McCain Raps Clintons On North Korea
Leader In GOP Presidential Derby Takes Swipe At Democratic Front-Runner
-
Play CBS Video
Video
McCain On North Korea
CBS News RAW: While campaigning in Michigan, Sen. John McCain stated that North Korea doubts the world's resolve and needs to face strict punishment for purportedly testing nuclear weapons.
-
Video
Clinton's N. Korea Strategy
CBS News RAW: Peter Zimmerman, a nuclear arms expert and a chief scientist of former President Clinton, discussed what he thinks President Bush did wrong with North Korea.
-
Video
Bolton On N. Korea Sanctions
A draft U.N. resolution calling for sanctions against North Korea is being pushed by U.S. Ambassador John Bolton. Hannah Storm speaks with Bolton about the issue.
-
-
Photo
Sen. Hillary Clinton, left, and Sen. John McCain (CBS/AP)
-
Photo
A North Korean soldier, right, wades into a creek that marks the border between China and North Korea to accept a bag of food from Chinese tourists, left, near the Chinese city of Dandung on Oct. 10, 2006. (AP Photo)
-
Photo
A North Korean looks out from a patrol tower in the North Korean town of Sinuiju, opposite the Chinese border city of Dandung on Oct. 9, 2006. (AP Photo/EyePress)
-
Photo
North Korean leader Kim Jong Il (AP)
-
-
Interactive
N. Korea: Tests And Threats
Follow recent events and learn about this secretive nation's nuclear capabilities.
-
Interactive
Nuclear Armed World
The world's nuclear weapons powers, missile defense and a history of the nuclear weapons age.
-
Fast Facts
North Korea
Learn about the people, economy and history.
“I would remind Senator (Hillary) Clinton and other Democrats critical of the Bush administration's policies that the framework agreement her husband's administration negotiated was a failure,” McCain said at a news conference after a campaign appearance for Republican Senate candidate Mike Bouchard.
“The Koreans received millions and millions in energy assistance. They've diverted millions of dollars of food assistance to their military,” he said.
Democrats have argued President Clinton presented his successor with a framework for dealing with North Korea and the Republican fumbled the opportunity. In October 2000, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a groundbreaking visit to Pyongyang to explore a missile deal with Chairman Kim Jong Il. There was even talk of a visit by President Clinton.
Reports this week suggesting North Korea tested a nuclear device prompted a number of Democrats to criticize Bush, arguing that he focused on Iraq, a country without weapons of mass destruction, while ignoring legitimate threats from Pyongyang.
The criticism took a presidential campaign turn on Tuesday as McCain, the Arizona senator considered the Republican front-runner for the party nod, assailed Clinton's husband and mentioned her by name. The New York senator is considered her party's leading candidate in 2008.
Sen. Clinton's spokesman dismissed McCain's criticism and argued that it was time for a new policy from the president.
“Now is not the time to play politics of the most dangerous kind — with our policy on North Korea,” Philippe Reines, spokesman for Sen. Clinton, said in a statement. “History is clear that nothing the Bush administration has done has stopped the North Koreans from openly testing a nuclear weapon and presenting a new danger to the region of the world.”
Five years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Bush “has allowed the 'axis of evil' to spin out of control. Our Iraq policy is a failure. Iran is going nuclear and North Korea is testing nuclear weapons,” the statement said.
A spokesman for President Clinton, Ben Yarrow, said in a statement that it was “unfortunate that anyone would attempt to rewrite history to score political points at a time when we need to address this serious threat.”
“For eight years during the Clinton administration, there was no new plutonium production, no nuclear weapons tests and therefore no additional nuclear weapons developed on President Clinton's watch,” said Yarrow, who added that Colin Powell, Bush's secretary of State, endorsed Clinton's policy toward North Korea in 2001.
McCain's criticism also elicited a strong response from Democratic Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 presidential nominee and a potential 2008 candidate.
“He must be trying to burnish his credentials for the nomination process,” said Kerry, who labeled McCain's comments “flat politics and incorrect.”
“The truth is the Clinton administration knew full well they didn't have a perfect agreement. But at least they were talking. At least we had inspectors going in and we knew where the (nuclear fuel) rods were. This way, we don't know where the rods are, the rods are gone. There are no inspectors. Ask any American which way is better,” Kerry said.
The Massachusetts senator made the remarks in Nevada during a campaign appearance with Elizabeth Carter, wife of Democratic Senate candidate Jack Carter.
In U.S.-North Korea relations, the initial breakthrough occurred in October 1994 when U.S. negotiators persuaded North Korea to freeze its nuclear program, with onsite monitoring by U.N. inspectors. In exchange, the United States, with input from South Korea and Japan, promised major steps to ease North Korea's acute energy shortage.
