U.S. Announces Diplomatic Breakthrough with North Korea on Nukes

I always wondered this..

Since the US economy is in dire straits and Debt is out-of-control, why doesn't the world come together and ask the U.S to cut back in Nukes in exchange for international aid and cash?

I don't understand why some of you say that there is a lack of food aid in the US, or that the aid should be given to starving americans instead of North Koreans. Well, let the next figures speak for itself.

NK gets 240.000 metric tons of food
The "starving" american gets 2,815,053 metric tons of food thrtough various aid programs, costing around $3,006,232,000 (numbers from 2009)..... So I dont really see why 240.000 metric tons to NK would change the situation for any "starving" american.
Link

reply to post by Juston

If the US gives aid in the form of food rather than military hardware it is a welcome change. N Korea is in dire need for food but it is a proud country. Give your aid without harping on the conditions for it frequently and I am sure they will not go back on their words. Unlike hardware you cannot take it back because its already consumed. Keep them well fed and they would not be a nuisance to anyone. A desperate N Korea will have to sell its nuclear products to buy food so this is a good start for better relationship which will foster better understanding of the situation of the world today. N Korea has been living in a cocoon for so long. With N Korea using tact will go a long way.

with stall tactics N.Korea will have enough
war heads to open up a "Smoke Shop"

reply to post by Clairaudience


Your premise is incorrect. This is from the link you provided.

The Food Aid Convention, 1999, is an agreement among donor countries to contribute to world food security and to improve international response to emergency and other food needs of developing countries. It describes the acceptable methods for providing food aid and includes minimum annual commitments for each participating country and the European Community. The United States has the largest minimum commitment of 2,500,000 metric tons.

In fiscal year 2009 (October 1, 2008-September 30, 2009), the United States provided more than $2.9 billion of food assistance to developing countries, providing approximately 2.8 million metric tons and reaching over 70 million people.

And maybe it's not a good thing to be giving endless aid packages to a totalitarian regime that has no intention of fulfilling its obligation? That is, if we are really holding them to any obligation at all.

Maybe because the US and NK have been in an bona fide state of war for decades?

Maybe because they have the largest army per capita in the world and a food aid package = feeding their army?

NK is a sad sad place. I feel for the people of NK for having to endure under a heinous oligarchy. That said, let NK collapse due to its own weight. Propping up the dictatorship whenever it's about to fall isn't helping NK's people.

reply to post by SloAnPainful


Lets just be thankful the chubby little leader, didn't trade
with Hezbollah, food for nukes.

reply to post by Clairaudience


Simply because the 240k metric tons of food could have relieved some of the food stamp burden. You act as if our country has to maintain such a large population of people on food stamps. We should not have people on food stamps while doling out food AND money in great quantities to other countries. This (the deal with NK) is only the tip. We continue to dole out billions and billions in aide all the while we become broker and broker. It makes no sense.

At some point, we have to start taking better care of our own people.

How many homeless people in NYC alone would have appreciated this "food drop"?

So we used diplomacy to settle this issue with a nation that has been referred to as part of the "Axis of Evil" and is considered a "rogue nation"

But we can not use diplomacy in Iran?

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
I always wondered this..

Since the US economy is in dire straits and Debt is out-of-control, why doesn't the world come together and ask the U.S to cut back in Nukes in exchange for international aid and cash?

That is because the USA is the greatest third world country EVER!

Hopefully the new young leader isn't as crazy as his old man and realizes just what their nuclear program is doing to his country.


I'm concerned though because as the article states the North has done this before in exchange for food and reneged on more then one occasion. This is most likely the same scenario right here. Is it really safe to assume that Kim Jong Un would really tarnish his father's legacy and just give it up?

Originally posted by METACOMET
reply to post by Azadok

 

I wish that being educated in the west was more reassuring, but it isn't. Most 2-bit dictators are educated in the west. Bashar al-Assad of Syria was educated in the west to be an optometrist of all things. Look at him now.

Well being an optometrist he should have no problem seeing things are not looking to good for him.

Breaking News update on the situation:

Israeli leader says North Korea nuclear deal is no model for Iran

Guess who else is talking about North Korea?

OK. So many think he's a nut.

But he's one of the few North Americans in Asia who has anything interesting to say about what's going on in the region.

...the regime change in North Korea has now resulted in concrete dialogue over reunification of the Korean peninsula and possibly even a union between a united Korea and Japan.

benjaminfulford.net...

You have to pay to see the full post, unless you can find a subscriber who has re-posted a post, such as this one:

exotica-radio.com...

Fulford just forwards what his contacts tell him. In that way he's like a channeller. He doesn't really know if what he's being told is true or not. So anyone can accuse him of spreading disinfo.

But I think it's interesting that this advance from North Korea was seen as a "surprise." If you only watch the mainstream media, sure, it was a surprise. But I know the State Department doesn't just watch the mainstream media! I wish they'd just come clean and start being honest with us. And I actually expect that they will some day.

Originally posted by METACOMET
reply to post by Clairaudience

 

Your premise is incorrect. This is from the link you provided.

The Food Aid Convention, 1999, is an agreement among donor countries to contribute to world food security and to improve international response to emergency and other food needs of developing countries. It describes the acceptable methods for providing food aid and includes minimum annual commitments for each participating country and the European Community. The United States has the largest minimum commitment of 2,500,000 metric tons.

In fiscal year 2009 (October 1, 2008-September 30, 2009), the United States provided more than $2.9 billion of food assistance to developing countries, providing approximately 2.8 million metric tons and reaching over 70 million people.

And maybe it's not a good thing to be giving endless aid packages to a totalitarian regime that has no intention of fulfilling its obligation? That is, if we are really holding them to any obligation at all.

Maybe because the US and NK have been in an bona fide state of war for decades?

Maybe because they have the largest army per capita in the world and a food aid package = feeding their army?

NK is a sad sad place. I feel for the people of NK for having to endure under a heinous oligarchy. That said, let NK collapse due to its own weight. Propping up the dictatorship whenever it's about to fall isn't helping NK's people.

edit on 29-2-2012 by METACOMET because: fx

The problem with that is that when the NK army starts starving the option of going out in a blaze of suicidal glory starts to look better to the leadership. While NK could quietly collapse under its own weight it could also have a seizure and kill millions of South Koreans in its death throes.

Nobody knows, so its easier to keep it limping along.