maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Tue Dec 12, 2017 7:43 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Harumpfh. English Gentlemen hardly need lectures on manners from some rabid colonial bumpkin



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Harry to Marry
PostPosted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:47 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14307
Reputation points: 9282
Quote:
Prince Harry to Wed American Actress Meghan Markle in the Spring
By Bridget Johnson November 27, 2017

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/p ... le-spring/
No problem except for her politics: "While most become star struck by A-list actors, you'll only see me in awe of leaders effecting change. Politician and diplomat Madeleine Albright, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon," she wrote for Elle UK a year ago. "These are my heroes. These are my celebrities."

_________________
Even so, never go to a gunfight without a gun and, if you intend to win, never go to a religious war without religion. You'll lose.
tomkratman.com


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harry to Marry
PostPosted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 4:17 pm 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9470
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 10688
Madeleine Albright did some good shit didn't she?

Ban Ki-Moon just seems to be a dupe, so deeply steeped in the rhetoric of International Relations academics that he does more harm than good.

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harry to Marry
PostPosted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 11:58 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 14307
Reputation points: 9282
Anthropoid wrote:
Madeleine Albright did some good shit didn't she?

Ban Ki-Moon just seems to be a dupe, so deeply steeped in the rhetoric of International Relations academics that he does more harm than good.
Quote:
Continued from page 1

History now shows that the chief policy goals served by the Agreed Framework were those of Pyongyang, which racked up a highly successful exercise in nuclear extortion, and carried on, first secretly, then overtly, with its nuclear weapons program. As South Korea’s president had predicted, the Agreed Framework helped fortify Pyongyang’s totalitarian regime, rather than transforming it.

Some of the negotiators involved in that 1994 deal have since argued that while the North Korean agreement eventually collapsed, it did at least delay Pyongyang’s progress toward nuclear weapons. What they tend to omit from that select slice of history is that the Agreed Framework helped rescue a North Korean regime which in 1994 was on the ropes. Just three years earlier, North Korea’s chief patron of decades past, the Soviet Union, had collapsed. The longtime Soviet subsidies to Pyongyang had vanished. China did not yet have the wealth to easily step in. And just three months before the nuclear deal was struck, North Korea’s founding tyrant, Kim Il Sung, died. His son and heir, Kim Jong Il, faced the challenge of consolidating power during a period of famine at home and American superpower ascendancy abroad.

But in the game of nuclear chicken, it was America that blinked. In exchange for North Korea’s promise to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program, the U.S. agreed to lead a $4.6 billion consortium to build two lightwater reactors for North Korea, and provide shipments of free heavy fuel oil for heating and electricity production while the new reactors were being built. This was augmented by U.S. security guarantees, easing of sanctions and promises to move toward normalizing diplomatic relations, with generous food aid thrown in.

By the late 1990s, just a few years into the deal, North Korea had become the largest recipient of U.S. aid in East Asia. That did not curb Kim Jong Il’s hostile ways. The Pyongyang regime put the interests of its military and its weapons programs before the needs of its starving population. In 1998, North Korea launched a long-range missile over Japan, a test for which it was hard to discern any purpose other than developing a vehicle to carry nuclear weapons. By that time, as a number of former Clinton administration officials have since confirmed, the U.S. was seeing signs that North Korea was cheating on the nuclear deal by pursuing a secret program for uranium enrichment.

Instead of confronting North Korea, Clinton during his last two years in office tried to double down on his crumbling nuclear deal by pursuing a missile deal with Pyongyang. In 2000, that led to an exchange of high-ranking officials, in which the Clinton administration dignified North Korea with the unprecedented move of welcoming one of its top-ranking military officials, Vice Marshal Jo Myong Rok, to a 45-minute sitdown with Clinton at the White House. Clinton then dispatched Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, together with the administration’s special advisor for North Korea policy, Wendy Sherman, to Pyongyang (yes, the same Wendy Sherman recently employed by Obama as chief negotiator of the Iran nuclear deal). Sherman and Albright brought North Korea’s Kim Jong Il a basketball signed by star player Michael Jordan; Kim entertained them with a stadium flip-card depiction of a long-range missile launch. There was no missile deal.

