The discussion revolves around the U.S. administration's approach to North Korea, particularly under President Bush, focusing on diplomatic strategies, the implications of unilateral versus multilateral negotiations, and the perceived effectiveness of current policies. Participants explore the historical context of negotiations, the role of international partners, and the consequences of the administration's stance on diplomacy.
Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the best approach to North Korea. Some advocate for increased diplomacy, while others defend the current administration's strategy. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the effectiveness and implications of the various proposed approaches.
Participants highlight limitations in the current diplomatic approach, including the loss of goodwill with international partners and the complexities of negotiating with North Korea. There are also unresolved questions about the motivations behind the administration's policies and the potential consequences of different negotiation strategies.
Gokul43201 said:Astro, could you throw in the link to the article?
We have gone wrong every time monied interests in control of aspects of our government have chosen profit and expediency instead of ethics, morality, and sound policies regarding the future of the human race. Whenever a politician tells us that we must aggressively oppose another country on the basis of ideology or some perceived threat, it's time to take off the blinders and start following the money. Jingoism and flag-waving are the clearest signs that our politicians are engaging in behavior that is detrimental to most of us, and financially beneficial to their handlers.denverdoc said:The Irani's are now trumpeting their 300 centrifuges to produce "energy".
Where did we go wrong?