Political Forum



Dear guest,

Welcome to the internet's top destination for the civil discussion of politics. This is a forum for discussion and debate of the issues, and not for personal remarks aimed at other discussants.

This forum has no political affiliation and welcomes your perspective on the issues. Membership is free. If you would like to join the discussions and debates please REGISTER HERE.

All new members should review the forum rules. The "Today's Posts" button automatically adjusts itself to fit your screen on its first use for Firefox and on its second use, for Internet Explorer. Have a pleasant day. (This is a spam free board.)

Old 02-12-2007, 09:23 PM   #1 (permalink)
Conscript
 
Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 15
Bolton: Bush should reject NK nuclear deal

It's not like we are going to be stopping NK any other way anytime soon. Sometimes compromise can be okay. Don't see what it would hurt. As for looking weak, we already do. Everyone see how tied up we are in Iraq. We couldn't invade either Iran or NK at this point and that's the only way we could be sure to get their nukes. Air strikes can't hit hidden targets and we don't even know where all their nuke capabilities are hiding.

Bush should reject North Korea nuclear deal: ex-UN envoy - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US President George W. Bush should reject an agreement reached at six-nation talks aimed at ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program, said Washington's former UN envoy, John Bolton.

"This is a very bad deal," Bolton told CNN television, saying it contradicts Bush's policy and would show US weakness at a time when it is challenging Iran over its controversial nuclear program.

"I'm hoping that the president has not been fully briefed on it and he still has time to reject it," he said.

He said the agreement, which needs the approval of the six governments involved in the talks, "undercuts" UN sanctions resolutions against North Korea, "and I think the Iranians have only to follow the same example."

"If the would-be proliferators can simply through persistence get the United States to compromise on its basic principles, they're going to succeed in proliferation. That's why this deal is such a bad precedent," Bolton said.

China circulated Tuesday a "final" joint statement outlining the first steps North Korea would take to end its nuclear drive and the economic rewards it would receive in return, said envoys meeting in Beijing.

Officials have yet to specify the details of the new joint statement, but they made it clear that North Korea would be given rich incentives in terms of oil and other energy aid if it took first steps towards disarming.

The chief US negotiator, Christopher Hill, described the text as "excellent."

He said it outlined initial actions the parties involved in the talks -- the United States, China, Russia, Japan and the two Koreas -- could take to kickstart the process of Pyongyang dismantling its nuclear weapons program.

North Korea carried out its first atomic bomb test in October, triggering United Nations sanctions on the impoverished nation and breathing new urgency into the six-party forum.
__________________
The opposite of bravery is not cowardice but conformity. - Robert Anthony

If the States do not have the right to secede, then they have no rights at all. - Dr. Walter Williams
Blade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2007, 12:11 AM   #2 (permalink)
Moderator
 
Sebelius for VP, not Hillary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,211
Country:
Country:
There is more details to this than I suspect that we have been made aware of. Bolton is probably not a stupid and spiteful man. He probably has the US interests in mind and at heart. He must see something wrong with this deal. He has no reason to reject a good deal.

Perhaps DPRK has some enriched uranium and plutonium that it is going to hold onto, despite the dismantling of their power plant. I guess that this deal would still be a step in the right direction, since it might decrease DPRK nuclear weapons potential.

However, I think we have to tread carefully here, as there could be a lot of important details missing.
Sebelius for VP, not Hillary is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0
A vBSkinworks Design
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=

right