Quote from: ReutersKerry says U.S. ready to "reach out" to North Korea
By Arshad Mohammed and Kiyoshi Takenaka
TOKYO (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday stressed the United States is willing to engage with North Korea as long as it takes steps to give up nuclear weapons.
He also vowed Washington would protect its Asian allies against any provocative acts by the North, but said it wants a peaceful solution to rising tensions in the region.
"We are prepared to reach out but we need (the) appropriate moment, appropriate circumstance," Kerry told a small group of reporters, adding that North Korea had to take steps toward giving up its nuclear programs.
"They have to take some actions. Now how many and how much I want to have a discussion with folks back in Washington (about)... but they have to take action," he added.
The North has threatened for weeks to attack the United States, South Korea and Japan since new U.N. sanctions were imposed in response to its latest nuclear arms test in February. Speculation has mounted of a new missile launch or nuclear test.
"I think it is really unfortunate that there has been so much focus and attention in the media and elsewhere on the subject of war, when what we really ought to be talking about is the possibility of peace. And I think there are those possibilities," Kerry earlier told a news conference in Tokyo after a meeting with his Japanese counterpart, Fumio Kishida.
Kerry was in Japan for the final stop on an Asian tour aimed at solidifying support for curbing North Korea's nuclear program, and reassuring U.S. allies.
Kerry said the United States would "do what was necessary" to defend its allies Japan and South Korea, but added: "Our choice is to negotiate, our choice is to move to the table and find a way for the region to have peace."
Kerry also sought to clarify his comments made in Beijing on Saturday, which some took to suggest he might be offering to remove recently boosted missile defense capabilities in Asia if China persuaded North Korea to abandon its atomic program.
The Pentagon in recent weeks has announced plans to position two Aegis guided-missile destroyers in the western Pacific and a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system in Guam.
"The president of the United States deployed some additional missile defense capacity precisely because of the threat of North Korea. And it is logical that if the threat of North Korea disappears because the peninsula denuclearizes, then obviously that threat no longer mandates that kind of posture. But there have been no agreements, no discussions, there is nothing actually on the table with respect to that," Kerry said.
"TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN"
Kerry said he might consider using someone other than an official U.S. government envoy to reach out to the North and he left the door open to a negotiation with the North that might not require them to take denuclearization steps in advance.
"If the Chinese came to us and said, 'look, here's what we've got cooking and so forth,' I'm not going to tell you that I'm shutting the door today to something that's logical and that might have a chance of success," he said. "On the other hand, what the standard is today is they have to take action."
Sen. John McCain, a Republican, voiced skepticism about the resuming negotiations with the North.
"If we give them food, if we give them oil, if we give them money, they will come around and they take our money and run," he said.
Japan's Kishida told the same news conference that the two allies want Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
"We agreed that North Korea should cease provocative speech and behavior and show it is taking concrete action toward denuclearization," he said. "We cannot allow North Korea in any way to possess nuclear weapons."
NORTH KOREA UNBENDING
Pyongyang, which was preparing to celebrate the birth date of state founder Kim Il-Sung on Monday, reiterated it had no intention of abandoning its atomic arms programs.
"We will expand in quantity our nuclear weapons capability, which is the treasure of a unified Korea ... that we would never barter at any price," Kim Young-nam, North Korea's titular head of state, told a gathering of officials and service personnel applauding Kim Il-Sung.
The KCNA news agency also rejected as a "cunning trick" South Korean President Park Geun-hye's suggestion last week of holding talks with the North.
The South Korean capital, Seoul, displayed the calm it has shown throughout the crisis. Residents strolled in bright sunshine a day after the city's World Cup stadium was jammed with 50,000 mostly young fans of local rapper Psy.
On Saturday, Kerry met leaders in China, the North's sole diplomatic and financial benefactor, and said China and the United States were committed to "the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula in a peaceful manner".
During his first stop in South Korea, where the United States has 28,000 troops stationed, Kerry said North Korea, furious at joint U.S.-South Korean military drills, would be making a "huge mistake" if it were to launch a missile.
He also said China was in a position to influence the North's policy and had to put "some teeth" into efforts to persuade Pyongyang to alter its policies.
Japan, separated from North Korea by less than 1,000 km (625 miles) of water and a frequent target of its anger, is well within range of North Korea's medium-range missiles.