North Korea continued raking in U.S. largesse until late 2002, when the Bush administration finally confronted Pyongyang over its nuclear cheating. North Korea then walked away from the 1994 deal (on which it had by then been cheating for years), withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (on which it had also been cheating) and began reprocessing plutonium from the spent fuel rods which despite the 1994 deal had never been removed from its Yongbyon nuclear complex. President Bush then made his own stab at nuclear diplomacy, ...
(Continued)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/claudiaros ... 1d802d6bd4
and Kosovo:
Quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_repo ... 315053.stm ... After Warren Christopher, a diplomat whose style had all the excitement of a fax machine, Madeleine Albright's colour scarves, pithy soundbites and obvious passion were widely applauded.

But three years on, the exuberance has evaporated. "Skepticism about her effectiveness is on the rise," says Jim Hoagland, columnist for the Washington Post.

And for all her supposed insight into Europe and its past, Madeleine Albright appears to have badly misjudged Milosevic and the Serbs.

Milosevic: 'Schoolyard bully'

By all accounts, it was Madeleine Albright who convinced Clinton, against the better judgement of the Pentagon, that the Serb leader would back down after a little light bombing.

She claimed that he was no more than a schoolyard bully who would retreat after one good punch on the nose.

When Milosevic refused to accept the Rambouillet peace accord, the State Department was reported to have been "baffled" and was wholly unprepared for the ethnic cleansing which swiftly followed.

Of course, with a little hindsight it's easy to see now that agreeing to Nato troops on Serbian soil would have spelt political death for Slobodan Milosevic, whereas facing down Nato bombs would ensure his position in Serb mythology.

But it's sad to think that perhaps Ms Albright did not learn the lesson of Munich after all: that true dictators do not operate on the basis of reasonable offers.
PS there was no ethnic cleansing.

_________________
Even so, never go to a gunfight without a gun and, if you intend to win, never go to a religious war without religion. You'll lose.
tomkratman.com


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harry to Marry
PostPosted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:31 am 
Offline
First Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 9470
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 10688
Ah yes. I guess she was a modern day Neville Chamberlain after all . . .

_________________
Nero: So what is your challenge?

Anthro: Answer question #2: How do "Climate Change models" mathematically control for the natural forces which caused the Ice Age(s) to come and go . . . repeatedly?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harry to Marry
PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:43 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 13116
Reputation points: 2401
Anthropoid wrote:
Ah yes. I guess she was a modern day Neville Chamberlain after all . . .

Chamberlain is not so popular name in Czech Republic. ;)

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Harry to Marry
PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:27 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 26915
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 16098
abradley wrote:
Anthropoid wrote:
Madeleine Albright did some good shit didn't she?

Ban Ki-Moon just seems to be a dupe, so deeply steeped in the rhetoric of International Relations academics that he does more harm than good.
Quote:
Continued from page 1

History now shows that the chief policy goals served by the Agreed Framework were those of Pyongyang, which racked up a highly successful exercise in nuclear extortion, and carried on, first secretly, then overtly, with its nuclear weapons program. As South Korea’s president had predicted, the Agreed Framework helped fortify Pyongyang’s totalitarian regime, rather than transforming it.

Some of the negotiators involved in that 1994 deal have since argued that while the North Korean agreement eventually collapsed, it did at least delay Pyongyang’s progress toward nuclear weapons. What they tend to omit from that select slice of history is that the Agreed Framework helped rescue a North Korean regime which in 1994 was on the ropes. Just three years earlier, North Korea’s chief patron of decades past, the Soviet Union, had collapsed. The longtime Soviet subsidies to Pyongyang had vanished. China did not yet have the wealth to easily step in. And just three months before the nuclear deal was struck, North Korea’s founding tyrant, Kim Il Sung, died. His son and heir, Kim Jong Il, faced the challenge of consolidating power during a period of famine at home and American superpower ascendancy abroad.

But in the game of nuclear chicken, it was America that blinked. In exchange for North Korea’s promise to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program, the U.S. agreed to lead a $4.6 billion consortium to build two lightwater reactors for North Korea, and provide shipments of free heavy fuel oil for heating and electricity production while the new reactors were being built. This was augmented by U.S. security guarantees, easing of sanctions and promises to move toward normalizing diplomatic relations, with generous food aid thrown in.

