Should the U.S. send Rice to North Korea?

[cestpaspossible]

North Korea has asked China to arrange a visit to Pyongyang by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a Japanese newspaper said, but Japan's top government spokesman said Washington had denied the report.

Nearly a year after the last round of six-country talks on North Korea's nuclear arms program, concerns are rising that Pyongyang may conduct an underground test of a nuclear device.

The Nihon Keizai financial daily said Tuesday that North Korea's proposal was conveyed to Rice by Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing during a telephone conversation on May 13.

The report, which cited unidentified diplomatic sources, did not say what response Rice had given.
http://today.reuters.com/News/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-05-17T043836Z_01_T200910_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-KOREA-NORTH-RICE-DC.XML">North Korea asks China to arrange Rice visit

The head of the World Food Programme's North Korea mission told the BBC that without new contributions famine-like conditions would be likely to reappear. The warning comes as North and South Koreans hold a second day of talks at which the North is expected to call for more aid and agricultural fertiliser. Seoul says it has offered new proposals to Pyongyang to resume six-party talks on its nuclear weapons programme.

The two sides are meeting for high-level discussions at Kaesong, just north of the border, for their first talks for 10 months. No details on the incentives were given, but the BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says they are expected to go beyond the economic aid and security guarantees offered almost a year ago. He says South Korean officials also warned the North not to continue developing nuclear weapons. Our correspondent says that Seoul believes Pyongyang is raising nuclear tensions to extract a better aid offer. The North has declared itself a nuclear weapons state, and says it has extracted nuclear fuel to make more bombs.

The WFP has not had a fresh offer of food aid for North Korea since October 2004. Richard Ragan says without new support the WFP will have to suspend aid altogether to about 3.5 million people and focus on a core 3m most at risk, including the elderly and infants. The situation is already worrying, with malnutrition described as widespread, especially among children.
N Korea 'in urgent need of food'

[queeg]

1. and leave her there....

[xultar]

32. You got it baby. Agree on a time to meet back @ the air field and

when she is out of site take the fuck off. Allowing her belongings packed behind her back to fall from the sky like an air lift package of emergency gear.

[whistle]

2. That is what North Korea wants, direct negotiations with the U.S.

...afterall John Bolton was the one who has turned that region into a nuclear land-mine. Since Condi is his boss, she ought to go in and straighten it out!

<snip>
N. Korea, U.S. Trade Harsh Words

SEOUL, South Korea , July 31, 2003

(AP) North Korea and the United States traded harsh criticism on Thursday, with a U.S. official describing the communist nation as a "hellish nightmare" and the North accusing Washington of "all sorts of lies and plots."

The accusations came amid uncertainty over prospects for a new round of talks on North Korea's suspected development of nuclear weapons, despite South Korean claims that the process was moving forward.In Seoul, U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton said North Korea had not agreed to a U.S. proposal for multilateral talks, and was instead sticking to a demand for one-on-one talks with Washington like a "one-note piano concerto."

"The ball is in North Korea's court," said Bolton, who was in Beijing earlier this week to discuss diplomatic efforts to resolve the standoff. In April, China hosted and participated in contentious talks involving the United States and North Korea. "The key now is to get South Korea and Japan, and ultimately Russia and others, a seat at the table," Bolton said. "Those with a direct stake in the outcome must be part of the process. On this point, we will not waver."

In remarks likely to infuriate North Korea, Bolton described the country's totalitarian leader, Kim Jong Il, as a "tyrannical dictator" and criticized the North's human rights record and weapons exports.

<more>
<link> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/31/world/main566103.shtml

[MrModerate]

3. Given the continued reports of famine, I'd recommend

Rice, wheat, corn, soy . . . anything their abused alimentary systems can handle.

[BornLeft]

4. Well they are getting ready to

test a nuke, will she be staying at ground zero?

[rpannier]

5. She'll only make things worse

She has terrible diplomatic skills.

[ReadTomPaine]

6. A group of Democratic leaders with ties to the SFRC...

should simply go there without any Republicans and start negotiating without Bush. They could set the table with preselected issues, undermine Republican negotiation points and provide information on Bolton and others to force the GOP delegation to come to terms that we set with NK. Call it "Preemptive Diplomacy". In fact the Dems should be doing it with every diplomatic overture the Bush Administration makes. Get there before them, frame the debate and force them to come to the terms Democrats have already set with other nations.

