Wednesday, October 11, 2006

North Korea: Is it Bush's fault?

North Korea: Is it Bush's fault?
Absolutly "Yes".
North Korea wanted direct talks with the US. As advised from people smarter than he is Bush pushed for 6 party talks instead, under this he was able to make some agreements. (In hind site this might have been a mistake, now that Kim Jong Il has made a stupid decision where is the country to turn to?) Rice is credited for having made a treaty with North Korea. One of North Korea's main concerns was invasion by the US. We promised not to invade. We promised them 92 million dollars. We allowed them to bypass weapon inspections. We would give them light water nuclear reactors (as opposed to the more dangerous ones they were already using). In exchange they would be quiet. (Way to go Rice. What a great deal you landed. Based on your preformance on landing this one-sided deal you should be fired.

Why should America bend over backwards so that we can get nothing in return?) But still the treaty as messed up as it was could at least quiet North Korea. -- That was until Cheney steped up the sanctions after the treaty. This was not part of the agreement. You see Cheney decided that the deal was not good enough so he cut back on everything else in the form of sanctions. The treaty stopped when N. Korea accused us of breaking the treaty and then left the table and stepped up nuclear production. They said they would step up Nuclear production, and they would test a bomb. They did. At least you can believe what North Korea says. North Korea gained 80% of it's nuclear fuel under the Bush administration.

North Korea withdrew from the non-proliferation treaty legally. Politely they asked the inspectors to leave, gave them time to leave. Told us they would make a bomb. Started creating nuclear fuel. The Bush machine said they were bluffing. Ooops Bush is full of shit, they have another (few) bomb(s). BAMB!! Bush's policy failed in an explosion. Bush's response: Sanctions! Kim Jong Il response: Sanctions are an act of war. Bush's response:

North Korea says that they will see sanctions as an act of war. Bush is playing into Kim Jong Il's hands.
So Lets recap

Pre Bush
  • North Korea has some bombs
  • North Korea has some Nuclear fuel
  • North Korea can be reasoned with because they do not have a working bomb
  • North Korea can be reasoned with because they are susceptible to sanctions

Post Bush
  • North Korea has more bombs
  • North Korea has much Nuclear fuel production up 600%
  • North Korea can not be reasoned with because they have a working bomb
  • North Korea can not be threaten with sanctions

Meanwhile Bush has riled up the public against Iran. Iran might have the BOMB!! Iran might have the BOMB!!

It's difficult to refine the nuclear material. Iran doesn't have enough machines to get a pure enough fuel to create a bomb. It's easy to tell what their capabilities are by counting these machines and the quality of these machines.

North Korea on the other hand we knew had it and could make it. They are planning to build small Israel sized bombs that fit in a suitcase. Bush's response? IRAN (maybe) has the BOMB!!

There is another scenario where Bush's national strategy comes under question. Venezuelaa. Right now we are in the position of "We won't accept your cheap oil". Is there no way to have avoided this or to turn this around to a win-win situation. We are actually sitting in the middle of a war and telling another country we won't accept their cheap oil? Consider this statement: “Oh yeah?! Well I won’t take your cheap oil!” Wow good job Bush. You turned a win-win situation into a lose-lose situation. There is a term for that: Miserable Failure


Post a Comment

<< Home