Friday, October 13, 2006
An Introduction and Discussion
I am the new contributor to this blog, an old friend of the two current authors. I describe myself as a staunch conservative on both social and economic issues: I subscribe to the economic theories of Adam Smith and the policies of administrations such as Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan. As a sort of expository statement, I find America to be a troubling country today - where more Americans vote for American Idol rather than the presidential election; where the the leading opinions on academic campuses are often vehemently anti-American; where the youth of America are largely apathetic and often indifferent to politics and current events.
While I have little power to change these shortcomings, I intend to at least express my opinions on the public forum. As for my background, I am a freshman at Richard Stockton College in New Jersey and intend to either major in Classics or Political Science, with possible careers being politics or education.
But I think that's quite enough of my overall background and opinions, and I think it's time to dive into the quagmire of political events that define our nation most dear. The issue at hand right now is the acquisition of nuclear arms by North Korea. Such an issue is intolerable, quite obviously.
What we have is an upstart nation that desires international recognition run by a short, balding, bespectacled man with a Napoleon complex.
On countless occasions Korea has defied the United Nations, and has now finally delivered the coup de grace. The fact that still no sanctions have been put on Korea is outrageous. Kim Jong Il does however state that if sanctions are placed upon his country, he will regard them as a declaration of war. As a result, the UN is foundering: they have softened up the draft resolution against Korea, and both China and Russia have opposed critical pieces of it. This brings on a larger debate about the inefficiency of the UN, a point that I bring up often in personal debate.
As for my personal solution to the issue - the issue lies with the past, and especially the Clinton administration's tolerance and allowing the Koreans to do whatever they please. I highly encourage you to check out an advertisement criticizing the Clinton Administration (and Madeline Albright). To solve the issue, immediate and decisive actions needs to be taken. If our military weren't stretched already in Iraq, I would recommend invasion. But we must settle with diplomatic action in this case and hope for the best. In any case, the United States cannot be nuked, for the missles that North Korea has are only capable of short to intermediate range - which is good news for US, but doesn't say much for Japan and other US allies in the region.
Unfortunately, we must wait to see the reaction of our government and as the adage states, 'Only time shall tell.' ¶ 3:57 PM
While I have little power to change these shortcomings, I intend to at least express my opinions on the public forum. As for my background, I am a freshman at Richard Stockton College in New Jersey and intend to either major in Classics or Political Science, with possible careers being politics or education.
But I think that's quite enough of my overall background and opinions, and I think it's time to dive into the quagmire of political events that define our nation most dear. The issue at hand right now is the acquisition of nuclear arms by North Korea. Such an issue is intolerable, quite obviously.
What we have is an upstart nation that desires international recognition run by a short, balding, bespectacled man with a Napoleon complex.
On countless occasions Korea has defied the United Nations, and has now finally delivered the coup de grace. The fact that still no sanctions have been put on Korea is outrageous. Kim Jong Il does however state that if sanctions are placed upon his country, he will regard them as a declaration of war. As a result, the UN is foundering: they have softened up the draft resolution against Korea, and both China and Russia have opposed critical pieces of it. This brings on a larger debate about the inefficiency of the UN, a point that I bring up often in personal debate.
As for my personal solution to the issue - the issue lies with the past, and especially the Clinton administration's tolerance and allowing the Koreans to do whatever they please. I highly encourage you to check out an advertisement criticizing the Clinton Administration (and Madeline Albright). To solve the issue, immediate and decisive actions needs to be taken. If our military weren't stretched already in Iraq, I would recommend invasion. But we must settle with diplomatic action in this case and hope for the best. In any case, the United States cannot be nuked, for the missles that North Korea has are only capable of short to intermediate range - which is good news for US, but doesn't say much for Japan and other US allies in the region.
Unfortunately, we must wait to see the reaction of our government and as the adage states, 'Only time shall tell.' ¶ 3:57 PM
Comments:
<< Home
Careful Brantley, i don't want you to fall in to the emotivist pit yourself.
You actually said that your solution was to President Clinton or his secretary of state is wholly unproductive. The status of North Korea now is the result of almost 50 years of blundering by both parties. This is the same in regards to all of the middle east too. Blaming ourselves in any way is simply counter productive. Let's be proactive.
Kim Jong-Il is a madman. I believe most people know that he is a madman. Placing more embargoes or trade restrictions on North Korea isn't going to make this problem go away. There are plenty of embargoes, restrictions, and international resolutions that have been in effect against them for decades. None of this has prevented Mr. Jong-Il or his party from doing whatever they please. And i'm pretty sure the detonation of a supposed nuclear weapon in direct violation of UN and IAEA sanctions is comparably an act of war.
Dealing with North Korea on its on is a fruitless enterprise. That's why we have not engaged them in one-on-one dialogue, but rather have been trying to get them to atten the "six country talks." The reason they don't want to attend these talks is because we are the devil they don't have to deal with. Ultimately, Russia, Japan, China, Taiwan, and South Korea do have to deal with them in a very direct way. If we can force an open dialogue between all of these nations, Mr. Jong-Il's hands will be more forcibly tied behind his back, and more importantly so will China's and Russia's.
Post a Comment
You actually said that your solution was to President Clinton or his secretary of state is wholly unproductive. The status of North Korea now is the result of almost 50 years of blundering by both parties. This is the same in regards to all of the middle east too. Blaming ourselves in any way is simply counter productive. Let's be proactive.
Kim Jong-Il is a madman. I believe most people know that he is a madman. Placing more embargoes or trade restrictions on North Korea isn't going to make this problem go away. There are plenty of embargoes, restrictions, and international resolutions that have been in effect against them for decades. None of this has prevented Mr. Jong-Il or his party from doing whatever they please. And i'm pretty sure the detonation of a supposed nuclear weapon in direct violation of UN and IAEA sanctions is comparably an act of war.
Dealing with North Korea on its on is a fruitless enterprise. That's why we have not engaged them in one-on-one dialogue, but rather have been trying to get them to atten the "six country talks." The reason they don't want to attend these talks is because we are the devil they don't have to deal with. Ultimately, Russia, Japan, China, Taiwan, and South Korea do have to deal with them in a very direct way. If we can force an open dialogue between all of these nations, Mr. Jong-Il's hands will be more forcibly tied behind his back, and more importantly so will China's and Russia's.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