Japanese news reports said Tokyo had sent Aegis-class destroyers capable of missile interception to the Sea of Japan. Patriot Advanced Capability-3 interceptor missiles have been deployed at key locations in the capital and surrounding areas.
Kerry's agenda in Tokyo also included Japan's territorial disputes with China, and the future of U.S. bases in Japan.
He repeated that while Washington took no position about the ultimate sovereignty of tiny isles in the East China Sea claimed by both China and Japan, the United States "opposed any unilateral action that would somehow change the status quo".
A flare-up of the territorial row has raised fears of an unintended military incident near the islands, known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China. The United States says the islets fall under a U.S.-Japan security pact, but is keen to avoid a clash in the economically vital region.
(Writing by Linda Sieg and Ron Popeski; Additional reporting by Mari Saito in Tokyo and Jane Chung in Seoul; Editing by Jason Webb)
Ah, the sell-out begins...I guess he will state he supported action against North Korea before he did not support any actions.
Obama will reset relations.
It will all get better as soon as we engage.
:bleeding:
I can't believe it. Again, the US folds to NK's bluff.
Meanwhile, Kim has not been seen in public for two weeks, apparently.
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2013/04/14/0200000000AEN20130414000400315.HTML
Perhaps the military decided to put its foot down?
Quote from: Strix on April 14, 2013, 01:58:59 PM
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday stressed the United States is willing to engage with North Korea as long as it takes steps to give up nuclear weapons.
...
Pyongyang, which was preparing to celebrate the birth date of state founder Kim Il-Sung on Monday, reiterated it had no intention of abandoning its atomic arms programs.
So there you go. Moral high ground stated and international credibility established makes it a lot easier to bomb shit.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 02:24:22 PM
So there you go. Moral high ground stated and international credibility established makes it a lot easier to bomb shit.
Nice try.
QuoteU.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday stressed the United States is willing to engage with North Korea as long as it takes steps to give up nuclear weapons.
"We are prepared to reach out but we need (the) appropriate moment, appropriate circumstance," Kerry told a small group of reporters, adding that North Korea had to take steps toward giving up its nuclear programs.
"They have to take some actions. Now how many and how much I want to have a discussion with folks back in Washington (about)... but they have to take action," he added.
"Give us a gesture--any kind of gesture--and we'll feed your army for another three years."
You seem shocked that this turn of events is any different for the last 30 years.
Like you said before, nothing's going to happen. SSDD.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgraphics8.nytimes.com%2Fimages%2F2013%2F03%2F29%2Fworld%2Fasia%2F29korea%2F29korea-articleLarge.jpg&hash=deb79346acf21ce78ec12455f31b48b378416992)
Reach out and touch someone.
Can we reach out with nuclear arms? :cry:
Wake me up when we actually give them money.
They "postpone" their missile launch, we give them aid and put-off the next extortion attempt for two years. :hmm:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 02:24:22 PM
Quote from: Strix on April 14, 2013, 01:58:59 PM
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday stressed the United States is willing to engage with North Korea as long as it takes steps to give up nuclear weapons.
...
Pyongyang, which was preparing to celebrate the birth date of state founder Kim Il-Sung on Monday, reiterated it had no intention of abandoning its atomic arms programs.
So there you go. Moral high ground stated and international credibility established makes it a lot easier to bomb shit.
:lol: Rationalize much?
A missile launch possible, likely, maybe later today (15th April).
I wonder if the 'crisis' will then subside, or will an unexpected out come of it or unforeseen event, stoke the tensions still further ?
Damned if I know.
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 06:03:29 PM
:lol: Rationalize much?
Have they actually done anything besides talk a lot?
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 06:03:29 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 02:24:22 PM
Quote from: Strix on April 14, 2013, 01:58:59 PM
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday stressed the United States is willing to engage with North Korea as long as it takes steps to give up nuclear weapons.
...
Pyongyang, which was preparing to celebrate the birth date of state founder Kim Il-Sung on Monday, reiterated it had no intention of abandoning its atomic arms programs.
So there you go. Moral high ground stated and international credibility established makes it a lot easier to bomb shit.
:lol: Rationalize much?
Jump to conclusions much?
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 06:03:29 PM
:lol: Rationalize much?
You saw how well Iraq went over. I'd rather us be the Good Guys this time around.
Don't we have a megathread for this?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 07:13:37 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 06:03:29 PM
:lol: Rationalize much?
You saw how well Iraq went over. I'd rather us be the Good Guys this time around.
So you really think this move is a possible pretext for military action on our part? We've owned the moral high ground against North Korea since 1950.
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 08:37:59 PM
So you really think this move is a possible pretext for military action on our part?
Since there's no possibility for military action on our part anyway, it's always good form to keep the diplomatic duckies in their rows.
QuoteWe've owned the moral high ground against North Korea since 1950.
So there's no harm done, now is there?
QuoteBeijing (CNN) -- Following a day of talks, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Chinese leaders said their two nations would work together to press North Korea to tone down its provocations, amid soaring regional tensions.
Speaking to reporters in Beijing, Kerry said both the United States and China are calling on North Korea to refrain from any provocative steps -- including any missile launches.
But, he said, both nations want to focus on a peaceful solution, not "threat for threat or confrontational language. There's been enough of that."
No option was left off the table in his talks with Chinese leaders, he said. Among those he met with Saturday were Chinese President Xi Jinping, Premier Li Keqiang and State Councilor Yang.
Kerry said there was no question that China was very serious about upholding international standards.
As he met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Kerry said, "Mr. president, this is obviously a critical time with some very challenging issues -- issues on the Korean peninsula, the challenge of Iran and nuclear weapons, Syria and the Middle East, and economies around the world that are in need of a boost."
In a joint statement before dinner, Kerry and Yang reaffirmed their intention to work together toward the peaceful denuclearization of North Korea.
"We agreed that this is critically important for the stability of the region and indeed for the world and for all our nonproliferation efforts," said Kerry.
"We are committed to taking actions in order to make good on that goal and we are committed to make that goal a reality."
China's position is "consistent and clear cut," Yang said. "China is firmly committed to upholding peace and stability and advancing the denuclearization process on the peninsula."
Beijing will work with its international partners to help restart the stalled six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program and hold it accountable to its international agreements, he said.
Meeting earlier with China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Kerry said there were "enormously challenging issues" in front of the two nations.
"I look forward to having that conversation with you today ... (to) define for both of us what the model relationship should be and how two great powers, China and the United States, can work effectively to solve problems," he said.
Wang said he hoped the two nations could work together to handle sensitive issues with "mutual respect."
Kerry landed in Beijing after leaving Seoul, South Korea, where he pledged unbending U.S. military support against any attack from the North.
Washington wants Beijing to "stop the money trail into North Korea" and give Pyongyang a strong message that China wants the Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons, two U.S. administration officials said.
U.S. officials said China has recently expressed frustrations over Pyongyang's actions.
"We hear a growing tone of frustration ... in official statements from the Chinese," an administration official said. "China is increasingly concerned about the downstream effects of North Korea's reckless pursuit of a nuclear missile capability and complications for China's foreign strategic environment."
Kerry will seek to define the areas of common interest with China.
"We have a common interest in putting an end to North Korean proliferation," a senior administration official said. "In stopping the highly destabilizing behavior and the provocative actions of the North Koreans."
Kerry is also expected to address computer hacking coming from state-sponsored sources inside China.
During his visit to Seoul on Friday, Kerry said the United States would talk to North Korea, but only if the country gets serious about negotiating the end of its nuclear weapons program.
"North Korea will not be accepted as a nuclear power," Kerry said in Seoul.
His trip to South Korea came a day after a Pentagon intelligence assessment surfaced suggesting North Korea may have developed the ability to fire a nuclear-tipped missile at its foes.
Disclosed first by a congressman at a hearing Thursday, and then confirmed to CNN by the Defense Department, the Defense Intelligence Agency assessment is the clearest acknowledgment yet by the United States about potential advances in North Korea's nuclear program.
U.S. officials think North Korea could test-launch a mobile ballistic missile at any time in what would be seen by the international community as a highly provocative move.
But a senior administration official said there's no indication that any such missiles are armed with nuclear material.
Pentagon spokesman George Little said that "it would be inaccurate to suggest that the North Korean regime has fully tested, developed or demonstrated the kinds of nuclear capabilities referenced" in the DIA study.