If the GOPer don't like it, too bad. Next time include Democratic representatives in steering decisions from the start.

[cestpaspossible]

7. Follow in Reagan's October Surprise footsteps?

[ReadTomPaine]

8. Not in secret - the world media should cover it extensively..

It's simply taking back the government. The GOP won't give an inch if all you use is harsh language. You have to *take* power from them, the way they have taken it from us.

On edit - The irony involved is also satisfying. After all, as you point out, there is plenty of past precedent for this straight from the GOP themselves. My own inspiration is Bolton's behavior, himself.

[cestpaspossible]

10. Breaking a long running precedent for political gain.

I don't think it would work politically.

[ReadTomPaine]

12. The political process is likely already broken beyond repair.

The future of this country does not belong to people who will play by the senate's rules of order. Nothing will work politically anymore. It's going to take forceful maneuvers as extreme as the GOP is pulling to stop them, and even more to swing that pendulum back.

Now is not the time to be squeamish, you have to hit them hard and never relent.

[cestpaspossible]

13. You've obviously misunderstood my comment

since I have no idea what you are talking about.

When I say I don't think it will play politically, I mean I don't think it will have the effect you intend, of allowing Democrats to frame the debate, of building public support for Democrats or discrediting Republicans.

[ReadTomPaine]

14. I understood your comment perfectly, I simply reject it

The US media and GOP voters will never support a Democrat, so their position is irrelevant. It would most certainly bolster democratic support all over the county. The rank and file are screaming for this sort of ballsy action from virtually every progressive outlet. Who cares what the red voters think, they got the country into this mess in the first place. This isn't about popularity, it's about power. The people will follow once the leaders lead.

[cestpaspossible]

16. Then why the bullshit strawman insinuation

that I don't want 'ballsy action'?

As far as your comment 'who cares what red voters think' the answer is, we care, if we want to win elections. Do you know how elections work? People vote, and if more people vote for your side you win. Just what the fuck is This isn't about popularity, it's about power. supposed to mean? How do you think we are going to gain power except through popularizing our ideas, politicians, and values?

Absent a demonstration of a basic understanding of simple political principles like "popularity = power" I'll assume, that no, you don't have any idea what I'm talking about... do you know what the "longstanding precedent" we'd be breaking is? After this high profile fight to preserve the tradition of the filibuster, you recommend we just change direction 180 degrees and say we don't believe in America's political traditions?

[ReadTomPaine]

18. You remind me of the "progressives" in Yugoslavia during the war

Telling the world press that it wasn't "viable" or politically expedient to stand up to Milosevic while they sipped coffee and watched the genocide on the evening news.

People in the former USSR didn't argue political expediency, tradition or polling numbers when Yeltsin climbed atop that tank. They saw a leader willing to take a stand against oppression and flooded into the streets to support him.

You won't win against the GOP any other way than by political force. Nothing else will work, and frankly international intervention may be required at this late date. I wish this weren't the case, but the routes to a systemic solution to the abuses we have seen were closed years ago. They will never be voted out of office, as they control the vote.

We are in a cultural and political war. The right knows this and so should you. Either fight to win or plan to lose.

[cestpaspossible]

19. Yeah 100% strawman bullshit - or simple lack of comprehension.

You've said nothing in any way related to my comments.

[ReadTomPaine]

20. Ad Hominem attacks won't help dig you out of your inherently weak position

I commented on all of the aspects of your position that deserved response. The rest is not comment worthy. Simple as that.

Politics won't work now. Luring red voters won't work now. Eventually, you'll understand this as well.

Best of luck with that.

[cestpaspossible]

22. An ad hominem attack would be directed at you, not your comment

and incomprehension as a reason for posting such a low value comment is certainly more gracious than just making a blanket assumption that you are consciously posing a strawman.

Anyway moving on, you say
Politics won't work now. Luring red voters won't work now.

so what exactly do you mean by that? If you aren't trying to 'do politics' or 'lure voters' with your idea of "Preemptive Diplomacy" what is your goal with it?

