Bubba I just left a comment over at Boyd's saying that I think that the nuke nonproliferation issue is just too big to deal with unilaterally. I think we need an international body with teeth, one supported enthusiastically by all world powers (i.e. something besides the UN and the current IAEA) and with some teeth. I think this is hard for Americans to accept because it entails ceding some influence to an international body, and saying that we're willing to be subject to the rulings of that body, but in this day and age I think it's the only way to begin to deal with such a huge issue. What do you think?
I don't hold out much hope for any international body coming up with any solution, unless the international body clearly becomes willing to follow the lead of the US and UK. I would not trust many of the other western nations, especially those aligned with the current culture of corruption that is the UN's calling card.
The Russians and the Chinese would probably not be a party to any such body where the driving force belongs to the US and UK. Having said that, I think the Chinese may yet come up with a solution in their best interests, which could also satisfy many of the other nations, including us, while keeping the Russians semi-happy.
The nation with the most to lose initially is obviously south Korea, but Japan is also vulnerable too.
"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?"
Bubba I just left a comment over at Boyd's saying that I think that the nuke nonproliferation issue is just too big to deal with unilaterally. I think we need an international body with teeth, one supported enthusiastically by all world powers (i.e. something besides the UN and the current IAEA) and with some teeth. I think this is hard for Americans to accept because it entails ceding some influence to an international body, and saying that we're willing to be subject to the rulings of that body, but in this day and age I think it's the only way to begin to deal with such a huge issue. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteI don't hold out much hope for any international body coming up with any solution, unless the international body clearly becomes willing to follow the lead of the US and UK. I would not trust many of the other western nations, especially those aligned with the current culture of corruption that is the UN's calling card.
ReplyDeleteThe Russians and the Chinese would probably not be a party to any such body where the driving force belongs to the US and UK. Having said that, I think the Chinese may yet come up with a solution in their best interests, which could also satisfy many of the other nations, including us, while keeping the Russians semi-happy.
The nation with the most to lose initially is obviously south Korea, but Japan is also vulnerable too.
Meanwhile, the Aussies acted first. We need to follow suit.
Here's what McCain says.
ReplyDeleteHe's right.
Excerpt:
"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?"
Exactly.
Very interesting situation, it also takes on a new meaning with the recent agreement. Take the booty when you can.
ReplyDeleteabsurd thought -
God of the Universe thinks
keep building your bombs
always threaten the world
get them to send you money
.