The DIA has been wrong in the past, producing an assessment in 2002 that formed the basis for arguments that Iraq had nuclear weapons -- a view later found to be incorrect.
Nevertheless, Kerry said any launch by North Korea would be a "huge mistake."
Despite weeks of bellicose rhetoric from Pyongyang threatening nuclear attacks on the United States, South Korea and their allies, U.S. officials have characterized the North's saber rattling as largely bluster.
South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se, speaking with Kerry on Friday, urged North Korea to open talks.
"We urge North Korea to cease its reckless behavior and to stop issuing threats," he said.
A joint statement issued by South Korea and the United States before Kerry's departure emphasized Washington's commitment to defending Seoul "in the wake of recent unacceptable provocations" by the North.
Before departing for Beijing, Kerry attended a meet and greet, where he called the children of diplomats to join him on stage. He told the group that their work was about making the world a safer place for the children.
"This is one of the most important places on earth," he said, referring to the divided Korean Peninsula. It shows what life is like when people are presented with no choices."
North Korea issued a scathing warning to Japan on Friday, saying via its state news agency, KCNA , that Tokyo should "stop recklessly working for staging a comeback on Korea, depending on its American master."
Japanese foreign minister spokesman Masaru Sato said such remarks only hurt North Korea.
"Japan would not be pushed around by rhetoric of North Korea," he said.
Japan's Transport Ministry has issued a notice requiring its airplanes to report to the U.S. military if they fly near the U.S. military's Kadena base in Okinawa prefecture, the Kyodo News Agency said.
The notice, made at the request of the U.S. military in Japan, is believed to be part of precautions taken against possible North Korean missile launches.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/13/world/asia/china-kerry-koreas-tensions/index.html?hpt=hp_inthenews
Could it be that Strix, Yi and Derspeiss are jumping the gun with their bribe theory?
It's the damned Defeatocrats and that illegitimate colonial Kenyan secular-socialist president.
Jump the what on the what now? :huh:
Forget your error so quick? :lol:
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2013, 09:24:22 PM
Forget your error so quick? :lol:
I suppose I did. Care to help me remember?
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:27:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2013, 09:24:22 PM
Forget your error so quick? :lol:
I suppose I did. Care to help me remember?
Something about the US wussing out.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2013, 09:32:28 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:27:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2013, 09:24:22 PM
Forget your error so quick? :lol:
I suppose I did. Care to help me remember?
Something about the US wussing out.
Oh, I'm not backing off from that one. Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Clinton was very close to ordering a pre-emptive strike in 1994 against the Yongbyon facility in North Korea, and we only know that from declassified documents. You don't know what's on the burner these days.
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2013, 09:32:28 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:27:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 14, 2013, 09:24:22 PM
Forget your error so quick? :lol:
I suppose I did. Care to help me remember?
Something about the US wussing out.
Oh, I'm not backing off from that one. Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Oh, I know. Several thousand dead is a small price to pay for you to say we didn't wuss out. We learned that in 2003, didn't we?
How exactly is that being more conciliatory? It's the same line we've been taking since grandpa was in power.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 09:44:06 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Clinton was very close to ordering a pre-emptive strike in 1994 against the Yongbyon facility in North Korea, and we only know that from declassified documents. You don't know what's on the burner these days.
And Clinton ended up sending a groveling letter to Bedhead.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 14, 2013, 10:35:35 PM
How exactly is that being more conciliatory? It's the same line we've been taking since grandpa was in power.
It's a softening of the stronger rhetoric we had been using until just recently.
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 10:40:19 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 09:44:06 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Clinton was very close to ordering a pre-emptive strike in 1994 against the Yongbyon facility in North Korea, and we only know that from declassified documents. You don't know what's on the burner these days.
And Clinton ended up sending a groveling letter to Bedhead.
Tell us how you'd play it, President Foetus.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 10:40:19 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 09:44:06 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Clinton was very close to ordering a pre-emptive strike in 1994 against the Yongbyon facility in North Korea, and we only know that from declassified documents. You don't know what's on the burner these days.
And Clinton ended up sending a groveling letter to Bedhead.
Tell us how you'd play it, President Foetus.
Don't know how derspiess would play it, but my inclination would be to glass over most of the area between the 38th parallel* and the Yalu.
