Because the last time we talked to N. Korea, Bill Clinton handed them $2 billion in aid, nuke reactors, and technology all on the promise that they wouldn't try to develop nuke weapons (which they admitted they broke that promise). So in other words, we can't trust them to hold up their end of the bargain.
2006-10-13 03:26:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
North Korea hates the U.S. and could care less what is said. It doesn't matter anyhow, the U.N. is playing a bigger role in this one. The U.S. pretty well got left to deal with the last episode in Iraq and I don't think the U.N. was happy with the way the U.S. dealt with it. As far as the U.S. going to war with them......probably not. It's not that we don't have enough people to go to war, it's the cost issue. Korea is going to have to become a threat to the U.S. by waging war before we'll go in at this point. Now China and Japan's pissed off at them though, among a few others so I really don't think America is going to HAVE to deal with this. I think the U.N. will play a bigger part if another country closer to them doesn't give them a spanking first.
2006-10-13 03:30:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by rowster 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
If we engage in 2 party talks, and they cheat (as was the case with Bill Clinton) then it reflects poorly on US Foreign Policy. If we engage 6 party talks (including S Korea, China, Japan, Russia) then it's much harder for everyone to blame the US, yet again, for failed foreign policy. Also, seeing as we have damaged our rep in the world's eye what we say directly to one country carries a bit differently if we say it in conjunction with 4 other countries.
Its funny how dems can blast the Republicans about not wanting to do 2 party talks, when they were all about having a multi-lateral action regarding Iraq. It would seem to me that they're just playing the flip-flop game, yet again.
2006-10-13 03:33:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by kyle d 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is over North Korea apparently building Nuclear Weapons
2006-10-13 03:25:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kyle W 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's a Bush thing. Now that we have N.K. setting off a weapon the B admin. doesn't want bilateral talks because it will appear to be "giving in". Same with Iran, Syria -- But you'll notice there are conservatives(not right wing or liberal)voices hinting at bilateral talks as a legitimate diplomacy. Will happen over time.
2006-10-13 03:43:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by s. k 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually the way I understand it ...........the situation is just the opposite. N. Korea is shunning talks with the U.N, we are part of the U.N.
2006-10-13 03:43:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by snobunny 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
We want other countries present as witnesses so that North Korea cannot twist everything and cheat as easily.
2006-10-13 03:25:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by scarlettt_ohara 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Maybe it's because of THIS!!!...
http://www.strayreality.com/Lanis_Strayreality/iraq.htm
2006-10-13 11:21:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Kimshi makes their breath stink.
2006-10-13 03:27:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Dave 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
The talking method has worked sooooo well so far....
2006-10-13 03:23:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by Goose&Tonic 6
·
0⤊
1⤋