Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: N. Korean Leader Regrets Test
breitbart.com ^ | oct 19, 2006 | breitbart.com

Posted on 10/19/2006 8:16:01 PM PDT by blogblogginaway

North Korean leader Kim Jong Il expressed regret about his country's nuclear test to a Chinese delegation and said Pyongyang would return to international nuclear talks if Washington backs off a campaign to financially isolate the country, a South Korean newspaper reported Friday. "If the U.S. makes a concession to some degree, we will also make a concession to some degree, whether it be bilateral talks or six-party talks," Kim was quoted as telling a Chinese envoy, the mass- circulation Chosun Ilbo reported, citing a diplomatic source in China.

Kim told the Chinese delegation that "he is sorry about the nuclear test," the newspaper reported.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nk
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-134 next last
To: hinckley buzzard
Well...don't you think maybe NK and China can orchestrate this for the sake of the world press? Sounds pretty much like a case of "good cop/bad cop" to me, with the US unwittingly cast as the bad cop.

Unwittingly...?

Has the draintream media gotten to you, that you have such a low opinion of our Bush Administration and national intelligence?

101 posted on 10/19/2006 10:11:10 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Thanks but I already read it.

The only words in the article that are Kims, are the "quoted" ones. the rest are the reporters assumption/spin. Compare this story to others.

He is not "sorry" he conducted nuclear tests. He never "regrets' doing them, in fact those aren't his words at all. The entire first paragraph are the opinion of the writer.

102 posted on 10/19/2006 10:12:14 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary (Bukhari:V1B1N6 “Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
drain[s]tream
103 posted on 10/19/2006 10:12:20 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
He is not "sorry" he conducted nuclear tests. He never "regrets' doing them,

That's not even remotely the most signifant thing going on here, nor in the article.

104 posted on 10/19/2006 10:13:34 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader
I'm not saying the U.S. isn't economically and militarily stronger than China, we are. I'm saying that China's threat, (or pressure), was taken more seriously by NK than ours were. And that is an embarrassment.

Quiz question: The president of what country has been pushing China to pressure North Korea about all this?

105 posted on 10/19/2006 10:17:30 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

Hint: China is a very significant one of the (what number) in this president's plan for "The (same number) Party Talks."
106 posted on 10/19/2006 10:19:37 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: unspun
"And he's willing to sit down, suffer the counsel of neighboring nations and the USA, and that's just what we've wanted and are affecting."

IF Bush gives in to his demands, the same demands he wanted since Bush came into office, and he wants them despite the fact he restarted his nuclear program, and expelled UN inspectors. He wants these new sanctions halted as well.

He will NOT stop doing wwhat he is doing if Bush gives him the consessions he's asking for, he's saying he will then only sit down and talk after getting them.

That's Bullsh%t, but media is spinning it like it's some breakthrough and concession on kims part.

107 posted on 10/19/2006 10:21:45 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary (Bukhari:V1B1N6 “Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

China must have really spanked his big fat @$$.


108 posted on 10/19/2006 10:22:51 PM PDT by F.J. Mitchell ( I predict a victory for Republicans that will make Dims remember 1994 as the good old' days.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

I give up. People are blind. China did absolutely nothing.


109 posted on 10/19/2006 10:27:08 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary (Bukhari:V1B1N6 “Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
IF Bush gives in to his demands, the same demands he wanted since Bush came into office, and he wants them despite the fact he restarted his nuclear program, and expelled UN inspectors. He wants these new sanctions halted as well.

Pretty clearly, it seems to me, this is a very significant step in allowing China and the US to enter into the step-by-step unraveling of both NK's nuclear steps and the US/UN sanctions. These things are done in multiple phases and communiques within phases.

We'll know much more after Rice's visit with the Beijing Mafia.

110 posted on 10/19/2006 10:28:30 PM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: TheCrusader

China dragged NK by the ear to the first 6 party talks. Providing 90% of the oil NK uses & about 50% of their grain imports gives China a lot of leverage over NK.

The "back door" deal would be what the US did to get China to use its leverage. Getting Washington to back off from economically isolating NK kinda looks like China told NK that American pressure was going to work if NK didn't quit dinking around.


111 posted on 10/19/2006 10:29:04 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002

"I agree. It makes China look like the new superpower of the world."

Why? It's just a handler reigning in their dog. Big deal.


112 posted on 10/19/2006 10:31:59 PM PDT by Constantine XI Palaeologus ("Vicisti, Galilaee")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Oh please. This is like us claiming credit for reining in North Dakota if the governor there threatened to nuke Canada.

Would we do that before or after Canada surrendered to him?

113 posted on 10/19/2006 10:33:20 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly
"China dragged NK by the ear to the first 6 party talks"

NO THEY DIDN'T !

"If the U.S. makes a concession to some degree, we will also make a concession to some degree, whether it be bilateral talks or six-party talks," Kim was quoted as telling a Chinese envoy,

Tell me, what are the issues here? What did Kim il Dong have to do in order for Bush to give N korea things they want?
Who refused to sit down and discuss them? It wasn't Bush. It was Kim. It was Bush who insisted they be tri-lateral talks at min. In Order for kim to get ANYTHING from the USA, they have to do what? HINT: STOP their nuclear program.

Bush is NOT going to give Kim Ding Dong concessions just so he will sit down and talk. He has to earn talks and rewards by halting his nuclear program

114 posted on 10/19/2006 10:41:21 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary (Bukhari:V1B1N6 “Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
From the article: Pyongyang would return to international nuclear talks if Washington backs off a campaign to financially isolate the country

What did Kim il Dong have to do in order for Bush to give N korea things they want?

NK walked away from the 6 party talks, not the US. A concession on the part of the US would be 2 party talks. I don't see anything about them, instead I see something about "international nuclear talks".

Who refused to sit down and discuss them?

NK walked away from the 6 party talks.

The US upped it's pressure on NK, via threats of further economic isolation to get them back to 6 party talks, AKA "international" talks. NK folded to avoid *additional* economic isolation. Japan refused NK ships this past week. China probably asked Kim if he wanted to continue getting any oil through them & somehow it's being reported that the US is making a concession to NK.

115 posted on 10/19/2006 11:06:06 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

China takes NK to the woodshed...FINALLY!


116 posted on 10/20/2006 5:05:39 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lib-Lickers 2

Yeah, we've been real effective in that regard lately. Iran has really listened to us. Iraq was fun. China did not move because of us. If they did then they's also have helped with Iran, Iraq, etc.


117 posted on 10/20/2006 6:13:48 AM PDT by bust (A biased media is the biggest threat to our democracy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002

bingo


118 posted on 10/20/2006 6:14:43 AM PDT by bust (A biased media is the biggest threat to our democracy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: blam

Sorry, I disagree. Nobody tells China what to do. They have made that clear. Maybe they don't want nukes in Japan and the South.

If we held sway over China, they would have been more help in runn up to Iraq.

We look like paper tigers making empty threats and China sends a freaking ENVOY and the idiot caves like a sinkhole. No, we look like hell.


119 posted on 10/20/2006 6:20:44 AM PDT by bust (A biased media is the biggest threat to our democracy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway
One cannot engage in honest negotiations with a lying bastard.

Regards, Ivan

120 posted on 10/20/2006 6:22:02 AM PDT by MadIvan (I aim to misbehave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-134 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson