You gotta love that. Eight years ago tomorrow, the Times excitedly puts its faith in a piece of paper -- an agreement brokered by Jimmy Carter and signed by Clinton. On Oct. 19, 1994, The Times editorial called the Carter/Clinton diplomatic efforts a resounding triumph. Furthermore, those two great men had put to rest widespread fears that an unpredictable nation might provoke nuclear disaster.
The Times went further to deride the people who said the piece of paper was worthless as "hawks" who were silly to have accused the Clinton administration of gullibility and urge swifter, stronger action to stop the proliferation of nukes to such an unstable country.
Today, the Times is not brave enough -- or honest enough -- to admit that it was 100 percent wrong on this issue -- and the "hawks" were 100 percent right -- when it really mattered. Even if they are too embarassed to admit their stupidity, couldn't they at least offer a slight nod to those who warned Clinton that this would happen?
1 posted on
10/18/2002 8:43:19 AM PDT by
seamus
To: seamus
To: seamus
doves will say this gives the lie to the administration's argument that Iraq is uniquely dangerousWhat part of "Axis of Evil" don't they understand? Once again, "stupid" Bush's analysis was right on the mark, while our pointed headed intellectuals were completely wrong. Makes the score around 10,000 to 0.
To: seamus
The only people that were "stunned" were those that were not paying attention.
4 posted on
10/18/2002 8:59:08 AM PDT by
wny
To: seamus
It is simply mindboggling to be constantly reminede that there are actually people stupid enough to have ever that the NKs would ever honor their agreement. Commies NEVER do. Only a complete and utter fool could believe such claptrap.
These ignoramuses have learned nothing form the lessons of places like Cambodia.
5 posted on
10/18/2002 9:06:25 AM PDT by
Seruzawa
To: seamus
Fellow Democraps we must take the
The Pledge of Resistance at www.looneyleft.com its for the children.
8 posted on
10/18/2002 12:33:24 PM PDT by
Democrap
To: seamus
". . .Because North Korea has now violated solemn international weapons agreements, any new understandings will have to be verified unconditionally and highly intrusively. If there is one analogy appropriate to Iraq, it is this: Keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of dictators who want them requires more than signed agreements..."
You can always count on the New York Times being right on target 9 years and 364 days after the fact...
To: seamus; All
11 posted on
10/18/2002 12:42:38 PM PDT by
backhoe
To: seamus
When has the editorial board of the trah NY Times *ever* been right about a foreeign policy issue?
I remember when they completely freaked out when Reagan labeled the USSR the "Evil Empire".
To: seamus
--couldn't they at least offer a slight nod to those who warned Clinton that this would happen?--
Not a chance, they'd sooner have NK drop a nuke on top of their building than admit the right was right about anything.
To: seamus
North Korea has stunned the world by acknowledging that it has been working to produce nuclear bomb fuel despite a 1994 agreement with the United States to freeze nuclear weapons development.Stunned who? Let's get real here. What did you think they were doing over there, playing canasta? C'mon.
All this is is more proof that Bill Clinton sold us a bill of goods and now, we're having to pay the piper.
Greatest president my ass. More like greatest grifter & con artist.
15 posted on
10/18/2002 1:56:51 PM PDT by
mhking
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson