Skip to comments.(Angry wacko candidate phones the NY Times) Kerry Says Bush Has Ignored North Korean Threat
Posted on 09/14/2004 1:26:14 AM PDT by dennisw
Senator John Kerry on Sunday accused the Bush administration of letting "a nuclear nightmare" develop by refusing to deal with North Korea when it first came to office.
In an interview, he argued that President Bush's preoccupation with Iraq let the North Korean crisis fester to the point that there were now indications that the country might be preparing to test a plutonium bomb. He presented his charges in a 15-minute telephone call he made to The New York Times.
"They have taken their eye off the real ball," Mr. Kerry said, his voice almost shaking in anger. "They took it off in Afghanistan and shifted it to Iraq. They took it off in North Korea and shifted it to Iraq. They took it off in Russia, and the nuclear materials there, and shifted it to Iraq."
Mr. Kerry's basic argument, that the Iraq war has diverted attention from more dangerous nations like North Korea, is one he has often used on the campaign trail and in interviews over the past several months. But his language on Sunday, calling the situation "a nuclear nightmare" and directly accusing Mr. Bush of leaving the United States more vulnerable to North Korea, was far harsher and more incendiary than the language he has used before.
It is also highly unusual for Mr. Kerry to seek out a reporter on a Sunday, when he had no public appearances scheduled, to attack Mr. Bush. This comes as Mr. Kerry and his aides, during this final 50 days of the campaign, have promised to draw more consistent and sharper contrasts to Mr. Bush in response to criticism from supporters that their message has been too weak.
Kerry should have saved it for Madeline Albright and Billy Jeff. It was their kowtowing to North Korea's Kim Jong-il that made them the nuclear power they are. But somehow that's Bush's fault in Kerry's feeble little Agent Orange-soaked brain.
And to throw a temper tantrum like two year old. What a pompous self aggrandizing twerp. This pursuer (gigolo) of loaded heiresses has shown zero leadership for decades. WTF has he done in 20 years in the US Senate? Yet he snipes at President Bush and puts himself forth as someone who can lead America and do better. What a joke.
Our President is running a campaign and running our country.
sKerry is running a so-called campaign and getting paid for not showing up at his job as a senator.
What's his point?!!!
Nothing is worse than throwing a temper tantrum when NO ONE CARES!
Bush has a strategy and I'll let you in on it SHHHH!
Satellite photos are being prepared showing Chechyn Islamic training camps in North Korea. The evidence will be clinched by proportionally spaced typed documents prepared in 1972 which describe the relationship between Al Queda and Kim.
They're only waiting for Dan Rather to have some spare time to air the scoop! :)
You know, whenever I read something quoting Kerry I have to check the link to make sure it didn't come from some parody website like "THE ONION." He is his own worst enemy.
"When Mr. Kerry was pressed about how he would handle the threat of a North Korean nuclear test if he was in the Oval Office, he declined to be prescriptive, other than to say that the issue would probably have to be taken to the United Nations Security Council. "Hypothetical questions are not real," he said..."
Two good examples of obfuscation, one in Timespeak, one in Kerry Spinspeak.
Hey John, we might say Hypothetical Presidents are not real, and considering our current situation, we decline to prescribe you for elevation to reality.
Sounds like he's taking lessons from Al Gore.
Kerry's looking more like Al Gore every day.
I wonder if he offered them any forged memos.
November 3, 2000
For U.S. leaders, North Korea had long been a forbidden land. No high-ranking U.S. official had ever set foot there. Last week Secretary of State Madeleine Albright paid a historic two-day visit to the country. She met with its leader, Kim Jong Il, and attended a huge rally.
"Mr. Kerry and his aides, during this final 50 days of the campaign, have promised to draw more consistent and sharper contrasts to Mr. Bush..."That ought to be easy. The contrasts are already consistently and sharply drawn:
It's between the steady, thoughtful, wise and expert leadership of a great President and the angry, paranoid ravings of a left-wing lunatic-fringe loose cannon.
