|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:20 am Post subject: Re: A North Korean Solution |
 |
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| He has China in his corner, he owns the SK government..what he fears is going out Caucescu style. |
The South Korean goverment is in KJI's pocket huh? I don't believe that for a minute. |
You dont follow politics much do you.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2872905
| Quote: |
| �It�s okay to be generous to North Korea.� North Koreans would be lunatics to make a preemptive strike with their nuclear weapon.� |
| Quote: |
| Mr. Roh said that Pyongyang made nuclear weapons because �there are people who scheme for the collapse of the regime without knowing that North Korea will make reforms and [adopt] open-door policies.� |
Just the latest of this idiot's lunacies. The more threateening the DPRK gets the more forgiving this shithead is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 4:50 am Post subject: Re: A North Korean Solution |
|
|
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
I am proposing a different direction. The direction the Bush administration is on has led to the detonation of a nuclear weapon. I do not think that KJI would have felt the need to detonate, much less create, a nuclear weapon had diplomacy been the method of interaction rather than breast-beating machismo.
I think KJI would do almost anything for the things I mentioned, which go way beyond establishing an embassy and a promise of not attacking. I am not saying things would change overnight, but a diplomatic approach would certainly remove his stubby little fingers from proximity of the nuclear push button.
KJI has his hands in private capitalistic endeavors all over the place. He even has his own military division (#39) for the sole purpose of capitalistic enterprises. He knows the value of free enterprise, and would only gain more power and wealth if his country opened up. That is why he sends his economic advisors to the west for their educations. He is not economically stupid, and there are forces in NK besides KJI maneuvering the direction of the country.
A direct US presidential approach to KJI in Pyongyang would show him we are serious in our diplomacy. Up to this point, we have not shown him that we are serious, save for Clinton's feeble attempts.
Please understand I am not saying NK is the worker's paradise. I believe it to be one of the most restrictive, abhorrent governments in the world. However, the only way to open up such a government is via diplomatic efforts.
Peace |
Hold on a bit. The Bush approach is working, we have to be patient to reap its yields.
The development of nascent nuclear capability is not a true threat to any power in the region. Look at North Korea's neighbors. All are established nuclear powers or are quite snug beneath the American nuclear umbrella. A plutonium bomb without a missile delivery system threatens very little. The artillery aimed at Seoul could already do as much damage more reliably.
The Bush approach was to ignore North Korea's idle threats until North Korea agreed to a multi-lateral treaty. China's influence is needed. If you will recall, the 1994 Framework fell apart precisely because it was a bi-lateral treaty that could not be enforced. If North Korea backs out this time, China is obliged to step in. Right now, the North Korean black market, which has become the real economy since the death of the food distribution system, is dependent upon shipments from China. That leverage is the best leverage.
| Quote: |
| I do not think that KJI would have felt the need to detonate, much less create, a nuclear weapon had diplomacy been the method of interaction rather than breast-beating machismo. |
Diplomacy has been tried, remember? The 1994 Agreed Framework. I'm sure it rings a bell.
Within the link you can see the kind of 'Sea of Fire' rhetoric to which North Korea has long been accustomed. North Korea is an old-hand at threatening to annihilate Seoul.
The new nuclear weapon is leverage for them to negotiate. I am suggesting that we do negotiate. But to offer them anything outside of the Six-Party Forum is at best a waste of time, and at worst has the potential to exhaust the ability for talks for years.
BTW, the Bush administration has been very active in negotiating with KJI this past month. (And for those on Iran threads, take note of how the Bolton-Cheney wing has been pushed aside on the Korean issue. Is this a sign of Cheney's waning influence?)
WashPost
Atimes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulunitarian
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: Re: A North Korean Solution |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
I am proposing a different direction. The direction the Bush administration is on has led to the detonation of a nuclear weapon. I do not think that KJI would have felt the need to detonate, much less create, a nuclear weapon had diplomacy been the method of interaction rather than breast-beating machismo.
I think KJI would do almost anything for the things I mentioned, which go way beyond establishing an embassy and a promise of not attacking. I am not saying things would change overnight, but a diplomatic approach would certainly remove his stubby little fingers from proximity of the nuclear push button.
KJI has his hands in private capitalistic endeavors all over the place. He even has his own military division (#39) for the sole purpose of capitalistic enterprises. He knows the value of free enterprise, and would only gain more power and wealth if his country opened up. That is why he sends his economic advisors to the west for their educations. He is not economically stupid, and there are forces in NK besides KJI maneuvering the direction of the country.
A direct US presidential approach to KJI in Pyongyang would show him we are serious in our diplomacy. Up to this point, we have not shown him that we are serious, save for Clinton's feeble attempts.
Please understand I am not saying NK is the worker's paradise. I believe it to be one of the most restrictive, abhorrent governments in the world. However, the only way to open up such a government is via diplomatic efforts.
Peace |
Hold on a bit. The Bush approach is working, we have to be patient to reap its yields.
The development of nascent nuclear capability is not a true threat to any power in the region. Look at North Korea's neighbors. All are established nuclear powers or are quite snug beneath the American nuclear umbrella. A plutonium bomb without a missile delivery system threatens very little. The artillery aimed at Seoul could already do as much damage more reliably.
The Bush approach was to ignore North Korea's idle threats until North Korea agreed to a multi-lateral treaty. China's influence is needed. If you will recall, the 1994 Framework fell apart precisely because it was a bi-lateral treaty that could not be enforced. If North Korea backs out this time, China is obliged to step in. Right now, the North Korean black market, which has become the real economy since the death of the food distribution system, is dependent upon shipments from China. That leverage is the best leverage.
| Quote: |
| I do not think that KJI would have felt the need to detonate, much less create, a nuclear weapon had diplomacy been the method of interaction rather than breast-beating machismo. |
Diplomacy has been tried, remember? The 1994 Agreed Framework. I'm sure it rings a bell.
Within the link you can see the kind of 'Sea of Fire' rhetoric to which North Korea has long been accustomed. North Korea is an old-hand at threatening to annihilate Seoul.
The new nuclear weapon is leverage for them to negotiate. I am suggesting that we do negotiate. But to offer them anything outside of the Six-Party Forum is at best a waste of time, and at worst has the potential to exhaust the ability for talks for years.
BTW, the Bush administration has been very active in negotiating with KJI this past month. (And for those on Iran threads, take note of how the Bolton-Cheney wing has been pushed aside on the Korean issue. Is this a sign of Cheney's waning influence?)
WashPost
Atimes |
I believe you are correct in that the new approach of Bush to NK is more diplomatic. I think the only reason Bush's approach is becoming more diplomatic is because he has exhausted his military resources, and has no other option. But in the big scheme, his motivation for diplomacy is irrelevant. I hope the trend continues and progresses until he leaves office.
Peace |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
