Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bush Rejects Idea of Talks With North Korea

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bush Rejects Idea of Talks With North Korea

    By JENNIFER LOVEN, AP

    WASHINGTON (Oct. 12) -- President Bush unapologetically defended his approach to North Korea's nuclear weapons program Wednesday, pledging he would not change course despite contentions that Pyongyang's apparent atomic test proved the failure of his nearly six years of effort.

    Bush rejected the idea of direct U.S.-North Korea talks, saying the Koreans were more likely to listen if confronted with the combined protest of many nations.

    The president said he was not backing down from his assertion three years ago that "we will not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea."

    He said the United States "reserves all options to defend our friends and our interests in the region against the threats from North Korea," a stance he said includes increased defense cooperation, especially on missile defense, with Japan and South Korea.

    But he added: "I believe the commander in chief must try all diplomatic measures before we commit our military."

    The president appeared at a news conference in the White House's Rose Garden in an effort to rescue a diplomatic drive to contain North Korea and to rebut charges he had been distracted by the Iraq war from the developing threat in Asia.

    Aftershocks of North Korea's claimed nuclear test continued reverberating around the world.

    At the United Nations, the United States and Japan pushed China and South Korea to support a sanctions resolution that would deliver what Bush called "serious repercussions" for Pyongyang, including cargo inspections.

    Japanese officials, fearing for their nation just across the Sea of Japan from North Korea, took action on their own to choke off an economic lifeline for the impoverished communist nation, barring lucrative North Korean imports, most entries into the country by North Koreans and the presence of North Korean ships in Japanese ports.

    South Korea, which fought a war with the North in the 1950s and like Japan regards Pyongyang warily, checked its readiness for nuclear warfare. The defense minister said Seoul could expand its conventional arsenal and the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended improved defenses.

    North Korea, in its first formal statement since Monday's test announcement, warned that new sanctions would be considered an act of war that would bring unspecified "physical corresponding measures."

    North Korea's No. 2 leader Kim Yong Nam said more nuclear tests are possible. And while the Demilitarized Zone dividing the two Koreas remained calm, North Korean troops tried to provoke guards on the southern side by spitting across the line, making throat-slashing hand gestures and flashing middle fingers, according to a U.S. military spokesman.

    In Washington, Democrats contended that Bush has mishandled North Korea by pursuing a strategy that led to a 400 percent increase in the nation's nuclear capabilities under his watch.

    "President Bush tries to talk tough, but he doesn't act smart," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "He insists on stubbornly following policies that don't work, and it is time for a change."

    William Perry, a defense secretary under former President Clinton, said the U.S. government must abandon its desire for a new government in Pyongyang and agree to direct, one-on-one talks -- even if on the sidelines of long-stalled six-party talks that also include China, South Korea, Japan and Russia.

    "Until we make those two steps, we're in a lost cause trying to deal with on North Korea," Perry said in a conference call with reporters.

    The call for bilateral negotiations was echoed Wednesday by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan from New York. But Bush again rebuffed the idea.

    "One has a stronger hand when there's more people playing your same cards," he said in an hourlong news conference that was dominated by the North Korean crisis. "It is much easier for a nation to hear what I believe are legitimate demands if there's more than one voice speaking."

    A day earlier, Republican Sen. John McCain had said Clinton was at fault for failing to take adequate action in the 1990s to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons.

    Bush gave scant attention to that domestic blame game, repeatedly turning the spotlight back on what he called "North Korea's provocation."

    He said he learned North Korea can't be trusted from the experience of the Clinton administration's 1994 pact with Pyongyang, which offered energy help in return for a nuclear freeze but which the North secretly defied nearly from the start. He defended his decision to switch nearly immediately to a policy of refusing to talk with North Korea except when other regional players were also at the table.

    "I appreciate the efforts of previous administrations. It just didn't work," he said.

    The president acknowledged the difficulty of persuading nations such as China and South Korea to drop any resistance to a tough crackdown on North Korea by the U.N. Security Council.

