Support NeoGAF

[Diablos]

WASHINGTON - In what sounded to many Washington ears Tuesday like an early shot in the 2008 presidential campaign, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., singled out Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., as he denounced the Clinton administration's policies toward North Korea.

``I would remind Senator Clinton and other Democrats critical of Bush administration policies that the framework agreement her husband's administration negotiated was a failure,'' McCain said in a speech near Detroit, where he was campaigning for a Republican Senate candidate.

``Every single time the Clinton administration warned the Koreans not to do something -- not to kick out the IAEA inspectors, not to remove the fuel rods from their reactor -- they did it. And they were rewarded every single time by the Clinton administration with further talks.''

Aides said McCain was responding to Hillary Clinton's comments Monday, when she criticized North Korea for its announcement of having tested a nuclear weapon and added: ``Some of the reasons we are facing this dangerous situation is because of the failed policies of the Bush administration. I regret deeply their failure to deal with the threat posed by North Korea. And I hope that the administration will now adopt a much more effective response than what they have up until now.''

The comments, made in response to reporters' questions during a Columbus Day Parade in New York City, drew modest attention Monday. But McCain pounced on them before the cameras Tuesday in Michigan, and other Republicans were soon distributing his remarks.

The two senators are considered serious contenders for the 2008 presidential nominations. McCain's comments seemed designed to highlight his foreign-policy differences with Hillary Clinton and to link her to aspects of her husband's presidency that some Republicans feel can be successfully attacked.

Philippe Reines, press secretary for Hillary Clinton, said of McCain's remarks: ``Now is not the time to play politics of the most dangerous kind. . . . President Bush has been in charge of North Korea policy for six years, and two days ago we saw the brazen result.''

He said the New York senator ``supports an approach that protects us from the threat of North Korean nuclear weapons, as the Clinton administration successfully did for eight years.''

In his speech, McCain said North Korea is testing the resolve of South Korea, Japan, China, Russia and the United States, which have pressed the isolated country to refrain from developing a nuclear weapons program. He said Bush is right to call on the U.N. Security Council ``to impose a military arms embargo, financial and trade sanctions and, most importantly, the right to interdict and inspect all cargo in and out of North Korea.''

Under the Clinton presidency, McCain said, ``We had a carrots-and-no-sticks policy that only encouraged bad behavior.''

McCain's remarks echo those made by Bush administration officials in early 2003. Abandoning a previous insistence that only North Korea was to blame for the brewing nuclear crisis, Bush allies then began arguing it was the predictable result of a flawed 1994 agreement between the Clinton administration and Pyongyang.

Allies of the Clintons have hit back, and Reines continued the defense Tuesday. Bush ``has allowed the `axis of evil' to spin out of control. Our Iraq policy is a failure. Iran is going nuclear and North Korea is testing nuclear weapons,'' he said. Bush's policies ``have made America less safe, not more so, and it is time for a new direction.''

So, what else are Republicans going to blame Bill Clinton for? Why is this attempted re-writing of history all of the sudden so popular? If they are so quick to point out what they think are Clinton's failures just as a means to defend President Bush, that's kind of sad. I'd think it would make more sense to point out what Democrats currently aren't doing, which they traditionally enjoy making statements and talking to the media about. But they seem to be starting to shift it over to talking about what Clinton did or didn't do last decade when it comes to certain things. I'm really, really starting to go from being annoyed by John McCain to hating John McCain. What a tool.

 

[radioheadrule83]

David Cameron's PR makeover of the Conservative party in the UK was ****ed in my eyes the moment this guy started backing him.

I don't know how this shit washes with people.

 

[Diablos]

Yeah, I don't either.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Why is this attempted re-writing of history all of the sudden so popular? If they are so quick to point out what they think are Clinton's failures just as a means to defend President Bush, that's kind of sad.

I think you answered your own question here. Placing blame on the previous administration this late into the game is pretty poor. Might as well go back further in time and place blame on the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations for the 9/11 attack because they helped to put Bin Laden in positions of power. Or let's blame them for setting up Hussein in Iraq.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I'm not so sure about "rewriting" history. Republicans have tried to blame Clinton since 9/11 occurred. The adminstration didn't bother because they were enjoying incredible popularity and planning multiple invasions.

 

[Diablos]

Ok, maybe not history, but specifically, Clinton's two terms.

