House of Eratosthenes

Well no, the situation is not good, it’s very, very bad. The article that sums it up, is good. And it really needs a broader audience. Via Political Party Pooper:

North Korea: A fumbled framework
By Snoop

REPOST: Good thing we can go back and read some of this stuff�
Now liberals pay attention, I�m reposting this for you because I have been reading some of your blog posts and you people simply are not dealing with reality.

Posted: January 15, 2003
2003 WorldNetDaily.com

On Jan. 13, 2003, former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright blasted President Bush’s handling of North Korea in an interview with The Times of London. She told the paper that “her Republican successors had squandered their inheritance from the Clinton administration and unwisely depicted North Korea as a member of the ‘axis of evil’ with Iran and Iraq.”

A day earlier, former Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger had also blasted the blunt talk from Bush. “This kind of rhetoric just plays into the paranoia of North Korea,” Berger asserted on CNN�s “Late Edition.” Berger also rejected criticism of the Clinton administration�s handling of North Korea: “For some people in this administration, I’m beginning to think that blaming Clinton is a substitute for thinking.”

Thus continues the all-out effort to redeem the 1994 Framework Agreement. Democratic strategists and Clinton apologists understand the stakes. Having been repudiated at the polls in November, Democrats understand that national security issues are likely to dominate the politics of the country for at least a decade, and the Clinton record is the record that all Democrats, but especially Hillary, will have to defend. The trouble is, it cannot be defended. The Clinton administration did almost nothing to contain the menace of al-Qaida, allowed itself and the U.N. to be expelled from Iraq, and oversaw the depletion of the nation�s military readiness. One of the very few “achievements” of the eight years of Clinton “statesmanship” was the North Korean deal. If it turns out to have been a fool�s play, it is going to be very hard to craft the exhibits for the foreign-policy wing of the Clinton Library.

Let us just say, as a hypothetical, this whole sorry situation was put in a manuscript…simplified…fewer characters…let’s say Secretary Albright, herself, is a key player in this current election cycle. Let’s say she has Nancy Pelosi’s job in your manuscript. And let’s say on her side of the aisle, there’s some flattering name given to this kind of diplomacy so it can be discussed more easily. This Jimmy-Carter-style, “I got him to agree so we don’t have to worry about that anymore” kind of diplomacy — where it’s taken as a given that life is just a big Star Trek episode, and nobody ever lies about anything. Don’t call it “appeasement,” call it — “Kumbaya” diplomacy. “Faith-based” diplomacy.

In your manuscript, the Albrosi brand of foreign-affairs leadership is shown to be utterly ineffectual, and even damaging, by a huge putrid mess along the lines of the sampling of reality chronicled above. And, mostly because of a sex scandal, the Albrosi party manages to retake Congress anyway…even though everybody knows, the way this party negotiates with the tinhorn dictators around the world, just flat-out doesn’t work.

No, wait. Everybody doesn’t just know that…everybody’s been shown that. But they go to the polls, and vote on the sex scandal.

Of course the publisher is going to reject your manuscript. Of course he will! It’s simply too far-fetched. It would never actually happen…in…real……..*

Update: Pillage Idiot put some enhancements on the graphic above to help get the point across. Great effort, kind of sad that it’s needed.

Update: Found a script to the first Die Hard movie. You know that ferret-faced guy who says man-o-action Bruce Willis is messing everything up, tries to negotiate with the terrorists like they’re okay kinda guys? Gets himself shot? His name is “Ellis” and one of his smartass first lines, inserted into the script to show the audience that he doesn’t know what the fuck he’s doing, is a silly little jumble of syllables “Sprickenzie Talk?”

Holly: Where are you going?

Ellis: I’m tired of sitting here waiting to see who gets us killed first… them… or your husband. Hi there.

Holly: What are you going to do?

Ellis: Hey, I negotiate million dollar deals for breakfast. I can handle these clowns. I want to talk to Hans. Hans! Sprickenzie talk?
:
:
Ellis: Hope I’m not interrupting…?

Hans: What does he want?

Ellis: It’s not what I want, it’s what I can give you. Look, let’s be straight, okay? It’s obvious you’re not some dumb thug up here to snatch a few purses, am I right?

Hans: You’re very perceptive.

Ellis: Hey, I read the papers, I watch 60 minutes, I say to myself, these guys are professionals, they’re motivated, they’re happening. They want something. Now, personally, I don’t care about your politics. Maybe you’re pissed at the Camel Jockeys, maybe it’s the Hebes, Northern Ireland, that’s none of my business. I figure, You’re here to negotiate, am I right?

Hans: You’re amazing. You figured this all out already?

Ellis: Hey, business is business. You use a gun, I use a fountain pen, what’s the difference? To put it in my terms, you’re here on a hostile takeover and you grab us for some greenmail but you didn’t expect a poison pill was gonna be running around the building. Hans, baby… I’m your white knight.

Hans: I must have missed 60 Minutes. What are you saying?

Ellis: The guy upstairs who’s fucking things up? I can give him to you.
:
:
Hans [on radio to McClane]: I have someone who wants to talk to you. A very special friend who was at the party with you tonight.

Ellis: Hello, John boy?

McClane: Ellis?

Ellis: John, they’re giving me a few minutes to try and talk some sense into you. I know you think you’re doing your job, and I can appreciate that, but you’re just dragging this thing out. None of us gets out of here until these people can negotiate with the LA police, and they’re just not gonna start doing that until you stop messing up the works.

McClane: Ellis, what have you told them?

Ellis: I told them we’re old friends and you were my guest at the party.

McClane: Ellis… you shouldn’t be doing this…

Ellis: Tell me about it.

Ellis: All right… John, listen to me… They want you to tell them where the detonators are. They know people are listening. They want the detonators of they’re going to kill me.

Ellis: John, didn’t you hear me?

McClane: Yeah, I hear you, you fucking moron!

Ellis: John, I think you could get with the program a little. The police are here now. It’s their problem. Tell these guys where the detonators are so no one else gets hurt. Hey, I’m putting my life on the line for you buddy…

McClane: Don’t you think I know that! Put Hans on! Hans, listen to me, that shithead doesn’t know what kind of scum you are, but I do —

Hans: Good. Then you’ll give us what we want and save your friend’s life. You’re not part of this equation. It’s time to realize that.

Ellis: What am I, a method actor? Hans, babe, put away the gun. This is

McClane: That asshole’s not my friend! I barely know him! I hate his fucking guts — Ellis, for Christ’s sake, tell him you don’t mean shit to me —

Ellis: John, how can you say that, after all these years–? John? John?

[Hans shoots Ellis]

Hans: Hear that? Talk to me, where are my detonators. Where are they or shall I shoot another one?

This shows signs of being a rough draft, since I remember Ellis being shot in the face through the bottom of a whiskey tumbler or something. But the point stands. “Sprickenzie Talk” diplomacy is rooted in the axiom that anytime anybody, anywhere, shows an ostensible willingness to cooperate, it must be genuine and there can be no ulterior motives.

Nobody with a lick of common sense would put any faith in it, because nobody with a lick of common sense would put any faith in this underlying axiom. Anybody who gives it five seconds of serious thought, knows this to be true.

And yet, how much are we being called upon to risk on it. Again and again and again…as “Sprickenzie Talk” diplomacy is shown to be a loser’s proposition, again and again and again. And again.

Update: NRO says to condemn the Axis of Evil speech is to condemn Bush for prescience.

He didn�t create the Axis of Evil; rather, he voiced the problem. And if that shocked European diplomats, well too bad. If it�s a choice between national security and enabling European diplomats to remain secure in their illusions, I�d hope both Republicans and Democrats would favor the former…Dialogue is no panacea.

[…] Meanwhile, in a sane world, the value of Pelosi’s trip would be measured according to the yardstick of Jimmy Carter’s trip to North Korea thirteen years ago, and the disaster that followed. The House Speaker’s authority to negotiate with foreign governments, is pretty much the same as the authority of a failed former President. Or a football, or expired carton of milk. I do hope the eventual results are better. There is no reason for me to think so. […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 04/07/2007 @ 11:10

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

This Is Good XXVTuesday, October 10th, 2006

This Is Good XXV
Tuesday, October 10th, 2006