North Korea Launches Long-Range Missile

[Anonymous]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/04/AR2009040403239.html?hpid=topnews

This thing is capable of hitting the Western U.S.

It is the culmination of nearly an entire decade where our only foreign policy toward Korea was public name calling. It is an utter failure of diplomacy that we have ended up here. We set this up by labeling them the Axis of Evil, even calling their leader a "Pygmy", and then doing nothing useful to contain their nuclear or ballistic missile programs. This day is really no surprise, since they tested this missile two years ago - unsuccessfully, but we knew it was just a matter of time. The last administration seemed only capable of two types of foreign policy: War, and War of Words. The first got us Iraq. The second got us the current North Korea (and the current Iran).

This did not have to happen. It is a big, big foreign policy failure.

[Anonymous]

Oh god do you think Obama would do better?

[Anonymous]

And does anyone really believe getting a UN Security Council resolution will change a thing? International politics is messy, whether you are a Dem or Gop - and some issues defy easy answers. How many presidents have tried to bring the Israeli's and Palestinians together to reach a common peace?

So OP. I am assuming you are more comfortable with WAR since WAR of WORDS which both Bush and Obama have employed against S Korea clearly doesn't work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And does anyone really believe getting a UN Security Council resolution will change a thing? International politics is messy, whether you are a Dem or Gop - and some issues defy easy answers. How many presidents have tried to bring the Israeli's and Palestinians together to reach a common peace?

So OP. I am assuming you are more comfortable with WAR since WAR of WORDS which both Bush and Obama have employed against S Korea clearly doesn't work.

OP Here. No, there is this thing called Diplomacy, which is neither. It was junked by the Bush Administration. Diplomacy takes time - decades, sometimes, but it works. Kissinger, Brzezinski, and Scowcroft are three people who exemplify the use of diplomacy to solve international problems (2 republican, one democrat). Listen to how they view problems of global security: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/8551 This is what has been missing from our leadership for eight years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And does anyone really believe getting a UN Security Council resolution will change a thing? International politics is messy, whether you are a Dem or Gop - and some issues defy easy answers. How many presidents have tried to bring the Israeli's and Palestinians together to reach a common peace?

So OP. I am assuming you are more comfortable with WAR since WAR of WORDS which both Bush and Obama have employed against S Korea clearly doesn't work.

OP Here. No, there is this thing called Diplomacy, which is neither. It was junked by the Bush Administration. Diplomacy takes time - decades, sometimes, but it works. Kissinger, Brzezinski, and Scowcroft are three people who exemplify the use of diplomacy to solve international problems (2 republican, one democrat). Listen to how they view problems of global security: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/8551 This is what has been missing from our leadership for eight years.

So I suppose Chuck Schumer insisting that China is the only country with the leverage to get the No Koreans to toe the line is Bush's fault too? Brzezinski was a disaster, but ideologically very similar to Obama & rabidly anti-Bush so I can see why you admire him.

[Anonymous]

Oh god do you think Obama would do better?

Yes, as it happens, I do. Obama has stated clearly that negotiation with North Korea isn't a reward for North Korea, but in the interests of US foreign policy. Just about everyone that I've read that really knows North Korea says that the only way to limit their nuclear program is through negotiation, eg. the six party talks (dead under the Bush Administration) and bi-lateral negotiation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And does anyone really believe getting a UN Security Council resolution will change a thing? International politics is messy, whether you are a Dem or Gop - and some issues defy easy answers. How many presidents have tried to bring the Israeli's and Palestinians together to reach a common peace?

So OP. I am assuming you are more comfortable with WAR since WAR of WORDS which both Bush and Obama have employed against S Korea clearly doesn't work.

OP Here. No, there is this thing called Diplomacy, which is neither. It was junked by the Bush Administration. Diplomacy takes time - decades, sometimes, but it works. Kissinger, Brzezinski, and Scowcroft are three people who exemplify the use of diplomacy to solve international problems (2 republican, one democrat). Listen to how they view problems of global security: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/8551 This is what has been missing from our leadership for eight years.

So I suppose Chuck Schumer insisting that China is the only country with the leverage to get the No Koreans to toe the line is Bush's fault too? Brzezinski was a disaster, but ideologically very similar to Obama & rabidly anti-Bush so I can see why you admire him.

1. This is not a problem caused by a single statement. As I said twice now, the major challenges to global stability take decades to fix. God, what is it with the public that they think that world affairs boil down to a single press quote or a week's worth of effort? Schumer's opinion is one ripple in a pond and not worth responding to.

2. I chose examples from both the Republican and Democrat administrations because this is a truly non-partisan issue. If you don't like Zbig, because he served under Carter, then how about Brent Scowcroft or Henry Kissinger? Surely one of them must fit you. All three of them are pleading for a return to the use of diplomacy.