PDA

View Full Version : Don't negotiate with......



Pages : [1] 2

PDA
8/29/2017 2:52pm,
I was going to ask this but on the Trump thread but did not want to derail.

Is refusing to negotiate ever a good idea?

I am looking at North Korea and even Isis and wondering surely there must be some merit in opening diplomatic channels even if it is only to get a better understanding of the individuals holding the power.

there does not have to be a commitment to achieve anything so I am not sure this policy isn't just perpetuating this problems .

Some people just can't be bullied into submission especially not fanatics and especially when despite the might of the bigger guy his hands are tied so he cannot unleash that which makes him stronger anyway.

Nutcracker, sweet
8/29/2017 2:57pm,
Is there any indication that DPRK or ISIS is open to negotiation? Because, I think that would be a prerequisite condition...

Bneterasedmynam
8/29/2017 3:15pm,
I would almost compare it to the bullshit about never apologizing for fear of looking weak. The concern is usually that if you negotiate with them that it somehow enables their behavior.

1bad65
8/29/2017 3:34pm,
Is there any indication that DPRK or ISIS is open to negotiation? Because, I think that would be a prerequisite condition...

We've negotiated with NK before:

"Good afternoon. I am pleased that the United States and North Korea yesterday reached agreement on the text of a framework document on North Korea's nuclear program. This agreement will help to achieve a longstanding and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula.

This agreement is good for the United States, good for our allies, and good for the safety of the entire world. It reduces the danger of the threat of nuclear spreading in the region. It's a crucial step toward drawing North Korea into the global community.

I want to begin by thanking Secretary Christopher and our chief negotiator, Ambassador at Large Bob Gallucci, for seeing these negotiations through. I asked Bob if he'd had any sleep, since he's going to answer all your technical questions about this agreement, and he said that he had had some sleep. So be somewhat gentle with him. After meeting with my chief national security advisers, and at their unanimous recommendation, I am instructing Ambassador Gallucci to return to Geneva on Friday for the purpose of signing an agreement.

The United States has been concerned about the possibility that North Korea was developing nuclear weapons since the 1980's. Three administrations have tried to bring this nuclear program under international control. There is nothing more important to our security and to the world's stability than preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. And the United States has an unshakeable commitment to protect our ally and our fellow democracy South Korea. Thirty-eight thousand American troops stationed on the Peninsula are the guarantors of that commitment.

Today, after 16 months of intense and difficult negotiations with North Korea, we have completed an agreement that will make the United States, the Korean Peninsula, and the world safer. Under the agreement, North Korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities.

This agreement represents the first step on the road to a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. It does not rely on trust. Compliance will be certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The United States and North Korea have also agreed to ease trade restrictions and to move toward establishing liaison offices in each other's capitals. These offices will ease North Korea's isolation.

From the start of the negotiations, we have consulted closely with South Korea, with Japan, and with other interested parties. We will continue to work closely with our allies and with the Congress as our relationship with North Korea develops." -President Bill Clinton, Remarks on the Nuclear Agreement With North Korea, October 18, 1994

Source:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=49319

https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/albright.jpg?w=635&quality=80&h=416



I'd say it didn't go so well. Considering we now know you can't trust NK to keep their word, what's that point in negotiating with them?

PDA
8/29/2017 3:41pm,
Is there any indication that DPRK or ISIS is open to negotiation? Because, I think that would be a prerequisite condition...

I don't know .

Is Isis even one group ?

I'd be amazed if there was not someone senior within their organisation that didn't want to sit and discuss things at some point during the conflict.

I bet Kim Jung Un doesn't want to die and likely many of his senior officials .

But given no diplomatic solution that's are its gonna end up and sadly they could take many on both sides with them.

Maybe the military agenda could even be to insist upon a diplomatic solution.
Nothing says let's talk like a few well positioned MOABs ?

Nutcracker, sweet
8/29/2017 3:57pm,
Maybe the military agenda could even be to insist upon a diplomatic solution.
Nothing says let's talk like a few well positioned MOABs ?

