Comments on: North Korea’s Body Snatchers

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 22 May 2009 08:40:22 +0000

They crossed into North Korea…which was really stupid. Local Chinese do not mess around near that River, it is heavily guarded by NKoreans. The river was low, the girls thought it might be a good picture to get closer, and crossed into NKorea.

Maybe next time listen to locals telling you not to go near the border.

By: Gordon Chang

Gordon Chang — Thu, 21 May 2009 11:37:28 +0000

scott, Japan is in North Korea’s crosshairs, and they know that in Tokyo. That’s why the Japanese have a better North Korea policy than we do.

We have a lot to learn from the Japanese when it comes to dealing with Kim Jong Il.

By: scott

scott — Thu, 21 May 2009 02:59:52 +0000

Japan better shed its anti-military policy like yesterday. They sure as hell won’t get any help from comrade Zero.

By: Gordon Chang

Gordon Chang — Thu, 21 May 2009 02:02:24 +0000

Ivanna Tinkle, yes. It is surprising how Washington doesn’t know the basics.

Thanks for your great comments.

By: Gordon Chang

Gordon Chang — Thu, 21 May 2009 02:00:48 +0000

LiberateLaura, thanks for the question.

I date the beginning of the “New York Channel” to June 1993, when the State Department’s Kenneth Quinones met with North Korean diplomats to discuss Pyongyang’s announced withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Since then, there have been many more informal discussions between American and North Korean diplomats. Usually, Pyongyang is represented by its New York-based U.N. diplomats. Our side is sometimes represented by senior Washington-based diplomats and sometimes by lower-level staff assigned to U.N. duty.

By: Gordon Chang

Gordon Chang — Thu, 21 May 2009 01:53:48 +0000

Vinny Vidivici, as we in this forum know, “there is no substitute for victory.” Of course, many in Washington are too smart to realize this.

By: Gordon Chang

Gordon Chang — Thu, 21 May 2009 01:51:24 +0000

what is occupation, I agree that the “billions in appeasement aid” has got to stop. You have to wonder how we forgot every important lesson of the 20th century.

By: Ivanna Tinkle

Ivanna Tinkle — Wed, 20 May 2009 19:39:07 +0000

Mr. Chang: This is the sentence you ended your piece with.
“we need to change course and start acting like a superpower again. Kim is a thug, and the only thing he understands is strength. You don’t see him kidnapping Chinese and Russian nationals, after all.”
I agree with you 100 percent on this but unfortunately Obambi sees the role of the United States somewhat differently. He doesn’t want the United States to be a superpower and has recently gone around the globe apologizing for past American expressions of their power. And he’s about to do it again in Egypt. Mr. Obambi seems to forget all about unintended consequences. If he acts weak and indecisive the leaders of the worlds countries who want to see us in decline will take note of that and act accordingly. Why should Pyongyang be afraid of the United States when they know they can bully and browbeat a cowardly President and get away with it.

By: LiberateLaura

LiberateLaura — Wed, 20 May 2009 16:22:01 +0000

Can you provide more details on back channel known as “New York Connection.” What is its origin, current players?

By: Vinny Vidivici

Vinny Vidivici — Wed, 20 May 2009 13:35:24 +0000

What is . . .

Sadly, decades of weak-kneed waffling by the West’s striped-trouser set will lead us, eventually, to your option. Almost passive/agressive we are. To mix metaphors, we allow gangrene to progress for fear of cutting off the toe, then the ankle, until finally . . . We say ‘never again’ do we don’t really mean it.

And the current batch blinkered diplomats, steeped in bogus tranzi-progressive conflict resolution theories are only making matters worse, or threaten to (see Sri Lanka). I’ll note that the only two wars ‘authorized’ by the UN ‘ended’ in debilitating stalemates characterized by oceans of human misery and are, in many respects, still underway. Sherman’s approach was far more humane.