18-07-2003 09:40									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Oh...and I love how you all want to blame W, for a regime which is a bad actor and should have had its wings clipped years ago when it would have been easier. Same deal as with Iraq. And same deal with the bubble. Typical Clinton crap.

	18-07-2003 09:45									#62
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Oh...and I love how you all want to blame W, for a regime which is a bad actor and should have had its wings clipped years ago when it would have been easier. Same deal as with Iraq. And same deal with the bubble. Typical Clinton crap.

i'm not blaming w for the situation. i'm blaming him for exacerbating it.
if gore were in power, we'd still have this same ***** of an affair.
if we'd had the balls, we'd've given macarthur free reign to smash those damned stalinists and maoists.
we didn't.
now we need a much better, much more coherent and clear policy on dealing with the north, one which is not forthcoming from the bush administration.
ignoring this will not make it go away, just as not calling it a crisis didn't change the fact that it was a crisis.

i'm sorry if you're so mad that people have been ragging on bush. i can't say i feel that bad for you, because american politics in the last twelve years have been even dirtier and nastier than i remember the 80s being.

	18-07-2003 09:47									#63
	Remove this text

quote: if we'd had the balls, we'd've given macarthur free reign to smash those damned stalinists and maoists.

I thought you were against seeing the Korean Peninsula turned to glass?

quote: now we need a much better, much more coherent and clear policy on dealing with the north, one which is not forthcoming from the bush administration.

Why don't you tell us what your "coherent and clear policy" would be in regards to the North? I'm all ears.

	18-07-2003 09:48									#64
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

He is doing the right thing by letting Kim jump up and down. People like you who want to react are helping Kim and not helping the situation. The way to grasp a nettle is firmly. Keep your eye on the ball. We have very little ability to "manipulate" the NK. The current policy is better than public reaction which exacerbates the pressure that they are already trying to put on us, to get a bribe. No point in making public remarks. It only hurts us. This is a big stick, small words time.

	18-07-2003 09:50									#65
	Increase Your PM Length

Frankly I'd love to see the NK regime try something. Scratch one more off that axis of evil. Dubya is like a superhero, freeing the world from evil!

And technically we are still in a state of war with North Korea. A permanent peace treaty was never signed.

	18-07-2003 10:02									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: I thought you were against seeing the Korean Peninsula turned to glass

i'm against seeing the korean peninsula turned into glass.
i have much less of a problem seeing manchuria turned into glass. macarthur wanted nukes to beat off the chinese by hitting them in their home territory, expanding the war from just the peninsula.
sounds callous, yes, but in my eyes it would have been worth it to have a unified, democratic korea.

quote: Why don't you tell us what your "coherent and clear policy" would be in regards to the North? I'm all ears.

from a post in the other thread, this is my take on it:
if you're talking about my disdain for bush, it's because i want bush to come up with a very clear policy on how to deal with the north. this ignoring them bit obviously isn't working. i don't think acting belligerent to the north will help matters either. i don't think we should cave into their demands for more aid unless it's coupled with a very clear reciprocation on their part which can be independently--and rigorously--verified. i think this interdiction is a good idea. and i think bush should send an envoy for bilateral talks, with multilateral observers.

quote: He is doing the right thing by letting Kim jump up and down. People like you who want to react are helping Kim and not helping the situation. The way to grasp a nettle is firmly. Keep your eye on the ball. We have very little ability to "manipulate" the NK. The current policy is better than public reaction which exacerbates the pressure that they are already trying to put on us, to get a bribe. No point in making public remarks. It only hurts us. This is a big stick, small words time.

we'll just have to agree to disagree. i will admit i've got a bias here, that of not wanting to see the peninsula dissolve into war again and possibly losing my extended family (the ones i know of and the lost ones in the north).

quote: Frankly I'd love to see the NK regime try something.

i wouldn't, simply because of the reason i list above.

quote: And technically we are still in a state of war with North Korea. A permanent peace treaty was never signed.

yes, yes we are. which gives us a lot more freedom.
i will never understand why skorea put so many of its eggs so close to the dmz. that eliminates our freedom.

	18-07-2003 10:07									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: and i think bush should send an envoy for bilateral talks, with multilateral observers.

