Points out "going wobbly" on both Middle East and North Korean issues by the Bush Administration in the closing months.
Interesting oversees perspective from what would normally be a friendly conservative ally and conceivably pro-Bush.
Ping
This is your Conservative newspaper in South Korea oh man can you say smack chat 101 by your own LOL!
Beginning????
Bush is politically compromised at home. He cannot afford again to offend any State Department or Central Intelligence bureaucrat. He meanwhile must follow the motions demanded from the Baker-Hamilton commission (hence the Palestinian nullity party in Annapolis) to curry favor with the Congress adequate to maintain the military. It might not work. Bush still cannot afford any flare on the North Korean front, so he’s kicking that can down the road until the Congress changes.
It’s possible that the Iraq invasion, Proliferation Security Initiative, multilateral diplomacy, and ultra-top-secret programs have stymied the nuclear ambitions of our enemies, but I somehow doubt it.
The true fruits of Papa Bush’s friendship with Bill Clinton?!
The Govt of Japan, China, and South Korea authored this agreement with NK. Bush was suppose to tell the rest of them “No, we aren’t going along with your ideas”
That would of been positively idiotic. Without help from South Korea and China, the US has no leverage at all over NK. That really would of lost support of “traditional US allies”/
This article is wholly ignorant drivel. Without even a single credible criticism.
Another example of how the rabid Bush haters, mad because Bush could not grant them their every personal political whimsy the second they decided they wanted it, are simply desperate to find something new each day to squeal at Bush about.
Oh please. Get a grip. You are wholly misrepresenting this papers political position. This is the S.K.'s equivalent of Pat Buchanan.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926561/posts
Odd change of tone from this column. Must be off his meds today
We always seem to want to imagine all sorts of powers of persuasion and transformation on our presidents full well knowing that that same thing doesn’t work in daily life.
Cops, if they end up on the job long enough, end up acting like - well - cops.
Same for Senators, CEO’s, Wall Street traders, stock brokers, doctors, lawyers etc. etc.
What I mean is that the power of the job to transform the man is stronger than the power of the man to transform the job.
Why should presidents be any different. IMHO they are not. The forces at play that act on the man and on the institution are powerful ones indeed and in the end, the presidents to tend to revert to form.
We kid ourselves if we think otherwise.
Yeah should of know better. God forbid anything like fact or reason get in the way of your hysteric bigoted hate for Bush.