These commitments were inherited by the Bush administration, which made clear almost from the outset that it believed the Clinton policy ignored key elements of North Korea's activities, especially the threat posed by the hundreds of thousands of troops on permanent duty along the Demilitarized Zone with South Korea.
McCain, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he backed tough U.N. sanctions against North Korea in response to the reported test. The measures, he said, should include a military embargo, financial and trade sanctions and the right to inspect all cargo in and out of North Korea.
McCain also called on China to “step up to the plate” and vote for sanctions and rejected calls for one-on-one talks between the United States and North Korea.
“The worst thing we could do is to accede to North Korea's demand for bilateral talks,” McCain said. “When has rewarding North Korea's bad behavior ever gotten us anything more than worse behavior?”
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, speaking during a debate Tuesday with his Republican rival for the Senate, accused the Bush administration of walking away from relationships the Clinton administration had developed.
“When the North Korean ambassador came to the United States, he had to go to New Mexico to meet Bill Richardson, who had been at the United Nations, because he didn't have anyone else to talk to,” Kennedy said. “The United States is the heavy in this. The United States has to engage. This administration has to have direct contact with North Korea.”
©MMVI, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



- 1
- 2
- next
See all 61 CommentsTo bad he couldn't stay himself.
We need to unite and focus our agenda into one concrete action! No use crying over spilled milk.
Let us all rally behind Pres. Bush and show him 101% full support.
"In October 2000, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a groundbreaking visit to Pyongyang to explore a missile deal with Chairman Kim Jong Il."
So the deal was still on the table in 2000. O.K. so remind me again... Why did it fail?
Clinton clinton shaboom shaboom clinton clinton dowoop dowoop personal responsibility Clinton.
I really do miss Clinton. Also Bush 41, Reagan, Carter, Nixon... They're all looking pretty good right now.
Come on, what do you expect? You declare 3 countries an "Axis of Evil", and then you invade 1 of the 3 countries. What other outcome can there possibly be other than the other 2 countries scrambling to arm themselves, lest they too find themselves on trial for their lives?
McCain is just doing what they always do, blaming Democrats. Last week it was Tom Foley. The week before it was 9/11. The Democrats have power over nothing, yet they are to blame for everything.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/sr.gowans/elichnorthkorea.html
Rumsfeld was on the board of directors of the company that brought the technology into N Korea but I guess he didn't know anything about it, just like Condi can't remember anything unpleasant from her meetings with Tenent, and didn't pay any heed to Richard Clark.
Neo-cons, see nothing and do nothing but line their pockets and lie. The republican party gets the Sargent Schultz Award for "knowing nothing" except how to bash the Clintons. Fits right in with their hate spewing talk radio crowd. And why does being a prisoner of war, getting shot down, make someone a good Presidential candidate?
So Bush's N Korea policy is a success- they've got nucs probably, makes people scared, yes, that's a success in the Bush playbook. The repubs are asleep at the switch from 911, to Foley, to Katrina, and now to N Korea. They've really got a great track record.
Heck even Herbie Hoover is looking good right now... well maybe a tie.
Okay, that was uncalled for.
Since Hillary Clinton might run against him in '08 she is responsible for North Korea getting nukes because her husband was President 6 years-ago.
Wow.
Posted by gwagener at 05:27 PM : Oct 10, 2006
How will THAT help the GOP hold onto Congress?
Hell yes, I LOVE giving into terrorists! I do it five times before breakfast. Do you think you can convince anyone of anything with this kind of caricature? It is my belief that Bush is playing right into Osama's hands. You may not share my belief and that's valid, but when you tell me how much I love terrorists, you're only convincing me that you know nothing of who I am or what I believe.
McCain isn't talking about "bullies and terrorists". He's talking about the Clintons. Same old song and dance.
ckMagic,
I have a BA in history. But it's not necessary to understand this issue.
The fact is that part of the 1984 agreement with N. Korea was for the U.S. to provide light water reactors to help with their critical energy shortage. Light water reactors do not produce weapons grade material. Once Bush took office he declared N, Korea part of the "axis of evil" and refused to provide the reactors, encouraging N. Korea to proceed with its nuclear (that's nucular in neo-con) program. Now N. Korea has met and exceeded all the criteria Bush used to justify the invasion of Iraq and you say they made a fool of Clinton?
Posted by FARTKNOCKER2 at 05:43 PM : Oct 10, 2006"
We were about due for a Monica Lewinsky reference. Haven't heard one of those in almost 15 minutes. The beauty of this particular post is that you can use it verbatim for almost any occasion where Clinton's name is evoked, thus reducing the risk of carpal tunnel syndrome, and frowm lines from having to think too much. Just copy and paste.
Same old song and dance.
