I find the last paragraph interesting.


"Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov made a fresh plea that North Korea allow international nuclear inspectors back into its territory as part of diplomatic efforts to solve the Korean nuclear crisis.

The suggestion was made Friday when Ivanov called on Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi on the first day of his three-day visit here, the Japanese foreign ministry said.

Ivanov and Koizumi agreed that the Korean nuclear stand-off should be solved only by "diplomatic and political means," ministry officials said, amid international worries that North Korea could become the focus of armed conflict after Iraq.

"The situation in North Korea is causing security concerns to the United States, Japan, South Korean and Russia," Ivanov was quoted as telling Koizumi in the 35-minute meeting at the prime minister's official residence."

Paragraph two. North Korea and Common sense?

MOSCOW, April 11 (Reuters) - A top Russian official said on Friday Moscow would review its long-standing policy of opposing international sanctions against North Korea if Pyongyang developed nuclear weapons.

"We will oppose this approach as long as our North Korean colleagues maintain common sense," Interfax news agency quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov as saying.

"But Russia will have to seriously consider its position as the appearance in North Korea of nuclear weapons and the possibility of its using them close to our borders goes categorically against the national interests of Russia."

From: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L11476786.htm

Colin,
let me translate this back into Russian from English and than into English back again..

Russian say:
Yankees,
we are with you about NK, do what you have to.

North Korea going nuclear and doing all the foolish things it has is a threat to the region more then it is to the United States.

If N. Korea goes nuclear it is going to force S. Korea and Japan to go nuclear. The region is TERRIFIED of the Japanese. They conquered and enslaved Korea quickly with 50,000 soldiers, and had most of China as well.....

No one in the region wants Japan to rearm.

Not only this, but if N. Korea continues on its path unchecked, the US might have to do something about it, and I am not sure the Chinese and the Russians are ready for a larger military presence in the region.

Hopefully, we can work this out multilaterally. If not, Bush has proven he will when he has to act unilaterally. ( which of course is now making other nations work with us multilaterally - love how that works out!)

NK is coming around. Maybe we've now reached the point where they start sending us "mixed signals" instead of just threatening ones.

"If the U.S. is ready to make a bold switchover in its Korea policy for a settlement of the nuclear issue, the DPRK will not stick to any particular dialogue format" - North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman

Did you realize if the NK crisis is solved diplomatically there is only one country left in the axis of evil?

From VOA:

"The State Department has expressed interest in a North Korean statement suggesting it may be open to multilateral talks on its suspected nuclear weapons program.

A State Department spokesman Saturday said officials plan to follow up on Pyongyang's statement through diplomatic channels.

Earlier Saturday, a North Korean spokesman told the country's official news agency that the country would consider any form of dialogue with the United States to resolve the dispute. But the spokesman stressed the United States must make a "bold switch-over" in what he called a "hostile" policy toward North Korea regarding its nuclear weapons program.

The comment suggests North Korea could back away from its demand for one-on-one talks with the United States, and accept multilateral negotiations. Washington has insisted that potential talks include South Korea, China, Russia and Japan.

Since the dispute over North Korea's nuclear ambitions flared up in October, Pyongyang has repeatedly warned the United States against invasion.

Washington has insisted the stand-off over North Korea's alleged nuclear weapons program can be solved peacefully.

North Korea has said it restarted its main nuclear reactor to produce needed electricity."

I don't really think the idea that a peaceful solution to this dispute will do much to slow down Japanese interest/intent to rearm.

There are some interesting and extremely important talks underway between the U.S. and South Korea right now intended to renegotiate the mutual defense agreement between the two countries. About the only thing that's going to be easy to agree on is the closing of the base in downtown Seoul. The hard questions on the table include American interest in repositioning the bulk of our troops further south and away from the DMZ - which some Koreans see as a way of giving us a freer hand in dealings with Pyongyang (at the risk of Korean lives). South Korea also is urging a restructure of the entire command system, which would give the U.S. overal command in the event of war.

