Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

*MUST READ: New York Times Editorial 10/18/94 on North Korea(We Love Karter and Klinton Alert)

Posted on 10/17/2002, 11:09:19 PM by newsperson999

This should be e-mailed to all talk radio programs, please go directly to the article because it has a great photo that goes with it.

CLICK HERE


TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:09:19 PM by newsperson999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
I guess that makes Carter's Peace Prize really a joke!
2 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:14:36 PM by dhfnc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
Great reminder. Only one problem - Liberal Media has no memory for liberal failure.
3 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:14:52 PM by txzman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
Clearly this comes under the heading of the meaning of what IS really means. So if North Korea is not making nuclear weapons then the meaning of is of course most important. If is means not making weapons then it is important.

I think Clinton knew the meaning of is therefore the North Koreans used the same meaning of IS. Like " didn't have sex with that woman," means he did.
4 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:16:54 PM by BeAllYouCanBe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txzman
Critics say the U.S. is in effect bribing North Korea to comply with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Yet Washington has previously provided inducements to others, including South Korea, to refrain from bomb-making. It has gotten the North to do a lot more than the treaty requires, like dismantle its nuclear installations.

From the start, the hawks' alternative to diplomacy was full of danger. Their solution -- economic sanctions and bombing runs -- might have disarmed North Korea, but only at the risk of war. President Clinton, former President Carter and Mr. Gallucci deserve warm praise for charting a less costly and more successful course

5 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:18:00 PM by newsperson999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: newsperson999
In return, the North will put its nuclear program in a deep freeze by not refueling its nuclear reactor...

Ah, the great wisdom of the New York Slimes shines through.

7 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:30:35 PM by San Jacinto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
GREAT find.
8 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:40:38 PM by groanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
Here's the article with picture:

alt

"Ah Miss Secretary, thank you for the billions in cash and the two new nuclear reactors, I promise North Korea will never ever touch a nuclear program again... ever!"

Flashback: New York Times Editorial 10/18/94

Diplomacy with North Korea has scored a resounding triumph. Monday's draft agreement freezing and then dismantling North Korea's nuclear program should bring to an end two years of international anxiety and put to rest widespread fears that an unpredictable nation might provoke nuclear disaster.

The U.S. negotiator Robert Gallucci and his North Korean interlocutors have drawn up a detailed road map of reciprocal steps that both sides accepted despite deep mutual suspicion. In so doing they have defied impatient hawks and other skeptics who accused the Clinton Administration of gullibility and urged swifter, stronger action. The North has agreed first to freeze its nuclear program in return for U.S. diplomatic recognition and oil from Japan and other countries to meet its energy needs. Pyongyang will then begin to roll back that program as an American-led consortium replaces the North's nuclear reactors with two new ones that are much less able to be used for bomb-making. At that time, the North will also allow special inspections of its nuclear waste sites, which could help determine how much plutonium it had extracted from spent fuel in the past.

A last-minute snag, North Korea's refusal to resume its suspended talks with neighboring South Korea, was resolved to Seoul's satisfaction. If Washington and Pyongyang approve the agreement, and if the North fulfills its commitments, this negotiation could become a textbook case on how to curb the spread of nuclear arms.

Hawks, arguing that the North was simply stalling while it built more bombs, had called for economic sanctions or attacks on the North's nuclear installations. The Administration muted the war talk and pursued determined diplomacy.

Reassuring the North paid off in the end. Given the residual mistrust between the two sides, the U.S. will now sensibly provide more tangible reassurance. It is moving toward diplomatic recognition, in the form of an exchange of liaison offices, and economic cooperation, in the form of heavy fuel oil from others in the U.S.-led consortium and the start of construction of new nuclear reactors.

In return, the North will put its nuclear program in a deep freeze by not refueling its nuclear reactor, arranging temporary safe storage of the spent fuel rods removed from that reactor and sealing its reprocessing facility to prevent the extraction of plutonium from those fuel rods. Implementing the freeze and allowing it to be verified are important tests of the North's good faith.

