This weekend, it was reported that North Korea detonated *something* last week that allegedly produced a smoke plume in the shape of your basic mushroom. And, right on cue, comes Senator Kerry with something nonsensical.
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) accused the Bush administration of letting a "nuclear nightmare" develop by refusing to deal with North Korea (news - web sites) when it first came to office.
In a telephone interview with The New York Times, published on its Web Site late Sunday, Kerry said the current fear that North Korea may be preparing to test a plutonium bomb was a consequence of President Bush (news - web sites)'s preoccupation with Iraq (news - web sites).Aren’t you forgetting something, Senator?
Two presidents belonging to your party tried to appease the North Koreans by bribing them into halting their nuclear aspirations. Well, the money got transferred and spent, the oil got used, the food got eaten—presumably by very few average North Koreans--but the cessation didn’t happen. The North Korean government may not be too up on feeding its “constituents” or developing its economy, but they certainly know a couple of marks when they see them.
These are the results of negotiating with a basket-case states with nuclear capability; terrorists, by another other name. As is so with Islamist terror, President Bush must also clean up after the botched policies offered in this area by leaders of your party, Senator. However, you and your party are not one in the same. So, since we know from observation that appeasement doesn’t work on madmen, it would please us, the American voting public, to know what your third way might be.
Oh. Never mind.
Asked about how he would handle the threat of a North Korean nuclear test if he became president, Kerry replied that the issue would likely have to be taken to the United Nations (news - web sites) Security Council.So let me see if I have this straight. President Bush is “bad” because he “refuses” to deal with the North Koreans and hands the situation off to the regional players (the PRC, Japan and South Korea), but your way is “good” because you’d hand the situation off to the UN Security Council?
I suspect that anything that just a little too tough for John Kerry to handle would be punted to the UN. If that doesn't freeze your blood, then nothing will.