Bilateral talks are horrible policy for the U.S. Engaging in them would once again place all the responsiblity for controlling North Korea on America and would allow South Korea, Japan and China to continue free-riding. Bush is doing the right thing; make it clear that only multilateral negotiations will be accepted and then wait for the powers in Asia to get off their asses and take some responsibility. It's their region, so they should have to bear some of the burden for controlling the black sheep of East Asia.

	18-07-2003 10:22									#68
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

the only big issue i see with allowing the east asians to take the lead is that they're scared of going one way and finding that they're not backed by america. they don't want to be left high and dry, so their hesitance, as i see it, is somewhat understandable.

"let the big kid handle it"--they want to pass the buck.

	18-07-2003 10:24									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: "let the big kid handle it"--they want to pass the buck.

It would be stupid of America to let them "pass the buck." We can't take care of every problem in the world.

	18-07-2003 10:32									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed the only big issue i see with allowing the east asians to take the lead is that they're scared of going one way and finding that they're not backed by america. they don't want to be left high and dry, so their hesitance, as i see it, is somewhat understandable. "let the big kid handle it"--they want to pass the buck.

Is leaving them on their own, "high and dry"? They want help, they can ask for it nicely. Enough with the spoiled children biching at mommy and then expecting to get treats.

	18-07-2003 10:35									#71
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Enough with the spoiled children biching at mommy and then expecting to get treats.

Amen to that. God knows we don't want our Asian allies to turn out like our European ones.

	18-07-2003 10:35									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Q-cubed, you don't let a bully make you change your policy too quickly (or at all). That makes you a punk. You have some really crappy ideas. Like bilateral negotiations. That would only make sense if we had freedom of action (i.e. that the SK, Japs would back us in whatever we do). Really bad idea.

You can't let your unhappiness with the situation make you lose sight of the cold realities. Letting a punk make you dance helps nothing.

	18-07-2003 10:36									#73
	Put an end to popups!

quote: It would be stupid of America to let them "pass the buck." We can't take care of every problem in the world.

which is the single bright spot in all of bush's efforts in the region, to try and convince the others to come in.

	18-07-2003 10:38									#74
	Remove this text

quote: Q-cubed, you don't let a bully make you change your policy too quickly (or at all).

bush's policy towards nkorea, if you haven't noticed, has flip-flopped a few times during his tenure...
if he went with one policy and stuck it it, we'd've been a lot better off.

we'll disagree on the bilateral negotiations bit. i think it's a good idea until we can finally convince the others to join in by carrot-and-stick diplomacy.

	18-07-2003 10:43									#75
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed quote: Q-cubed, you don't let a bully make you change your policy too quickly (or at all). bush's policy towards nkorea, if you haven't noticed, has flip-flopped a few times during his tenure... if he went with one policy and stuck it it, we'd've been a lot better off. we'll disagree on the bilateral negotiations bit. i think it's a good idea until we can finally convince the others to join in by carrot-and-stick diplomacy.

Pathetic. What will it accomplish. Rediculous. Counterproductive.

	18-07-2003 10:43									#76
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: bush's policy towards nkorea, if you haven't noticed, has flip-flopped a few times during his tenure...

It's a difficult foreign policy problem that has taken several suprising turns. I'd be much more worried if Bush's foreign policy hadn't changed.

quote: we'll disagree on the bilateral negotiations bit. i think it's a good idea until we can finally convince the others to join in by carrot-and-stick diplomacy.

We would never convince the others to jump on board after we started bilateral negotiations. Why would they stick their necks out to solve the problem when the U.S. was already commited? Much easier to let the "big kid" take care of everything once again.

	18-07-2003 10:44									#77
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

it should be obvious that we have much more leverage to get the other players onboard BEFORE we start bilateral talks than after they are underway. You really are naive.

	18-07-2003 10:46									#78
	Suffering from ads?

this:

quote: bush's policy towards nkorea, if you haven't noticed, has flip-flopped a few times during his tenure...

is a direct response to this:

quote: Q-cubed, you don't let a bully make you change your policy too quickly (or at all).

