By
Carter Says N.Korea Willing to Scrap Nuclear Program
Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter says North Korea’s nuclear issue could be worked out “in half a day” given the right conditions. Carter told AP he believes North Korea would surrender its nuclear weapons in return for U.S. diplomatic recognition, a peace agreement with South Korea and the U.S., and new atomic power reactors and fuel oil.
He said North Koreans “have always been willing to forego their nuclear capability if they have diplomatic relations with the United States.”
Carter ran one of the worst administrations in US history and now has finally managed to make himself one of the most disgraceful ex-presidents as well.
Twice he has sought to rally foreign governments against the military policies of two sitting presidents.
Over the last few years, he has been trying to influence US Israel policy. And now he is using his position as an ex-president to influence the new Obama administration on North Korea policy.
The Democrat party really needs to tell this man to STFU…
I don’t want to hear a peep out of Carter, Bush Jr., Sr., or Clinton when it comes to anything Obama or any future president is dealing with in foreign or domestic policy.
Most former presidents have understood that using their clout as former presidents to speak on current and future policy is taboo in a democracy. Carter’s humble facade must mask an enormous ego….
9:22 pm on January 27th, 2009 1
Gee, it's good to know that KCNA has a conservative counterpart to balance things out in the expat K-blogosphere!
11:24 pm on January 27th, 2009 2
He said North Koreans “have always been willing to forego their nuclear capability if they have diplomatic relations with the United States.”Really! They will simply give up their nukes in order to have ‘diplomatic relations’ with the United States? Wow, I never knew it was so easy to negotiate with and trust despotic leaders who run death camps like the one in Yoduk, North Korea, which houses thousands of political prisoners.
2:10 am on January 28th, 2009 3
It would be a sad and tragic day to trade all JC mentioned above for the continued incarceration and abuse of 22 million fellow human beings up north. Some day they will be free, but not this way!
2:53 am on January 28th, 2009 4
I can't believe I am defending Jimmy Carter but it should be noted that he prevented a war with North Korea during the first nuclear crisis. The Clinton administration was set to bomb North Korea which could have foolishly started a much larger war on the peninsula which the North Koreans would have political cover for retaliation since they were attacked first. So no matter what you think about Carter, who I don't think much of the one good thing he did was prevent a war on the peninsula during the Clinton administration. Clinton was reportedly furious at Carter's trip to North Korea that prevented the war and allegedly the animosity from the two continues to this day when Carter supposedly snubbed Clinton at the inauguration of President Obama.
3:33 am on January 28th, 2009 5
I've been told more than once that my head is rather stubborn, but I have never bought the idea that Clinton had his finger on the trigger with Pyongyang and was about to pull it. No way…….The man who ordered missile and air strikes after a series of terrorist attacks — and was so tepid with the military response in Bosnia and Kosovo — who yanked troops out of Somalia — who wouldn't back up a rebellion by the Kurds or OK an assassination of Bin Laden —- was going to war with a likely nuclear armed (even at that time) North Korea – (who had loads of other WMDs if not nukes) ——- I just can't buy it.I understand why he and those in his administration talk like that. I understand why he put up the show like that. It is part of effective diplomacy – especially with a nation like North Korea: to make the regime think America is capable of pulling the trigger.But I can't bring myself to believe President Clinton had the guts (or insanity) to do it.Anyway, it wouldn't matter to me if Carter had been a good president. If Reagan had been spouting off about contemporary policy issues, I'd have railed against him. I even said I didn't want to hear anything from Bush Sr. about what he thought of Bush Jr.'s policies while in office. And if Bush Jr. pipes in during Obama's time in office, I'll say the same to him: Shut up!!But — Carter is the only president I can think of in modern times who has run around spouting off — again and again — on major policy issues.It is a disgrace. I wish we could kick him out of Georgia, my home state….
4:36 am on January 28th, 2009 6
Orbendorfer writes extensively about what happened during the first nuclear crisis in his book Two Koreas. I tend to give great creditability to what Orbendorfer writes and see no reason to doubt his sources that the Clinton administration was on the verge of bombing North Korea. Remember the Clinton administration had no problem with conducting bombing campaigns during their tenor and bombing North Korea would fit with their MO. They probably figured North Korea would not retaliate against being bombed which I believe is a false assumption.
1:24 pm on January 28th, 2009 7
As one of your liberal readers:I like Carter usually. He wasn't the best (nor the worst) president, but he's done some amazing work out of office: Habitat, global health work, election monitoring and diplomacy in the Sudan, Bosnia, and Israel. And I don't see why he should just sit silently by in the world just because he's a former president. It's important in a democracy that differing views are heard, not only by us, but by the outside world. But he's an idiot to think NK will give in through a single act of diplomacy. Kim is a megalomaniac dictator who thinks agreements are meaningless. I'd rather send Chris Hill to talk than thousands of troops to die, but I see diplomacy as a holding action to keep Kim from doing something stupid before he dies -not a solution.
2:02 pm on January 28th, 2009 8
I say send Carter to nK again. Remember what happened right after his last visit to nK? Kim Il-Song died!! Coincidence?? Some wonder about the timing and whether Carter carried something with him on his trip that did in the Great Leader. Hehehehe…
6:30 pm on January 28th, 2009 9
To me, this isn't a partisan issue: I strongly favor the tradition of ex-presidents not using their former status to try to influence policy. If they want to continue to be a player, then they should run for Congress or some other democratically elected post. Better yet, just shut up. One man's voice lost on the latest major foreign policy issue will not be much of one.
9:38 pm on January 28th, 2009 10
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2…..
2:18 pm on January 29th, 2009 11
Being a proud progressive myself, I would love to back Carter on this but, I can't. He has done many things for the good of humanity. But, I must admit that a former president should not unilaterally try to influence foreign policy without the request of the sitting president. Many sitting presidents have asked former presidents to help with diplomacy. However, when one acts as though he speaks with current US policy without the backing of the current president sends a mixed message to the countries with which we deal. Now, I have heard ex-presidents make comments on what they would like to see when being interviewed by the press. This is OK to express and opinion, as long as he doesn't say that it is the will of the US or the will of people of the US. So, Carter should STFU unless asked for his help by the current Prez.