Remember: 9/11 was never repeated--thanks to President Bush.
"...in response to criticism from supporters that their message has been too weak."It's not just the message. The candidate is weak.
In fact, the entire Democrat Party--considering its fundamental immorality, its confused vision of the world, its inability to protect the U.S. and liberty, its commitment to Marxism, etc., et al.--its utter decadence--is weak. If this were not so, they wouldn't have nominated a man like Kerry in the first place.
The more the voters hear of their message, the higher President Bush rises in the polls.
same here ... we just can't make up this stuff!
In October of 2000, you go to Pyongyang. We know that you're there to try to get them to put away their missile program, to stop making their long-range missiles. What is Kim Jong Il up to, in your opinion?
Well, I think at that stage he wanted very much to have a relationship with the United States. The purpose, I think, generally, of his policy was to get some recognition from the United States that North Korea existed, that we should have diplomatic relations. So he was really quite open, in discussions that we had, in terms of limiting his missile program, and it was very evident that what he wanted to do was to be involved in a negotiation, which would lead to a meeting with President Clinton that would result in a better relationship.
If he's willing to give away his missile program, why does he embark on that in the first place?
Well, I think that the whole issue probably goes back to the end of the Cold War, where he had lived under the patronage and with the support of the Soviet Union and China. Then all of a sudden the Soviet Union, his major patron, disintegrates, and the question is what is the status of North Korea, in itself, in the world, which explains, I think, a lot of what happened from '93, '94 on.
We talked to Stalin, we talked to Mao, we talked to Khrushchev, and Brezhnev. We made agreements. I don't consider talking appeasement.
What I think he wanted to do was to establish himself as a leader on the world stage, and the only way he could do it was by developing various aspects of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, and to have some kind of missile projection, because that's their only cash crop.
It is an economy that doesn't work, but they do manage somehow to figure out how to build various high-tech missile components.
And sell them to people like the Yemenis or the Syrians or--
There are a lot of people out there who want various weapons, and this is what they sell. That's why the situation is so dangerous.
Is he delusional?
I don't think he's delusional. I've thought a lot about this, and I obviously prepared a lot before I went there. I talked with Kim Dae Jung, president of South Korea, who had been there and met with him.
For the most part, we had very peculiar information about Kim Jong Il that he was a recluse. I think delusional actually was a word that was used. But Kim Dae Jung had reported that it was possible to have perfectly decent, rational conversations with him.
For me, the situation was that here is a person who is isolated, but not uninformed, who has operated in his own system where he is deified and, at the same time, wants to be in the outside world where nobody will pay any attention to him.
So I can't imagine what it is like to be raised in a society where their only statues that exist are to you and your father.
He wanted to show you how he was deified after that first day of negotiations.
Well, he was trying, I think, to do many things; one, to show that, but to be a good host, and also to show that it was a country that was filled with joy and color.
Just describe [your trip] for me, if you could.
Well, what happened was that he was the host, and so it was a little hard always to say, "I'm not going to do whatever you're suggesting."
So, at the end of about three or four hours of official meetings, he said, "I want to take you tonight to a huge celebration," and when we got there, we walked in, and we were in a stadium, where there was something like 200- to 250,000 people in the bleachers who applauded wildly at his entrance. It was evident that what we were going to was the recreation of the 50th anniversary celebration of the Workers Party.
Even though there had not been anybody in the streets -- there were very few people on the streets -- all of a sudden all of these people materialized.
And then the performance itself was kind of two-tiered. You know how they do those flash cards at our big football games where students can deliver various messages? Well, this was done in the most precise way, where they showed tableaus of farmers with Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il and various agricultural projects, and various scenes of countrysides.
And then there was one, and they were so good at it that they could make a rocket go up by moving the cards. At that point he turned to me, and it was a Taepodong missile. ...
It's very, very odd for you to be sitting there. You're there to negotiate a missile deal, and you're taken to a stadium and shown a depiction of a missile going up. What was going through your head?
