Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Agamemnon
Well... wouldn't the bedwetter be the United States? Aren't these the same things the US has basically been saying; diplomacy > intervention right now? Or is it just the world's current political climate that prevents the US for intervening? I haven't read or heard that Bush advocated military intervention, only to be denied by... who?
What does it say when the 'bedwetters' are getting their way? How effective (or right) is the (so-called) reasonable person? It sounds like they're not getting what they want... obviously they're not in the same position of power that the bedwetters are, like the US Administration. Of course, these labels sort of automatically remove any interest in this post, given that its pretty clearly massively slanted. Remove the derogatory labels and its a lot more effective.
|
The bedwetter would be anyone you make it out to be, but yes, in specifics, it would apply to the US and Bush, considering he has called for a diplomatic resolve to the situation.
I don't think diplomacy will work anymore, Il has clearly shown he will defy the international community over and over again, and there is no reason why he should obey the demands from the UN this time around.
I think the political climate right now, plus the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan has a LOT to do with why NK isn't being dealt with properly. Frankly I'm scared that a nation like NK will be allowed to retain nuclear weapons, and even possibly have the power to use them.