 

[APF]

I think it's disgusting that he would respond to arguments that Democrats would do a better job getting NK to cooperate, by arguing that the previous Democrat Administration's NK policy was largely a failure, and suggesting what he believes to be a better approach.

Have you no shame, Senator? AT LONG LAST, HAVE YOU NO SHAME???

 

[teruterubozu]

McCain can't be taken seriously anymore.
You just don't know which guy is going to show up on any given day.
He's destroyed his chances on both sides of the fence.

 

[Property of Jumpship]

I'm not so sure about "rewriting" history. Republicans have tried to blame Clinton since 9/11 occurred. The adminstration didn't bother because they were enjoying incredible popularity and planning multiple invasions.

If you trace anything further back you can find excuses for everything.

 

[SteveMeister]

I suppose McCain's forgotten Dubya's "Axis of Evil" rhetoric. Wasn't that during his FIRST state of the union address?

 

[Learn2read]

I think it's disgusting that he would respond to arguments that Democrats would do a better job getting NK to cooperate, by arguing that the previous Democrat Administration's NK policy was largely a failure, and suggesting what he believes to be a better approach.

Have you no shame, Senator? AT LONG LAST, HAVE YOU NO SHAME???

Clinton successfully kept NK from developing plutonium. Dubya came in and tore what those agreements (however faulty) to shambles. The plutonium used in the bomb has been developed since 2002. Damn reality! Always getting in the way of a good wingnut rant!

 

[JayDubya]

I like McCain. This changes just about nothing. *whistles*

Honestly, this stuff is the politics game. There is nothing here worse than what both sides of the isle do to each other every day. It's entirely a response to the "zOMG all Bush's fault spin."

The reality of the situation, as usual, is that it's both admins faults, and both sides need to shut up. But I don't begrudge any individual senator for playing the politics game once it's started.

 

[APF]

Clinton successfully kept NK from developing plutonium. Dubya came in and tore what those agreements (however faulty) to shambles. The plutonium used in the bomb has been developed since 2002. Damn reality! Always getting in the way of a good wingnut rant!

Except the Agreed Framework did nothing to stop their nuclear weapons program. They still had enough Plutonium for a weapon at the time, and even during the Clinton Admin there were strong suspicions that NK had a covert NW program--and in fact, they did have a covert uranium enrichment program they had been pursuing for years, even while they were negotiating for more handoutseerrrbetter-relations. CURSE REALITY GETTING IN THE WAY OF A DEMORAT RANT!!!

 

[He Wants Chalupas]

There's no way I'd ever vote for McCain after his shilling during the '04 RNC.

 

[scorcho]

Except the Agreed Framework did nothing to stop their nuclear weapons program. They still had enough Plutonium for a weapon at the time, and even during the Clinton Admin there were strong suspicions that NK had a covert NW program--and in fact, they did have a covert uranium enrichment program they had been pursuing for years, even while they were negotiating for more handoutseerrrbetter-relations. CURSE REALITY GETTING IN THE WAY OF A DEMORAT RANT!!!

there was at least a framework in place - it wasn't perfect and both sides (NK and the US) were at fault during the Clinton Administration for not faithfully abiding by every provision in the agreement (esp. the US by not providing the light water reactors). the thing is, at least there were inspections and the weapons-grade plutonium was actually accounted for. additionally, we had some diplomatic relationship with the regime, which matters when you're dealing with an egomaniacal despot who actually pays lip service to international recognition.

the Bush Administration came in, argued that the framework was a failure (which is definitely arguable), BUT replaced it with nothing but bombastic rhetoric (AXIS OF EEEEEVILLL!!!!) and diplomatic chill. from what i recall, it was this that compelled NK to kick out inspectors and 'unfreeze' the plutonium they had in stock. how can you both state that a nuclear DPRK is unacceptable, do nothing to counter it?

the Six Party talks are a joke - what NK wants is direct bi-lateral talks with the US, and in my estimation that's what we should be doing. this isn't 'rewarding' bad behavior - it's understanding that in successful diplomacy, there has to be meaningful dialog both with friends and perceived enemies. nothing will get accomplished if we close our eyes and put our fingers in our collective ears when it comes to dealing with 'rogue' states like NK or Iran.

 

[Cheebs]

So McCain has pretty much sold his apparent "moderate" soul to win the GOP nominations?

Am I the only one who sees around this desperation that this man has to be president?

I get the same vibe from Hilary Clinton, desperation and power hungry to become president so they will take on whatever issue will help them, regardless of their personal views. The last time I think we had a candidate who honestly seemed to want to president for genuine reasons was Bill Clinton in '92.

