The Snail's Pace For Condemning North Korea

Doesn't inspire much confidence from whom? Scherer you definitely don't speak for most of America which isn't very worried about yet another failed missle test by N Korea. Sorry to throw cold water on your attempt to throw cold water.

This post demonstrates conclusively that Michael Scherer should be Secretary of State, because he knows so much more than the people who actually have responsibilities for our foreign relations.
.

Seriously, MS, the fact that you're waiting for someone to hand you a story doesn't mean "the world is still waiting" for squat.

"It may be the best strategy, but it is not the sort of thing that inspires much confidence as it happens"
.
I'm unsure what that means.
.
And what follows from the simple statement of global condemnation that the world is waiting for? North Korea gives up its programs?

It also illustrates both how tenuous the international consensus is right now on North Korea and how few options the Obama administration has for dealing with the rogue regime.
.
This pretty much contradicts your call for action here, chief. Also, what sg and FlownOver said.

"This provocation underscores the need for action –- not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons"
.
MS, you moron, that's why Obama was calling for action outside of the Security Council. He's not stupid enough to think they're going to do anything useful.
.
it is not the sort of thing that inspires much confidence
.
You can stop clutching your pearls now. Please.

"Does not inspire confidence" in whom? To whose detriment? You assert these things, but why does a week of diplomacy hurt anyone anywhere in the actual world, other than the feelings of reporters in the thrall of the news cycle?
-
Lest we forget, “It took a couple days because I like to know what I am talking about before I speak.”
-
This "declare controversy and ask questions later" approach is better fit for Jay Mariotti on Around the Horn than for a grown-up reporter, Michael.

Thanks for the response to the questions.
.
I wonder if 8 years of blowhard led diplomacy has cause some impatience. Real consequences will entail more than sternly worded statements. They can even occur without a UN Statement of condemnation.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/04/un_council_unanimously_condemns_nkorea_launch.php
.
Your call for action was heard!

Micheal,
I'm having difficulty understanding your sense of urgency. The missle launch was hardly a surprise and certainly any words issued in response are merely words. Do you imagine that the North Koreans are watching their calendars to see if they got away with anything or will be called out. As someone who grew up wondering if we were going to accidently destroy the entire planet based on any potential miscommunication between the US and the Soviets OR the Chinese, I can't help but agree that having a unified response from the Security Council that won't cause any defections later is significantly more important than getting it done yesterday.
.
I know you'd prefer having 'developments' to report but I'm afraid there are more important considerations.

I guess what MS wants is "Bring 'em on!" followed by a nuclear strike on Pyongyang. That's how real men take charge of a crisis!

What call for action am I making?
.
The slow response, after a missile launch that was expected for weeks and individual meetings by Obama with the presidents of China and Russia, is a bit embarrassing for the White House, which talked so tough a week ago but then found itself unable immediately to back up its strong words.
.
As of this writing, eight days after the launch, the world is still waiting for a simple statement of global condemnation.
.
The US said the UN would respond. But it did not. For more than a week.
.
The implication to me is that you are condemning the Obama Administration for its slow response, and thus are calling for a swifter, harder response.

OK, so the guy who's been White House correspondent for all of about eighty-five days knows how long any particular diplomatic action should take. Quel imbécile, to use the language (if not the tone) of diplomacy.
.
Michael, all you're doing is Monday-morning quarterbacking with no qualified basis at all for the opinions you so freely express. If you're determined to be the cause of a loss of confidence (one, incidentally, not otherwise evident apart from the rantings of the Disloyal Opposition) please do it on your own time.

Thanks, Paul NNTO, that about wraps things up around here.
-
Michael-- your next default attack on Obama is, "a mere UN condemnation isn't likely to inspire confidence." That you'd argued 15 minutes ago that the delay in such a condemnation was a cause for concern shouldn't trouble you at all. After all, political journalism is a zero-accountability profession. See, e.g. Just keep up that substanceless, passive-voice mudslinging! You'll go far.

No, you're characterizing and expressing an opinion. "Snail's pace." "Then, nothing." Describing, my Aunt Fanny.
.
If you truly think this is objective reporting you're farther from competence than we ever dreamed.

Ok MS, seriously, "The slow response, after a missile launch that was expected for weeks and individual meetings by Obama with the presidents of China and Russia, is a bit embarrassing for the White House, which talked so tough a week ago but then found itself unable immediately to back up its strong words." and then "It may be the best strategy, but it is not the sort of thing that inspires much confidence as it happens. As of this writing, eight days after the launch, the world is still waiting for a simple statement of global condemnation."

