If at First You Don’t Succeed ...

Email    Print    Share x

RSS Feed
Digg
Facebook
TwitThis
StumbleUpon
Reddit
YahooBuzz
Email
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MyShare
NewsVine
Propeller
SphereIt
Technorati
YahooMyWeb

Posted on Jan 17, 2007

The U.S. and North Korea may meet for a second, and possibly even a third round of talks following a surprise meeting.

The White House had steadfastly refused to give in to Pyongyang’s desire for direct discussions outside of the six-party talks, but the recent rendezvous between the two countries suggests there may be more flexibility in Washington these days.

Reuters via Yahoo

The bilateral talks were the first outside the framework of six-country negotiations in Beijing which began in 2003 to try to stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons ambitions.

Officials said Washington’s willingness to talk directly with Pyongyang—as North Korea has long demanded—suggests it may be ready to compromise over a crackdown on North Korea’s finances, despite a nuclear test by Pyongyang last October.

Russia’s new chief negotiator at the six-party talks has put pressure on Washington to scrap its financial sanctions against Pyongyang.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

TAGS: asia china kim jong-il north korea nuclear proliferation russia six party talks u.s. weapons

Related Entries

• 

  Russia and Exxon Mobil Sign Arctic Oil Deal

• 

  No Deal Yet in Iran Nuclear Talks

• 

  Every Year Russia Beats the Nazis One More Time

• 

  Raining on Obama’s Gay Pride Parade

Email to a friend

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: Condoleezza Rice Might Testify at Libby Trial

Next item: State of Emergency for California Crops

New and Improved Comments

We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.

By T. Z. Cart Dumond, January 17, 2007 at 3:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bush, “more flexibility” –a contradiction in terms:

Could it be that both North Korea and Iran have a clear example of US intent and really do need nuclear weapons to prevent the idiot that currently occupies the White House from launching the next stage of his religious crusade and his promised follow-up to the War of Aggression Against the People of Iraq?

Isn’t a strong defense and possession of Nukes the only rational lesson to be drawn from Bush’s war?

Israel has hundreds of nukes, regularly threatens other nations—as they have in the case of Libya— and use their military might to expand its’ boarders in their government’s drive to expropriate Palestinian territory and to occupy its neighbors.

The United States is currently OCCUPING Iraq.

Iran and North Korea are sovereign nations and maintain fixed boarders and neither of these nations are occupying other people’s territory, they have not occupied Palestine or Iraq: they are not expanding.

Doesn’t it make sense, from their perspective that they should not capitulate to Bush’s insane double and triple standard?  That is, if there is a standard at all, other than the obvious “I can have nukes and you can’t”? 

Could it be that Nuke’s alone can help make the Neonazicon’s pause in their ongoing crusade? But maybe even nukes will not work? Maybe the Bush gang seeks in essence to advance the apocalypse instead?

One American’s opinion: I think that Kim Jong Il and N. Korea are less a threat to my rights than is George W. Bush . . .  and I see little difference between a tyrant and a would-be tyrant.

Report this

By Clifton Mitchell, January 17, 2007 at 12:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“(North Korea’s leaders) have to decide if they want nuclear weapons or if they want a place in the international community.” (Quoted by Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill.

If I were Kim Chong Il, given the dismal state of the international community, I think I would choose nuclear weapons.  It’s quite evident that the Great Satan (USA) has not, does not, and never will abide by any sort of agreement made with North Korea.  It is irony of ironies that NK exists today only because one Dean Rusk, a US Army colonel at the time, was given the task of dividing the Korean peninsula on August 10, 1945, so as to facilitate the surrender of Japanese forces to US and Soviet troops.  Rusk, with a total disregard for the long suffering Korean people, arbitrarily decided that Korea be divided at the 38th Parallel.  Today, Korea remains the one country in the world divided as a result of WWII. In effect, the US ceded the north to her Soviet communist friends.  This act of treachery lies heavy on the hearts of all Koreans, even those in the north, who benefited from the arrogance and stupidity of the US government.  If you are listening Mr. Kim, tell the US to take a hike, and continue developing and testing your nukes.  You’ll need them someday - maybe soon!  Do you remember the infamous “Axis of Evil Speech?”  Iraq is under US occupation, Iran soon will be attacked by Israel and her lap dog ally America.  North Korea remains on Bush’s checklist.  My suggestion to the leaders of both North and South Korea is to bury the hatchet, reunify under the name CHOSON, and show the world how great Koreans really are!

Report this

By trantieungoc, January 17, 2007 at 10:45 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Nobody wants to speak to the walls !

Report this