Well, we were in the middle of our talks, and so the next day, when we returned to our talks, I had, with my delegation, worked out a series of questions that we needed to have answered about what the propositions would be to work out some kind of an agreement to limit the production of missiles and their export. ...
But what was interesting was that, as I said to him, "I have a series of questions for you, maybe you'd like to ask your experts and get me the answers," and he said, "No, just give me the piece of paper."
And what he did was systematically start answering the questions, without advising or asking advice from his advisers sitting next to him. So I think that he is informed on the subject, technically, and very much wanted to show that he was in charge.
And so, to go back to an initial question of yours, he's not delusional, and he's not someone who only is interested in watching bad movies, but someone who really is very much involved in the best product that he thinks his country has.
I would imagine this is one of the stranger visits you've experienced to another country as a negotiator, as a Cabinet member.
Yes. I mean, I had spent my life as an academic studying communist systems and had been to many communist countries and, actually, in various periods, as a private citizen, met with communist officials. So it isn't as if I'd never seen a communist country.
But this was the most totalitarian city I had ever seen, because certain marks of it, in terms of huge buildings, very wide boulevards, all designed to make the individual feel like an ant, and then basically all of these statues or monuments to the Great Leader and the Dear Leader, of the father and son, and then the fact that it was pretty much an empty city.
I've been in many motorcades, and usually people wave or are surprised to see such a long line of cars. Nobody paid any attention to us, as if they had motorcades all the time.
Obviously, we saw only what they wanted us to see, but it's evident that there were apartment buildings that had no electricity in them beyond the lower-level floors, and pretty dingy in that regard. But his own guest houses and the things that we were taken to were very ornate.
Did you feel uncomfortable at that celebration of the Workers Party, sitting next to Kim, being photographed?
... Of course it was uncomfortable. I didn't have the sense that people were looking at me. He was the center of attraction, and to have everybody robotically applauding him, it was like being in some very strange movie myself.
But I have to say I was fascinated because here this country is dead poor, and somehow he managed to make all of these people come and perform. He said that people loved it, you know, that all the students had volunteered to be a part of this. This was a big part of their lives. They just thought it was, you know, a great pleasure to perform like this. But it was pretty strange.
Did you ever raise with him the anomalies that pervade his country, the fact that so much of the resources go to the military, and yet people are starving?
No. What we did talk about, at one of the two dinners, actually, was we started talking about the farming situation, and he said that there clearly were serious problems and that it was due primarily to bad weather conditions. So we talked about whether people had enough to eat, and he said, well, the weather, there had been a drought and various things. ...
The hawks, people like Richard Perle, will say you cannot negotiate. You shouldn't talk to people like Kim Jong Il. You can't negotiate with them, that essentially it's appeasement.
I completely disagree, because I believe that it is essential to see whether there's a way to have some agreements. We talked to Stalin, we talked to Mao, we talked to Khrushchev, and Brezhnev. We made agreements.
I don't consider talking appeasement. It depends on what it is you agree to, but I think it is very much worth having conversations and delivering a very tough message. And when you actually go and you say, "You have to get rid of your missiles," or, as was done in terms of freezing the fuel rods at Yongbyon, I think it's worth the conversation.
J effing Carter solved this many years ago. Got a piss prize too. Even algorejr knows that. Good bye John>>>>
"No, I don't have Prince Albert in a can...Dammit John, will you get a life already?!?"
It is highly unusual for Mr. Kerry to "speak" to a reporter.
He hasn't even spoke to his own press core in about a month!
Let's hope not.
Albert Gore, Jr. got FIFTY MILLION VOTES for President in 2000.
We do NOT want that to happen again.
John F*ckin' NEVER mentioned how he would handle the North Korean situation different from Bush. Just kept mumbling about "hypotheeticals." Yeah right and this is the guy people tell us is well-informed and articulate. So much so he's stumped about what to do in response to the nuclear-armed Koree-Coms.
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.