Here's the thing, as you even wrote, "When North Korea launched a three-stage ballistic missile last week, President Obama was awoken before dawn to address the urgent matter. Hours later, he stood in a Prague square before a vast crowd calling for a prompt response to punish North Korea. "This provocation underscores the need for action –- not just this afternoon at the U.N. Security Council, but in our determination to prevent the spread of these weapons," he said."

So Obama immediately made clear to North Korea where the US stands...exactly what we should expect. Then, he has to deal with the UN Security council and of course Chine and Russia, who unfortunately, no longer have any particular need to engage us as we would hope. Hmmm, wonder why? Maybe...this is a longshot, maybe you should write about the fact that clearly, our standing on the world stage has been so detrimentally impacted by the Iraq war and this recession, we can't even get a friggin Security Council resolution passed.

I mean what exactly is the inane logic you're using to demonstrate a White House failing, rather than writing about this new reality and world order we're living in - oh and the failings of the prior's administration for creating the situation.

Sheesh

Elvis, of course you'll recall that Obama's comments on AIG were pretty f'in stupid, and he chilled out pretty fast on his faux outrage. How does that Kool-Aid taste?
.
North Korea is a real problem. The country's leadership has shown itself willing and able to carry out acts of war (e.g., abduction of Japanese civilians). That's why blaming Clinton, Bush or Obama for North Korea is pretty tough. Yeah, Clinton was a bit too trusting, and Bush basically marked time (although Bush really made them pay by going after their counterfeiting operations, once again an act of war, they screamed bloody murder on that one). Obama made the mistake of talking tougher than he is going to be. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised, but Obama doesn't seem like he's got it in him. (After all, didn't he just get the Heisman treatment from Brazil's president on the case of an American boy that was kidnapped and brought to Brazil?) Obama's not going to do squat about this.
.
In my view, and I admit that this may seem a bit bellicose, but I think that we need to tell China that we consider N. Korea their responsibility, in the sense that their support of this lunatic government is what makes them a problem. Sans China, North Korea ceases to exist. The other angle I think we need to take is to ratchet up the pressure on China with respect to the North Korean refugee issue. We should take every instance to bring this matter up. China follows a ghastly policy whereby North Koreans who flee into China are to be returned to certain persecution and often death. This is in complete violation of China's treaty obligations with respect to refugees. If China can be pushed to allow North Koreans safe passage to South Korea, then the North Korean regime's days are numbered.
.
I fully understand that no one wants to deal with millions of refugees etc., but the human rights conditions in North Korea are compelling.

No, Cliff. I am not prescribing anything. I am just describing what happened.
.
Oh, so you don't have any answers, but you're going to complain anyway. Thanks for clearing that up.

MS - the problem is not with the administration or with the UN, the problem is with you. My God, the "time is now" could mean paradigm, era, etc. You decided it meant within a day so therefor when it took longer you decided the response took too long. Fortunately, no one voted to let you set the parameters.
.
For the last 8 years George W. Bush and crew have been systematically destroying this country and you sat back and did nothing. Now that we must live with the consequences of those actions and our country is in a weaker position, militarily, economically, morally, hell even geographically (now even as a result of some countries refusing us the use of their airspace) Obama is supposed to solve all of the myriad problems we face in a matter of 100 days. Is that about right Mikey?

Dee, the issue is that Obama opened his yap and talked tough in specific terms, but there does not seem to be a way his tough talk is going to be backed up. Of course, with North Korea, a few well-trained SEALs aren't going to be able to bail out the nation.

spob, I'm really glad you're here-- lord knows we need more conservatives in this country who are willing to engage with the non-cocoonosphere.
-
That said, sometimes you tend to derail threads (and many of us are happy to assist you!). This thread is about the DPRK missile launch, so I'm going to refrain from getting into parrying "Obama/Cinton/Barney Frank is a poopypants because of unrelated issue x" stuff here.
-
Your discussion of China is pretty dead on. How do you think you would handle things were you in the position of the Chinese leadership? They certainly don't have much of an interest in a collapse of the DPRK...

I don't think we will get anywhere with N. Korea without first getting Chinese support. Which has been sadly lacking thus far.

(no idea why I got moderatized... lemme try again...)
-
spob, I'm really glad you're here-- lord knows we need more conservatives in this country who are willing to engage with the non-cocoonosphere.
-
That said, sometimes you tend to derail threads (and many of us are happy to assist you!). This thread is about the DPRK missile launch, so I'm going to refrain from getting into parrying "Obama/Cinton/Barney Frank is a p00pypants because of unrelated issue x" stuff here.
-
Your discussion of China is pretty dead on. How do you think you would handle things were you in the position of the Chinese leadership? They certainly don't have much of an interest in a collapse of the DPRK...

You know, Mike, I'd be careful about predicting failure for Obama like this; your buddy Newt Gingrich did that with the pirates situation, and ended up with his foot lodged firmly in his mouth.