Posted on 05/17/2006 6:35:18 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
Bush's top advisers have recommended a broad new approach to dealing with North Korea that would include beginning negotiations on a peace treaty, NYT planning to report in Thursday Page Ones... Developing...
My impression is that they hate the North, and would sooner die than surrender. Perhaps I'm misinformed, I don't know for sure.
I'm still wondering how are they able to keep their doors open. The ads department must be keeping it afloat. They're definately Not Yet News worthy.
All the facts in the world, isn't going to sway someone who posts that kind of drivel.
"That was a cease fire.
Technically, we are still at war with them. "
I bet more Korean vets are dying of old age than were dying during the war.
//Don't underestimate the military minds behind President Bush's actions//
// The strategy behind this may be interesting.... no guesses, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt//
Bump,
W.
Technically, we are still in a UN police action with them.
Ohio,
It's really getting tiresome anymore wading through the " Bush is an idiot " posts to read someones opinion that is worth reading.
These " Bush is worse than big slimy goop" posters are not making me change any opinions I have of our, as it will be written in the history books, very GOOD PRESIDENT.
But it sure is ruining my experience, here, at one of my favorite hobbies, reading at FR.
Only one reason for this: the U.S. has found a sophisticated undersea tunnel from North Korea to Alaska.
U.S. Proposes New Disarmament Nuke Treaty
GENEVA - The United States on Thursday proposed that the 65-nation Conference on Disarmament negotiate a new treaty banning production of the nuclear material needed to make atomic bombs.
Stephen G. Rademaker, acting U.S. assistant secretary of state for arms control, told the body that developments in the nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran showed it was time for a rapid agreement on the treaty to ban production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium, known as "fissile material."
"The treaty text that we are putting forward contains the essential provisions that would comprise a successful legally binding FMCT," or Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, Rademaker said.
"It bans ... the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices," he said.
Rademaker said the proposal has widespread support and would give the conference a positive role for the first time since it completed the ban on nuclear bomb testing 10 years ago.
"The only possible avenue for progress in this conference is to concentrate its efforts on the one topic on which we most likely shall be able to take action," he said.
But Hamid Eslamizad, a senior official at Iran's mission in Geneva, stressed that his country's uranium enrichment program was entirely peaceful.
Eslamizad said that U.S. criticism of Iran's nuclear activities was reminiscent of similar, incorrect allegations by Rademaker in an early 2003 appearance before the conference when he said that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and had been collaborating with al-Qaida against the United States.
"A couple of months later it was the American troops attacking Iraq in search of weapons of mass destruction," he said. "Later on it was the U.S. troops themselves who said they could not find any weapons of mass destruction or any real linkages between the previous Iraqi regime and al-Qaida."
He suggested that Rademaker's remarks might be taken as "the omen of repetition of what the Americans did with Iraq."
In the International Atomic Energy Agency's investigation of Iran's nuclear program, he said, "I would like to recall that so far the agency has made it clear that there has not been any diversion of nuclear materials in Iran towards prohibited use."
Rademaker responded that Iran was merely repeating its usual defense that all nuclear material in the country has been accounted for by the IAEA.
"The question is, is there any undeclared nuclear material in Iran? And that's the whole issue," Rademaker told reporters.
The U.S. proposal is only 3 1/2-pages long, much shorter than what many treaties become. And it would go into force with only the approval of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.
Rademaker noted that the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of the 1960s went into effect with the approval only of Britain, the Soviet Union and the United States and that other nations — including nuclear powers France and China — joined later.
In contrast, he told reporters, the nuclear test ban treaty approved by the conference in 1996 required ratification by more than 30 countries, and it remains inactive because a number of nations, including the United States, never ratified it.
Another step to get the treaty passed faster was the U.S. decision to leave out any verification measures. Rademaker said that could take years to negotiate and that U.S. officials thought it better just to sign the treaty and rely on countries to abide by it.
What a bunch of crap. Fifty years of 35,000 soldiers sitting on a border - what a friggin waste of time and money. Bring them all home NOW. Let SK fend for themselves. KJI doesn't have the nads to attack anyone for fear he won't get to see reruns of I Love Lucy.
too bad we're not as smart as you are.
The anti-bushbots must be on a hair trigger.
Peace talks? Wow. I know the term "Neville Chamberlain" tends to get over-used, but this would be shockingly reminiscent. Kim Jong-il is a monster. His regime doesn't get the same exposure as, say, Saddam Hussein's did, because they're so frickin' isolated. But if I wanted to field of baseball team of tyrants, Kim Jong-il would be batting third with Hitler hitting cleanup.
Anyone here who supports peace talks with Kim Jong-il needs to retract every criticism ever made about Madeleine Albright.
My bet is that the White House has intelligence that N. Korea is in the process of supplying Iran with a delivery system for a nuclear payload. If that's the case, then the administration has decided it can't/won't stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons and the best bet is to delay their acquisition of a long-range delivery system that can one day reach the United States.
Brainless, empty headed post.
If you were in agreement with him, you are highly suspect.
This is a CONSERVATIVE forum, and we are going to take it back from those who are seeking to destroy it with empty headed Bush bashing, and ignorance of history.
Ignorant.
What is important is that the TRUTH is posted on every thread that they infect with their diseased posts..........like this one.
The lurkers need to see the facts on every single thread about President Bush.
We cannot let these lying Bush haters, ignorant of history and devoid of ethics, take over this forum.
It is one thing to disagree with reasoned opinions........it is quite another to come up with cynical, stupid one liners that are in complete opposition to the truth.
These mindless, ethicless Bush haters have taken all that away from the vast majority of freepers.
But I'm sure that's their entire point. They want to take the forum out of the realm of the rational, and turn it into another DU or LP -type forum, where emotions and hate rule, and reasoned debate is absent.
They're trying to drive us away.
The older generation of South Koreans, the ones who remember what communism was really all about, do hate the North. It's the younger generation that has swallowed all the lies about how wonderful it is and has responded to Kim Jong Il's use of the people in the South's desire to reunify with family members still in the North. Of course, Kim Jong really has only one thing in mind, conquering the South and using it's industrial base to lift the North out of it's abject poverty and to use it to build a giant military to spread his influence all over SE Asia.
South Korea's president is a leftist who's pretty much dancing to Kim's tune. This is the Cliff's Notes version of what's going on on the Korean peninsula - of course, the full story is much more complicated and would take someone more expert than I a long time to fully lay out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.