I've found this conversation a litte dull (so far) because of your failure to respond when I've asked you to explain or expand upon your own views. Let's pick up the pace here and actually discuss something other than whether I resemble some unsavory characters, ok?

[ReadTomPaine]

23. Think outside of the beltway box.

People with your views pepper Washington. The beltway rituals and games you describe are part of the problem that got Democrats lunching with Karl Rove instead of organizing national strikes to stop the advance of the GOP agenda.

These people you are trying to lure don't care about you or your politics. They make a fool out of you every day, to your face, and you smile and let them. They are not your friends, nor will they ever be. Many would be happy to see you dead. Yet you spend your time berating other progressives on their behalf, thinking this is somehow helpful. It's frankly baffling. Don't think "bipartisan". Don't think about "reaching across the aisle". Don't follow the rules. We are in the equivalent of a fixed casino, and you will never win by just sitting down and playing cards. Start thinking like they are the enemy and you've started on your path to enlightenment.

Hurry up, however. There's not a lot of time left.

[cestpaspossible]

24. I'm asking you to explain your views, not what you imagine mine to be

the question is:

You said
Politics won't work now. Luring red voters won't work now.

So what exactly do you mean by that? If you aren't trying to do 'politics' or 'lure voters' with your idea of "Preemptive Diplomacy" what is your goal with it?

[ReadTomPaine]

26. You are failing to see the forest for the trees

With voting fixed, the political process nonexistent and an ideologically extreme President on the opposite side of the spectrum from your beliefs there is no systemic means by which to regain power in the government's current state.

As 2000 and 2004 have shown, voting is largely irrelevant now. As the current process of stripping the minority of any means to influence government should have made clear, this process has proceeded apace. Unless stronger measures are taken, the Judiciary will fall next.

They won't stop if you ask them to. They won't stop if you order them to. They won't stop to obey any laws, old or new. The GOP will only stop if you force them to.

So we need to force them to listen to us.

[cestpaspossible]

28. What is the goal of your idea of "Preemptive Diplomacy"?

You said
Politics won't work now. Luring red voters won't work now.

So what exactly do you mean by that? If you aren't trying to do 'politics' or 'lure voters' what are you hoping to achieve?

So we need to force them to listen to us.

So - politics is out - luring voters is out - violence is the answer?

Again, please explain your views, stop talking about what you think is in my head. I assure you you are 100% wrong in every speculation you've made about what I think.

[ReadTomPaine]

30. The point is to force a seat at the table.

This is abundantly clear.

Now what issue do you think will bring these conservatives into the progressive fold?

I cannot conceive of any scenario that hasn't already happened to this White House. They will never lose popularity with the critical segment of the population they require to claim a mandate. We've had unjust war, financial disaster, massive debt and governmental expansion, close family-like ties to the 9/11 backers in SA, A gay male prostitute making hundreds of clandestine, unexplained visits and outright, documented treason. It reads like a progressive wet-dream of GOP scandals, but nothing seems to phase them, their voting base or the media despite every one of these being a key GOP issue.

What could you possibly offer to GOP voters to top what's already happened? If they haven't turned now, they will never turn. Even if they did, I'm not sure they deserve to be courted by the Democratic party. They should come to us, not us on bended knee to them.

Moreover, they are being emboldened to take violent steps against progressives and other enemies of their GOP political machine, as evidenced by Delay's comments recently supporting actions against judges. You don't argue with people who have those goals, as a compromise is precisely what they seek to push you further back to the wall.

The only counter to this show of strength is an equal show of strength. After the post political conflict period, when the GOP has been broken, we can establish a functional political and media process again. It's going to take time, exceptional leadership and a reforging of the political landscape as complete as the New Deal, likely even more so. But it won't start with a vote, it will start with a political confrontation.

Let's take this to PM - I need some sleep after 36 hours awake. I'd be happy to discuss this further with you.

[cestpaspossible]

33. What table?

You've already excluded 'politics' and 'luring voters'.

What's left? What 'table' are they being forced to?

The only counter to this show of strength is an equal show of strength.

What is the venue in which this 'equal show of strength' will take place, and what actions will constitute it, and what is it's intended effect? How are we to gain power except by 'luring voters'?

