N. Korea Pledges To Give Up Nukes

No. 2 Leader Tells Officials From South To Expect "Efforts To Realize" Disarmament

(CBS/AP)  North Korea's No. 2 leader pledged his country's commitment Thursday to giving up its nuclear program amid intensifying diplomacy aimed at implementing Pyongyang's pledge to disarm.

"The denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is the dying wish" of the country's late founding president Kim Il Sung, Kim Yong Nam said in Pyongyang during a visit from a high-level South Korean delegation.

The North "will make efforts to realize it," he said.

At the meeting, South Korean Unification Minister Lee Jae-joung pressed the North to implement a Feb. 13 pledge made with the U.S. and four other countries to take initial steps to disarm.

"It is important to make efforts to ensure that South and North Korea cooperate and six countries each assume their responsibilities," Lee said.

Kim Yong Nam also called on the Koreas to cooperate to achieve the reunification of the peninsula, which was divided in the wake of World War II and still remains technically at war since the 1950-53 Korean War ended in a cease-fire.

Kim also repeated the North's calls for inter-Korean collaboration, an idea South Korea has dismissed as a ploy to drive a wedge in Seoul's alliance with Washington.

This week's Cabinet-level talks between the North and South — the highest-level regular contact between the Koreas — are the first in seven months. The talks resumed after North Korea's agreement last month in Beijing to shut down its main nuclear reactor within 60 days in exchange for aid.

Meanwhile, the New York Times published a story Thursday that raises questions about how the U.S. got into the situation of having to negotiate with North Korea to abandon a well-developed weapons program.

The Times quotes an unnamed "senior administration official" who suggests the nuclear standoff with the North could have been avoided, or at least greatly eased, had the White House "handled differently" evidence in 2002 that suggested Pyongyang was enriching uranium to create a bomb.

American intelligence officials are "publicly softening their position" on how much progress has actually been made in that enrichment process, according to the report.

"The question now is whether we would be in the position of having to get the North Koreans to give up a sizable arsenal if this had been handled differently," the official told The Times.

[j-whitman]

Looks as though as for NK goes,, Bush chose to use Clinton's foreign policy instead of his own on this one,,,,, What's that tell you of Bush's policies ?????

[crater7]

formrusmcsgt: NOT USING CAPS: I USE CAPS, BECAUSE I HAVE A VISUAL IMPAIRMENT. SORRY IT BOTHERS YOU, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THE NOISE DOWN, AND NOT YELL AT YOU ANY MORE. NAAAAAAAA, EXPECT MORE OF THE SAME. TURN YOUR VOLUME DOWN.

[pakaal]

"Bush is being successful with his approach in NK."

And what happens six or eight years from now, when we're negotiating again? We've been down this road before, when Clinton was in office. Hate to rain on anyone's parade, but anyone who touts this as a success should take a look at recent history. There's no way to say NK is any more sincere now than they were then. I wouldn't characterize this as successful - unless you're willing to say it's as successful as Clinton was when he negotiated with NK....

[agnim]

"N. Korea Pledges To Give Up Nukes"

Promises

Promises

Promises LOL

[formrusmcsgt]

That, and I'm trying to get into one of those middle school classes where I can be molested two or three times.
Posted by Musty2U at 11:11 AM : Mar 01, 2007

Maybe that's what that 29 year-old was after trying to pass himself of as a 12 year old a month or two ago...lol.

[musty2u]

That, and I'm trying to get into one of those middle school classes where I can be molested two or three times.

[formrusmcsgt]

Whew, that's an acceptance speech I would have a hard time writing.
Posted by Musty2U at 11:02 AM : Mar 01, 2007

You mean because of your talons, bro? lol.

[musty2u]

Whew, that's an acceptance speech I would have a hard time writing.

[formrusmcsgt]

but...the original post is because Bush is being successful with his approach in NK...and we will have a thawing with Iran within 180 days...
Posted by golfkt at 10:55 AM : Mar 01, 2007

Believe what you will. I only present the facts.

In regards to Bush's "success" with N. Korea, I will observe that he is at least making progress after abandoning his banty-rooster sabre-rattling approach that got us nowhere.

All that did was give N. Korea time to build 12 nukes instead of 2 and drive the cost of the deal up four-fold. Some "success".

