South Korea Says North Korea Should Have Right to Peaceful Nuclear Program

[NNN0LHI]

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB64YG39CE.html

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - A senior South Korean official said Thursday that North Korea has the right to a peaceful nuclear program, a view conflicting with Washington in its disagreement with the hard-line Pyongyang regime that has snagged disarmament talks.

"Our position is that North Korea has a general right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, for agricultural, medical and power-generating purposes," South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young said in an interview Thursday with the online news service Media Daum.

"Building a light-water nuclear reactor is a general right of North Korea," Chung said. "In this, our position differs from that of Washington."

There was no immediate reaction from the Bush administration. But on Wednesday, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill reiterated U.S. opposition to allowing North Korea to retain a nuclear capability for civilian use.

[IA_Seth]

1. Its only a matter of time...

Before South Korea asks us to get the hell out.

[NNN0LHI]

3. I honestly think they would tell us to leave if they thought we would

Try and think of some country that the USA has stationed troops in and then later pulled them all out of. I can only think of one country that has ever happened in. Vietnam is the only one.

Don

[IA_Seth]

5. Yeah...

You are right, unfortunately. Once we settle in to 'defend' you we sure as hell make ourselves comfortable eh?

I can't see us agreeing to leave the region really either, especially considering the billions we have probably spent on our bases, etc. Besides, China is probably our next 'great enemy' and we need to stay in the neighborhood...booooo

[StrafingMoose]

6. And Vietnam has offered US to re-occupate

the bases the Soviet took (which were USA's one before 1975) after the USA left.


:rofl:

[wtmusic]

2. This is almost...funny

Their neighbor says it's OK to have a peaceful nuke program, while Washington is trembling in their collective boots.

This is a result of not communicating with our allies--our foreign policy is in shambles.

[endarkenment]

4. They don't view them as allies.

They imperialists think of the world as divided into 'client states' and 'adversaries'. South Korea is a client state. its opinions about our garrisons are not important.

[moondust]

8. Well...Iraq's neighbors weren't concerned about Saddam.

But the hegemonists on the other side of the planet knew better.

I detect a pattern.

[Brooklyn Michael]

7. Something I don't quite get...

I mean, I GET it, but....

Conservative Republicans = Pro-nuclear power advocates. They say it is a cheap, safe way to provide power to citizens.

Now, whether you agree with that assessment or not (and to some degree, I don't), you would think that if there WERE a cheap, safe way to generate power to a large number of people, especially if they were in a second or third world nation that could use a little help getting up to speed, technology-wise, that those same advocates would be trying to HELP under-developed nations achieve that technology.

But when another country, particularly one we're not friendly with, says that they want to develop nuclear energy to provide their own citizens with inexpensive, safe power supplies, those same Conservative/Republican pro-nukers say "No, no! You might make bombs out of them! So you can't have ANY nuclear technology at ALL!"

Like I said...I GET it. We want to be the ONLY nuclear power in the world - or at least hold the keys to the castle and only let in who we like. Just another example of inherant conservative hypocrisy....

[NNN0LHI]

9. And the more we tell them we don't want them to go nuclear...

...the more they will want to go nuclear. Human nature I think.

Don