* And yes, I know the current "border" isn't exactly along the line of latitude; I was being poetic.
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 10:41:32 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on April 14, 2013, 10:35:35 PM
How exactly is that being more conciliatory? It's the same line we've been taking since grandpa was in power.
It's a softening of the stronger rhetoric we had been using until just recently.
Talk is cheap. Who cares if it's strong or weak?
Quote from: dps on April 14, 2013, 10:59:25 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 10:40:19 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 09:44:06 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 09:39:16 PM
Being more conciliatory = wussing out. And I'm not picking on Obama. Clinton and Bush did the same damned thing.
Clinton was very close to ordering a pre-emptive strike in 1994 against the Yongbyon facility in North Korea, and we only know that from declassified documents. You don't know what's on the burner these days.
And Clinton ended up sending a groveling letter to Bedhead.
Tell us how you'd play it, President Foetus.
Don't know how derspiess would play it, but my inclination would be to glass over most of the area between the 38th parallel* and the Yalu.
* And yes, I know the current "border" isn't exactly along the line of latitude; I was being poetic.
Okay, outside of a video game how would you play it?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 14, 2013, 02:35:33 PM
"Give us a gesture--any kind of gesture--and we'll feed your army for another three years."
I don't see it.
First I don't think this was aimed at North Korea. It was while he was visiting the region and about to go to China. I think the target of this was Beijing.
Secondly, that last line, 'now how many and how much I want to have a discussion with folks back in Washington (about)... but they have to take action', makes it sound like it was a response to a journalist's question. So I suspect he's speaking off the cuff rather than making a statement, or a speech where he says the US wants to 'reach out'. If that was the case, and if this was aimed at North Korea, I suspect he'd have rather specific ideas about what North Korea needed to do.
Why do you think that?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 15, 2013, 09:01:30 PM
Why do you think that?
Think what? Which bit are you asking about?
Apart from launching preemptive strikes, which doesn't seem to be a realistic option at this point, what better options are available in terms of regional stability other than indicting a continued openness for dialogue?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
Tell us how you'd play it, President Foetus.
Exactly how the Administration was playing it, up until a few days ago.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 09:34:32 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
Tell us how you'd play it, President Foetus.
Exactly how the Administration was playing it, up until a few days ago.
Eternal escalation? Constant asset deployment? Tit for tat forever and ever and ever?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 09:42:35 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 09:34:32 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
Tell us how you'd play it, President Foetus.
Exactly how the Administration was playing it, up until a few days ago.
Eternal escalation? Constant asset deployment? Tit for tat forever and ever and ever?
So you think Obama was following the wrong strategy? Your God-King was wrong???
I favor a midgetman enema for Fatty Arbuckle.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 09:45:01 PM
So you think Obama was following the wrong strategy? Your God-King was wrong???
I don't see him following any "wrong" strategy at all. Where exactly is this deviation in US policy you're seeing?
And no, your hyperbolic hallucinations of "wimping out" or whatever doesn't count.
I'm still hoping your slavish devotion to Obama is a shtick.
Answer the question, Mr. Ambassador. Don't wait for the translation.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:11:01 PM
Answer the question, Mr. Ambassador. Don't wait for the translation.
Well you apparently thought it unwise to follow the strategy he had been following until a few days ago. I think putting the pressure on NK was the right thing to do.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:09:51 PM
I'm still hoping your slavish devotion to Obama is a shtick.
We all know your hatred of the man isn't.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:14:45 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:11:01 PM
Answer the question, Mr. Ambassador. Don't wait for the translation.
Well you apparently thought it unwise to follow the strategy he had been following until a few days ago. I think putting the pressure on NK was the right thing to do.
I'm still waiting for you to explain where you think he went wrong "a few days ago".
Or is this all Kerry Swiftie Hate left over from '04?
Seems to me the response has been perfectly consistent.
Kim ramps up the overheated rhetoric and the US moves assets around to clearly signal that if the rhetoric turns to action, the US will offer a robust response.
Kim turns the rhetoric down a bit and refrains from doing something irreversible for a while; the US says "if you're prepared to be reasonable, maybe we can talk."