 

[APF]

there was at least a framework in place - it wasn't perfect and both sides (NK and the US) were at fault during the Clinton Administration [...]

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying in and of itself, but this is hardly an effective counter-argument to McCain's point.

 

[scorcho]

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying in and of itself, but this is hardly an effective counter-argument to McCain's point.

i guess what i'm trying to contend is that while Clinton's position wasn't perfect, it was at least more effective at containing NK than GWB. i think that is pretty obvious on both sides of the aisle (unless you're pandering for your party's nomination for 2008 that is).

i laugh at people (including my super liburrrral friends here in nyc) who try to argue that GWB was to blame for 9/11; he was in the office for not even a full ****ing year yet for Christ's sakes. for NK, however, i think the GWB deserves as much criticism as he can get - he had over 5 years to do something, ANYTHING, and offered little besides for 'no direct talks'.

 

[whytemyke]

he's been bitching about the clinton framework since it was enacted. if I remember correctly, he was one of the only republican senators that even had a problem with it, so it's not like the DNC railroaded the GOP.

 

[Learn2read]

They still had enough Plutonium for a weapon at the time

Which was created during Bush I.

in fact, they did have a covert uranium enrichment program they had been pursuing for years

Uranium is not plutonium and is much, much harder to build into a bomb. The bomb they set of was plutonium.


Let's take a stroll through your world for a second...

Clinton era of "Agreed Framework", which according to you is "failure"
- No plutonium production.
- All existing plutonium under international inspection
- No bomb

The Dubya era of Tough Talk and ummm...more talk, which in your world is "success"
- Active plutonium production.
- No international inspections of plutonium stocks.
- Nuclear warhead detonated.

Sorry to drop and A-Bomb of Truth on your world.

 

[Tauntaun]

What I really want to know is, do you think they'll make a Wolfenstein-esque game about this? Like a Pyongyang 3D? I'd play it!

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

What exactly should the Bush Administration have done with North Korea exactly? They've been pursuing nuclear weapons for well over a decade now, and we're talking about a country that has all but cut ties with most of the rest of the world. They have a leader who likes to spout saber rattling rhetoric any chance he gets, and has shown a propensity to disregard any deals or treaties that don't suit his needs at the time.

There is also the complex situation of having China right next door, South Korea just across the DMZ, and Japan a short range missle launch away. All of those interests need to be considered when dealing with the North Koreans.

Admittedly the on going operations in Iraq have distracted some attention away from North Korea (and Iran for that matter), allowing them to be more bold than usual, but the use of troops in Iraq has no impact on this situation, as there isn't going to be a military solution to this issue.

 

[Learn2read]

What exactly should the Bush Administration have done with North Korea exactly? They've been pursuing nuclear weapons for well over a decade now, and we're talking about a country that has all but cut ties with most of the rest of the world. They have a leader who likes to spout saber rattling rhetoric any chance he gets, and has shown a propensity to disregard any deals or treaties that don't suit his needs at the time.

There is also the complex situation of having China right next door, South Korea just across the DMZ, and Japan a short range missle launch away. All of those interests need to be considered when dealing with the North Koreans.

Admittedly the on going operations in Iraq have distracted some attention away from North Korea (and Iran for that matter), allowing them to be more bold than usual, but the use of troops in Iraq has no impact on this situation, as there isn't going to be a military solution to this issue.

They could've kept or even tried to improve a working policy. I know after six years the bar has been set so low that this doesn't even seem reasonable anymore, but that is what administrations are supposed to do.

 

[Mr. E. Yis]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1908571.stm

Bush GAVE $95 MILLION to North Korea to 'fix' it's old Nuclear program in 2002 - after his Axis of Evil speech.

Not good at all. Since then, did any real inspections happen at all, like what was agreed at that time?

 

[ToxicAdam]

 

[teiresias]

I'm sure you really don't want to go there.

 

[terrene]

I think it's disgusting that he would respond to arguments that Democrats would do a better job getting NK to cooperate, by arguing that the previous Democrat Administration's NK policy was largely a failure, and suggesting what he believes to be a better approach.

Have you no shame, Senator? AT LONG LAST, HAVE YOU NO SHAME???

4/10

 

[monchi-kun]

there was a picture of a cage match right after this one that never got published.

battle of the international fatties!

