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: jttmab who wrote (187053)	5/22/2006 7:02:01 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

IS IT BETTER IF IT'S THE FAULT OF NORTH KOREA, RUSSIA AND CHINA? Only BEAN COUNTERS know. Absolutely.. The more governments that have a political stake in the negotiations, the more likely that, if only to sheer "peer pressure" politics, no one wants to be seen as being the nation that "broke the deal". And from N. Korea's perspective, it's much more difficult for them to focus their propaganda solely against the US for negotiations not bringing out a break-through.. He has to blame MULTIPLE governments, including several who share a historical relationship with him. N. Korea and Iran share a common thread in all of this since both China and Russia have publicly stated that they have "great concern" about either state possessing nuclear weapons. That doesn't mean that I don't believe there are segments of their respective governments (Russia and China) that aren't involved in assisting Iran and NK with obtaining nuclear capability. But diplomats and intelligence/defense apparachiks have always had a rivaly. Look at the tension in our own government between DOD, CIA, and the State Department. And it's the State Department/Foreign Ministy's job to broker these international agreements. And they have an interest in being sucessful. ""Look no further than Jimmie Carter, who unilaterally took it upon himself, without authorization..."" Without authorization? From who? You? President have the authority to carry on foreign policy. The last time I checked, Jimmie Carter was not President in 1994 when he visited Kim Il Sung and brokered that agreement. His visit was solely as a "private citizen" who was seeking the limelight and fell squarely into the trap set by the N. Koreans.. The question is whether Kim Il Sung was actually serious, or whether Carter was just a useful pawn aimed at forcing the US into a negotiation from which NK would derive clear benefit by blackmailing the region and the US. Yep... get your money for nothing.. and your checks for free... But it doesn't matter if he was serious or not.. Because clearly his son WAS NOT serious and felt no compulsion to adher to an agreement that he had not PERSONALLY signed off on. Hawk