Good point. Let's look at how North Korea scores on the "Global Test" that Kerry mentioned in tonight's presidential debate:
·Kerry has criticized Bush on the campaign and during tonight's debate for not giving the U.N. and multilateral diplomacy a chance in Iraq before committing to military action
·Kerry said during the debate that "nuclear proliferation" is the biggest threat to America and pointed to North Korea as the major malefactor in that threat
·Since it was discovered North Korea was attempting to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons in October 2002, Bush has used a multilateral diplomatic coalition of at least five nations (USA, China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia) to contain the potential North Korean nuclear threat
·During tonight's debate, Kerry told America that to end North Korea's nuclear proliferation, he would hold bilateral talks rather than using the leverage that China, South Korea, Japan, and Russia would bring to the negotiations
In other words, Kerry said that America should take a unilateral approach (REMEMBER: Taking a "bilateral" approach i.e. having the USA deal directly with threats, has been called "unilateral" by Kerry earlier this month when he said in a campaign speech that Bush "has chosen to move in a unilateral way" in the War on Terror) in dealing with North Korea. Kerry himself described North Korea and "the spread of nuclear weapons was the biggest threat facing the United States" in Thursday night's debate—so why is Kerry willing to squander the international goodwill created by the Bush Administration's diplomats between China, South Korea, Japan, and Russia and "go it alone" with North Korea?
Does this mean Kerry doesn't think North Korea's nuclear weapons program passes the "Global Test" to have multilateral talks or is this just another example of Kerry's typical political tactic of trying to have it both ways.
And, talk about recycling old terminology. I haven't heard that phrase being trotted out for at least a decade.
Plus, how is the "security" crowd going to take Kerry's vow to stop our nuclear program? It was one thing to say that during the Cold War, but another thing entirely to think that way during an era when terrorists are developing these weapons. Does he think that they will be as slow to use they as when the USSR -- who didn't want to die -- faced off with us? Terrorists don't care if they kill us and them both. They just want us dead.