OT: Blood is on China’s hands

[KIBU]

When one looks closely at what NK has been doing, most people are puzzled as to WHY they did it and think it’s a crazy goverment who rather chase after conflicts and weapons while starving its large population. Many things they have done do not seem to profit their people or even the leadership. Similarly, when one looks closely at what the Khmer Rouge and Polpot did in Cambodia during their crazy and mad period, one couldn’t understand why one would do such thing to his own people.

But when you know that Polpot was following Maoist doctrine and under the influence and supports of Communist China for a very long time, then you would know why such smart and intelligent leaders of a country would kill and go against the interest of its people, chasing after conflicts and SELF DESTRUCTION for someone else interest.

[briansd1]

[quote=KIBU]The fallacy is to assume that since play tough policy didn’t seem to work with NK, hence, cooperative policy should have worked. More likely, it’s the other way around that happened. Cooperative diplomacy couldn’t work, hence we have to play tough, which is just another facet of diplomacy.
[/quote]

So you want to get tough. But remember than Bush got tough, and backtraked with 6-party talks. So much for getting tough.

So get tough now? Is the United States prepared for war? What will that do to South Korea and to world economic growth?

South Korea and the USA have a lot more to lose than the North Koreans leadership. Since Bush already indicated that he wanted to get rid of them like he did Saddam Hussein, the North Korean leadership has few reasons to trust America.

In diplomacy, never give an ultimatum unless you’re not prepared to carry out and face the consequence.

[quote=KIBU]
You don’t see anyone jumping to the 6 parties talk suggestion last week, do you???
[/quote]

Nobody is jumping to the 6-party talks because it’s an American idea. America requested the involvement of S Korea, China, Japan and Russia to deny the North Korean’s desire for bilateral negotiations.

The 6-party talks was Bush backtracking when the get tough approach did not work. At that time, the quagmire in Iraq was unfolding and there was no American wherewithal to deal with North Korea.

Realistically, why would Russia and China help America extricate itself from the North Korean problem of its own making?

Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea. Kim Dae Jung received the Nobel Peace Prize. Japan joined in. Then Bush developed the Axis of Evil doctrine and vetoed South Korea and Japan’s efforts at peace in the region.

The sitution is the Korean Peninsula today is of American making. Our intransigence got us what we deserve and we are paying the price. The innocent dead South Korean islanders and their families are collateral damage.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/6-party.htm

[briansd1]

[quote=KIBU]The fallacy is to assume that since play tough policy didn’t seem to work with NK, hence, cooperative policy should have worked. More likely, it’s the other way around that happened. Cooperative diplomacy couldn’t work, hence we have to play tough, which is just another facet of diplomacy.
[/quote]

So you want to get tough. But remember than Bush got tough, and backtraked with 6-party talks. So much for getting tough.

So get tough now? Is the United States prepared for war? What will that do to South Korea and to world economic growth?

South Korea and the USA have a lot more to lose than the North Koreans leadership. Since Bush already indicated that he wanted to get rid of them like he did Saddam Hussein, the North Korean leadership has few reasons to trust America.

In diplomacy, never give an ultimatum unless you’re not prepared to carry out and face the consequence.

[quote=KIBU]
You don’t see anyone jumping to the 6 parties talk suggestion last week, do you???
[/quote]

Nobody is jumping to the 6-party talks because it’s an American idea. America requested the involvement of S Korea, China, Japan and Russia to deny the North Korean’s desire for bilateral negotiations.

The 6-party talks was Bush backtracking when the get tough approach did not work. At that time, the quagmire in Iraq was unfolding and there was no American wherewithal to deal with North Korea.

Realistically, why would Russia and China help America extricate itself from the North Korean problem of its own making?

Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea. Kim Dae Jung received the Nobel Peace Prize. Japan joined in. Then Bush developed the Axis of Evil doctrine and vetoed South Korea and Japan’s efforts at peace in the region.

The sitution is the Korean Peninsula today is of American making. Our intransigence got us what we deserve and we are paying the price. The innocent dead South Korean islanders and their families are collateral damage.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/6-party.htm

[briansd1]

[quote=KIBU]The fallacy is to assume that since play tough policy didn’t seem to work with NK, hence, cooperative policy should have worked. More likely, it’s the other way around that happened. Cooperative diplomacy couldn’t work, hence we have to play tough, which is just another facet of diplomacy.
[/quote]

So you want to get tough. But remember than Bush got tough, and backtraked with 6-party talks. So much for getting tough.

So get tough now? Is the United States prepared for war? What will that do to South Korea and to world economic growth?

South Korea and the USA have a lot more to lose than the North Koreans leadership. Since Bush already indicated that he wanted to get rid of them like he did Saddam Hussein, the North Korean leadership has few reasons to trust America.

In diplomacy, never give an ultimatum unless you’re not prepared to carry out and face the consequence.

[quote=KIBU]
You don’t see anyone jumping to the 6 parties talk suggestion last week, do you???
[/quote]

Nobody is jumping to the 6-party talks because it’s an American idea. America requested the involvement of S Korea, China, Japan and Russia to deny the North Korean’s desire for bilateral negotiations.