By the late 1990s, just a few years into the deal, North Korea had become the largest recipient of U.S. aid in East Asia. That did not curb Kim Jong Il’s hostile ways. The Pyongyang regime put the interests of its military and its weapons programs before the needs of its starving population. In 1998, North Korea launched a long-range missile over Japan, a test for which it was hard to discern any purpose other than developing a vehicle to carry nuclear weapons. By that time, as a number of former Clinton administration officials have since confirmed, the U.S. was seeing signs that North Korea was cheating on the nuclear deal by pursuing a secret program for uranium enrichment.

Instead of confronting North Korea, Clinton during his last two years in office tried to double down on his crumbling nuclear deal by pursuing a missile deal with Pyongyang. In 2000, that led to an exchange of high-ranking officials, in which the Clinton administration dignified North Korea with the unprecedented move of welcoming one of its top-ranking military officials, Vice Marshal Jo Myong Rok, to a 45-minute sitdown with Clinton at the White House. Clinton then dispatched Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, together with the administration’s special advisor for North Korea policy, Wendy Sherman, to Pyongyang (yes, the same Wendy Sherman recently employed by Obama as chief negotiator of the Iran nuclear deal). Sherman and Albright brought North Korea’s Kim Jong Il a basketball signed by star player Michael Jordan; Kim entertained them with a stadium flip-card depiction of a long-range missile launch. There was no missile deal.

North Korea continued raking in U.S. largesse until late 2002, when the Bush administration finally confronted Pyongyang over its nuclear cheating. North Korea then walked away from the 1994 deal (on which it had by then been cheating for years), withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (on which it had also been cheating) and began reprocessing plutonium from the spent fuel rods which despite the 1994 deal had never been removed from its Yongbyon nuclear complex. President Bush then made his own stab at nuclear diplomacy, ...
(Continued)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/claudiaros ... 1d802d6bd4
and Kosovo:
Quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_repo ... 315053.stm ... After Warren Christopher, a diplomat whose style had all the excitement of a fax machine, Madeleine Albright's colour scarves, pithy soundbites and obvious passion were widely applauded.

But three years on, the exuberance has evaporated. "Skepticism about her effectiveness is on the rise," says Jim Hoagland, columnist for the Washington Post.

And for all her supposed insight into Europe and its past, Madeleine Albright appears to have badly misjudged Milosevic and the Serbs.

Milosevic: 'Schoolyard bully'

By all accounts, it was Madeleine Albright who convinced Clinton, against the better judgement of the Pentagon, that the Serb leader would back down after a little light bombing.

She claimed that he was no more than a schoolyard bully who would retreat after one good punch on the nose.

When Milosevic refused to accept the Rambouillet peace accord, the State Department was reported to have been "baffled" and was wholly unprepared for the ethnic cleansing which swiftly followed.

Of course, with a little hindsight it's easy to see now that agreeing to Nato troops on Serbian soil would have spelt political death for Slobodan Milosevic, whereas facing down Nato bombs would ensure his position in Serb mythology.

But it's sad to think that perhaps Ms Albright did not learn the lesson of Munich after all: that true dictators do not operate on the basis of reasonable offers.
PS there was no ethnic cleansing.



Albright's (as well as John Kerry and Hillary Clinton) form of diplomacy had less to do with actually achieving a real goal (actual peace, true nuclear and/or ballistic missile disarmament, etc), and more to do with diplomacy for the sake of diplomacy. They negotiate so that they can get a treaty/agreement (any sort of agreement). Their measure of success has more to do with having an agreement, and less to do whether that agreement actually accomplishes anything.
We've seen how much value that a piece of paper (alone) has:

Image

The Presidents who were in charge at the time these agreements were negotiated never even bothered getting them approved by the US Senate (meaning that they were not a treaty binding on the United States and more a personal agreement between the US President and a foreign power).

Just look at some the worthless agreements that came out of these "deals":
---Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances: Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons on the assurance that its security would be protected by the US and other powers (President Clinton/Sec of State Warren Christoper) [Russia's annexation of Crimea was a violation of that "memorandum"
---The 1994 nuclear deal between Clinton/Madeline Albright and the US (already discussed in the article ABradley posted). Never ratified as a treaty by the US Senate
---The Obama-Iran nuclear deal. Never ratified by the US Senate

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group