    "We share the same goal, but sometimes the internal issues are different from ours. And, therefore, it takes a while to get people on the same page. And it takes awhile for people to get used to consequences," he said. "And so I wouldn't necessarily characterize these countries' positions as, you know, locked-in positions."

    The United States and Japan want the Security Council to impose a partial trade embargo, including strict limits on Korea's weapons exports, a freeze of related financial assets and inspections of cargo to and from North Korea. They prefer that the sanctions fall under the portion of the U.N. Charter that gives the council the authority to back up its resolutions with a range of measures that include military action.

    China is considered to have the most leverage with North Korea as its top provider of badly needed economic and energy aid. But both Beijing and Seoul worry a hard-line approach could destabilize the North and send refugees flooding over their borders.

    "Peace on the Korean Peninsula requires that these nations send a clear message to Pyongyang that its actions will not be tolerated," Bush said.

    Associated Press writers Hans Greimel in Seoul, South Korea, and Nick Wadhams at the United Nations contributed to this report.

  • #2
    You cant talk to unreasonable people. These Korean's are going to be a problem, they are the last cocksuckers i would want to have nuclear capability
    Questions, comments, complaints:
    [email protected]

    Comment


    • #3
      well....if CHINA doesnt squeeze them , than we have too SQUEEZE CHINA.....i mean dont they realize that the USA is one main reason they have had such huge development . They now manufacturer everything so we in AMERICA can concentrate on more pressing needs in the SERVICE sector like Hamburger flipping and Housekeeping.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by jcindaville
        You cant talk to unreasonable people. These Korean's are going to be a problem, they are the last cocksuckers i would want to have nuclear capability
        Clinton did JC as we had good communications with them. They weren't making Nukes, we knew where the nuke rods were at etc. Prime Minister couldn't even speak to Bush when he came over here. We went into Iraq instead knowing that North Korea had nukes.

        Now we have 2 Countries pissed at us North Korea and Iran with both having Nuclear weapons.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BettorsChat
          Clinton did JC as we had good communications with them. They weren't making Nukes, we knew where the nuke rods were at etc. Prime Minister couldn't even speak to Bush when he came over here. We went into Iraq instead knowing that North Korea had nukes.

          Now we have 2 Countries pissed at us North Korea and Iran with both having Nuclear weapons.
          bullshit....the nukes were being processed while clinton was in office...Didn't you watch TV in the last 2 days.....This is the same ploy they alway use to get us to the bargaining table....

          Comment


          • #6
            I just can not fathom the idea that people can truly be this sick... it seems as if parts of the world need to be wiped out and re populated... I do not mean to sound brash but hearing this and seeing people celebrate in other countries after the 9/11 attacks is just sickening...

            I hardly ever follow anything political, but this is too hard not to.. this is absolutely rediculous and we have ourselves to blame for putting this whimp into office...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by THENDY
              i mean dont they realize that the USA is one main reason they have had such huge development.
              But US also needs China for cheap labor. It's a two way thing. They need us just as we need them.
              NFL Kruise
              2-2*

              *updated as of 9/9

              Comment


              • #8
                why can we have nukes bot not others? I say as long as we have nukes than anyone who wants em can make em

                until we get rid of our shit no way we can tell others they cant

                what makes us reasonable? we fucken invade countries like its goin out of style.....i say let em have nukes......if N Korea didnt have em they prolly wouldve been invaded by now

                PEACE

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TwoTonTony
                  bullshit....the nukes were being processed while clinton was in office...Didn't you watch TV in the last 2 days.....This is the same ploy they alway use to get us to the bargaining table....
                  Tony you're obviously a staunch Republican by your responses. Do you believe attaching a gambling bill to a port bill was right by the Republicans?

                  Do you honestly think that not having any talks with North Korea is a good idea?

                  Why did Colin Powell say that what Clinton left was a good layout to handle the situation in North Korea? Why did Colin Powell quit on Bush? Why have so many other of his board members quit? More than any other President??

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BettorsChat
                    Tony you're obviously a staunch Republican by your responses. Do you believe attaching a gambling bill to a port bill was right by the Republicans?

                    Do you honestly think that not having any talks with North Korea is a good idea?

