The discussion centers around the involvement of Donald Rumsfeld and the Clinton administration in North Korea's nuclear program, exploring the implications of political dealings with regimes perceived as adversarial. Participants debate the historical context, accountability, and motivations behind the nuclear agreements made with North Korea.
Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the accountability of Rumsfeld and the Clinton administration in relation to North Korea's nuclear program.
There are unresolved assumptions about the effectiveness of the Clinton deal and the motivations behind Rumsfeld's business involvements, as well as differing interpretations of the historical context surrounding North Korea's nuclear capabilities.
Originally posted by damgo
This thread should be titled "Clinton and NK's nuke program" since Clinton and Albright made the deal. At most, Rumsfeld didn't make a public outcry when the company got a contract -- he wasn't an administration official at the time -- so I guess he's not an idealist adamantly opposed to any sort of dealing with NK. Shocking, that.
Originally posted by damgo
Clinton's administration made the deal, hence provided the capability. In fact, if you recall, the deal was civilian reactors and was specifically intended to get NK to stop their nuclear weapons program. No nuclear fuel was ever delivered -- NK already had that. If the deal had succeeded, there would be no NK crisis now. Since it didn't, the taxpayers are out some money, but that's it.
Why not attack real conservative hypocrisy, like the Bill Bennett thing? I'm no member of the Rummy Fan Club either, but grasping at straws like this is kinda embarrassing.