Bushamerica $3 gas is here NOW 4739Robert Cruickshank Utter nonsense, and I note you don't have any support for your guesses. North Korea had been working on a nuclear plant since at least...
Karla Wilson
The flaws here are many.
What Clinton and Albright did was buy off North Korea. They gave them the ability to further make nuclear materials for peaceful purposes in exchange for a rigorous system of checks to ensure that their work on nuclear weapons stopped. And stopped it did - North Korea did not have a plant in '94, but they were close. All independent verifiers indicate that the deal was held to by Pyongyang.
Until Bush came to office. It is without doubt that it was under Bush that North Korea reneged on the deal - but only after it announced its intentions in a plea for further talks. When this was refused, they disconnected the monitoring devices and resumed work on nukes, hoping this would spur Bush to hold talks. When this did not happen, they finished their work and in late '02 or early '03 announced they had a plant. Bush did nothing at this point, either, except to undercut Colin Powell's early efforts to restart talks.
The facts are clear, and not in dispute. Under Clinton North Korea did not have nukes, and had verifiably stopped their work on nukes. Under Bush North Korea abandoned this deal, and Bush did not lift a finger to stop it.
Like it or not, the responsibility for North Korea's nuclear program as it stands today rests at the feet of George W. Bush. We can argue whether he was right to let this happen or not. But we cannot argue whether he holds the responsibility. Clearly, he does.
-- Robert I. Cruickshank roadgeek, historian, progressive
