Getting North Korea back to the negotiating table next week offers at least the chance for progress on the unsettling standoff over the nation’s nuclear arms. The latest six-nation talks may do about as much good as the first three rounds, which is none. But when it comes to managing a loose cannon like dictator Kim Jong Il, talking beats not talking.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22

9 Comments
Rhonda,
“Talking beats not talking”
Wow! (That is all I have to say…)
Yeah, another empty Rhonda blog.
Agreed! We need a dialogue with North Korea if we are able to get anywhere. This arms standoff is not going to do nobody any good if we work under assumptions and fear.
Nathan, I’m so impressed. You always manage a swat at the Eagle without really contributing to the subject at hand. Are you the designated “attack Republican?
Hammer,
I am impressed. You seem to go to every blog and swat at either me or Hank.
Are you designated by Ed and the gang the attack liberal?
Hummer has nothing better to do than troll around and be a nuisance, never adding a thing to the discussion. He seems to think he’s done something to Hank, but it escapes me what that might be, other than bore him to tears.
If human rights and WMDs were really our concern, then someone explain to me why our government focused more on taking out Saddam than Kim Jong. He is a horribly brutal dictator with concentration camps full of his political enemies and their families, AND he’s admitted to developing nuclear weapons. What’s the deal?
You support war now Damoon?
Why the change of heart?
I’m just wondering why we picked Saddam when Kim Jong is just as evil and even more of a threat to his neighbors. I’ll bet if he was sitting on a bunch of oil, we’d already have gone in and taken him out. It’s not that I don’t support war, Nathan, I don’t support THIS war. Sometimes we have no choice, like in WW2. As far as invading Iraq, all it has done is crush our credibility to the rest of the world and made us more vulnerable to terrorists. American arrogance will be our downfall. If we are truly concerned about human rights, we’d be doing more about Sudan and a host of other places. We went into Iraq for one reason and one reason only, to control the flow of oil from the Middle East, to establish bases and gain political power there. Like I have stated in many of my posts, war should be a last resort to solving conflict and then only for the right reasons.