But can a Japanese rearmament help lead to a peaceful solution ???

Currently Japan has the 3rd largest military budget in the world. On par with UK and France and almost as much as the second largest which is Russia.

The latest action in Iraq sent them a very powerful message.

i think the North Korean thing has been blown out of proportion tremendously.

first)
they are starving to death

second)
the recent "we are going to kill all you imperialist fuckers in a great fire storm from hell" rhetoric is nothing new. its not any less freaky. but its consistent with their behavior since getting spanked 50 years ago.

third)
they are starving to death.

fourth)
the government is popular much in the same way Saddam Hussein was popular in Iraq. Its all fun and games until that little spark sends the people running into the street and spitting on the leader, toppling statues and burning government offices of the regime that is starving them to death.

i think that is the bigger lesson they got from Iraq. that the regime can go from hero to zero at any moment.

what impact do you think the people riding down the street on Saddam Husseins head had on a Stalinist, autocratic dictatorship whos people are suffering far worse that Iraqs ever did?

fifth) they are starving to death.

- meaning that this is a regime that is more concerned with survival most likely than anything else. going nuclear would have been the last great bargaining chip in the international food line of global politics.

their attempt at nuclear blackmail failed.

they just got a good taste of two things

1) they witnessed that a military that can vaporize them in days. (AK-47's were notably unsuccessful against Tomohawks). 1,000,000 soldiers with AK-47's against B-2's, laser and sattelite guided missiles aren't going to do much except cost us more money as we bomb 1,000,000 soldiers.

that does not include Japan, South Korea which would certainly throw everything they have at them as well.

2) just because a population fanatically supports you in million man demonstrations, does not necessarily mean its out of adoration.... and that fear used to control them, can VERY EASILY turn to rage. That rage was just proven to be easily focused inward, just as they have managed to direct it outward today.

I think North Korea is weak. They have no support. They are like some troublemaking, bastard stepchild that no one wants.

All their neighbors are against what they are doing, their attitude and their rhetoric. The world community is against them. if there was ever a time in history to put overwhelming pressure on them to modify their behavior, and possibly force the collapse the worlds last Stalinist regime, this is it.

I would bet everything i have right now that Bush and Co. are going to put a major stranglehold on them in the near future. If Bush gets a second term... i am very confident that Iran and North Korea will be very changed places by the end of his term as President.

my prediction is that the pressure on them will increase in the future... not decrease through "diplomacy"

JR as I read your last post, I realize you should be a columnist! This was a very good peice.... no shit!!

I always enjoying reading your editorials....

:okthumb:

Thanks Mike.

i know i am generally a little more conservative that anything in my political beliefs, though i try not to be. i think that being biased to either side is a fault. but i cant help it. i often feel its just a struggle between logic and emotion... and logic for me is an easier argument.

This last year has changed my in some big way when it comes to global politics. I really began to believe the UN Security Council is a failure, while the UN itself remains the single greatest humanitarian organization in the world... since 1945, there has been about 300 or so armed conflicts in the world. Who knows how many millions of deaths? 10 million? 20 million? 50? How it that for an odd turn of events? it was formed to stop all wars... it became the single greatest enabler of wars. It became an enabler of dictators. it became an enabler of murderous regimes, of fundamentalists, of terrorists or of arms proliferators... with each new backwards regime they cause to exist... cames a new set of policies aimed to appease them. The UN has made terrorism both profitable and successful.

I always think about this: if you pull a gun on a cop, you get shot. no questions asked. Few will argue that you did not deserve it. if you drive in the direction of a police officer standing in front of the car... they can dump 100 rounds into you. if you threaten someones life, you can go to prison. If i push you, its assault. if i hit a child, i go to prison. Did you know that you cannot "taunt" Stellar Sea Lions in Alaska? its a federal crime.....