Yea, you're right kid:
Peace
balanced budget
affordable gas
respect of our allies
fair elections
cleaner air
safer food
What was he thinking!
1) Ignore them
2) Attack them militarily
3) Negotiate with them
Bush unilateraly decided not to do #3. That only leaves 2 options. Given our pre-emptive attack on Iraq and our threats against Iran, North Korea had no other choice but to do what they did - their actions makes sense and it was a logical conclusion.
North Korea pursued and aquired nuclear weapons because Bush precluded diplomacy and forced their hand.
You mindless Clinton haters are so blinded by rage that you fail to see that his negotiating with NK forestalled their development of nuclear weapons by at least 10 years.
When will our leaders stop looking to blame and start looking towards positive progression for our nation and the worlds problems?
Sounds like a bunch of 3 year olds blaming each other over ***.
1.
"For eight years during the Clinton administration, there was no new plutonium production, no nuclear weapons tests and therefore no additional nuclear weapons developed on President Clinton's watch," said the statement, which added that Colin Powell, Bush's secretary of State, endorsed Clinton's policy toward North Korea in 2001."
2.
"The truth is the Clinton administration knew full well they didn't have a perfect agreement. But at least they were talking. At least we had inspectors going in and we knew where the (nuclear fuel) rods were. This way, we don't know where the rods are, the rods are gone. There are no inspectors. Ask any American which way is better,"
3.
"Democrats have argued President Clinton presented his successor with a framework for dealing with North Korea and the Republican fumbled the opportunity. In October 2000, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a groundbreaking visit to Pyongyang to explore a missile deal with Chairman Kim Jong Il. There was even talk of a visit by President Clinton."
If you "really" want the truth, you can find it.
Do Republicans really want to know the truth?
The fact is that the GOP has had control over the executive, legislative and judicial branches of our government for the last six years. If they were able to work something out with their foreign policy we wouldn%u2019t be reading about a North Korean atomic blast. This is a Bush administration failure and I challenge the GOP readers to show some leadership and accept the fact that they made the wrong choice by reelecting Bush!
1500 characters is not enough space to list the other failures or reasons not to vote for the GOP!
But this time around, despite what the anal-retentive Neo-Fascists and Pervert Clinton defenders whine, he's right. Clinton gave North Korea a pass. With the assistance of that other piece of work, Howdy Doody Carter, outside of equally gutless Jemmy Buchanan the worst President in American History, Clinton and Miss Piggy NoBright gave this babykilling regime economic aid and perks - so that they would not build nukes.
So what did Kim do? He smiled. Did the hoochie koo with the befuddled Miss Piggy, and built the nukes nonetheless. Once again, Democratic appeasement, cowardice and lies have put the world in jeopardy. Wonder what Cuckolded Shrill Shrew wants to tell the Japanese. Oh yeah, her hubby is such a nice, brave guy. Pardon me while I puke.
you say Clinton gave us peace, right.
Where did you get your education? Heinz 57 varieties? Oh, Teresa was your college dean, and Benedict Arnold Kerry your chief instructor. I got it!
Peace? Well, tell that to the 2000 Serbian men, women and children who perished under the explosions of USAF B-52s bombing Belgrade on a regular basis.
Peace?
Yeah. When the pervert could have sent those bombers on regular runs to Afghanistan, he chose not to. Too busy with Lewinsky, or bombing people who were not a threat to the U.S. - UNLIKE BIN LADEN or North Korea.
And respect of our allies? Who? The Israelis, whose 1999 election was manipulated by Carville? Barak might have kissed Lewinsky's spot - but that didn't save him from the Intifada Clinton's real ally, Arafat (you know, the terrorist whom Clinton invited to the White House 9 times!) dropped on him. Luckily the Israelis wised up and got rid of gutless wonder ehud at the same time we put paid to Gore. But much too late to stop both Osama and Kim.
Care to applaud the Pervert and his Cuckolded Shrill Shrew now?
Here's a good primer on why you're all competely insane:
http://tinyurl.com/6bylt
"CUT AND RUN"
Neo-Cons elected a great American President, Ronald Wilson Reagan - whom did you elected, sonny? Howdy Doody Carter or Good Ol' Bill the Pervert - BOTH COWARDS - BOTH LIARS - BOTH DEMOCRATS.
Korea has tweeked the nose of the whole world, not just US but we are yelling the loudest. All I say.. is get on your knees.... Widow lady
Clinton told the truth? Say, where and when.
He lied under oath, but then again he was a cowardly opportunist all his life. You pathetic weasels and ******* cannot even refute a truth like Clinton's failure in North Korea, his appeasement of Yasser Arafat, which culminated in a decision by his advisers NOT to launch another missile strike on Bin Laden that might have gotten him before 9/11.
