Update: Journalists Freed, Bolton Complains..... Clinton Heads to Pyongyang to Negotiate for Two US Journalists Freedom

[Lemon law]

Lets tell the damn truth, this release was a done deal before Bill Clinton got involved. Kudos to those who did the hard negotiating beforehand, the dying Kim gets the prestige of doing the right thing, Bill Clinton gets to step in at the last minute and grab the glory, please don't think I am being critical of Bill Clinton, but in the grand game of hostage negotiations, its simply part of the way the game is played.

All is well that ends well.

As for us, we should have only two dogs in the fight, namely the two journalists who became pawns in a larger snit between two countries.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
There's nothing unusual or wrong with sending Clinton to NK. I'll remind people that there is a photo of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam, and it wasn't because they got together to play golf.

Why did Rumsfield go to Iraq?

Rumsfeld went to Iraq, because after seeing Saddam gas 'his own people', they recognized they had a leader who could be of use, and he was there to make the relations closer.

The US was interested in using Saddam to attack Iran, after our policy for decades of keeping a dictator in power in Oran who served our interests had ended when he was finally overthrown, and the Carter administration had not prevented that. We thought the appropriate next thing to do to Iran was to 'weaken' them - in what was the longest major war of the 20th century with a million casualties, many of them with attacks such as civilians being gassed. But not a war we paid for and fought, but a proxy war by Saddam.

Remember, that we had oil and security alliances with the Sunni nations like Saudi Arabia, and Iran was the leading Shiite nation.

He was offered the carrot that if he defeated Iran, he'd be welcome to take back Kuwait, which had been cut off decades earlier by the British.

So after he did the war on Iran for us, and went to claim his prize of Kuwait, and our interests were then for him to be weakened - well, you know the rest.

There's a certain logic to the policies that oppress and kill so many - if you are willing for the US to behave in a very evil manner, as the British often did there before us.

The #1 question Americans have of the people who if lucky live under dictatorship, and if unlucky are targetted by violence, all to get us cheap oil: "why don't they like the US?'

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Sacrilege

EDIT 2:

John Bolton Update:

Breitbart Link

The Obama administration is rewarding North Korea for its bad behavior by sending ex-president Bill Clinton to Pyongyang to win the release of two US journalists, the former US ambassador to the UN said Tuesday.

"I think this is a win-win for North Korea," according to Bolton, who believes all negotiations are useless in trying to force North Korea to abandon its weapons-grade nuclear program.

All negotiations useless? The guy must own defense contractor stocks and have no children in the military.

John Bolton can go F himself. He is the epitome of Bush's failed 8 years of international policy. 8 years that won the US no ally, started a war about nothing, and lost countless international friendship and goodwill.

Bolton resigned his UN ambassador post because he was such a bad representative, even some western US ally called he a bully. Bush insisted that Bolton did a fabulous job, but we all know what happened when Bush said the last guy did a heck of a job.

And now Bolton criticizes other people's diplomatic achivements? Does the guy have any shame?

 

[Via]

Does this issue really warrant partisan bull%^&?

If you're happy the two women are free, great. I am.

If you aren't just give a golf clap (if that's all you have to give) and move on.

 

[Phokus]

Should have exchanged John Bolton for the two women as a 'gift' (maybe send a few P&N republicans along with him)

 

[runestone]

I think Slick just played the H card: "hey, if ya don't let em go, A'hm gonna send Hillary over here, to stay".

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Should have exchanged John Bolton for the two women as a 'gift' (maybe send a few P&N republicans along with him)

They tried. North Korea said forget it, he's too crazy for them.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Dari
A nuke can arrive faster and solve far more problems.

Yes lets kill millions of innocent civilians (more than we already have through sanctions) to get one guy that doesn't like us and is dying

Are you blaming the death of millions of NK civilians on sanctions? Ahhh, now I understand why some people just want to punch bleeding-hearts in the face. It'll give them a nice reality check.

I just hope you're the fucking hostage when we do nuke them.

 

[colonel]

should' m sent dick Cheney with a couple shottys and Delta squad.

