Kim: U.S. Should Talk Directly to N. Korea

[IChing]

SEOUL, Oct. 8 (UPI) -- Former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung Sunday called on the United States to talk directly to North Korea about its nuclear program.

Kim said direct talks with the isolated country not only could encourage it to dump its nuclear ambitions but also to return to the negotiation table, the Korea Times said. North Korean officials said the country is preparing for a nuclear test.

'Even former U.S. President Ronald Reagan had dialogue with the Soviet Union, which he branded as an `evil empire,`' Kim told CNN`s 'Talk Asia' Sunday. 'I can hardly understand why the U.S. does not hold talks with North Korea.'



http://news.monstersandcritics.com/roundups/article_1209512.php/News_Roundup

IN YOUR FACE BUSH
YOU FUCKED AROUND FOR 6 YEARS.

[TomInTib]

1. Bingo!

The N Koreans beat the WH to the punch.

Fucking losers.

[MidwestTransplant]

2. This Admin's NK policy is a COMPLETE AND UTTER failure

Direct talks would have avoided this. Not cutting off dialogue when Shrub and the rest of the incompetents took over would have avoided this. The UN was in monitoring their reactors and uranium. It wasn't being enriched. We had given them light water reactor techonolgy. Of course the Freepers don't understand this. It's Klinton's fault to them.

[janx]

3. "Cowboy" diplomacy again

Direct talks needn't have meant capitulation.

Edit to add: And as a result, ironically, the U.S. has been put on the defensive.

[Erika]

13. Yes, we refused to talk

The arrogant sign of W/Bolton/Rice.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

22. Sorry, I just don't see rice as a maker of policy.

unless it has to do with whether she swallows or spits.

Cheney has total control over foreign policy. Bolton and Rice AND BUSH take their orders from him.

[IChing]

6. So the former leader of the country where this effects the most

has no bearing or relevance on the course or path of diplomacy?

I think President Kim proves this wrong, he had even ask for the conferences which Rice and Bolton turned down for unitary diplomacy.

[MGD]

17. What policy of this administration isn't a complete and utter failure?

The "Axis of Evil" is kicking the shit out of the "axis of incompetents." Iran will be next.

[twaddler01]

32. .................. N/T

[stepnw1f]

27. They Don't Really Care Whose Fault it is

I think they just desire war and death, and they will say anything to justify it or to just allow it to happen.

[shadowknows69]

4. With this idiot in charge

His message to you may be on the tip of an ICBM Kim. Thanks for kicking the hornet's nest we call a president.

[habitual]

5. K&R

[DianaForRussFeingold]

7. Japanese and Chinese governments warned N.Korea against proceeding

North Korea bans Bolton from talks; calling a senior American official "human scum" for criticizing North Korea's leader, banned him from U.S.-proposed multilateral talks on its suspected development of nuclear weapons. http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030804-121425-6611r.htm Japanese and Chinese governments warned the communist country against proceeding with the test. ... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=ao1_XkSfgyoM&refer=japan


Too Bad Powell Was Fired Or Made To Resign

:scared: :grouphug: :kick:

[alittlelark]

8. W/the lunatics currently in control of the WH...

no one gives a sh*t. So other Govt's warned them - WE are the ones that made them part of the evil triad of 'The Axis of Evil'. We are the ones Kim Jong Il is measuring his dick against.

[orleans]

9. bush can't talk to north korea

he doesn't know koreneese

[Kablooie]

10. Because he's busy protecting us from islamic terrists.

America must be protected first.

(but if we're being protected, why did N.K. all of a sudden get the bomb? )

[Taoschick]

11. In this case,

Talk really means listen to NK's latest economic demands. For crying out loud, they've lied to the entire world while they did exactly what they wanted. Is that suddenly going to change? Is NK suddenly going to obey the international community after decades of flipping it off? We're not going to cut off all aid and allow them to starve their people because then the UN would get the blame. NK will do whatever the hell it wants and there really isn't anything we can do about it.

[Erika]

12. Bolton/Rice/W failed us miserably

Too occupied with Iraq who was never a danger to us.

Clinton kept them in check.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mojorabbit]

16. I think he did it

just to rub *'s face in it. His way of saving face.
This article is very interesting from the N Korea standpoint
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/HJ06Dg01.html

[pampango]

21. There is nothing the West can do about it, but Kim had better watch China

very carefully. They have been his best (only?) supporter. They provide NK with the oil, food, and diplomatic protection that keeps his regime in business.