The 6-party talks was Bush backtracking when the get tough approach did not work. At that time, the quagmire in Iraq was unfolding and there was no American wherewithal to deal with North Korea.

Realistically, why would Russia and China help America extricate itself from the North Korean problem of its own making?

Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea. Kim Dae Jung received the Nobel Peace Prize. Japan joined in. Then Bush developed the Axis of Evil doctrine and vetoed South Korea and Japan’s efforts at peace in the region.

The sitution is the Korean Peninsula today is of American making. Our intransigence got us what we deserve and we are paying the price. The innocent dead South Korean islanders and their families are collateral damage.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/6-party.htm

[briansd1]

[quote=KIBU]The fallacy is to assume that since play tough policy didn’t seem to work with NK, hence, cooperative policy should have worked. More likely, it’s the other way around that happened. Cooperative diplomacy couldn’t work, hence we have to play tough, which is just another facet of diplomacy.
[/quote]

So you want to get tough. But remember than Bush got tough, and backtraked with 6-party talks. So much for getting tough.

So get tough now? Is the United States prepared for war? What will that do to South Korea and to world economic growth?

South Korea and the USA have a lot more to lose than the North Koreans leadership. Since Bush already indicated that he wanted to get rid of them like he did Saddam Hussein, the North Korean leadership has few reasons to trust America.

In diplomacy, never give an ultimatum unless you’re not prepared to carry out and face the consequence.

[quote=KIBU]
You don’t see anyone jumping to the 6 parties talk suggestion last week, do you???
[/quote]

Nobody is jumping to the 6-party talks because it’s an American idea. America requested the involvement of S Korea, China, Japan and Russia to deny the North Korean’s desire for bilateral negotiations.

The 6-party talks was Bush backtracking when the get tough approach did not work. At that time, the quagmire in Iraq was unfolding and there was no American wherewithal to deal with North Korea.

Realistically, why would Russia and China help America extricate itself from the North Korean problem of its own making?

Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea. Kim Dae Jung received the Nobel Peace Prize. Japan joined in. Then Bush developed the Axis of Evil doctrine and vetoed South Korea and Japan’s efforts at peace in the region.

The sitution is the Korean Peninsula today is of American making. Our intransigence got us what we deserve and we are paying the price. The innocent dead South Korean islanders and their families are collateral damage.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/6-party.htm

[briansd1]

[quote=KIBU]The fallacy is to assume that since play tough policy didn’t seem to work with NK, hence, cooperative policy should have worked. More likely, it’s the other way around that happened. Cooperative diplomacy couldn’t work, hence we have to play tough, which is just another facet of diplomacy.
[/quote]

So you want to get tough. But remember than Bush got tough, and backtraked with 6-party talks. So much for getting tough.

So get tough now? Is the United States prepared for war? What will that do to South Korea and to world economic growth?

South Korea and the USA have a lot more to lose than the North Koreans leadership. Since Bush already indicated that he wanted to get rid of them like he did Saddam Hussein, the North Korean leadership has few reasons to trust America.

In diplomacy, never give an ultimatum unless you’re not prepared to carry out and face the consequence.

[quote=KIBU]
You don’t see anyone jumping to the 6 parties talk suggestion last week, do you???
[/quote]

Nobody is jumping to the 6-party talks because it’s an American idea. America requested the involvement of S Korea, China, Japan and Russia to deny the North Korean’s desire for bilateral negotiations.

The 6-party talks was Bush backtracking when the get tough approach did not work. At that time, the quagmire in Iraq was unfolding and there was no American wherewithal to deal with North Korea.

Realistically, why would Russia and China help America extricate itself from the North Korean problem of its own making?

Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea. Kim Dae Jung received the Nobel Peace Prize. Japan joined in. Then Bush developed the Axis of Evil doctrine and vetoed South Korea and Japan’s efforts at peace in the region.

The sitution is the Korean Peninsula today is of American making. Our intransigence got us what we deserve and we are paying the price. The innocent dead South Korean islanders and their families are collateral damage.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/6-party.htm

[AK]

[quote=briansd1]
Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea.[/quote]

Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

That Nobel Peace Prize is a joke. Obama freely admitted he hadn’t done anything to deserve his, but at least he didn’t get it through crass bribery.

Incidentally, the payoffs were disguised as part of the jointly owned Mount Kumgang resort project in North Korea. Once the scandal was uncovered in 2003, the flow of illicit cash stopped and North Korea’s attitude hardened almost overnight. The resort closed after a South Korean visitor was shot by guards while taking a walk on the beach, and was later expropriated by NK.

[AK]

[quote=briansd1]
Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea.[/quote]

Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

That Nobel Peace Prize is a joke. Obama freely admitted he hadn’t done anything to deserve his, but at least he didn’t get it through crass bribery.

Incidentally, the payoffs were disguised as part of the jointly owned Mount Kumgang resort project in North Korea. Once the scandal was uncovered in 2003, the flow of illicit cash stopped and North Korea’s attitude hardened almost overnight. The resort closed after a South Korean visitor was shot by guards while taking a walk on the beach, and was later expropriated by NK.