 

[sportage]

You know they are beyond hope when the dark side slams a successful rescue.
Aundrea Mitchell on NBC could hardly contain her despite of success by those liberals.
P A T H E T I C

And some of the silly people actually think the dark side is concerned about your healthcare costs, choice or availability.
Starting to see the pattern here???

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Rumsfeld went to Iraq, because after seeing Saddam gas 'his own people', they recognized they had a leader who could be of use, and he was there to make the relations closer.

Except for the fact that Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 and the Kurdish gas attack happened in 1988. Don't let the facts get in the way of your partisan arguments though, OK?

He was offered the carrot that if he defeated Iran, he'd be welcome to take back Kuwait, which had been cut off decades earlier by the British.

Link, please.

Hats off to Clinton, but I would love to know what concessions were granted to NK.

 

[SP33Demon]

My new plan to be a millionaire: I'm going intentionally to go to Colombia and get captured by the guerillas there. Then after Bill comes and rescues me, I can write a book, become famous, and eat dinner with Ms. Betancourt while people take my picture and marvel at my bravery in the face of death.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: blanghorst
Originally posted by: Craig234

Rumsfeld went to Iraq, because after seeing Saddam gas 'his own people', they recognized they had a leader who could be of use, and he was there to make the relations closer.

Except for the fact that Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 and the Kurdish gas attack happened in 1988. Don't let the facts get in the way of your partisan arguments though, OK?

He was offered the carrot that if he defeated Iran, he'd be welcome to take back Kuwait, which had been cut off decades earlier by the British.

Link, please.

Hats off to Clinton, but I would love to know what concessions were granted to NK.

Hey crybaby craig....do you ever get tired of being wrong?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Dari
A nuke can arrive faster and solve far more problems.

Yes lets kill millions of innocent civilians (more than we already have through sanctions) to get one guy that doesn't like us and is dying

Are you blaming the death of millions of NK civilians on sanctions? Ahhh, now I understand why some people just want to punch bleeding-hearts in the face. It'll give them a nice reality check.

I just hope you're the fucking hostage when we do nuke them.

I got a vacation for a similar comment. I guess the target of the insult matters.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: blanghorst
Originally posted by: Craig234

Rumsfeld went to Iraq, because after seeing Saddam gas 'his own people', they recognized they had a leader who could be of use, and he was there to make the relations closer.

Except for the fact that Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 and the Kurdish gas attack happened in 1988. Don't let the facts get in the way of your partisan arguments though, OK?

He was offered the carrot that if he defeated Iran, he'd be welcome to take back Kuwait, which had been cut off decades earlier by the British.

Link, please.

Hats off to Clinton, but I would love to know what concessions were granted to NK.

Ouch.

Saddam didnt defeat Iran so what made him think Kuwait was still on the table?

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: blanghorst
Originally posted by: Craig234

Rumsfeld went to Iraq, because after seeing Saddam gas 'his own people', they recognized they had a leader who could be of use, and he was there to make the relations closer.

Except for the fact that Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 and the Kurdish gas attack happened in 1988. Don't let the facts get in the way of your partisan arguments though, OK?

Iraq's chemical programs began in the 1970s, and though their first use was 'reported' in 1983 a UN investigation found extensive use beginning in 1981.

As far as John Bolton is concerned, I imagine the majority of even the GOP would prefer he STFU. He is not the 'face' conservatives need on foreign policy. He is the nut-case PNAC fringe.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: blanghorst
Originally posted by: Craig234

Rumsfeld went to Iraq, because after seeing Saddam gas 'his own people', they recognized they had a leader who could be of use, and he was there to make the relations closer.

Except for the fact that Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983 and the Kurdish gas attack happened in 1988. Don't let the facts get in the way of your partisan arguments though, OK?

Iraq's chemical programs began in the 1970s, and though their first use was 'reported' in 1983 a UN investigation found extensive use beginning in 1981.

As far as John Bolton is concerned, I imagine the majority of even the GOP would prefer he STFU. He is not the 'face' conservatives need on foreign policy. He is the nut-case PNAC fringe.

The information I've seen indicates it was reported in use against Iran as early as 1983, but this is not "against his own people" which Craig was clearly implying was the Kurdish attack. If you have more information, I'd like to read it as I am genuinely interested. And if I am wrong, so be it and I can admit it, unlike Craig.

