wiffleball 4,659 Posted February 12, 2007 BEIJING, China (CNN) -- North Korea has tentatively agreed to close down its nuclear weapons program in exchange for energy aid, U.S. and Chinese officials said Tuesday. But the proposed deal was being reviewed by officials in the negotiators' capitals before becoming final. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the lead American official at the talks, said the United States will give an unspecified amount of energy assistance to North Korea in exchange for North Korea freezing its production of plutonium. full article @ cnn.com I'm pretty sure the Right Wingers were and when it was suggsted that the whole "I'm not gonna talk to you policy" was maybe not the best policy. I'm pretty sure I remember hearing & seeing a lot of commentary and posting about how Clinton's policy of "bribing" NoKo was 'appeasement' and how NoKo will never live up to any deals we make with them - and what a gullible fool he & Richardson were for thinking otherwise. So, this differs HOW? TIA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nobody 2,077 Posted February 13, 2007 So you're confused because you think you might remember some people who might have been right wing conservatives maybe talking about something similar to this. You're better than this, man. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,348 Posted February 13, 2007 So, this differs HOW? TIA. Because it just does Personally, I can care less who gets the little focker from developing nukes, as long as it happens. I'll bet Jimmy Carter had a hand in this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,289 Posted February 13, 2007 full article @ cnn.com I'm pretty sure the Right Wingers were and when it was suggsted that the whole "I'm not gonna talk to you policy" was maybe not the best policy. I'm pretty sure I remember hearing & seeing a lot of commentary and posting about how Clinton's policy of "bribing" NoKo was 'appeasement' and how NoKo will never live up to any deals we make with them - and what a gullible fool he & Richardson were for thinking otherwise. So, this differs HOW? TIA. From cnn.com, it looks like we've taken away his cigars, rolexes, diamonds, etc... did Clinton do this? Huh? HUH?!@# Without knowing the details it is kinda hard to compare the two scenarios. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boz/BoFan 0 Posted February 13, 2007 I wont be happy until that fockin midget gives 100% oversight of his nuclear facilities to either UN or US officials. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,289 Posted February 13, 2007 I wont be happy until that fockin midget gives 100% oversight of his nuclear facilities to either UN or US officials. Agreed. The UN did such a kickass job with Iraq. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,348 Posted February 13, 2007 Agreed. The UN did such a kickass job with Iraq. UN = Undeniably Nearsighted Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boz/BoFan 0 Posted February 13, 2007 Agreed. The UN did such a kickass job with Iraq. They cant go 0-2 back to back ehh? Regardless, the UN has alway just been a shoehorn for US, we'll keep em honest now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Let Da Big Dog Eat 38 Posted February 13, 2007 To take my tax $'s and pay anyone not to develope WMD's is wrong, no matter who it is. Nuke 'em all. We are the only ones who deserve WMD's. It's our right GADDAMMIT! Seriously, I am so sick of us giving $ to those who hate us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badmojo1006 0 Posted February 13, 2007 And why are we talking with North Korea but just had to invade Iraq because of the "Possibility" of WMD's? I do not believe a word coming from this administration Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,573 Posted February 13, 2007 It'll be nice to put this behind us and just monitor compliance. Something new to be eternally vigilant about, but what can you do? I've never criticized the Bush plans in NK since I didn't hear any other tactic to negotiate with them that didn't have other bad options. Hopefully the situation simmers down. We still have an unknown ammount of nuclear weapons that were manufactured, hopefully they don't wind up in the hands of buyers with cold cash. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
What is the deal? 1 Posted February 13, 2007 And why are we talking with North Korea but just had to invade Iraq because of the "Possibility" of WMD's? I do not believe a word coming from this administration maybe because NK hasn't violated any UN resolutions Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badmojo1006 0 Posted February 13, 2007 maybe because NK hasn't violated any UN resolutions Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SUXBNME 1,348 Posted February 13, 2007 There is so much that I want to say / type on the issue of WMD's in Iraq I can't though. There are to many people here that I really like chatting with. I don't want to ruin what few online friendships I have here with my opinions on what I feel is really going on in the world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,573 Posted February 13, 2007 maybe because NK hasn't violated any UN resolutions words escape me... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
What is the deal? 1 Posted February 13, 2007 words escape me... well, we could start with- are you referring to 825, 1540, 1695, or 1718? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GettnHuge 1 Posted February 13, 2007 maybe because NK hasn't violated any UN resolutions because 911 was plotted in iraq Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paulinstl 295 Posted February 13, 2007 maybe because NK hasn't violated any UN resolutions Another shining example of the decline of education in our country. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akaoni 0 Posted February 13, 2007 because 911 was plotted in iraq this too... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted February 13, 2007 This thread went so went in the wrong direction. I forgot the topic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Know Doubt 0 Posted February 14, 2007 maybe because NK hasn't violated any UN resolutions I can't believe you just wrote that lc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