                    Why did Colin Powell say that what Clinton left was a good layout to handle the situation in North Korea? Why did Colin Powell quit on Bush? Why have so many other of his board members quit? More than any other President??
                    I am not a staunch republican......to your 1st question....

                    I, being a gambler do not think it is a good bill, but lets be honest...the feds want their cut of the pie and this actually is an illegal activity we do.....So i am not surprised....I wish it were legal, but it's not....

                    I think talks with north korea should be done on our terms....not theirs....They pull this shit all the time....Let China lean on them.....Also, in all fairness it depends who you listen to when talking about how clinton dealt with NK....I mean all issues have become so partisan and it kind of nauseates me....

                    I have no idea why so many people have quit? Maybe they were pressured into resignation.....who knows???

                    All i know is that it is very hard to make an educated opinion when all the info we are fed is partisan, depending on which TV station or politicians you listen to....THAT is a fact....I do not pretend to know the answer and i readily admit that

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I've never seen you take the opposite side of the Republicans!

                      They didn't quit from pressure c'mon. They didn't like the way things were being done by the head honcho.

                      We should not be closing talks down with them when they have nukes. Sure let China and Japan lean on them that's fine, but we should be there too as its the motto of the republicans about shouting terror alert all the time. And a Country having Nukes is a good threat of terroism for us especially when they have been testing them.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by BettorsChat
                        I've never seen you take the opposite side of the Republicans!

                        They didn't quit from pressure c'mon. They didn't like the way things were being done by the head honcho.

                        We should not be closing talks down with them when they have nukes. Sure let China and Japan lean on them that's fine, but we should be there too as its the motto of the republicans about shouting terror alert all the time. And a Country having Nukes is a good threat of terroism for us especially when they have been testing them.

                        There have not been enough issues for you to make that judgement monte....I believe that stems from your very far leaning left opinions and you towing the democratic line....I am a moderate with slight lean to being conservative....

                        You can not make the judgement why people quit....

                        We should not be running to the table either to apease them.....In due time they will see that the offers put on the table in the treaty from 2005 i believe had incentives economically for them.....Why should we run to the table when they are in direct violation of this treaty? Should we just give in to whoever breaks the law....This is a test of wills i believe......

                        Again you have your opinion and I have mine, but neither of us knows the whole deal...only what we hear 2nd hand

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TwoTonTony
                          There have not been enough issues for you to make that judgement monte....I believe that stems from your very far leaning left opinions and you towing the democratic line....I am a moderate with slight lean to being conservative....

                          You can not make the judgement why people quit....

                          We should not be running to the table either to apease them.....In due time they will see that the offers put on the table in the treaty from 2005 i believe had incentives economically for them.....Why should we run to the table when they are in direct violation of this treaty? Should we just give in to whoever breaks the law....This is a test of wills i believe......

                          Again you have your opinion and I have mine, but neither of us knows the whole deal...only what we hear 2nd hand
                          They have had nukes before we went into Iraq that worked. And we still haven't did anything. I thought the republicans cared about terroism? We have Iran stating that they will use them on us and now for some time our relationship with N. Korea has detiorated.

                          As for why they left Bush give them a call i'm sure they will give you the real reason...j/k. No other President has had that many members quit on them. Think about it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by BettorsChat
                            They have had nukes before we went into Iraq that worked. And we still haven't did anything. I thought the republicans cared about terroism? We have Iran stating that they will use them on us and now for some time our relationship with N. Korea has detiorated.

                            As for why they left Bush give them a call i'm sure they will give you the real reason...j/k. No other President has had that many members quit on them. Think about it.

                            nothing for me to think about.....I try to keep my thinking on issues i have direct control over......

                            they fired a missile about 5 months ago that was a failure.....

                            remember these people are starving....they want us to come crawling like you say...1 on 1....we want to talk with a party of 6 countries......why reward them??? because you are frightened??? what do they have to do with terror?? i do not know, but nothing i have heard of thus far....Iran is behind all terror.....

                            again...i deal with issue not with party labels

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              China will take out N.Korea and Israel will take out Iran

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X