EDIT: This link indicates the first use against civilian targets was in 1987, again disputing Craig's initial assertion. I will research more to see if I can find something that states otherwise.

EDIT2: I don't want to derail this thread any further, so anyone interested in discussing further, we can do it via PM.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Dari
A nuke can arrive faster and solve far more problems.

Yes lets kill millions of innocent civilians (more than we already have through sanctions) to get one guy that doesn't like us and is dying

Are you blaming the death of millions of NK civilians on sanctions? Ahhh, now I understand why some people just want to punch bleeding-hearts in the face. It'll give them a nice reality check.

Are you still too chickenshit to join the military and put your ass on the line? Or is posting on the internet enough for you?
Dropping bombs on civilians seems to get you excited, so maybe you should join the airforce and get your chance.

 

[Deadtrees]

So those reporters didn't know what was going on. They were told that they are to go to a meeting and when the door opened, Bill Clinton standing right there.
Imagine the suprise and joy they felt seeing Bill Clinton standing right there in North Korea. That would make a great movie scene.

I'm happy they are free but I really hope they or the media don't make heros out of those two. In fact, I hope they be charged with all the costs Bill Clinton team spent for freeing them, just like how Japanese charged those who became hostages in Iraq.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Dari
A nuke can arrive faster and solve far more problems.

Yes lets kill millions of innocent civilians (more than we already have through sanctions) to get one guy that doesn't like us and is dying

Are you blaming the death of millions of NK civilians on sanctions? Ahhh, now I understand why some people just want to punch bleeding-hearts in the face. It'll give them a nice reality check.

I just hope you're the fucking hostage when we do nuke them.

I got a vacation for a similar comment. I guess the target of the insult matters.

Probably in your case it was the asshole making the comment and not the other way round.

 

[tk149]

Good job, Bill. I'm very happy for the the two journalists.

I wonder what he promised Kim? I estimate a 99.99% probability that something was traded under the table. If you believe that the husband of the Secretary of State didn't have some government backing, and completely negotiated this on his own, then I have a bridge to sell you.

On a more prurient note, I wonder if Bill availed himself of Kim's brothels... er, "amenities"...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Dari
A nuke can arrive faster and solve far more problems.

Yes lets kill millions of innocent civilians (more than we already have through sanctions) to get one guy that doesn't like us and is dying

Are you blaming the death of millions of NK civilians on sanctions? Ahhh, now I understand why some people just want to punch bleeding-hearts in the face. It'll give them a nice reality check.

I just hope you're the fucking hostage when we do nuke them.

I got a vacation for a similar comment. I guess the target of the insult matters.

Or the history of the person posting it.

 

[Lemon law]

Getting hopefully back to the thread topic, and be it resolved, Kim needed some high profile US poobah to finalize a done deal. It worked for Kim and it worked for Bill Clinton, no reason to heap great praises on Bill Clinton and no reason to bash Bill Clinton either.

Bottom line, the journalists got freed. End of story and no reason for us at P&N to hurl partisan insults at each other.

And on a more humorous note, found this on major geeks. For his next trick, Kim plans to abduct the moon and hold it hostage.

http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=8479

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: Deadtrees
So those reporters didn't know what was going on. They were told that they are to go to a meeting and when the door opened, Bill Clinton standing right there.
Imagine the suprise and joy they felt seeing Bill Clinton standing right there in North Korea. That would make a great movie scene.

I'm happy they are free but I really hope they or the media don't make heros out of those two. In fact, I hope they be charged with all the costs Bill Clinton team spent for freeing them, just like how Japanese charged those who became hostages in Iraq.

first paragraph reminds me of a kiddie joke about a guy going to hell and seeing in the first room hitler backside borking marlene deitrich. guy says "hey this doesn't look too bad!!!". devil says "this is her hell, not his..."... they mustn't have heard this joke and/or bill mustn't have had a cigar in hand...

as to the second paragraph, i didn't check, but the kids say that these gals work for an al gore company... and that one gal is related to a famous actress... but i do always wonder about who's picking up the tab...