Meanwhile, whether it's a result of anything the US has done or it's an internal Chinese thing, the States have China aligned their way more than ever. So far, Kim hasn't gotten anything for his tantrums and there's been no disasters. Seems a pretty solid outcome so far.
Unfortunately, China's not going to do shit in the long run. It's all lip service.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:17:33 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:09:51 PM
I'm still hoping your slavish devotion to Obama is a shtick.
We all know your hatred of the man isn't.
Believe it or not, I'd love to have more common ground with Obama. Gets kinda tiring after a while to have to disagree with him all the time. Just like with Clinton-- though thankfully with him I had NAFTA and welfare reform as a nice change of pace.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:28:36 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:17:33 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:09:51 PM
I'm still hoping your slavish devotion to Obama is a shtick.
We all know your hatred of the man isn't.
Believe it or not, I'd love to have more common ground with Obama. Gets kinda tiring after a while to have to disagree with him all the time. Just like with Clinton-- though thankfully with him I had NAFTA and welfare reform as a nice change of pace.
Well, you could just stop being wrong. That would fix the problem.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:19:07 PM
I'm still waiting for you to explain where you think he went wrong "a few days ago".
Canceling the missile test, you goof.
QuoteOr is this all Kerry Swiftie Hate left over from '04?
Hey, as bad as Lurch is I'm just grateful we didn't have to send Susan Rice over to Asia <shudder>.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:29:35 PM
Well, you could just stop being wrong. That would fix the problem.
So, so witty.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:26:27 PM
Unfortunately, China's not going to do shit in the long run. It's all lip service.
My money is on "internal reasons" rather than "lip service". I have no actual clue, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of the outgoing leaders with a descending star - say a Zhou Yongkang - had North Korean relations as their fief and pawn, and that the downgrading is either a deliberate signal or evidence of their loss of influence. Or maybe Kim was rude to the wrong person or something.
Personal relationships and the internal manoeuvres of power blocks counts for a lot in Chinese politics; it's my go to explanation for everything if I don't have hard info to the contrary.
Exactly what are the great crimes of the Obama administration then, Derspeiss? Which Freedoms has he taken from us?
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:32:51 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:29:35 PM
Well, you could just stop being wrong. That would fix the problem.
So, so witty.
:hmm:
I don't believe that was an attempt at wit, but rather an earnest entreaty.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:34:26 PM
Exactly what are the great crimes of the Obama administration then, Derspeiss? Which Freedoms has he taken from us?
Am I not allowed to disagree with the President? :huh:
Sure, but what terrible thing has he done? Most of your gripes seem to be over symbollic things, like not looking tough enough. Not using the word terrorist enough, and other absurdities.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:32:19 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:19:07 PM
I'm still waiting for you to explain where you think he went wrong "a few days ago".
Canceling the missile test, you goof.
I know you're thick sometimes on the whole "international nuance" thing, but you do realize that wasn't for North Korean consumption, don't you?
Announced missile test or not, the Chinese and Russian strategic missile defense networks don't need to see an ICBM launch during a time when the balloon could go up at any moment on the peninsula, and we've been sortieing B-2s and shit.
Fuck, Yelstin almost pushed the button in '95 when the Norwegians launched a scientific test missile that looked like a Trident launch, and the Russian duty officers freaked the fuck out because they didn't get the fucking memo.
Think, man. Fuck.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:44:22 PM
Sure, but what terrible thing has he done? Most of your gripes seem to be over symbollic things, like not looking tough enough. Not using the word terrorist enough, and other absurdities.
Not taking the bait on that. Brad. Just accept the fact that I disagree with Obama's policies and his political views.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:46:12 PM
I know you're thick sometimes on the whole "international nuance" thing, but you do realize that wasn't for North Korean consumption, don't you?
I realize that's your little pet theory. But hey, as long such rationalizations help you sleep at night knowing that your president can do no wrong, keep on keepin' on, man.
:lol: Pet theory.
OK, derLeMay.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:53:18 PM
:lol: Pet theory.
OK, derLeMay.
I'll take that as a compliment. My dad served under him and he was a great Ohioan.
Well that's just super.
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:49:02 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 15, 2013, 10:44:22 PM
Sure, but what terrible thing has he done? Most of your gripes seem to be over symbollic things, like not looking tough enough. Not using the word terrorist enough, and other absurdities.
