At 08:59 PM 10/9/2006 -0400, Ed Leafe wrote:
This is a story from 3 April, 2002:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The US Government has announced that it will release $95m to North
Korea as part of an agreement to replace the Stalinist country's own
...
In releasing the funding, President George W Bush waived the
Framework's requirement that North Korea allow inspectors to ensure
it has not hidden away any weapons-grade plutonium from the original
reactors
...
So how does not waiving verification of their potential weapons
program enhance US security?
First, why are you bringing this up at this point in time? What did you
think about the action when it took place back in 2002? Off the top of my
head, I don't remember much about the situation with N. Korea back then.
The main things I recall are Clinton's talks/agreements/diplomacy with N.
Korea turned out to be a sham. And ex-president Carter taking a trip over
there and reporting back that "...there is no crisis or danger here..." Was
this monetary funding an 'olive branch' attempt? Of course, here in 2006 we
see N. Korea's blatant disregard for international diplomacy and talks.
Hindsight is usually 20/20.
Second, IMO, I think it was dumb to give them the money. I think it's dumb
to give money to any dictatorship as a general rule. But I don't know what
other stipulations went with it. Were there restrictions on where the money
would be spent? Were there monetary monitoring restrictions in place in the
deal? Where there US inspectors/engineers/etc involved with the expenditure
of the money? And so on. In hindsight, it doesn't appear like much other
'intelligence' resources were put in place with the funds release, so it
certainly seems dumb to me.
But to answer your question directly "...waving... enhance US security",
here are a few thoughts:
- the money may have been hoped to improve relations, which would be better
for national security
- if monetary (spending) "monitoring" stipulations were part of the
agreement, it may have provided better insight into where/how N. Korea was
getting it's nuclear weapon resources, which again would have helped
national security
- if US resource presence (material, personnel) were part of the deal, then
intelligence gathering possibilities would be made available, again aiding
our national security. We all know just how good those international
inspectors are. If truth be known, if international inspections were
waived, it probably didn't hurt security at all (given past performance).
In any event, bringing up the article now seems to simply be a smear
attempt during an election season. If someone were proposing to give N.
Korea money today, or try more 'appeasement' diplomacy with N. Korea, then
I can see this article could be related. It shows that N. Korea pretty much
cannot be reasoned with. Clinton's talks failed, Bush's talks failed, all
UN talks have failed, etc. So, it appears military action may be the only
option left. Is that why you posted this message? To show that it's time to
take out N. Korea?
-Charlie
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
