Deal cut with North Korea: For real, this time?

[BrainGlutton]

The six-nation talks have finally produced a settlement:

. . . Within 60 days, the North Korean regime is to shut down its Yongbyon nuclear reactor and reprocessing plant under the monitoring of international inspectors, who would return to the country after a four-year absence. In exchange the North is to receive 50,000 tons of fuel oil, the “resolution” of U.S. banking sanctions and the beginning of bilateral talks on the normalization of U.S.-North Korean relations. If the shutdown takes place, North Korean production of plutonium for nuclear weapons will also stop – a welcome if very limited step forward.

Unlike the failed “Agreed Framework” between the Clinton administration and North Korea, the new deal is not open-ended: North Korea will get no more than the one-time “emergency” supply of oil, worth about $12 million, unless it takes further action.

Will this be the one that does it? No more fear of a nuclear-armed NK?

[RTFirefly]

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
The six-nation talks have finally produced a settlement:

Will this be the one that does it? No more fear of a nuclear-armed NK?
[/QUOTE]
Hey, the last one was for real, until GWB screwed it up.

I think Tom Toles nailed it.

[Bryan_Ekers]

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Will this be the one that does it?
[/QUOTE]

Sure. Eighth time’s the charm.

[Shodan]

IIRC, the NKs are keeping the nukes they already have. The $400M are so they don’t make any more.

The drawback is that North Korea keeps, for now, the weapons and plutonium stockpile it has amassed.

Hey, the last one was for real, until GWB screwed it up.

You misspelled “Clinton and Carter”. Even the Washington fucking Post doesn’t buy that one -

Unlike the failed “Agreed Framework” between the Clinton administration and North Korea, the new deal is not open-ended: North Korea will get no more than the one-time “emergency” supply of oil, worth about $12 million, unless it takes further action. This accord also includes China, South Korea, Japan and Russia, whose involvement raises the chance that Pyongyang will comply and demonstrates that the six-party approach the Bush administration embraced more than three years ago can produce results. In that sense it is wrong to argue that the administration has simply reverted to the Clinton-era arrangement that it repudiated in 2002, and if it is rewarding North Korea’s misbehavior, the bribe is a small one.

I realize that hope springs eternal in your breast that if you sling enough bullshit, you will get away with some of it, but really…

Regards,
Shodan

[Squink]

It must be a pretty good agreement. John Bolton Hates it with a purple passion:

“It is rewarding bad behavior of the North Koreans by promising fuel oil,” said Bolton. "It’s a bad signal to North Korea and it’s a bad signal to Iran. It will say to countries like Iran and other would-be proliferators, if you just have enough patience, if you just have enough persistence, you’ll wear the United States down. They’ll give up on point after point after point.”

On the other hand, I’m going to wait a few weeks to see if it holds up before digging into the nitty gritty of the thing. We’ve had six years of repeated ‘almost’ breakthroughs after all. There’s no sense wasting time on what may just be another of the same.

[Fear_Itself]

Isn’t this pretty much the same deal Clinton made with Kim Jong Il, and was roundly excoriated by the right for?

[Squink]

Looks pretty much that way, although I’m certain that it’s a great victory for our leader:

Bush in 2003:
We will not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea. We will not give into blackmail. We will not settle for anything less than the complete, verifiable, and irreversible elimination of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030523-4.html

[Shodan]

For heaven’s sake, don’t you people read?

Unlike the failed “Agreed Framework” between the Clinton administration and North Korea, the new deal is not open-ended: North Korea will get no more than the one-time “emergency” supply of oil, worth about $12 million, unless it takes further action. This accord also includes China, South Korea, Japan and Russia, whose involvement raises the chance that Pyongyang will comply and demonstrates that the six-party approach the Bush administration embraced more than three years ago can produce results. In that sense it is wrong to argue that the administration has simply reverted to the Clinton-era arrangement that it repudiated in 2002, and if it is rewarding North Korea’s misbehavior, the bribe is a small one.

Regards,
Shodan

[BrainGlutton]

What tangible benefits did Clinton grant to NK, which the current deal does not?

[Fear_Itself]

[QUOTE=Shodan]
For heaven’s sake, don’t you people read?

Unlike the failed “Agreed Framework” between the Clinton administration and North Korea, the new deal is not open-ended: North Korea will get no more than the one-time “emergency” supply of oil, worth about $12 million, unless it takes further action…

Regards,
Shodan
[/QUOTE]
A very negligible distinction. I am surprised you are so easily impressed.

[Squink]

the bribe is a small one.

It wasn’t much of a blow job either.
I thought we were dealing with rock solid conservative principles here. Turns out it was bullshit.
NK doesn’t get what they want for next year, they’ll set off a another nuke by Christmas. We should’ve negotiated in good faith back in 2001-2002, when we were in a position of strength. The reversal now, looks like an attempt at a legacy enhancement move by the president, nothing more.

[Shodan]

[QUOTE=Fear Itself]
A very negligible distinction. I am surprised you are so easily impressed.
[/QUOte]
Not me, the Washington Post.

OK, I guess we have established - you don’t read.

Regards,
Shodan

[Fear_Itself]

[QUOTE=Shodan]
Not me, the Washington Post.

OK, I guess we have established - you don’t read.

[/QUOTE]
Do you agree with their assessment or not? If not, why would you post it?

[FRDE]

Maybe N Korea bought in their fire cracker

• it does not matter, the real thing is letting them sort out a reunification with S Korea that gives them dignity.

Personally I would build tractor factories against the wire, and then request that the wire is cut.

There is also a shortage of Korean farmerettes …

[BrainGlutton]

[QUOTE=FRDE]

• it does not matter, the real thing is letting them sort out a reunification with S Korea that gives them dignity.
  [/QUOTE]

What makes you think they’re moving toward reunification?

[Squink]

The list of those not impressed with the agreement grows:

Elliott Abrams, a deputy national security adviser, fired off e-mails expressing bewilderment over the agreement and demanding to know why North Korea would not have to first prove it had stopped sponsoring terrorism before being rewarded
…
John R. Bolton - “a bad deal”
…
National Review, a conservative bastion, yesterday slammed the agreement as essentially the same one negotiated by President Bill Clinton in 1994 … “When exactly did Kim Jong Il become trustworthy?”

It remains to be seen whether Bush negotiated a decent deal, and whether he can stand up to the pressure to repudiate it; to say nothing of Kim Jong Il.

[FRDE]

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
What makes you think they’re moving toward reunification?
[/QUOTE]

Unified athletics (like Olympic Games)

• also plain common sense, you can’t stop a nomentacura (sic ?) avoiding obvious survival

They are watching the DDR and those revolting ‘uman rites’ stuff’s

• you don’t want to be stuck with an old crime

[Ravenman]

So we’ve negotiated a deal with crazy ol’ North Korea. I’m waiting for the explanation from the White House about why it continues to reject diplomacy with Iran.

[Quartz]

I don’t believe Comrade Kim will uphold his end of the bargain. Danegeld never works in the long run.

Hmmm… this cartoon and this one come to mind.

[BrainGlutton]

[QUOTE=FRDE]

• also plain common sense, you can’t stop a nomentacura (sic ?) avoiding obvious survival
  [/QUOTE]

What is that word, and who is “avoiding survival”?