Not taking the bait on that. Brad. Just accept the fact that I disagree with Obama's policies and his political views.
Yeah, so do alot of Republicans, even if they were George Bush's policies that he simply continued. It's perplexing. And no, liberals don't worship their leaders. They aren't mirror images of conservatives. They say in holy awe about being in the, "house of Obama", like Republicans do at the Reagan museum.
Great Ohioan?
And what is with a West Virginian caring about Ohioans anyway?
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 10:55:54 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 15, 2013, 10:53:18 PM
:lol: Pet theory.
OK, derLeMay.
I'll take that as a compliment. My dad served under him and he was a great Ohioan.
Was it in the Army, the Airforce or George Wallace campaign?
Quote from: katmai on April 15, 2013, 10:59:22 PM
Great Ohioan?
And what is with a West Virginian caring about Ohioans anyway?
I'm 3/4 Buckeye :contract:
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
I'm 3/4 Buckeye :contract:
A West Virginian with Ohio roots? Twice as useless.
I YAM EESENTIAL CRACKA
Quote from: derspiess on April 15, 2013, 11:02:06 PM
Quote from: katmai on April 15, 2013, 10:59:22 PM
Great Ohioan?
And what is with a West Virginian caring about Ohioans anyway?
I'm 3/4 Buckeye :contract:
Well, I just lost 75% of my respect for you.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 15, 2013, 09:09:14 PM
Think what? Which bit are you asking about?
Why do you think Kerry would have had specific acts in mind if the statement had been intended for North Korea?
The correct attitude toward NK by the US should be: bring it on!
at the very least ignore them completely once some kind of military buildup is done. This fucking thing must end one of these days, and it might as well can end now to ignite some wartime spending for all the Keynesians out there :P
It's the Koreans (South), who are going to have shoulder the burden here. I imagine we should let them lead.
The only thing worse than having a politician figure out military strategy is to have a wargamer figure out strategy.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 14, 2013, 07:13:37 PM
Quote from: derspiess on April 14, 2013, 06:03:29 PM
:lol: Rationalize much?
You saw how well Iraq went over. I'd rather us be the Good Guys this time around.
If your plan is for Europeans to love America, it would make more sense for you to focus on destroying America so that it becomes weak and poor. Their peculiar morality is that weakness makes right.
Quote from: Neil on April 16, 2013, 07:49:03 AM
If your plan is for Europeans to love America, it would make more sense for you to focus on destroying America so that it becomes weak and poor. Their peculiar morality is that weakness makes right.
Luckily that isn't my plan.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 16, 2013, 08:03:30 AM
Quote from: Neil on April 16, 2013, 07:49:03 AM
If your plan is for Europeans to love America, it would make more sense for you to focus on destroying America so that it becomes weak and poor. Their peculiar morality is that weakness makes right.
Luckily that isn't my plan.
So, by 'good guys' you just mean 'have a Democrat for president'? Then why go through all the diplomatic effort?
Quote from: PDH on April 16, 2013, 07:41:45 AM
The only thing worse than having a politician figure out military strategy is to have a wargamer figure out strategy.
I pile all Waffen SS divisions into one big stack.
Quote from: Neil on April 16, 2013, 08:06:07 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on April 16, 2013, 08:03:30 AM
Quote from: Neil on April 16, 2013, 07:49:03 AM
If your plan is for Europeans to love America, it would make more sense for you to focus on destroying America so that it becomes weak and poor. Their peculiar morality is that weakness makes right.
Luckily that isn't my plan.
So, by 'good guys' you just mean 'have a Democrat for president'? Then why go through all the diplomatic effort?
I'm more concerned about regional players. This is the Pacific. It's ours.
You can mock Europeans about this issue, but I'd rather ignore them.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 15, 2013, 11:18:22 PM
Why do you think Kerry would have had specific acts in mind if the statement had been intended for North Korea?
Because I think if the US had really decided to reach out to North Korea it would've been decided by Obama. His message would be from Obama and it'd be clear he was speaking for the US government. Kerry wouldn't have to go back to Washington to check.
That suggests to me there's no shift, he's not been sent to reach out to North Korea. I think it was in response to a question and I think, given that he was about to go to China, that chances are he was told to sound more emollient without actually changing anything. Which is what he did.