS style munitions to kill him as we tried to use against Saddam. And were we to have 100% confidence that Kim Jong Il was going to be in a certain location at a certain time, I'm sure the temptation would be great to kill him. So you believe we should approach N. Korea in a unilateral manner, EXCLUDING all other nations in the region from any negotiations? We should continue to provide food so his political hacks can continue their black market activities selling it to their favored supporters, and shipping them hundreds of thousands of tonnes of fuel oil so they can top off the fuel tanks of their Tank forces?? I can imagine the kind of parent you were (are?).. Let your kids scream and bluster, even threatening bodily harm to you, and you cave in and give them everything they want... What wonderful life lessons they must have learned from you. The alternatives to talking are: (1) Watch while North Korea builds its nuclear arsenal -- which they are now merrily doing -- and face the consequences down the road, and (2) Go to war now. Uh.. GST.. Clinton and Carter "talked" to them in 1994.. We submitted to their extorsion, even volunteering to build them a light water nuclear reactor significantly more powerful than anything they currently have. But apparently they didn't feel compelled to abide by their obligations and those talks meant nothing. I'm tired of talking. I want agreements that are binding and confirmable. And that can only be achieved if a number of nations are involved in a subject that DIRECTLY involves their own national security. We have no right to "play dice" with the security of S. Korea, Japan, and any other nation in the region by advancing our own interests over theirs. Btw, there are more than two options. Option (3) is to provide S. Korea and Japan with their own nuclear deterrent, thereby nullifying any political or military advantage Kim Jong Il believes he will gain by building nuclear weapons. M.A.D worked for the US and USSR for 50 years. It will work on the Korean peninsula. Hawk