I'm confused

[chris_gerrib]

I thought we (the US, I mean) weren't supposed to talk to The Bad Guys. I heard something about "appeasement" and "a sign of weakness." Then I hear we talked to North Korea, gave them some concessions, and they go and blow up their nuclear reactor. I'm confused.

[insert picture of blog owner wearing a shit-eating grin here]

In other news, the Supreme Court in D.C. vs. Heller overturned the defacto gun ban in Washington, D. C. I agreed with the decision, and said so over at Scalzi's blog. He agrees with the decision as well, which caused the comment thread to revert to a bog-standard gun control debate. Been there, done that and got the T-shirt.

I have no idea where I stand on my $10-a-political-post pledge, so I'm giving $50 to the American Red Cross* and calling it done.



*I hear that the Red Cross is up to their asses doing flood relief.

Comments

I can help you with that confusion

[rodney-g-graves.livejournal.com]

The Clinton Administration engaged in direct bilateral talks which resulted in an agreement (the Agreed Framework) which the North Korean's promptly cheated upon, culminating with a fizzle (unsuccessful nuclear test).

The Bush Administration called the North Koreans on their violations of the agreement, and imposed sanctions. As the sanctions started being felt, the Bush Administration started a series of talks that included North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, Russia, and the United States. Despite repeated demands from the North Koreans for bilateral negotiations with the United States during the Six Party negotiations, no such bilateral talks were held.

And, while I could be mistaken, I don't believe the U. S. Secretary of State was directly involved in the Six Party talks, whereas former Secretary of State Albright was indeed involved in the negotiation of the Agreed Framework for the Clinton Administration.

I do hope that cleared the mater up for you somewhat.

Re: I can help you with that confusion

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

Well, actually I'm not confused. My point was that John McCain says "we can't talk to Iran - they're Eeevilll!" Barack Obama says, "let's give it a shot."

I can help you correct that error

[rodney-g-graves.livejournal.com]

Since what Senator McCain objected to was Senator Obama's statement that he would engage in direct face to face diplomacy (and Senator Obama has since changed his position vis a vis direct face to face diplomacy at least twice that I am aware of).

Personally, I think there are better ways to engage Iran (http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/operation_carthage/).

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam

Re: I can help you correct that error

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

It may yet be necessary to bomb Iran. I do, however, have some thoughts on how to win a war. It's a bit longer then will fit in a blog comment, so you'll have to watch this space.

Which war?

[rodney-g-graves.livejournal.com]

The bare bones Op-Plan I linked to is rather more than a bombing and rather less than a full on war.

I shall take you up on your offer.