user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Yes: Shows failure of Bush policies
Yes but not because Bush's foreign policy towards North Korea was too harsh but because it was not hardline enough.He should have really pushed the world community to sanction them.
But that's all in the past now we must look to the future and perhasp it is time to arm Japan with nuclear weapons.We can't allow the Koreans to continue to black mail the world.
Voted : No: (explain)
I agree that Bush made mistakes, but not in the manner that you described above.
For one thing Bush's threats were empty rhetoric- he should have pushed for the international sanctions or at least tried to.
Another thing- his obsession with the Middle East. North Korea announced that it ws going to test a nuclear weapon? Where was Condoleeza Rice? Israel! What was Bush commenting about all week end? Iran! Yuck!
So, yes the Bush administration has flaws. It is NOT that Bush was 'too assertive', but rather he ignored the problem. CLinton, although naive and counter-productive, was at least trying and was more actively giving attention to the issue at hand. I seriously doubt the claim that North Korea only wanted nuclear weapons at the last moment because Bush was supposedly being threatening. North Korea has been trying to get nuclear weapons the entire time, it was NOT a last minute decision. The communist regime in Pyongyang is very provocative. It is NOT one that acts purely from defense. During Clinton's Administration, Clinton was trying all kinds of warm diplomacies and gestures toward peaceful co-existence with North Korea. How did the North Koreans react? They launched missiles over Japan! So North Korea was provocative BEFORE Bush, and Bush has not been 'too assertive' but rather has been ignoring the problem.
Voted : No: (explain)
No. North korea did not produce nukes in the past 5 years.
They had a program going for years under clinton, which bush had nothing to do with, it just happened to fall on his watch.
Just like 911, people try to claim that this came about because of bushs policies, but conviently disregard the years of plan that went on prior to his election.
If they were planning on building nuclear weapons under cliton, and were able to get much of it done while he was screwing around, but they didn't finish until bush takes office is that A) entirely bushs fault or B) not entirely bushs fault? Well I know your answer, but actually it's B, not entirely bushs fault.
And BTW, sitting down and chatting with them wouldn't have dissuaded them one bit. The US was hardly aggressive under clinton, but they still worked on their nuclear program, obviously that isn't it.
Voted : No: (explain)
This is a complex political situation. North Korea is a rogue nation with lunatics at the helm. As much as I would like to blame Bush for North Korea's actions, I have to say that I don't think they could have done much more than they have. I think Clinton's approach was worth a try, but any progress now must come from the Chinese who appear to have the only leverage with the North Koreans.
Voted : Yes: Shows failure of Bush policies
I wish I knew what to say here...
I submit to you that NK's primary motivation, these days, is fear of an aggressive US. they never felt the need to do any public 'testing' before.
Voted : Yes: Shows failure of Bush policies
If Bush has screwed up, it must be Clinton's fault! Yee Haw, Texas! 
To answer the ballot, rather than sidestepping the question and bashing Bill Clinton (who was an infinitely superior president to George WMD Bush), the test DOES demonstrate the failure of Bush's North Korea policy.
Bush's policy was aimed at getting North Korea to abandon it's nuclear program. The policy failed. It's as simple as that.
Iraq is a disaster.
The Taliban is resurgent in Afghanistan.
Osama is still at large.
North Korea has become an official 'nuclear' state.
Iran feels it can act with impunity.
Tell me, again, which part of this indicates Bush's 'foreign policy' hasn't been an unmitigated failure?
But Cath, Bush's foreign policy isn't a total failure...and if it is a total failure, it's Clinton's fault!
"I submit to you that NK's primary motivation, these days, is fear of an aggressive US. they never felt the need to do any public 'testing' before."
Ahh, so correlation proves causation eh?
^No, neoconation proves cowardization.
Voted : Yes: Shows failure of Bush policies
On the international stage, bluffs and threats/versus Diplomacy may well have given the NK more impetus to obtain a nuclear device, and watching Iraq get attacked didn't help matters either...
North Korea appears to have an "inferiority complex" and not having direct talks seems to be a snub...Although there is a need for the neighboring Countries to be involved...
cranky- "If Bush has screwed up, it must be Clinton's fault!"
- No, not at all. I have never indicated that I believed that it was only Clinton's fault, and no fault of Bush. What I have asserted is that both had faults. But I am not going to be silly enough to blame only one of them because that would be irrational.
I have clearly stated that I believe Bush's foreign policy toward North Korea was a failure because he did not attempt to push for international sanctions AND he payed little attention to the problem due to an obsession with the Middle East.
Voted : No: (explain)
The same news reports tell us that North Korea's test of a nuclear weapon was not successful.
If appears that if Clinton's policies had continued, the test may have met with greater success.
|
|
