It is amazing that Dan
Rather and his media kindred have all of a sudden developed keen analytical
abilities and our asking the question “if Iraq, why not North Korea”? I don’t
seem to recall the “If Serbia, why not Sudan and Rwanda”, even though an excess
of 2 million were killed in civil wars there. Without too much thinking I can
think of some of the differences between Iraq and North Korea.
Iraq has
within the last 12 years:
1. Violated the terms of surrender they had
signed.
2. Ignored every UN resolution.
3. Paid to the families of Suicide
Bombers a reward for their efforts.
4. Allowed al-Qaeda to train in their
country and to provide financial and covert government backing.
5. Invaded
another country and attempted to expand their conquest.
6. Fired Scud
missiles into other countries.
7. Gassed their own population.
I am not trying to justify war on Iraq but just to demonstrate the obvious
differences.
Their keen analytical abilities seem to have totally missed the accord,
called the “Agreed Framework,” that was supposed to have frozen the accelerating
North Korean nuclear weapons program brokered by Jimmy Carter and approved by
the Clinton administration. If I was the owner of a large company and was having
trouble with my union workers, I would call Jimmy Carter to help negotiate a
deal. This way I could promise to pay higher salaries and provide more benefits
and on the workers part they would work harder and pretend that I was going to
actually keep my promises. After all, what would be the difference between that
example and the US building a Nuclear Power Plant in North Korea and providing
other financial assistance in trade for them to continue on just as they were?
If I was going write a book on Mr. Carter and his diplomatic efforts I would
title it “Gullible Travels”.