We can reach him from Seoul. We can reach him from Japan. Hell, we can reach him from here. (edit: it's 6600 miles from St. Louis to Pyongyang; a Minuteman missile has a published range of over 8,000 miles)

Raycetpfl
8/29/2017 4:02pm,
We've negotiated with NK before:

"Good afternoon. I am pleased that the United States and North Korea yesterday reached agreement on the text of a framework document on North Korea's nuclear program. This agreement will help to achieve a longstanding and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula.

This agreement is good for the United States, good for our allies, and good for the safety of the entire world. It reduces the danger of the threat of nuclear spreading in the region. It's a crucial step toward drawing North Korea into the global community.

I want to begin by thanking Secretary Christopher and our chief negotiator, Ambassador at Large Bob Gallucci, for seeing these negotiations through. I asked Bob if he'd had any sleep, since he's going to answer all your technical questions about this agreement, and he said that he had had some sleep. So be somewhat gentle with him. After meeting with my chief national security advisers, and at their unanimous recommendation, I am instructing Ambassador Gallucci to return to Geneva on Friday for the purpose of signing an agreement.

The United States has been concerned about the possibility that North Korea was developing nuclear weapons since the 1980's. Three administrations have tried to bring this nuclear program under international control. There is nothing more important to our security and to the world's stability than preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. And the United States has an unshakeable commitment to protect our ally and our fellow democracy South Korea. Thirty-eight thousand American troops stationed on the Peninsula are the guarantors of that commitment.

Today, after 16 months of intense and difficult negotiations with North Korea, we have completed an agreement that will make the United States, the Korean Peninsula, and the world safer. Under the agreement, North Korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities.

This agreement represents the first step on the road to a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. It does not rely on trust. Compliance will be certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The United States and North Korea have also agreed to ease trade restrictions and to move toward establishing liaison offices in each other's capitals. These offices will ease North Korea's isolation.

From the start of the negotiations, we have consulted closely with South Korea, with Japan, and with other interested parties. We will continue to work closely with our allies and with the Congress as our relationship with North Korea develops." -President Bill Clinton, Remarks on the Nuclear Agreement With North Korea, October 18, 1994

Source:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=49319

https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/albright.jpg?w=635&quality=80&h=416



I'd say it didn't go so well. Considering we now know you can't trust NK to keep their word, what's that point in negotiating with them?

In retrospect we should have leveled the place.

hungryjoe
8/29/2017 4:05pm,
China, China and China.

As long as China continues to end around the sanctions put in place, NK will change little to none. China doesn't want to get swamped with refugees and has an afinity for KK's high grade coal.

Raycetpfl
8/29/2017 4:05pm,
We can reach him from Seoul. We can reach him from Japan. Hell, we can reach him from here. (edit: it's 6600 miles from St. Louis to Pyongyang; a Minuteman missile has a published range of over 8,000 miles)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/B-2_Spirit_050404-F-1740G-001.jpg/220px-B-2_Spirit_050404-F-1740G-001.jpg we could turn the lights out on the place without a doubt.

PDA
8/29/2017 4:11pm,
We've negotiated with NK before:

"Good afternoon. I am pleased that the United States and North Korea yesterday reached agreement on the text of a framework document on North Korea's nuclear program. This agreement will help to achieve a longstanding and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula.

This agreement is good for the United States, good for our allies, and good for the safety of the entire world. It reduces the danger of the threat of nuclear spreading in the region. It's a crucial step toward drawing North Korea into the global community.

I want to begin by thanking Secretary Christopher and our chief negotiator, Ambassador at Large Bob Gallucci, for seeing these negotiations through. I asked Bob if he'd had any sleep, since he's going to answer all your technical questions about this agreement, and he said that he had had some sleep. So be somewhat gentle with him. After meeting with my chief national security advisers, and at their unanimous recommendation, I am instructing Ambassador Gallucci to return to Geneva on Friday for the purpose of signing an agreement.

The United States has been concerned about the possibility that North Korea was developing nuclear weapons since the 1980's. Three administrations have tried to bring this nuclear program under international control. There is nothing more important to our security and to the world's stability than preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. And the United States has an unshakeable commitment to protect our ally and our fellow democracy South Korea. Thirty-eight thousand American troops stationed on the Peninsula are the guarantors of that commitment.

Today, after 16 months of intense and difficult negotiations with North Korea, we have completed an agreement that will make the United States, the Korean Peninsula, and the world safer. Under the agreement, North Korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities.

