North Korea Indicates Six-Party Talks Over

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

Vance

New Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
4,265
Reaction score
1
North Korea Indicates Six-Party Talks Over

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- North Korea's deputy U.N. ambassador indicated Friday that six-nation talks on the country's nuclear program were over and said the real issue is whether the United States intends to attack the reclusive communist nation.

Han Song Ryol made clear that his country's announcement Thursday that it is a nuclear power and would indefinitely suspend its participation in six-party negotiations was the result of Pyongyang's belief that the United States is bent on invading North Korea to topple Kim Jong II's authoritarian regime.

But Han went further in a brief interview Friday with Associated Press Television News when asked what it would take to get North Korea to come back to the six-party talks.

"Six party talks is old story. No more," the North Korean envoy replied in English.

Han was quoted in a South Korean newspaper on Friday as demanding bilateral talks with the United States to defuse the tension created by Thursday's announcement.

"If the United States moves to have direct dialogue with us, we can take that as a signal that the United States is changing its hostile policy toward us," he was quoted as telling South Korea's Hankyoreh newspaper in an interview Thursday.

But Han appeared to backtrack on the demand in Friday's APTN interview when he was asked whether the United States needs to have bilateral talks with North Korea.

"No, we do not ask for bilateral talks," Han replied. "The formality of the dialogue is not essential one. The essential one is the U.S. policy - whether it try to attack us or not. That is the problem, but not the bilateral or multilateral one. We do not care about the formality."

The North Korean diplomat was also very pessimistic when asked whether his government would engage in talks if the United States showed a more positive attitude.

"We do not expect any further positive measures from the U.S. side," Han told APTN. "We have seen already, fully, and we made already decision."

Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/UN_NORTH_KOREA?SITE=VASTR&SECTION=HOME
 
"We do not expect any further positive measures from the U.S. side," Han told APTN. "We have seen already, fully, and we made already decision."

The "WE" he speaks of is the Monarch. Kim has decided. He never entered negotiations in good faith anyway. He was biding his time until he had the nuclear missiles well on their way to completion. Do a search on his Highness and try to crawl inside his mind. It is, I assure you a scary place!
 
Codger said:
The "WE" he speaks of is the Monarch. Kim has decided. He never entered negotiations in good faith anyway. He was biding his time until he had the nuclear missiles well on their way to completion. Do a search on his Highness and try to crawl inside his mind. It is, I assure you a scary place!
Click to expand...
I don't want to bring this specific subject in this topic but I'd like to point one thing out. We can say the same thing about Bush. Many americans and countries do not want Bush to wage a war on Iraq but he alone flatly has decided.

From here, I don't see any difference. Sorry if I disagree with you at this point or use your words but I want to point that out, Codger.
 
All I can say is...

Never underestimate your enemies, expect the worst from them in order to be better prepared.
 
Banjo said:
All I can say is...

Never underestimate your enemies, expect the worst from them in order to be better prepared.
Click to expand...
That's entirely true.
 
Then we had better not underestimate the damage the Bush cabal is doing.
FLASHBACK TO APRIL 2002---our dear govt gives North Korea 94 Million dollars to help them develop its nuclear program...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/world/asia-pacific/1908571.stm

Where there were 7 countries with declared nuclear weapons, there are now 8.
Nice going, Bush.
 
Yeah, Codger, I remember that. Sheesh.
Clinton was almost singlehandedly responsible for China VASTLY improving their missile technology. WTF????
 
Just pointing out that every administration has had it's hand in the nuclear proliferation pie. China can now, thanks to U.S. technology both stolen and sold, hit the U.S. with ICBMs. In fact, they have openly threatened to do just that even recently. Now North Korea has developed (or been given) the technology to do that.

Blaming one administration for all the world's problems is very short sighted. I realize that Bush-bashing is a popular sport these days just like Clinton-bashing was in years past. If you cannot look at it all with a much broader view, then you are doing exactly what the people you oppose want you to do. That is one reason an unbiased study of unrevised history is so important. Otherwise you might as well be watching WWF and believing the good guy is really good and the bad guy is really bad.
 
True, Codger, but the stakes are much higher now than before, and I have feelings of dread. Is that wrong? Are we all to just forget about the machinations pushing us to the brink of extinction and leap about joyfully like naked whores?
This present "administration" is far worse than all the others combined, but that is just my opinion. I am not a naked whore, so I will continue to blow the whistle every chance I get. I do not subscribe to the present mood that all is well, it is just a phase.
 
History is never a phase. It is as continual as time. I am merely suggesting that you think outside the box. By watching the magicians right hand, you are missing what he is doing with the left. It is called misdirection.

Let's see. I like this illustration:
You are on the beach. Looking closely at the beach, you only see the grains of sand and maybe a particle of shell. Looking further, you might see a dune, the patterns made by the waves on the sand. From an airplane, you will see the shape of the beach, where dunes begin and end, where the shoreline retreats and advances, how the beach is merely a border that divides land from sea.