In short, what the hell are you talking about (or was it just a case of being up for 36 hours, lol) ?

[ReadTomPaine]

36. Don't be purposefully obtuse.

Since process is dead, we have to make our own. My suggestion is an example of compelling this administration to pursue Democratic goals via forceful political means rather than acquiescing to whatever place the RW desires us to keep. Force doesn’t necessarily mean physical violence; it means forceful, insistent action. The GOP does this all the time, redistricting by force, changing news stories by force, taking the Presidency by force. The only way to get them back is to take them back.

National strikes, preemptive politics, co-opting media sources and the similar actions I have described put Democrats in control of or at the very least involved with situations the GOP would otherwise have us excluded from. It would also give national Democrats and progressives a rally point of strength to build a movement around. It would show the world and remaining free America that democracy in the United States is not dead and help us find allies to topple the GOP’s coup.

With the strength of people in the streets, the country’s economy frozen in strike and the world press screaming war crimes charges against the Bush administration preventing them from travel abroad, options like impeachments, prosecution and similar would suddenly become possible as the more craven parts of the GOP crack and turn on the others.

Bush will never leave the White House voluntarily, but with an appropriately sanctioned federal or international body, he can be ejected nevertheless. Then a properly monitored rebuilding period would restore the America they have so carefully and completely destroyed and the GOP reformed after the virulent elements have been excised from political life or incarcerated.

This is just one scenario, but if we are to avoid decades of corporate, pseudo Christian fascist rule, it’s going to take something like this to make it happen. I am unwilling to wait a generation for the future we should have started in 2000, and I am not alone.

Bush won’t leave if you just ask and stamp your feet, however.

I think the problem you have is one of scope. You promote luring GOP ‘voters’, but you profess no ideas of how to actually do this when asked. You seem to prefer standard politics without realizing the rat maze you scurry down was prepared for you by the opposition. The only thing you will ever get staying inside of beltway political bounds is a little piece of the political pie put out for you by Karl Rove.

This casino is fixed, but you are still there, with your last 100 dollars, just sure you will win the next hand. Much seems to escape you regarding the current dire political situation. You don’t seem to think the process is broken, and you refuse to consider otherwise. It’s wise to start, before you find yourself with a tattoo on your arm and an electronic bracelet around your ankle.

When you are ready, the rest of progressive America will be waiting for you to join us. Until then, do what you can. For the sake of the future of this country I sincerely hope you are correct that a political process can still be salvaged. I’d be happy to be wrong in this case. I just don't see the means by which an institutional process can deliver us from this situation or make it better in any way. Best case scenario is status quo. It would be nice if that weren't the case, so here's to proving me wrong.

[cestpaspossible]

38. I've asked you the same simple questions repeatedly without an answer.

Your unwillingness to actually engage in discourse does not translate into me being 'purposefully obtuse'.

BTW, I haven't read any of your comments except the first couple, I only skimmed them to see if they answered my questions, I don't need to read the same rhetoric I've been reading for decades over and over. I come here to discuss things, not be lectured at.

[ReadTomPaine]

40. Keep your fingers in your ears then.

I can't help you if you refuse to read or understand. You're not here to discuss anything if you don't read what others say to you and cannot see obvious responses to your simple questions. Rather amusing of you to criticize the reading skills of others when when you yourself don't read, understand or even respond properly.

I hope your political action on behalf of progressives is taken with greater care, intelligence and comprehension than you've displayed here. We need all the help we can get.

Best of luck.

[cestpaspossible]

41. I refuse to pretend the same tired old rhetoric is something new.

You've rejected 'politics' and 'luring voters' but nothing in your decades old rhetoric offers an alternative to 'politics' or 'luring voters'.

If you didn't really mean it when you rejected 'politics' and 'luring voters' or have some alternative, your comments might form the basis of a discussion, but as it stands, your comments make as much sense as a loud fart.

[ReadTomPaine]

42. So now we go from not reading to not agreeing with me..

That's a step, even if it suggests that you lied previously when you stated you didn't read the posts.

This is hardly decades old rhetoric (we wouldn't be in the place we are politically if it were), it's just not something you agree with. That's fine. You don't have effective counters to the arguments I make or the questions I've asked, but that's fine also. I can tell you where the water is, but it's up to do to drink it. It's better than carrying that water, believe me.