...i think Albright was trying to recreate that classic scene from The Princess Bride

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

They could've kept or even tried to improve a working policy. I know after six years the bar has been set so low that this doesn't even seem reasonable anymore, but that is what administrations are supposed to do.

What would this working policy consist of? We give them aid and theys top nuclear development? As has already been stated, the policies of the Clinton Administration, for various reasons, didn't really deter them from continuing to seek out a nuclear weapon. So what next?

The Bush Administration policy has always been to try to put pressure on them from their neighbors, most notably China, which is one of the few countries that actually holds any sway over the North Koreans as it is.

What's worse is that any sanctions against them will likely have limited effect, since the people there are already impoverished and lacking in their needs thanks to a repressive government that isn't probably going to feel the effects of those sanctions to begin with.

 

[Learn2read]

Let's take a stroll through your world for a second...

Clinton era of "Agreed Framework", which according to you is "failure"
- No plutonium production.
- All existing plutonium under international inspection
- No bomb

The Dubya era of Tough Talk and ummm...more talk, which in your world is "success"
- Active plutonium production.
- No international inspections of plutonium stocks.
- Nuclear warhead detonated.

Sorry to drop and A-Bomb of Truth on your world.

 

[dskillzhtown]

I hate national politics, it is all about posturing and placeing blame. I wonder if I will ever vote in a national election again.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Let's take a stroll through your world for a second...

Clinton era of "Agreed Framework", which according to you is "failure"
- No plutonium production.
- All existing plutonium under international inspection
- No bomb

The Dubya era of Tough Talk and ummm...more talk, which in your world is "success"
- Active plutonium production.
- No international inspections of plutonium stocks.
- Nuclear warhead detonated.

Sorry to drop and A-Bomb of Truth on your world.

Actually, considering recent results, I'd say both of those approaches were failures. Time for a new approach for sure, but the question is what should that appraoch be.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Actually, considering recent results, I'd say both of those approaches were failures. Time for a new approach for sure, but the question is what should that appraoch be.

The answer is more autographed basketballs.

 

[Learn2read]

The answer is more autographed basketballs.

The Facts are clear Adambot. Clinton had things relatively in check (however imperfect), Bush didn't and we have to live with the results, sucks huh?

 

[Learn2read]

Actually, considering recent results, I'd say both of those approaches were failures. Time for a new approach for sure, but the question is what should that appraoch be.

WTF???

 

[Boogie]

The Facts are clear Adambot. Clinton had things relatively in check (however imperfect), Bush didn't and we have to live with the results, sucks huh?

wow, your spin is more than a match for the Republican party. The dems should sign you right up

 

[krypt0nian]

I suppose McCain's forgotten Dubya's "Axis of Evil" rhetoric. Wasn't that during his FIRST state of the union address?

It's election time. Of course he has.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Don't you get it, Boogie. Once an adminstration is out of office, they are completely absconded from any blame.


Can't wait for 2009 when killings in Iraq won't be Bush's fault anymore, or genocide in Sudan isn't Bush's fault, or the economy isn't Bush's fault. That's how it works ya know!

:lol

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

WTF???

What don't you get? The Clinton Administrations approach just bought N.K. time to work on their nuke program while appearing to be on the up and up with the International community. They didn't build this program over the past six years, it's been going on for far longer than that, it was just a lot more underground while Clinton was in office. His admin didn't keep anything in check.

I'm also not saying what Bush has done has been better. But because the U.S. is preoccupied elsewhere, N.K. has been able to rattle their sabers more, make more noise, and be more up front with their weapons program.

Neither one of these administrations has been able to keep them in check, and I'm not sure there is a policy that would do so. North Korea has been determined to join the nuclear club for some time, and no matter what the United States has to say about it, they're proceeding with that process.

 

[Learn2read]

Don't you get it, Boogie. Once an adminstration is out of office, they are completely absconded from any blame.


Can't wait for 2009 when killings in Iraq won't be Bush's fault anymore, or genocide in Sudan isn't Bush's fault, or the economy isn't Bush's fault. That's how it works ya know!

:lol

What don't you get?

Bush I - Enough Plutonium for 1-2 bombs
Clinton - Enough Plutonium for 0 bombs, control of existing plutonium.
Bush II - Enough Plutonium for 10-11 bombs and counting, first nuclear test

THESE. ARE. FACTS.

As much as cooperating a wacko like Kim Jong Il who starves millions of his own people to build weopons feels wrong, Bush shows that the alternative is obviously worse and we are paying for his neglect.

