Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

North Korea frees Journalists

Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 2:41:35 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Here is the latest story from the AP:
http://hosted.ap.org...

North Korean leader Kim Jong Il issued a "special pardon" freeing two jailed American journalists after talks with former U.S. President Bill Clinton, North Korea's official news agency announced Wednesday.

Impressive. But why couldn't Hilary or Barack do it?
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 2:46:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 2:41:35 PM, Nags wrote:
Impressive. But why couldn't Hilary or Barack do it?

It's not that they couldn't, it's that they wouldn't. Why the hell would the give a crap?
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 2:47:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 2:41:35 PM, Nags wrote:
Impressive. But why couldn't Hilary or Barack do it?

They're state officials, and there is no real official ties between the two countries right now. Those journalists needed to be freed ASAP, and restoring state ties would have taken tine and a lot of concessions on the US's part.

So, because Bill Clinton is a private citizen, he can go in and do his thing, without wasting time or doing any diplomatic fumblings that could harm relations further.

This is an excellent step in DPRK/US relations though. We now know that the US has an open and effective method from which to communicate to Kim Jong-Il about their ideas, without using the not-so-keen neighbours near DPRK.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 2:48:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Bill Clinton was probably pushed or enabled to do this by the State Department or the President. He isn't like Jimmy Carter.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 2:48:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
And the latest story from CBS:
http://www.cbsnews.com...

North Korea will pardon two jailed US journalists after visiting former president Bill Clinton apologised to leader Kim Jong-Il for their behaviour, state media reported Wednesday.

"The measure taken to release the American journalists is a manifestation of the DPRK's (North Korea's) humanitarian and peace-loving policy," the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported…

"Clinton expressed words of sincere apology to Kim Jong-Il for the hostile acts committed by the two American journalists against the DPRK after illegally intruding into it," KCNA reported.

"Clinton courteously conveyed to Kim Jong-Il an earnest request of the US government to leniently pardon them and send them back home from a humanitarian point of view," it said…

KCNA said Clinton's meetings with leader Kim and with his official number two Kim Yong-Nam featured "candid and in-depth discussions on the pending issues between the DPRK and the US in a sincere atmosphere and reached a consensus of views on seeking a negotiated settlement of them".

A sincere apology for what? This administration needs to stop apologising for everything.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 2:50:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 2:48:54 PM, Nags wrote:
A sincere apology for what? This administration needs to stop apologising for everything.

The two journalists did break into the DPRK. They committed illegal acts, broke laws that are reasonable, instead of stupid, so it was proper to "apologize."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 8:56:49 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Wait, which reasonable laws?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 8:59:03 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 8:56:49 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Wait, which reasonable laws?

Oh, right, sorry. No government laws are reasonable, because no government is reasonable, or legitimate.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:01:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 8:59:03 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 8/4/2009 8:56:49 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Wait, which reasonable laws?

Oh, right, sorry. No government laws are reasonable, because no government is reasonable, or legitimate.

You're talking to Ragnar, not Rezz.

What I was asking was the specific charges, and then I was going to comment on their reasonableness. If I were Rezz, given his premises, I wouldn't need to know the specific charges to condemn, because he is against all government. I'm just against roughly 90% of it :).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:04:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:01:46 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
What I was asking was the specific charges, and then I was going to comment on their reasonableness. If I were Rezz, given his premises, I wouldn't need to know the specific charges to condemn, because he is against all government. I'm just against roughly 90% of it :).

Fair enough.

The laws I was referring to were the ones where the two journalists crossed over the border illegally, basically violation of sovereign territory by the two individuals.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:07:49 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I consider that no more reasonable than the US's similar laws on the matter.

).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:08:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:04:07 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 8/4/2009 9:01:46 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
What I was asking was the specific charges, and then I was going to comment on their reasonableness. If I were Rezz, given his premises, I wouldn't need to know the specific charges to condemn, because he is against all government. I'm just against roughly 90% of it :).

Fair enough.

The laws I was referring to were the ones where the two journalists crossed over the border illegally, basically violation of sovereign territory by the two individuals.

Illegally crossing a border does not constitute 12 years of hard labor.

Although, it's not that bad of an idea once I think of it.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:10:40 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:08:42 PM, Nags wrote:
Illegally crossing a border does not constitute 12 years of hard labor.

Although, it's not that bad of an idea once I think of it.

Lol, I should clarify for both you and R_R that when I said "reasonable," I meant it in the sense that the American and many other governments have similar laws against such acts. I'm sure it is a logical fallacy or two, but that isn't the point.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:24:10 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:01:46 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
You're talking to Ragnar, not Rezz.

What I was asking was the specific charges, and then I was going to comment on their reasonableness. If I were Rezz, given his premises, I wouldn't need to know the specific charges to condemn, because he is against all government. I'm just against roughly 90% of it :).

Our names both have R's and we might be the closest neighbors on the DDO Political Compass map, but we are not the same by a long shot o_o;

Yes, I would not need to know specific charges to condemn, which is why I didn't ask for and didn't condemn because it's such a nonunique argument at this level, so instead I answered something else that would make me less of a broken record.

Also.

At 8/4/2009 9:10:40 PM, Volkov wrote:
Lol, I should clarify for both you and R_R that when I said "reasonable," I meant it in the sense that the American and many other governments have similar laws against such acts. I'm sure it is a logical fallacy or two, but that isn't the point.

Do not understand what is being said here.
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:31:52 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:24:10 PM, Rezzealaux wrote:
Do not understand what is being said here.

Eh, it means that when I said that the law North Korea was sentencing the two journalists for break was a "reasonable" law by the standards of other governments, because they were crossing over the border illegally.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:34:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:31:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 8/4/2009 9:24:10 PM, Rezzealaux wrote:
Do not understand what is being said here.

Eh, it means that when I said that the law North Korea was sentencing the two journalists for break was a "reasonable" law by the standards of other governments, because they were crossing over the border illegally.

Of course the law is reasonable.

But the punishment is by no means reasonable.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2009 9:36:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/4/2009 9:34:21 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/4/2009 9:31:52 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 8/4/2009 9:24:10 PM, Rezzealaux wrote:
Do not understand what is being said here.

Eh, it means that when I said that the law North Korea was sentencing the two journalists for break was a "reasonable" law by the standards of other governments, because they were crossing over the border illegally.

Of course the law is reasonable.

But the punishment is by no means reasonable.

It's probably reasonable relative to other NK laws.
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?