However, If i am a dictator, using chemical and biological weapons to kill hundreds of thousans, the world doesn't care. Genocide? not an issue! If i kill millions, its just a number. If you as a nation oppose me, other nations will rise up and protest your objections, your imperialist ambitions to control me and your meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. When i threaten you, the world will tell you its your fault for not appeasing me... it will be your fault for aggitating me... for making me feel threatened... for not going the extra mile to talk to me.

It will the job of the UN Security Council to stop me... but they cant. They cant, yet they will demand you to put your faith in them. They won't stop me... and why?... because for most members, it is not in their political or economic interest to do so. And what about the people? what about the threat? what about the suffering? what about people dying?

if its not in most of the 15 member states interest to care... tough luck.

I dont think unilateralism is a good solution to global issues. I understand now why the world hates to the USA for its double standards. I also now understand the necessity of those double standards and the need to walk the fine line of trying to bend the rules as far as possible in your favor while claiming your not. Its a reality of global politics. Its what everyone is doing... and doing so, while claiming the other side is being unfair in doing so.

I dont really like Bush. I think he is a very poor speaker and a very poor leader. The world seems to think so too. I think he is needlessly abrasive and even arrogant and condescending when he speaks. I think people are more than right to criticize his administration for the way they went about this war... and their "wandering justifications" as PD put it. They set themselves up now... instead of an issue of "verification" they made it an issue of "dissarmorment" which means that to justify it, they need to find something. But i also think that maybe i am being naive. Something really great happened in that region, for the world and for the people of that country.

Maybe he did and said the exact right things to get the job done. maybe people hate that about him most of all.

It's interesting, isn't it? We humans have created rules of conduct that are acceptable per institution. "You can kill with JDAMs but not with mustard gas". "You can bomb their cities but only if you have good enough aim to miss civilian areas most of the time".

Certain reasons are justifiable for invasion. Others are not.

The rules. Very liquid and often used to enforce the existing pecking order of nations.

According to the UN, the organization has negotiated 172 successful peace settlements since it's 1945 inception.

i think that is a perversion of reality.

"settlements" usually come AFTER both sides slaughtered each other, invaded each other and have either achieved their military or political objectives or face a continued fight they realize they cannot win.


how many people have died in armed conflicts that were not averted since 1945?

All of them.

I'm agnostic regarding necessity of the UN Security Council issue.

Surely the UN stats are "a perversion of reality". Marketing.

Here's a question.

If the UN Security Council is "irrelavant", why do the nations that are participating in it continue to do so? What Darwiniam mechanism allows it to survive? What value do the Security Council members see in it?

I don't hold the "irrelavant" view myself in light of the fact that I don't enough about UN History [yet]. As I said above, I'm pretty agnostic on the whole UN security council issue. I think reading the resolutions and observing the results would be a good start. Perhaps it has been true that the UN Security doesn't stop any wars [no idea if that is actually true] but has had some success with curbing weapons proliferation. That would be worth having.

Quite obviously, it can't stop a permanent member from going to war because of the veto [and it has been used for such] but are there any conflicts which were avoided as a result of Security Council actions? How do we know when conflicts would have arisen with certainty?

The Security Council voted to send troops to Korea and Kuwait. Those were sanctioned uses of force with the intention of reversing other invasions. Not the only way "success" may or may not be measured though.

Excellent timing for a book on the subject.

Yeah, JR's a really good writer. His writing always makes me want to read more. :)

Alex thinks i am a dick.

Its ok though, my dad thinks i am a dick too. i haven't spoken to him in 12 years and i still talk to Alex. I realized that today. Once i finish pondering that one, it will probably put me in analysis for most of the next decade.

Hell, I think you're a dick and I'm your partner. They're getting off lucky. I have to talk to you 12 times a day!

What N. Korea has not mentioned...
We recently stationed 24 nuclear-armed B-2's within easy range of Pyongyang.

What most people seem not to know...
A fission bomb (that's like the ones used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki) can do a bit of damage; BUT a 100 megaton fusion bomb detonated at the proper height could totally eliminate Pyongyang and probably a lot of the surrounding countryside.