Perception shapes our view of reality. In order to more truthfully percieve reality, you must be willing to see more than that which is in front of your eyes. I am not telling you to stop speaking your mind. Just to try to view what you see from a broader perspective.

Of course this moment in time is the most dangerous and urgent you have ever experienced. I doubt you were involved in the "duck-and-cover" indoctrination in public scools at a time when we were expecting a shower of Soviet nukes at any moment. Or the horror of the American public when it was revealed that the Soviets were installing nukes in Cuba just off our coast. Or the chills of the standdown orders after an actual Defcon alert. Do you know how many times the launch codes were transmitted just waiting for the order to turn the key? Viewing this history, we are more stable now than then, though you did not experience it.
 
"History is never a phase."
What are you, a creationist or something?
I agree that we cannot see the tree for the forest, and I shake your hand, Codger, you are such a welcome addition to our dreamworld and I merely regret the temptation to throttle you, because the past is just a dream to most people in this forum. It is nice to have civil discussions and to have second chances because God knows I blew a few chances.
 
Beowulf said:
True, Codger, but the stakes are much higher now than before, and I have feelings of dread. Is that wrong? Are we all to just forget about the machinations pushing us to the brink of extinction and leap about joyfully like naked whores?
This present "administration" is far worse than all the others combined, but that is just my opinion. I am not a naked whore, so I will continue to blow the whistle every chance I get. I do not subscribe to the present mood that all is well, it is just a phase.
Click to expand...

You've described my state of mind these days to a T. I didn't know how to explain this uneasiness I had in my bones - just cant shake it off. This is very different and serious.
 
Beowulf said:
"History is never a phase."
What are you, a creationist or something?
I agree that we cannot see the tree for the forest, and I shake your hand, Codger, you are such a welcome addition to our dreamworld and I merely regret the temptation to throttle you, because the past is just a dream to most people in this forum. It is nice to have civil discussions and to have second chances because God knows I blew a few chances.
Click to expand...

Why, thank you Beowulf. I..I..I think! Almost all of the people on the AD forum have good hearts. And most want to seek the truth about events and their own feelings about them. We have all had chances that we have blown. One of the blessings of life is that most of the time they are not fatal. A person who claims to be perfect is a terrible liar.

I remember the old joke "I've only been wrong once and that was when I thought I was wrong but I was not"?
 
im kinda dumb in politics... but one thing i want to know... are we in any danger from iran and n korea? both have nukes and wants to use it against america... am i correct?
 
SpiceHD said:
im kinda dumb in politics... but one thing i want to know... are we in any danger from iran and n korea? both have nukes and wants to use it against america... am i correct?
Click to expand...

Like all matters of foriegn affairs, the answer depends on who you ask. Most of what you hear from those two countries, and China as well, is what is called "sabre rattling". Basically bluff and bluster. But do they have the MEANS to harm us? Perhaps they do. Certainly not enough pirepower to "win" a nuclear exchange (win is a relative term), but perhaps harm the U.S. directly or through our interests. I would say that North Korea is the more likely to launch nukes at us mostly because of the perceived instability of the Monarch there. With their two stage rocket, they can hit our pacific fleet, and maybe the Alaskan mainland. There is speculation that they have almost completed a three stage missile, their version of the Chinese Long March. It would be able to hit almost any target in the U.S. mainland. They have recently threatened Japan with nukes, but the Japanese response when asked about their response merely gave the reporter a "Cheshire Cat" grin.

Iran more directly threatens our interests in the middle east. But they are a bit more stable. At least as long as we don't poke them in the eye.

All this is just my opinion. Like I have said, the world nuclear situation is a bit more stable now than it has been during most of my life so far. Don't worry. Be happy! :D
 
dont forget

Codger said:
Like all matters of foriegn affairs, the answer depends on who you ask. Most of what you hear from those two countries, and China as well, is what is called "sabre rattling". Basically bluff and bluster. But do they have the MEANS to harm us? Perhaps they do. Certainly not enough pirepower to "win" a nuclear exchange (win is a relative term), but perhaps harm the U.S. directly or through our interests. I would say that North Korea is the more likely to launch nukes at us mostly because of the perceived instability of the Monarch there. With their two stage rocket, they can hit our pacific fleet, and maybe the Alaskan mainland. There is speculation that they have almost completed a three stage missile, their version of the Chinese Long March. It would be able to hit almost any target in the U.S. mainland. They have recently threatened Japan with nukes, but the Japanese response when asked about their response merely gave the reporter a "Cheshire Cat" grin.

Iran more directly threatens our interests in the middle east. But they are a bit more stable. At least as long as we don't poke them in the eye.

All this is just my opinion. Like I have said, the world nuclear situation is a bit more stable now than it has been during most of my life so far. Don't worry. Be happy! :D
Click to expand...
that bush is trying to take care of of it.Instead of waitingg to late.Like i said the eirlier the better, less casuality and less money too .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top