He claimed that he had to hold the N. Koreans "accountable". Looking at the increased price of the deal, I would say that the N. Koreans held Bush more accountable than he did them.

[karlimhof]

sorry musty2u

MITYWHITY

I would wholeheartedly recommend you as a member of the American Academy of Science!

You first job should be to go to Mars yourself and check out why that SUV is causing so much trouble!

[golfkt]

form:
Christ, you know we have plans for everything....to indicate that we enetered Iraq to build bases is not accurate...again, an offshoot but not the primary reason for enetering Iraq....espcecially becuase we have relatively large bases close by...


but...the original post is because Bush is being successful with his approach in NK...and we will have a thawing with Iran within 180 days...

[formrusmcsgt]

Pentagon Expects Long-Term Access to Four Key Bases in Iraq
By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT
New York Times

Saturday 19 April 2003

WASHINGTON: The United States is planning a long-term military relationship with the emerging government of Iraq, one that would grant the Pentagon access to military bases and project American influence into the heart of the unsettled region, senior Bush administration officials say.

American military officials, in interviews this week, spoke of maintaining perhaps four bases in Iraq that could be used in the future: one at the international airport just outside Baghdad; another at Tallil, near Nasiriya in the south; the third at an isolated airstrip called H-1 in the western desert, along the old oil pipeline that runs to Jordan; and the last at the Bashur air field in the Kurdish north.

-----------------

Two weeks after the invasion the plans for the bases are presented but there was no planning beforehand, right golkt? PUHLEASE!

[karlimhof]

Musty2U

I would wholeheartedly recommend you as a member of the American Academy of Science!

You first job should be to go to Mars yourself and check out why that SUV is causing so much trouble!

[formrusmcsgt]

so an R congress pulls the plug...if that was the express purpose of the war...you would have seen much more activity on tat front...

much more!!!..it was an off shoot...but not the reason...escpecially in light the the bases we have close by....
Posted by golfkt at 10:44 AM : Mar 01, 2007

They pulled the plug on the funding as it became more than obvious that a degree of stability would never be achieved in Iraq to allow for thier existence.

"As the New York Times revealed in a front-page piece by Thom Shanker and Eric Schmitt on April 19, 2003, just after Baghdad fell, the Pentagon arrived in the Iraqi capital with plans already on the drawing board to build four massive military bases"

[mitywhity]

I guess you're living on a mountian top somewhere. Global warming is a proven reality.
Ask the Eskimos!............Posted by karlimhof

Yeah, yeah, it used to acid rain, then it was deadly solar rays, ozone layer, radon gas, etc.

It's a wonder we are still alive with all the global catastrophe we have had since 1980. Global warming is just SOCIAL ENGINEERING. It is designed to redistribute wealth, insert suction tubes into industry and connect them to Washington. You can buy the hoopla if you want to and go delivery ice to your eskimos. Why is there global warming on Mars when there is only ONE SUV THERE?

[golfkt]

so an R congress pulls the plug...if that was the express purpose of the war...you would have seen much more activity on tat front...

much more!!!..it was an off shoot...but not the reason...escpecially in light the the bases we have close by....

[golfkt]

so an R congress pulls the plug...if that was the express purpose of the war...you would have seen much more activity on tat front...

much more!!!..it was an off shoot...but not the reason...escpecially in light the the bases we have close by....

[musty2u]

The bases would have been in the way of my glassed parking lot.

War news must be held for March Madness.

[formrusmcsgt]

FormerUSMC:
is your point that we got into Iraq for the express purpose of permanent bases...I disagree whole heartedly...
Posted by golfkt at 10:37 AM : Mar 01, 2007

You can disagree all day long if you wish, but then you'll have to explain why Congress pulled the plug on these unplanned bases just last October if they were never the goal......

[golfkt]

FormerUSMC:
is your point that we got into Iraq for the express purpose of permanent bases...I disagree whole heartedly...is that an outcome yet....but the war for that reason...NO ...the liberals subscribe heinous things to Bush for this war....Not True....were we wrong.....maybe...maybe not....did we execute the peace ( after the war) correctly....no way...but...10-15 yrs will be needed to assess the right or wrong of this war...

suffice it to say: NK talking is ue to several reasons...the primary being---we cut off their source of cash...

Iran--- both sides will ultimately agree...again...the big concern is them getting the weapon then handing off to Hezbollah..or some other group...