What Next With NK?

OrnotBitwise said:
They who? Who this "they" of whom you speak? I see a lot of nations coming down on North Korea and China but not a lot of criticism aimed at our government.
Click to expand...
But do they have enough leverage to do anything? "They" are the same people starting the thread. "Does Bush have..."

Where are the people putting forward actual plans from a different direction?

Sitting around saying "Bad NK!" is not a way to get China to do something about it.
 
Bush has lead and succeeded. The UN says they shouldn't have the bomb, the 5 nation regional group says the same thing. But talk is cheap. The UN had an emeergency seccession and condemned the action of this test! Ouch that hurt NK! Do it again and we will condemn you again. That is diplomancy at its finest.
 
Cypress said:
The question AOI posed was does bush have the credibility and skill to lead an effective multilateral effort.

The history of the last six years, says No.
Click to expand...
Bull. The question was (and I quote), "The question is, does Bush have the credibility, or more importantly, the ability, to bring the Chinese to enact western will?"

That has nothing to do with multilateral... It has everything to do with "Look to the US because we aren't going to do anything!"
 
Damocles said:
Bull. The question was (and I quote), "The question is, does Bush have the credibility, or more importantly, the ability, to bring the Chinese to enact western will?"

That has nothing to do with multilateral... It has everything to do with "Look to the US because we aren't going to do anything!"
Click to expand...

Okay, my bad. He asked about Bush's "ability", not "skill".

My judgment, based on the last six years, is that bush's foreign policy "ability" sucks. Its horrid.

What's your opinion of Bush's foreign policy abilities?
 
Cypress said:
Okay, my bad. He asked about Bush's "ability", not "skill".

My judgment, based on the last six years, is that bush's foreign policy "ability" sucks. Its horrid.

What's your opinion of Bush's foreign policy abilities?
Click to expand...
He didn't say anything about multilateralism either.
 
Seems the Bush was right saying back in 2002 that NK was develping nukes and called them an evil power.
 
toby said:
Bush has lead and succeeded. The UN says they shouldn't have the bomb, the 5 nation regional group says the same thing. But talk is cheap. The UN had an emeergency seccession and condemned the action of this test! Ouch that hurt NK! Do it again and we will condemn you again. That is diplomancy at its finest.
Click to expand...
Toby, let me inform you of what may well be the most open secret in the entire world. Any nation with sufficiently advanced industrial and academic resources can arm themselves with nuclear weapons. There's no way to stop them from doing so. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was just a delaying tactic: a "gentlemen's agreement" to not build such weapons and to not aid any other nation in building them.

What do you want the Security Council to do? Sanctions? Okay, but the people of North Korea will be the only ones to suffer. Invade? Get real. That's not an option and you know it.

That's part of the problem with all of this tough, he-man rhetoric our Fearless Leader and other immature world figures have been applying. Since there's no way to back it up all you do is make yourself look stupid.

Get used to a nuclear North Korea . . . and plan for it.
 
Get used to a nuclear North Korea . . . and plan for it.
//

Yepper Ornot, I don't see where we or any other country has the right to dictate to a sovern nation whether they can have the bomb or not, unless that country has signed a treaty or something to that effect.
 
uscitizen said:
Get used to a nuclear North Korea . . . and plan for it.
//

Yepper Ornot, I don't see where we or any other country has the right to dictate to a sovern nation whether they can have the bomb or not, unless that country has signed a treaty or something to that effect.
Click to expand...
I've said this many, many times before. If I were the leadership of a third world nation and had a shot at Nuclear power. I'd be there. And I would do what was necessary to get me there. Sign and renege on agreements, pander and coddle until it was too late. You bet I'd do it.
 
toby said:
So you guys think every country should have the bomb? We shouldn't mind or try to stop them?
Click to expand...
"Should" has nothing to do with it. The fact is that we can't stop them if they choose to go that route. It's called "sovereignty".

Now, if all the nations would agree to surrender some of their sovereignty to another body -- oh, call it the United Nations or something like that -- and give that body the authority to enforce some real international laws, that might be different. Possibly different. We haven't tried yet so the question is purely speculative.
 
No, everybody stares at the us and in their whiniest voice, "What are you going to dooooooo?"

Not a lot the US can do about NK. Kim has outflanked the US, by knowing that a nuclear capability makes it impotent.

In my original post I indicated that only China can do something about it, not the US, so the faux-indignation doesn't work.

The thing is, the US has made its own bed. It was Bush who came up with his fight against the 'axis of evil', hence my question.

The EU is also a major investor in China and will be making every effort to persuade the Chinese to tighten its grip on NK.

But your monkey in chief openly decided to take the lead on these 'axis of evil' states. My question was, does Bush now have the credibility to continue the lead.

Please, stop the false indignation whenever the US is challenged or criticised. You can't declare one thing, and then whine whenever people ask what is going on to keep that declaration.
 
Honestly I don't think you can stop them if they are determined to get the bomb short of warfare and occupation.

China could simply cut all resources to NK. It will collapse the state and cause many problems, such as a mass of refugees flooding over the Chinese border, but it will collapse the state.
 
NK should have been handled differently from the start. The key to turning NK is to change the perceptions of its people to its state. The problem is that the NKns don't see problems of their regime, they are in an Orwellian 1984 daydream, they do actually believe that they live in a 'model state'. We would have needed to persuade the NKn people that they live in a state far from this.

Doing that would have involved having to maintain a better relationship with the NK regime, a kind of switch and bait. By pretending to maintain relations with the NK regime we could have had better access to the NKn people and been able to more easily demonstrate the poor conditions in relation to the rest of the world.

Only by turning the NKn people onto the poor conditions they are under in relation to the rest of the world would we be able to turn them onto their own government.

Enforcing a change from the outside, through force or bullying would never work, it would simply turn the NKn people into a greater defence of the regime.

Bush's shit-poor rhetoric has spiked this notion. By acting like a bullet-head, he has made the NKn people more defensive of their state and less likely to turn on the regime.

So we are left impotent, without guile or cunning. We can only huff and puff from the sidelines, desperately hoping that China will see reason in our calls for it to pull the plug on the NK regime.
 
AnyOldIron said:
Honestly I don't think you can stop them if they are determined to get the bomb short of warfare and occupation.

China could simply cut all resources to NK. It will collapse the state and cause many problems, such as a mass of refugees flooding over the Chinese border, but it will collapse the state.
Click to expand...
However, China could do that regardless of the US. Pretending that the US is the only place that can make the difference there is pretense and dodging. My point in this thread is how all these other nations that could be doing as you suggest are instead whining in their best sanctimonious voices about, "What are you going to doooooooooo?"
 
However, China could do that regardless of the US. Pretending that the US is the only place that can make the difference there is pretense and dodging. My point in this thread is how all these other nations that could be doing as you suggest are instead whining in their best sanctimonious voices about, "What are you going to doooooooooo?"

As I said earlier....

"But your monkey in chief openly decided to take the lead on these 'axis of evil' states. My question was, does Bush now have the credibility to continue the lead."

Bristling with indignation when your own man stated he wants the lead, and then others ask what he will do with that lead, is not effective.

I haven't pretended the US is the only place that can make the difference. Bush has made his bed by taking the lead, and a unilateral lead on these issues. You can't then blame others for asking what he will do with that lead...
 
I've already stated an answer to that question, not reading it and pretending that I haven't doesn't make it any less so. This is a copout. Where is your own responsibility?

Once again, the whine rings out.... "What are you going to dooooooooo?"

Remember when you point one finger at somebody four point right back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top