He cannot survive long without China. They have evidently preferred him to a unified and prosperous Korea, but that preference may not last forever. Today China condemned the nuclear test and suspended one shipment of food aid. Could just be posturing, as all countries do, but Kim had better worry that it does not go beyond posturing in the long run.

[MGKrebs]

24. Even if that's true, and it might be, what are you saying?

Wouldn't it still be better to pretend to listen to their demands rather than provoke them constantly?

If there were ANY chance of delaying or attenuating their aggressiveness, isn't it more likely going to come from at least being occassionally in the same room with them?

Bush is the one who said we won't tolerate this. Now he is in a position to try to back down gracefully- which I think we have yet to see him do- or ratchet things up a notch- which he's good at.

All your comments apply to both parties by the way (except maybe the starving part).

[Taoschick]

28. Perhaps

It would be better if we just backed off and stopped rattling our own sabers. The idea that we can place demands on NK is just as insane as the idea that they can place demands on us. It appears that NK has mightily pissed off China, who they need for aid and support. Let Moscow and Beijing lean on them before we start threatening even more sanctions.

[pampango]

14. Kim thought: "I know what I want and I am going to get it."

Look, Kim is not Hitler, but he knows what he wants (a nuclear toy) and he will play the negotiation card as often as he can to keep people off balance. If someone wants to negotiate, that's fine with him. Just don't expect "peace in our time." If they don't, that's fine, too.

What could we give him in negotiations? South Korea? A few billion dollars? It would have to be something that benefits him and not the people of North Korea, since he doesn't give a s*** about them. Kim contends that a nuclear bomb is defensive in nature. That will teach South Korea to trash their democracy and economy to build up to invade the North. It will also keep the US at bay, since we all know that it covets the North's barren hills and starving people.

What can be done about North Korea and their nuclear bomb? Nothing, unless China wants something done, nothing will happen. It seems to still be more concerned by a united, prosperous Korea than by a starving dictatorship with a few nuclear weapons that are aimed somewhere other than China.

[MGKrebs]

29. I don't understand this "nothing can be done" idea.

The thing that MIGHT be able to be done is to not provoke them into blowing something up, or not provoke them into provoking us into blowing something up.

This question is about engagement vs. isolation. And I'll tell you what we can offer them: The continued chance to participate in the community of nations for one thing. Do we even know what the crazy bastard might want? Why don't we just ask? Maybe all he wants is a trip to Graceland and an Elvis belt buckle.

[MGD]

18. So much for the "strong on national security" argument.

I know I sure feel safer now. :sarcasm:

[bdamomma]

19. I think it's a good idea, let all the dictators talk to each other

Bush, Ahmadinejad, and Kim Yong Il, they have alot in common.

[LynnTheDem]

20. Other than illegal "supreme crime" wars of aggression;

bush has them beat all to hell on that.

Then there's per capita number of own citizens jailed; that would be America. We're #1! We're #1!

But we're not #1 for safest nation from terrorist attacks; that would be...North Korea.

[IChing]

23. China and Russia urged talks but Bolton said no...from friday

Both China and Russia have urged the United States and North Korea to hold talks, which Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said Friday “could be useful in resolving the situation.” But he said U.S. Ambassador John Bolton informed the council that there would be no North Korean-U.S. talks except in the margins of resumed six-party talks.

Bolton said the Security Council needs to adopt a long-term strategy to deal with North Korea but the top U.S. priority now is to stop a nuclear test.

“We take the threat by North Korea seriously. We don’t think this is an attention-getting device of people waving their arm to say ‘see me, see me.’ We think this would be consistent with the unfortunate logic that North Korea has been following,” he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15152981/

[IChing]

25. Bush: “Why should I care about North Korea?”

“Why should I care about North Korea?”
In State of Denial, Bob Woodward recounts a conversation between then-Gov. George W. Bush and then-Saudi ambassador to the U.S. Prince Bandar, in which Bush wonders why he should care about North Korea. “I get these briefings on all parts of the world,” Bush said, “and everybody is talking to me about North Korea.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/09/why-should-i-care-about-north-korea

[stepnw1f]

26. GOP and BUSH Allowed N. KOrea to Make Nukes

They are responsible for this shit.

[Judi Lynn]

30. Bush people can't look anyone whom they intend to destroy, if possible,

long enough to talk to them.

Guilty consciences.

They aren't "coming from" a dignified, statesman-like position. They are speaking from a ridge-runner, shoot-em-in-the-back, dirty liar's perspective.

[MGKrebs]

31. Given the timing, perhaps we are.

Not much could knock Foley off the front page.

Or, is Kim shrewd (or naive?) enough to think that Bush would recognize that he (Kim) has done him a favor and offer something in return?