Bush Writes to North Korean Leader

Joeychgo

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
6,044
Reaction score
193
Location
Chicago, IL
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 — President Bush, directly engaging the man he publicly called a “tyrant” and privately called a “pygmy,” wrote a letter to the North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in which he held out the prospect of normalized relations with the United States if North Korea fully disclosed all nuclear programs and got rid of its nuclear weapons, administration officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/world/asia/06cnd-korea.html?hp



This is EXACTLY what he should have done YEARS ago!
 
This is EXACTLY what he should have done YEARS ago!

How is this inconsistent with what he has been doin?

"held out the prospect of normalized relations with the United States if North Korea fully disclosed all nuclear programs and got rid of its nuclear weapons, administration officials said."

Hasn't he being saying that all along?

"we won't negotiate with NK until they get rid of the nukes."

"The White House declined to provide transcripts of the letter and sought to minimize its significance by pointing out that Mr. Bush also wrote letters to the leaders of four other countries in the so-called “six party” group, made up of China, Japan, North Korea, South Korea, Russia and the United States. “In these letters, the president reiterated our commitment to the six-party talks and stressed the need for North Korea to come forward with a full and complete declaration of their nuclear programs, as called for in the September 2005 six-party agreement,” said Gordon D. Johndroe, a White House spokesman."

Still holding to the six party talks here. I don't see any dramatic change. Where are you getting that?
 
Easy - this is diplomatic, not saber rattling. Its holding out the carrot instead of the stick.
 
Easy - this is diplomatic, not saber rattling. Its holding out the carrot instead of the stick.


"Saber rattling" in regards to modern foriegn relations is nothing more then "diplomacy that liberals in the media don't like." The thing is liberals are wrong 100% of the time when it comes to dealing with a hostile foreign power (at least since 1900). Appeasement was tried against Hilter and you ended up with WW2, a war which was ultimately a failure foreign policy. Churchill was view as a "war monguer" before WW2, and his ideas for foriegn policy considered "saber rattling".

The only difference you could claim in regards to diplomacy is in style; The substance in Bush's stance is the exact same. As to style, there is no indication in this report that this is a change in style (or tone, if you wanna put it that way). The letter wasn't released to the public or the media. The only facts we know are what the admin has told us. the only difference in diplomacy here is how this is how this is being reported.

Besides, when has anything other then "saber rattling" ever worked? Let me rephrase, has appeasement ever worked? Those are ulitmately the two options you have when it comes to foreign policy regarding a hostile foreign power.

Teddy Rosevelt said, "speak softly and carry a big stick."
 
Easy - this is diplomatic, not saber rattling. Its holding out the carrot instead of the stick.
Did you criticize Clinton for behaving in the same way? He did not normalize relations with NK. In fact, he negotiated a non-nuclear deal with them and he got rolled.

Your BDS is still showing.
 

Members online

Back
Top