It's pretty clear that you are done with this discussion or something more substantive would have come out of you by now.

Tell you what. If you are serious about dialog, I'll reopen my invitation to discuss this offline, away from any soapbox or ego you feel you need to defend. Otherwise, I'll just make my peace with you here, and wish you the best with all your political action on our behalf. I meant what I said above (if you had read it) about hoping you are right and I am wrong. We will just have to wait, see and act.

RTP

[cestpaspossible]

43. Actually I'm just pointing out that your comments are total nonsense

devoid of meaning. I can't disagree with them any more than I can disagree with the wind, no matter which way it breaks.

[ReadTomPaine]

44. My comments stand for themselves - besides you didn't read them, remember?

Judging from the response from others I've gotten here on your thread and in my mailbox, I'm not alone.

[cestpaspossible]

45. I read them, I reread them, I just didn't keep rererereading them

I don't need to read the same comments over and over and over.

[ReadTomPaine]

46. So the story changes again...

From not reading them, to skimming them, to reading and rereading them :) This has been an interesting discussion, indeed.

I'll let you have the last word here. It's your thread, after all.

RTP

BTW the edit your performed on your previous post was a wise move.

[cestpaspossible]

47. Like I said the first time

BTW, I haven't read any of your comments except the first couple, I only skimmed them to see if they answered my questions, I don't need to read the same rhetoric I've been reading for decades over and over. I come here to discuss things, not be lectured at.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3670620&mesg_id=3674856


Back to the topic:

If we won't win power by 'luring voters', how will we?

Either we win power by using the political system, or through violence, afaik. Which of these alternatives are you advocating or are you advocating a different alternative that I am not aware of and if so, what is it?

[Swamp Rat]

11. You have a very good idea.

This would make the GOP look like the cow dung they really are. I suggest you email this idea to Jon Conyers, Howard Dean, et al.

[Swamp Rat]

9. She's perfect for the job

She and Kim Jong Il can watch Russian bootleg Elvis movies together.

[bdot]

15. Don't they grow rice in that region of the world already?

[cestpaspossible]

17. According to the BBC article, they asked China to send Rice.

[ogradda]

21. I'm thinking real hard about this.

I can't think of anywhere we can send her without her screwing up. Damn that's sad.

[cestpaspossible]

25. Nauru. They should send her on an extended factfinding mission to Nauru

[0007]

27. .........and here's Condoleezza Secret to the North Korea folks

[unhappycamper]

35. *cough* *cough* *URRRRRRRRRRRRRG*

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[sweetheart]

29. Naah, let them eat nuclear waste

Send them several containerships of spent nuclear fuel, so they can
reprocess it in to food. It would be a cheap way to get rid of nuclear
waste, and as well, it lasts longer than rice. Its a bit heavy in the
stomach, but solves starvation and stupidity problems right fast.

Perhaps they can make rice out of plutonium and see if it grows in to
goodwill? What the heck. If they want nukes, sell the bastards nukes
so they can starve and die. Why help your enemy be intelligent, rather
give them what they want... more cake.

[cestpaspossible]

31. I hear ya but

it's just a shame that Kim Jong-Il will be the last one to starve.

[sweetheart]

34. you speak the truth

IMO, America should withdraw its troops from their 50 years vigilance
on the korean peninsula for the discredited domino theory, and let the
korean people sort it out.

I sppent my own time negotiating with koreans, and their chaebol (same
as japanese keretsu), and they're a royal pain in the tukus... let them
negotiate with each other, and they can drink each other under the
table and decide how to get along. As long as the american army is
involved, combined with the ass-banana in washington, there is no
solution and never will be.

[cestpaspossible]

49. Interesting idea

I guess it should be noted that the Korean war is not officially over.... I think they simply signed a truce, but never any peace treaty.

[maveric]

37. I think we should send Pasta instead. Oh, wait...Condi??

Oh never mind!

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[paineinthearse]

48. Yes, on a ONE WAY ticket

See coverage of her recent trip to mess o' potamia - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3673847

Caution - graphic photos.

[Mr_Spock]

50. In a nuclear missle.

WOOHOO!