This agreement represents the first step on the road to a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. It does not rely on trust. Compliance will be certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The United States and North Korea have also agreed to ease trade restrictions and to move toward establishing liaison offices in each other's capitals. These offices will ease North Korea's isolation.

From the start of the negotiations, we have consulted closely with South Korea, with Japan, and with other interested parties. We will continue to work closely with our allies and with the Congress as our relationship with North Korea develops." -President Bill Clinton, Remarks on the Nuclear Agreement With North Korea, October 18, 1994

Source:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=49319

https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/albright.jpg?w=635&quality=80&h=416



I'd say it didn't go so well. Considering we now know you can't trust NK to keep their word, what's that point in negotiating with them?

I have read some of the articles at the time and get the impression that there was something about the US behaviour at the time that lead to the Koreans feel that an attempted regime change was in planning/progress.

Now that could just be bullshit BUT it is not unlikely considering Americas history of regime change and most of all it's actually a good idea .

Regardless , how long should one not discuss matters.

Not talking to them has not stopped them developing nukes which was the reason for not talking .

ChenPengFi
8/29/2017 4:19pm,
We can reach him from Seoul. We can reach him from Japan. Hell, we can reach him from here. (edit: it's 6600 miles from St. Louis to Pyongyang; a Minuteman missile has a published range of over 8,000 miles)


Don't forget bout lil ole us, out here in the middle of the ocean...



...when Oahu is ranked by number of military personnel, it comes in at No. 4, behind No. 1 Virginia Beach-Norfolk with 79,770 armed forces members, the San Diego-Carlsbad area in California with 77,935 armed forces members, and the Washington, D.C., area with 47,837 members of the military.

https://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/news/2012/09/17/oahu-has-fourth-largest-military-work.html


We have a few things that go bang, and the means to distribute.

ChenPengFi
8/29/2017 4:24pm,
I also have it on good authority that a few of our subs are right in his backyard, so I doubt they would ever get to know if their weapons even made it to target.

hungryjoe
8/29/2017 4:33pm,
I have read some of the articles at the time and get the impression that there was something about the US behaviour at the time that lead to the Koreans feel that an attempted regime change was in planning/progress.

Now that could just be bullshit BUT it is not unlikely considering Americas history of regime change and most of all it's actually a good idea .

Regardless , how long should one not discuss matters.

Not talking to them has not stopped them developing nukes which was the reason for not talking .

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/19/world/clinton-approves-a-plan-to-give-aid-to-north-koreans.html?pagewanted=all

We gave them oil. They continued to be the number one counterfeiter of US $100 bills. I have faith that continued negotiations will work.

PDA
8/29/2017 4:36pm,
Yes but the US cannot strike first with nukes.

There would be civil war if it did even if it had good reason I suspect.

The only option would be to retaliate and I am pretty sure the Koreans know exactly who and what they could hit and although that is not the US it will be somebody and that would be really really bad.

I don't want to see Korea wiped out there people are victims of shitheads.

Rightly or wrongly I do not feel that Koreans would be so difficult to bring round to South Korea's way of life if the leaders were gone or deposed or whatever , Isis on the other hand may need a good deal of vaporisation to see the error of their ways but I don't know.

Nutcracker, sweet
8/29/2017 4:39pm,
I also have it on good authority that a few of our subs are right in his backyard, so I doubt they would ever get to know if their weapons even made it to target.

Also, I imagine half the boomers out of Kitsap are on regular duty in westpac.

ChenPengFi
8/29/2017 4:48pm,
Yes but the US cannot strike first with nukes.

There would be civil was if it did even if it had good reason I suspect.

The only option would be to retaliate and I am pretty sure the Koreans know exactly who and what they could hit and although that is the US it will be somebody and that would be really really bad.

I don't want to see Korea wiped out there people are victims of shitheads.

Rightly or wrongly I do not feel that Koreans would be so difficult to bring round to South Korea's way of life if the leaders were gone or deposed or whatever , Isis on the other hand may need a good deal of vaporisation to see the error of their ways but I don't know.



It's only the nuke card that even gets them to the table.
We'd ignore them otherwise.


Re isis et al, amazing how far backwards a place can go in such short time.

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/files/webfm/pictures/women/548x331_afghan_women_1970s_via_twitter.jpg