 

[Learn2read]

What don't you get? The Clinton Administrations approach just bought N.K. time to work on their nuke program while appearing to be on the up and up with the International community. They didn't build this program over the past six years, it's been going on for far longer than that, it was just a lot more underground while Clinton was in office. His admin didn't keep anything in check.

I'm also not saying what Bush has done has been better. But because the U.S. is preoccupied elsewhere, N.K. has been able to rattle their sabers more, make more noise, and be more up front with their weapons program.

Neither one of these administrations has been able to keep them in check, and I'm not sure there is a policy that would do so. North Korea has been determined to join the nuclear club for some time, and no matter what the United States has to say about it, they're proceeding with that process.

The existing plutonium in NK was under control in the Clinton agreement, none was being produced. To say that his admin didn't keep anything in check is pure bullshit, and you know it.

 

[DJ Sl4m]

I like McCain. This changes just about nothing. *whistles*

Honestly, this stuff is the politics game. There is nothing here worse than what both sides of the isle do to each other every day. It's entirely a response to the "zOMG all Bush's fault spin."

The reality of the situation, as usual, is that it's both admins faults, and both sides need to shut up. But I don't begrudge any individual senator for playing the politics game once it's started.

 

[maynerd]

What don't you get?

Bush I - Enough Plutonium for 1-2 bombs
Clinton - Enough Plutonium for 0 bombs, control of existing plutonium.
Bush II - Enough Plutonium for 10-11 bombs and counting, first nuclear test

THESE. ARE. FACTS.

As much as cooperating a wacko like Kim Jong Il who starves millions of his own people to build weopons feels wrong, Bush shows that the alternative is obviously worse and we are paying for his neglect.

Facts are worthless man.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

The existing plutonium in NK was under control in the Clinton agreement, none was being produced. To say that his admin didn't keep anything in check is pure bullshit, and you know it.

It's debatable if it was actually under control or not. There were provisions in place, and agreements made, but there is plenty of speculation that the North Koreans never really stopped the refinement process, and it was just hidden better. Especially late in the Clintion Administration when the North Koreans complained about the fact that they were promised new energy plants, and the U.S. drug it's feet on providing them. N.K. threatened to back out of the deal, but there are some people who believe that they already had by that point.

 

[APF]

How can you claim someone is successfully contained when they're actively doing an end-run around the agreement that allegedly is containing them? It's nonsensical spin. FACT.

 

[ronito]

 

[maynerd]

:lol

 

[Learn2read]

How can you claim someone is successfully contained when they're actively doing an end-run around the agreement that allegedly is containing them? It's nonsensical spin. FACT.

What end run? I see now facts, they were actually developing plutonium under Clinton? Link?

Facts are worthless man.

I always forget. Dammit!

 

[APF]

Certainly the reactor that was built during (IIRC) the Carter Administration was there when they got there, sure. And certainly during the Reagan and Bush I Administrations, they convinced the North Koreans to enter into the NPT (omg containments). And certainly pressure during Bush I led to the discovery of NK's noncompliance with the NPT, since apparently NK wanted nukes when they started construction under Carter. And certainly during the Clinton Administration the North Koreans used their nuclear weapons program as leverage to get all sorts of agreements out of the US, while not abandoning their desire for nukes that began when they started construction under Carter, and the discovery of their noncompliance wasn't uncovered until the Bush II Administration...

[edit: do you know what the term, "end-run" means?]

 

[Learn2read]

Certainly the reactor that was built during (IIRC) the Carter Administration was there when they got there, sure. And certainly during the Reagan and Bush I Administrations, they convinced the North Koreans to enter into the NPT (omg containments). And certainly pressure during Bush I led to the discovery of NK's noncompliance with the NPT, since apparently NK wanted nukes when they started construction under Carter. And certainly during the Clinton Administration the North Koreans used their nuclear weapons program as leverage to get all sorts of agreements out of the US, while not abandoning their desire for nukes that began when they started construction under Carter, and the discovery of their noncompliance wasn't uncovered until the Bush II Administration...

[edit: do you know what the term, "end-run" means?]

Oh no, we didn't stop their "desire", Agreed Framework am fail.

Well they *did* have leverage against us, and all it cost us back then was some fuel oil, assistance building non-proliferation plants and a ****ing basketball.

How much leverage do they have now the GWB let them set them up the bomb?