Dammit, Be Unilateral, Unless We Say Multi-Lateral
As usual, the Democrats are having personality issues. The bipolar portion of the left is on the surface again today.
For three years George Bush has been beat up for being too unilateral on Iraq; today he's getting beat up for not being unilateral with North Korea.
John Kerry and others have been all over the tube and sending out press releases complaining that six party talks; involving the neighboring countries to North Korea; are a bad idea. In other words, when and where we should be unilateral is no longer the President's decision, but the opposing parties, at least as evidenced by these two examples.
Of course, those same folks have some serious memory lapse issues when it comes to failed, and unilateral, policies with North Korea. Remember the previous administration offered just about every carrot in the fridge, cheap oil from Alaska, free food, lightwater reactors to generate power. And North Korea took them all, and under the cover of dark kept on developing their nuclear weapon.
The truth is, whether some like it or not, the neighboring countries (China, South Korea, Japan, Russia) need to be involved; the UN is involved only because they have nice conference rooms , they are useless otherwise. Those are the countries with tangibles to offer to withhold to Kim Il Jong and his band of robbers. We have nothing, other than a threat of force, that when it was mentioned a few years back brought similar guffaws from the peacenik crowd on the left.
One thing I noticed starkly lacking from any of the complaints today was any mention of the fact that North Korea is the country that has stalled the current talks to the point of motionlessness. Also missing, the fact that for over two years both China and Russia, as with Iran, have made it clear that they weren't ready for sanctions; both hold Security Council vetoes, so getting them by would have been tough. And finally, missing, is any mention of the fact that Jong has repeatedly said he won't negotiate with the US alone.
So maybe the answer is to go back to the head in the sand approach of the last administration, give away billions more in food and oil which will end up with the NK Army (again), and then wonder why they are launching more sophisticated missiles in 5 more years.
Technorati Tags: North Korea, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Nuclear Weapons
For three years George Bush has been beat up for being too unilateral on Iraq; today he's getting beat up for not being unilateral with North Korea.
John Kerry and others have been all over the tube and sending out press releases complaining that six party talks; involving the neighboring countries to North Korea; are a bad idea. In other words, when and where we should be unilateral is no longer the President's decision, but the opposing parties, at least as evidenced by these two examples.
Of course, those same folks have some serious memory lapse issues when it comes to failed, and unilateral, policies with North Korea. Remember the previous administration offered just about every carrot in the fridge, cheap oil from Alaska, free food, lightwater reactors to generate power. And North Korea took them all, and under the cover of dark kept on developing their nuclear weapon.
The truth is, whether some like it or not, the neighboring countries (China, South Korea, Japan, Russia) need to be involved; the UN is involved only because they have nice conference rooms , they are useless otherwise. Those are the countries with tangibles to offer to withhold to Kim Il Jong and his band of robbers. We have nothing, other than a threat of force, that when it was mentioned a few years back brought similar guffaws from the peacenik crowd on the left.
One thing I noticed starkly lacking from any of the complaints today was any mention of the fact that North Korea is the country that has stalled the current talks to the point of motionlessness. Also missing, the fact that for over two years both China and Russia, as with Iran, have made it clear that they weren't ready for sanctions; both hold Security Council vetoes, so getting them by would have been tough. And finally, missing, is any mention of the fact that Jong has repeatedly said he won't negotiate with the US alone.
So maybe the answer is to go back to the head in the sand approach of the last administration, give away billions more in food and oil which will end up with the NK Army (again), and then wonder why they are launching more sophisticated missiles in 5 more years.
Technorati Tags: North Korea, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Nuclear Weapons
posted by Crazy Politico at 8:18 PM
2Comments:
They're just being contrarians. They are against whatever Bush does on sheer principle.
Funny you should mention bipolar...since ol' Teddy "World Games" Turner is widely known to be in dire need of lithium.
Post a Comment
<< Home