Nuclear armed?

Torone, they did mention is many many times. they characterized it as an action that signaled the "first strike" intent of the US.

Why would North Korea not mention it? Why do you think Rush Limbaugh told you to say that?

North Korea has said it restarted its main nuclear reactor to produce needed electricity."

Now that's funny. What they going to do with all that electricity. The country is not even wired with power lines.

Do you get your information the same place as Torone gets his?

Jr,
I didn't hear it from him. Beyond that, life is too short to screw with you...

TRANSLATION: Yes, I heard it on Rush Limbaugh.

" For every asshole with the thread, there is a dick with a screw " - Serge.

hahaha... i think lifes too short for you to spend your time worrying about "converting" everyone in an attempt to "make you guys see the truth" as you once put it.

lets make a deal... you try to resist making bizarre, innacurate and false statements, accusations and mischaracterizations to make a political point by blindly reciting a.m. talk radio hosts and i will try not to make fun of you for it. that seems like a fair deal.

Jr,
Anytime I make a statement that is not backed up by fact, I say that it is my opinion.

Along that line, it is my opinion that you are actually about as smart as my left front-runner...(where's that damned 'finger' smilie?)



Last edited by Torone at Apr 16 2003, 07:00 AM

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States and North Korea will meet face to face for the first time in over six months, holding multilateral talks in Beijing next week, according to an administration official."

The beat goes on ...

NK official statement:
Friday April 18, 2003

The DPRK-US talks for the settlement of the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula is slated to open in Beijing shortly. At the talks the Chinese side will play a relevant role as the host state and the essential issues related to the settlement of the nuclear issue will be discussed between the DPRK and the US.

There is a wide range of international opinion on the Beijing talks as they are to open at a time when the Iraqi war was fought.

The Iraqi war teaches a lesson that in order to prevent a war and defend the security of a country and the sovereignty of a nation it is necessary to have a powerful physical deterrent force only.

As we have already declared, we are successfully reprocessing more than 8,000 spent fuel rods at the final phase, as we sent interim information to the US and other countries concerned early in March after resuming our nuclear activities from December last year.

We have already clarified our stand that if the US has a willingness to make a bold switchover in its Korea policy, we will not stick to any particular dialogue format, and we would like to confirm the US intention in the forthcoming talks.

haha. i just noticed that.

its not as if everyone runs around saying "he's as smart as a truck driver" either.

(TORONE - DON'T LOOK!!!! BIASED LIBERAL MEDIA PROPAGANDA - TAKE IMMEDIATE DEFENSIVE MEASURES!!!!)

Today's NY Times .... North Korea Says It Is Extracting Plutonium From Fuel Rods
By DON KIRK


One thing you can count on ... these guys are consistent.

so was Hussein....
;-)))

haha. i just noticed that.

its not as if everyone runs around saying "he's as smart as a truck driver" either.[/b][/quote]
This trucker ain't your average trucker. BTW, what will you be doing for a living when you're my age? Trucking is at least as complicated as webmastering; PLUS your life is on the line...ever haul hazmat? (where's that 'finger' smilie?)

i believe that just in the same way that would believe someone who said "this house painter aint your average painter"

in case you are not aware, Smokey and the Bandit was JUST a movie. Goofy guys in Cowboy hats, red shirts and a black Trans AM, don't really speed around the country followed by two dipshit cops while jumping rivers and running through road blocks in an effort to divert attention from a speeding 18 wheeler.

assuming i live to be your age and i am not abducted by the black helicopters, i would be doing very little. i could retire right now if i wanted.

*yawn* - hate to break it to you, but i do in fact have a CDL.
been there. done that.

why would anyone be impressed at hauling hazardous materials? Do you have to change gears differently or something?

everyones life is on the line on the highway. You can't brag about "risking" your life without admitting you are a direct threat to the safety of others.