But hey, it was quite all right to drop high explosive on Belgrade for a month, wasn't it.
Go fly your swastika flag, shout Heil Clinton, Heil Carter, Heil Kerry, and go goosestepping. That's about all you are truly worth.
I think you work for Fox or something.
It's good writing, but without factual basis.
Just like in most GOP/Conservative/Republican leaning viewpoints in the media these days, it sounds convincing but the logic is scrambled.
Less emotion, more facts please.
High on money but low on cash?
I understand, I'm with you.
Get informed, Get centered.
Sticks and stone will break my bones but names....................oh never mind.
Is it worth the time?
Clinton's major crime against America was to embrace the notion of the imperial presidency, which directly led to the idiotic half-witted son of a former emperor (Bush) taking the throne. Clinton's supporters, every time they praise his personal actions as if he was a god or emperor, are participating in the destuction of our nation. They are participating in the dumb hero-worship and lack of political understanding that led us to trust Bush after 9/11, rahter than trusting each other.
To be a Clintonite is to be treasonous against the constitution. This is more dangerous than Korea's nuclear weapons.
Should we reward the Bush administration a GOP majority considering how it has performed over the over the last 6 years?
Better yet can anyone tell me about a foreign policy success in the Bush administration?
Does the fiscal irresponsibility of the GOP and the Bush administration warrant another 2 years of GOP majorities?
As an engineer I am paid to provide a solution that addresses a need for my customers. I cannot afford to exceed my budget or timing requirements for my assigned projects without being held accountable. Why is that we are not holding this administration accountable for their failures over the last 6 years? Are they royalty or above the law?
The fact is the GOP has had 6 years to solve all those problems the democrats are being blamed for.
All I ask is to keep that in mind and disregard the negative campaign ads when deciding who to vote for. Focus on the issues.
All these negative things you say about Democrats, but you haven't put forth (or put out), any positives that Bush has done on the same subjects.
You must live one bitter life to feel the way you do and say the things you say. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is a Nazi?? HA HA HA. We know where you are coming from.
Funny how every response to my comments is typical Democratic Neo-Nazi (and if the shoe does fit, wear it, kiddies - after all, you've retained a Klansman in our government, not the GOP) Evasiveness and Lies. Even when we admit Bush or McCain have faults, the Dems and their Neo-Nazi allies can't bring themselves to saying the same about Clinton, Carter, or the traitor Kerry.
Not once. Not at all. Just lie - just hate Bush and love the finger wagging perv and his shrew; just love the Jew-baiting Carter. That's all - and that's all that you are.
Pretty pathetic. But then again, you wouldn't have it any other way.
What do you Neo-Fascists stand for - you from MoveOn.Org, from Air Hate America, from ANSWER, from the Daily Kostroite? The second coming of Hitler, but if he doesn't arrive another Clinton or Carter will do, right. Since you hate Jews and Christians so much, why not elect your hero KKK Byrd - or is the white-sheeted *** just a little too much for you?
the shoe obviously fits in your case. After all, what did Clinton do to get at Bin Laden? One half-assed missile strike and crying that Arafat would be offended when Clarke suggested another strike after the Cole bombing. Nothing else. Nothing more.
And North Korea? He gave them economic aid - not bomb their nuke sites. But hey, he reserved that for innocent Serbian civilians.
Go and sieg heil your cuckolded shrill shrew Hil and that hapless *** who looks like the befuddled defense attorney on "Law and Order SVU" - you know, Chuckie Schmucker. Oh, but you're too busy sieg heiling your other hero Sharpton.
Not angry. Actually I get a kick out of the anal-retentive neo-fascists who call themselves Liberals and don't even know what the word means. They're laughable, and you're right, both parties have their share of losers and half-wits. From my perspective though, it is the Dems who are much, much worse because they lie through their teeth and try to say its the truth.
Bull____.
One other thing that they won't admit, girl, is that Clinton was a predator, a sad sack who claimed he loved women. If demeaning is Love, then I wonder what is hate to the finger-wagging pervert. He's a gutless joke, and so is that cuckolded shrill shrew who still defends him!
Let's see here, exactly what has George Bush done on the North Korean issue since he took office six years ago? Well, let's see I do recall him saying that North Korea was part of a modern "Axis of Evil". And.... Umm.... Yeah, I think that's about it. It's great to play the oldies but goodies, but seriously, Bush has had a Republican House and Senate to work with his entire presidency, the closest thing to carte blanche a president could ask for. If there is a failure here, it's because we were misled about and misfocused upon Iraq, at the cost of not addressing a real threat - North Korea.
The Bush Administration didn't deal with this, so let's be honest and say so, rather than try to blame someone who hasn't been in office for two whole terms.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 61 Comments