Heads Up! President Bush Addresses the Nation 09:45AM ET

Fox News | 10/9/2006 | staff

[kellynla]

President Bush addresees the nation from the White House 09:45AM ET

[deputac]

The history of NK has shown different. The famine of the nineties almost brought NK to its knees, but China and the US (including President Bush) sent them the food aid to brink their country back from the brink. I guess this Administration has to make a decision between starving this despicable regime out (and thus, allowing a lot of innocent people to die) or allow even more people to die when these maniacs nuke someone.

Tough choice that I would not want to make.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Old tradition of blaming current president for the sins of his predecessors has been taken to a new artistic highs by the current crop of dems and msms...

[WoofDog123]

"Didn't really like all the crap about diplomacy, however."

well he isn't going to say 'we will bomb them' or anything provocative....and IF (big if) there is a chance of pending blockade or military action he isn't going to tell DPRK via this statement before the proper assets are all in place. speak softly and carry a big stick is in the end a better policy than bark loudly before stick is in place.

I still think the only goal the US can pursue at this point is assassination/destabilization of the DPRK government, with the alternatives being nuclear DPRK or a potentially VERY nasty regional conflict.

[sasha123]

exactly, the citizens of NK get thrown into torturous labor camps saying the slightest negative word. I don't know how they'd manage to conspire to overthrow this leadership.

[Williams]

We have to accept there is no consistency to current policy. The urgency that took us into Afghanistan and Iraq is gone. We expected to be out of Iraq long ago and on to the next mission. I believe there is logic behind the president's decisions. We are waiting for Iraq to be sorted out, and Iran is next on the agenda. But meanwhile NK gets worse, Latin America becomes hostile, Syria has totally backslid from some earlier compliance, Iran is defiant, and we are mired in the UN.

Ronald Reagan built up the military, especially the Navy. It is just possible that Rumsfeld's downsizing is in error.

[OldFriend]

I thought I heard that the dems wanted to work together to help solve the problem of North Korea.

/s/

[corlorde]

there is a fine balance there we have to maintain, isn't there. A lighter, more mobile capacity and a heavy armor contingent. Air power is great, but it should be backed up with heavy armor capability.

[standingfirm]

Thanks you MN Johnnie, but I am not a Bush hater, much less rabid. I support most of what the President has done and said. I don't think he said that about N. Korea, because everyone knows that they had nukes a long time ago. I do believe he has said that Iran will not be allowed to get nuclear weapons. B. Netanyahu has said publicly that Bush has assured him privately that Iran will not be allowed to build nuclear weapons, which of course, they are doing in front of all the world to see. So, we shall just have to wait and see.

[OldFriend]

Reminds me of Colin Powell insisting we stop pursuing the Republican Guard on their way back to Iraq.

Poor baby, just didn't have the courage to finish the job.

Now he backstabs our President for having to clean up his mess.

[Law is not justice but process]

I generally agree. Don't make any fanfare, just cut off the fuel and supplies. We don't even have to announce sanctions. Just end the food aid. We will see if Kim is willing to get on the world stage and beg for food and fuel. The linchpin to such a strategy would be China and Russia. If there were no declared sanctions, they may go along with some sort of back room deal. Kim would either have to declare war unilaterally or buckle under diplomatically.

That or be the last North Korean to starve to death.

[Sacajaweau]

Naval Blockade on its way. Japan is the target in all this and we know it.

[Steel Wolf]

Do you REALLY think we should take action that our major allies in the region are asking us NOT to?

Sure. Once North Korea goes nuclear, they're no long just a South Korean problem.

It's not 1950. Global communism isn't poised to take over the world, and we have no interest in defending South Korea vital to the United States. While South Korea may be happy to bow down and accept the North's leadership, we are not. What South Korea wants is no longer the primary consideration, when dealing with North Korea.

The dark secret of WMDs is that once the know how and technology passes between enough hands, there's no way we'll be able to track it back to Pyongyang. If Libya got the bomb from Pakistan and used it on Algeria, would Pakistan be on the hook? How about China, who gave Pakistan the bomb? Of course not. Politics don't work like that. Weapons sold are just that. Weapons sold. The only people who are held accountable are those who use them.

Same goes for whoever the DPRK sells weapons technology to. WMD proliferation will destabilize the entire world, so it's in our interest to combat it, whether or not the locals support us.

[finnigan2]

"He looked serious, angry and was quite brief.."

- It's my guess he looked that way because he now knows that he's been conned by Chinese assurances that they could handle Kim if he just left the matter to them. He now realizes (I hope) that China has betrayed his trust and is playing a double game. To the Chinese, there is no downsize to a nuclearized North Korea. Kim can now swagger and strut about, threaten his neighbors with nuclear blackmail while the US appears impotent and China stands quietly back, enjoying the spectacle while pulling Kim's strings.
This can only diminish US influence in the far east as countries there look more and more to China for protection.

[Williams]

You're exactly right, but look at what you wrote: That we should threaten to end trade with China unless they put a stop to NK. But we have absolutely zero chance of making that threat. We are back in a pre 9-11 mentality. Threats are emerging but it would just be too "hard" and "radical" to actually eliminate the threats. Except a nuclear NK can wreck a lot more havoc than 9-11.

[r9etb]

Think a little bit about what I posted before you start calling names.

If you had kids in-theatre and still talk about "lack of stomach," then you've got NO excuse for the comment.

There's plenty that can be done w/ respect to NK, and it will be done. But -- of necessity -- it will be done quietly, and very likely not by us.

[OldFriend]

Both China and South Korea have been sending food and other supplies to North Korea. South Korean has unification in mind, China has war in mind. Harming the US in any way possible.

[WoofDog123]

" but holding back while awaiting more information and world reaction."

and additional tests by DPRK probably.

[johnny7]

For a brief minute... I thought I had on PMSnbc... until I saw the FOX logo. Allen looked/acted like he was suppressing an orgasm when giving his worthless opinion on NK's ominous action. The Newsweak b*tch blamed it all on Bush's... failure to communicate.

[Williams]

And let's not leave out the Navy. The reality seems to be that we have not seriously re-armed following 9-11.

[ichabod1]

I'd make it without a second thought. Let'em eat cake.