Don’t have a Macau, man

by mdr on March 17, 2007

John Berthelsen at the Asia Sentinel lambastes the Macau Bank deal. Some background here.

{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }

1 iheartblueballs March 17, 2007 at 1:08 pm: Hey look, a $25 million wet sloppy kiss from George W Bush to Kim Jong Il.

Just like the rest of the Appeasement-palooza that’s been sweeping the Bush administration, it’s all Clinton’s fault. Ask the nearest right-wing North Korean “expert” you can find. He’ll give you a thousand reasons why Slick Willie is to blame but can’t muster a single critical word of King George when he gets on his knees to service a dictator.
2 railwaycharm March 17, 2007 at 3:27 pm: He’s not?
3 Robert Koehler March 17, 2007 at 3:47 pm: Ask the nearest right-wing North Korean “expert” you can find. He’ll give you a thousand reasons why Slick Willie is to blame but can’t muster a single critical word of King George when he gets on his knees to service a dictator.

That’s odd. I just had dinner this week with one right-wing North Korea expert of some repute who gave me a whole list of reasons why the capitulation of “King George,” if you will, was much worse.
4 wjk March 17, 2007 at 3:57 pm: norks might get zero, if they insist on getting aid first without doing something first. Which is what is happening now. Wasn’t there suspicion that the nuke test might have been a failure?

The norks are playing their cards, but they might get nothing. This time, DC trickles aid after action.
5 railwaycharm March 17, 2007 at 4:38 pm: I too felt the W should not have thrown in the towel however; we do not have the free hands to take on the Norks at this point. Let’s hope that KJI gets his when the mess in the desert is contained. Mr. Marmot can you share some of his points?
6 railwaycharm March 17, 2007 at 4:38 pm: That

Sorry
7 iheartblueballs March 17, 2007 at 5:49 pm: That’s odd. I just had dinner this week with one right-wing North Korea expert of some repute who gave me a whole list of reasons why the capitulation of “King George,” if you will, was much worse.

Thrilled to hear that some intellectual honesty is seeing the light of day on the Seoul cocktail circuit, as it’s noticeably absent otherwise. Maybe when that dinner gossip translates into an actual op-ed from the unnamed expert you’ll give us a link, although I won’t hold my breath.

And you may want to keep your voice down when repeating such treasonous accusations. You’re obviously undermining the troops and emboldening the enemy by even repeating criticism of the policies of the Bush administration.

At least that’s what I learned from Dick Cheney and all my favorite commentators on Fox News.
8 Andy Jackson March 17, 2007 at 8:17 pm: So is this Berthelsen guy a hardliner who wants to stick it to the Norks or is he just confused.

The bank has been barred from access to the American market. Unless we can send Treasury Department guys into Macao to cuff n’ stuff folks, what else can be done?
9 Kunsanpcv March 20, 2007 at 8:40 am: Yet another example of the general cluelessness of Bush foreign policy.
10 snow March 20, 2007 at 11:22 am: Bush supporters are blaming this all on Clinton?? As far as I’ve heard, plenty of conservatives are up in arms about this crap, myself included. I don’t know what they’re thinking, but I’m worried the Norks are going to pretend to disarm and the US will pretend to believe them, as Hill said would not happen. Just like the US is pretending to believe that the money was gained legitimately and they’re pretending that the Norks will use the money for the benefit of Northerners and pretending to believe that the Norks are going to stop counterfeiting and dealing drugs, etc, etc. Downright disgusting. Especially since giving the money back BEFORE shutting down Yongbyon was not even a part of the deal.

How much more kowtowing to the appeasenix is Bush going to do?
11 Wedge March 20, 2007 at 1:22 pm: Blueballs: You must be projecting, since I don’t see conservatives cutting W any slack. I’ve been accused of being a neocon and I think W is way off base in his new policy of appeasement. It didn’t work in ’94 and it won’t work in ’07.