Then, in elaborately choreographed stages detailed in a confidential note, nuclear dismantling will proceed step-by-step with reactor replacement. That gives both sides leverage against reneging. At the end of stage one, with construction of the first reactor well under way but before key nuclear components have been supplied, the North will allow special inspections of its nuclear waste sites.

In stage two, as construction proceeds on the two reactors, the North will gradually ship its 8,000 spent fuel rods abroad for reprocessing. In stage three, as the second replacement reactor nears completion, the North will dismantle all its bomb-making facilities, including its old graphite reactors and reprocessing plant.

Critics say the U.S. is in effect bribing North Korea to comply with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Yet Washington has previously provided inducements to others, including South Korea, to refrain from bomb-making. It has gotten the North to do a lot more than the treaty requires, like dismantle its nuclear installations.

From the start, the hawks' alternative to diplomacy was full of danger. Their solution -- economic sanctions and bombing runs -- might have disarmed North Korea, but only at the risk of war. President Clinton, former President Carter and Mr. Gallucci deserve warm praise for charting a less costly and more successful course.


9 posted on 10/17/2002, 11:45:56 PM by xsysmgr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
These guys do not deserve "warm praise"! Clintoon and Carter took the easy way out in dealing with China - this is after all their backyard.

Clinton had no guts, no plan and no method for coercing the Chinese into bringing North Korea to heel. In fact, Clinton was so busy taking Red Chinese money that he had no hope of ever doing ANYTHING constructive here.

Give me a break! I take it you voted for the man?
10 posted on 10/18/2002, 12:25:15 AM by txzman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Times issues a humble apology for being so f#cking wrong in 1994.

NYT editorials have been wrong since day ONE on all their mutterings about communism going back to Stalin Mao and Fidel
11 posted on 10/18/2002, 12:37:32 AM by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: txzman
No, he's quoting from the NYT article. Flame off!
12 posted on 10/18/2002, 12:37:45 AM by martin_fierro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
bump
13 posted on 10/18/2002, 12:46:18 AM by TomB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newsperson999
This is great, in a sick scary sort of way. The Hawks were right, and the liberal media was wrong yet again. They are doing much the same thing right now about Iraq.
The damage the Clinton administration did to our national security is something we will all have to live, or die with for years to come, and yet he will never be called into account for it.
14 posted on 10/18/2002, 1:11:12 AM by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chadsworth; Clovis_Skeptic; nopardons; COB1; gracie1; notpoliticallycorewrecked; JustAmy; ...
Do not miss this editorial on N.Korea from the Clinton years!
15 posted on 10/18/2002, 1:14:18 AM by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dhfnc

TONIGHT! 6pm PDT/9pm EDT Unspun With AnnaZ and Guest Hostess DIOTIMA!

ELECTIONS and OMISSIONS!

Plus, let's hear from FReepers around the country about what you're doing in YOUR local area with the midterm elections!

Call in! 1-868-RadioFR!

Click HERE for RadioFR Archives!

Click HERE for the RadioFR Chat Room!


16 posted on 10/18/2002, 1:14:52 AM by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Please do your magic list on this must read!
17 posted on 10/18/2002, 1:16:30 AM by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xsysmgr
Here's the article with picture:

File/SaveAs
Save In: 5
File Name: More NYT Propaganda

Thanks for the ammo!

18 posted on 10/18/2002, 1:32:52 AM by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
BUMP
19 posted on 10/18/2002, 2:27:18 AM by JustAmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
This is worth a large-scale boycott of all NY Times advertisers until the Times issues a humble apology for being so f#cking wrong in 1994.

Apology my ass...the times should be boycotted out business. The abominable monster albright should be facing charges of deliberatly negotiating an agreement full of loopholes for her communist friends to exploit.

20 posted on 10/18/2002, 4:45:42 AM by kimosabe31
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson