Q&A at President's News Conference
			Archive

Posted by: JAK ® 03/06/2003, 21:52:21 Author Profile Mail author

In President Bush’s news conference tonight consider a question and a response by the President. What in the President's response addressed the question? Question: Another hot spot is North Korea. If North Korea restarts their plutonium plant, will that change your thinking about how to handle this crisis? Or are you resigned to North Korea becoming a nuclear power? BUSH: This is a regional issue. I say regional issue because there's a lot of countries that have got a direct stake into whether or not North Korea has nuclear weapons. We've got a stake as to whether North Korea has a nuclear weapon. China clearly has a stake as to whether or not North Korea has a nuclear weapon. South Korea, of course, has a stake. Japan has got a significant stake as to whether or not North Korea has a nuclear weapon. Russia has a stake. So, therefore, I think the best way to deal with this is in multilateral fashion by convincing those nations that they must stand up to their responsibility, along with the United States, to convince Kim Jong Il that the development of a nuclear arsenal is not in his nation's interests, and that should he want help in easing the suffering of the North Korean people, the best way to achieve that help is to not proceed forward. We've tried bilateral negotiations with North Korea. My predecessor, in a good-faith effort, entered into a framework agreement. The United States honored its side of the agreement; North Korea didn't. While we felt the agreement was enforced, North Korea was enriching uranium. In my judgment the best way to deal with North Korea is to convince the parties to assume their responsibility. I was heartened by the fact that Jiang Zemin, when he came to Crawford, Texas, made it very clear to me and publicly, as well, that a nuclear weapons-free peninsula was in China's interests. And so we're working with China and the other nations I mentioned to bring a multilateral pressure and to convince Kim Jong Il that the development of a nuclear arsenal is not in his interests. JAK: What in this response addresses the question asked at the top? It was almost as if Bush had a script, not of the questions in this news conference, but a script of what he wanted to say. So it did not matter much what the question was, the answers seemed pre-written. But the large question is must the war be waged now. JAK Modified by JAK at Thu, Mar 06, 2003, 21:54:11

| Recommend | Alert

Previous | Next | Current page

Replies to this message

Almost?
Re: Q&A at President's News Conference -- JAK		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: jersey girl! ® 03/06/2003, 21:58:40 Author Profile Mail author

Hello JAK, During the press conference he stated he had a script. I believe he was referring to the list of journalists however, it was clear that he was well rehearsed. How many times did he use the phrase "My job is to protect the American people" , "we will disarm him" or "if he were disarming we would know it". There was another set of phrases that he used more than once "he is a threat to his own neighborhood" and he WAS so well rehearsed that when he delivered the phrases he tripped on his own attempt to fit them into his "spontaneous" delivery. I do not consider myself a very politically savvy person however, I am a keen observer of human behavior. The repetition of certain phrases is most certainly intended to influence our position. Victoria p.s. should I count the repetitions from the transcripts? ;-) another p.s. please explain to me how "we" will overthrow the regime, and disarm Saddam (with 200K+ troops in the area and 3K bombs in the shoot) without doing harm to "innocent life"? Modified by jersey girl! at Fri, Mar 07, 2003, 00:17:54

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Harming Innocent people
Re: Almost? -- jersey girl!		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: ramona ® 03/07/2003, 13:19:36 Author Profile Mail author

Victoria, You ask, ""how "we" will overthrow the regime, and disarm Saddam (with 200K+ troops in the area and 3K bombs in the shoot) without doing harm to "innocent life"?" Silly Girl the answer is simple. Have you ver heard of the term, "guilt by association?" His people are his by association therefore no Iraqi person is guilt-free. Innocent people will therefore, not be killed. Ramona

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Harming Innocent people
Re: Harming Innocent people -- ramona		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: bosquero ® 03/08/2003, 23:43:51 Author Profile Mail author

Liberating is a bloody business. I believe more were killed than freed in the Civil War. --Bosquero

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Harming Innocent people
Re: Re: Harming Innocent people -- bosquero		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: ramona ® 03/09/2003, 06:11:51 Author Profile Mail author

I am well aware of the bloodletting. My family was mostly NOT liberated in WWII. Ramona

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous |   | Current page

What I tell you three times is true.
Re: Almost? -- jersey girl!		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Another Bob ® 03/09/2003, 03:36:39 Author Profile Mail author

Strange how hunting for meaning can often seem like the hunt for some mythic beast. It's a quest through many tangles and furroughs and dangers aplenty. The greatest danger is however, not the battles we might face along the way, but rather the fear that we might just slip away...

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous |   | Current page