(sigh) i'm tired of this. i can't convince you, and you won't convince me. let's let this thread die and let preconceptions live on.

and i realize we have more leverage before. but we're not going to stop this from getting worse unless we get in there now.

i'm not naive. from what i know, and how i believe things are laid out right there right now, it's the best solution that i've come to.

you're more than welcome to disagree. it doesn't matter anyhow, because we're not the ones who'll ultimately decide the policy.

	18-07-2003 11:08									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

If I were Bush, this is what I'd do: I would accept bilateral negotiations with North Korea. But here comes the three catches:

1. Before negotiations even begin, NK would allow full access to its nuclear facilities by the appropriate UN personnel.

2. At the same time, NK would cease any nuclear activities related to weapons — verifiable, of course, by the same UN personnel as described above.

3. With the negotiations under way, I would be quite blunt: I am willing to overlook this entire treaty-abrogating episode, NK, but only if you agree to go back to the terms of the 1994 Framework Agreement *amended* so that there's more than just two UN personnel in Pyongyang to ensure you're following the terms of that agreement to the damn letter. NK must also avail itself of the offers of help that have come from across the planet.

That's our offer from these negotiations, NK. Go back to 1994 or risk it all for the very likely chance you will no longer be in power by the middle of 2004, Mr. Kim.

So, I have no problem with "bilateral negotiations." The only thing is, it's back to the 1994 Framework Agreement or nothing. You can't expect to cave in to NK, give them *more* than what they had in 1994, and expect them to follow any new agreement for any longer than they think it might benefit them. At which point, they'd pull the same crap again — gimme, gimme, gimme, or we'll sell nukes and/or make life a living hell for the rest of the world.

Gatekeeper

	19-07-2003 05:43									#80
	Suffering from ads?

Gatekeeper, the negotiations would never happen then.

	19-07-2003 05:59									#81
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

ok Q.

	19-07-2003 06:28									#82
	Put an end to popups!

I'm inclined to wait it out some. Take an opportunity if it's offered free of charge. Quietly line up world opinion for interdiction of all NK cargo. Use the implicit threat of nuclearization of our allies to incentivize China. Exert constant low-level military pressure on NK. IOW, what Bush is doing now.

About the clarity of Bush's policy, all I have to say is that US policy is clearer than any other country's in the area.

	19-07-2003 07:16									#83
	Support Apolyton

Sometimes, I get the impression people like to just ***** abouyt us. They ***** when we don't go to war. They ***** when we do.

	20-07-2003 11:50									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Then they accuse us of being inconsistent in both circumstances.

	20-07-2003 20:49									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

They're like little children who complain when Daddy isn't perfect.

	21-07-2003 04:29									#86
	Tired of ads?

everybody is an idiot



that was easier than i thought

	21-07-2003 04:30									#87
	Inflate your Upload Space

if we all chant "everyone is an idot" together, and hold hands, it would be an exdellent bonding excersize for teh forum

	21-07-2003 10:12									#88
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

No thanks. Not everyone is an idiot. They should know better and be more self critical rather than being kneejerk Americritics.

Last edited by DanS on 21-07-2003 at 10:54

	21-07-2003 10:16									#89
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed i have much less of a problem seeing manchuria turned into glass. macarthur wanted nukes to beat off the chinese by hitting them in their home territory, expanding the war from just the peninsula. sounds callous, yes, but in my eyes it would have been worth it to have a unified, democratic korea.

Would it have been democratic? It's only become so in the last ten years.

Anyways, the use of nukes by the US on China would very likely have resulted in the use of nukes in Europe by the Soviets.

I certainly would not have wanted to see WWIII over Korea. It's just not important enough to destroy the world over.

	21-07-2003 11:25									#90
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Would it have been democratic? It's only become so in the last ten years. Anyways, the use of nukes by the US on China would very likely have resulted in the use of nukes in Europe by the Soviets. I certainly would not have wanted to see WWIII over Korea. It's just not important enough to destroy the world over.

No, it would not be worth it, IF it ends up starting another WWIII. But i believe Q was only considering the nuclear damages without causing WIII. Perhaps nuking Manchuria could be better, if it results Unified Korea without creating another WW. I believe this is what Q meant.