[AK]

[quote=briansd1]
Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea.[/quote]

Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

That Nobel Peace Prize is a joke. Obama freely admitted he hadn’t done anything to deserve his, but at least he didn’t get it through crass bribery.

Incidentally, the payoffs were disguised as part of the jointly owned Mount Kumgang resort project in North Korea. Once the scandal was uncovered in 2003, the flow of illicit cash stopped and North Korea’s attitude hardened almost overnight. The resort closed after a South Korean visitor was shot by guards while taking a walk on the beach, and was later expropriated by NK.

[AK]

[quote=briansd1]
Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea.[/quote]

Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

That Nobel Peace Prize is a joke. Obama freely admitted he hadn’t done anything to deserve his, but at least he didn’t get it through crass bribery.

Incidentally, the payoffs were disguised as part of the jointly owned Mount Kumgang resort project in North Korea. Once the scandal was uncovered in 2003, the flow of illicit cash stopped and North Korea’s attitude hardened almost overnight. The resort closed after a South Korean visitor was shot by guards while taking a walk on the beach, and was later expropriated by NK.

[AK]

[quote=briansd1]
Futhermore, with Kim Dae Jung as president, South Korea began the Sunshine Policy of raprochement with North Korea.[/quote]

Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

That Nobel Peace Prize is a joke. Obama freely admitted he hadn’t done anything to deserve his, but at least he didn’t get it through crass bribery.

Incidentally, the payoffs were disguised as part of the jointly owned Mount Kumgang resort project in North Korea. Once the scandal was uncovered in 2003, the flow of illicit cash stopped and North Korea’s attitude hardened almost overnight. The resort closed after a South Korean visitor was shot by guards while taking a walk on the beach, and was later expropriated by NK.

[briansd1]

[quote=AK]Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

[/quote]

The link you provided indicates a $150 million payoff.

What’s $150 million if peace and raprochement can be achieved, resorts and factories built and jobs provided for thousands of North Koreans?

Do we want the two Koreas to resolve their own problems? Or do we want to own their problems? The South Koreans won’t try very hard as long as we micro-manage their security affairs and hold veto over their decisions.

As I said before, in order to be successful in negotiations, you have to make it worthwhile for the other side.

The problem with North Korea is that we have branded their leadership “evil”. So from their standpoint, what’s there to negotiate? How would you negotiate with a party who’s labeled you evil and thus wants to kill you?

The Axis of Evil doctrine doesn’t leave America much wiggle room for negotiation and for North Korea to negotiate.

[briansd1]

[quote=AK]Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

[/quote]

The link you provided indicates a $150 million payoff.

What’s $150 million if peace and raprochement can be achieved, resorts and factories built and jobs provided for thousands of North Koreans?

Do we want the two Koreas to resolve their own problems? Or do we want to own their problems? The South Koreans won’t try very hard as long as we micro-manage their security affairs and hold veto over their decisions.

As I said before, in order to be successful in negotiations, you have to make it worthwhile for the other side.

The problem with North Korea is that we have branded their leadership “evil”. So from their standpoint, what’s there to negotiate? How would you negotiate with a party who’s labeled you evil and thus wants to kill you?

The Axis of Evil doctrine doesn’t leave America much wiggle room for negotiation and for North Korea to negotiate.

[briansd1]

[quote=AK]Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

[/quote]

The link you provided indicates a $150 million payoff.

What’s $150 million if peace and raprochement can be achieved, resorts and factories built and jobs provided for thousands of North Koreans?

Do we want the two Koreas to resolve their own problems? Or do we want to own their problems? The South Koreans won’t try very hard as long as we micro-manage their security affairs and hold veto over their decisions.

As I said before, in order to be successful in negotiations, you have to make it worthwhile for the other side.

The problem with North Korea is that we have branded their leadership “evil”. So from their standpoint, what’s there to negotiate? How would you negotiate with a party who’s labeled you evil and thus wants to kill you?

The Axis of Evil doctrine doesn’t leave America much wiggle room for negotiation and for North Korea to negotiate.

[briansd1]

[quote=AK]Boy, am I glad you mentioned the so-called “Sunshine Policy” … because it’s been well documented that Kim Dae-jung initiated it with a $500 million payoff to North Korea from a secret political slush fund.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-South_presidential_summit_corruption_allegations

[/quote]

The link you provided indicates a $150 million payoff.

What’s $150 million if peace and raprochement can be achieved, resorts and factories built and jobs provided for thousands of North Koreans?

Do we want the two Koreas to resolve their own problems? Or do we want to own their problems? The South Koreans won’t try very hard as long as we micro-manage their security affairs and hold veto over their decisions.

As I said before, in order to be successful in negotiations, you have to make it worthwhile for the other side.

The problem with North Korea is that we have branded their leadership “evil”. So from their standpoint, what’s there to negotiate? How would you negotiate with a party who’s labeled you evil and thus wants to kill you?

The Axis of Evil doctrine doesn’t leave America much wiggle room for negotiation and for North Korea to negotiate.

[Author]

Posts