World Peace is Expensive. Who Should Pay?

The world was a buzz yesterday with news that talks between the US and North Korea, which were brokered by China, resulted in what is being touted as a significant diplomatic breakthrough. From Yahoo News we learn:

The United States announced a diplomatic breakthrough with North Korea Wednesday.

Under an agreement reached in direct talks in Beijing last week, North Korea has agreed to allow the return of nuclear inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, and has agreed to implement a moratorium on long-range missile tests, nuclear tests, and nuclear activities  at Yongbyon, including uranium enrichment activities, the State Department said. In return, the United States will provide North Korea with a large food aid package.

That certainly qualifies as a major diplomatic breakthrough in the cause of world peace.  The US has been trying to curb nuclear proliferation in North Korea for years. Now, in our first sit down with the new North Korean regime, we have this incredible agreement. This is also a big win for China. Not only because they brokered the talks but because if the US provides food aid to North Korea, China won’t have to carry that burden alone. Here is some more from the Yahoo News story:

“To improve the atmosphere for dialogue and demonstrate its commitment to de-nuclearization, the DPRK has agreed to implement a moratorium on long-range missile launches, nuclear tests and nuclear activities at Yongbyon, including uranium enrichment activities,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in a press statement Wednesday. “The DPRK has also agreed to the return of IAEA inspectors to verify and monitor the moratorium on uranium enrichment activities at Yongbyon and confirm the disablement of the 5-MW reactor and associated facilities.”


In return, the United States will “move forward with our proposed package of 240,000 metric tons of nutritional assistance along with the intensive monitoring required for the delivery of such assistance,” she said.

So, what’s not to like about this deal?  In exchange for some “nutritional aid”, the DPRK  will put an end to their development of nuclear arms. The world will be a safer place, right? Well, it may be a tad too early to start celebrating.

Throughout the day, yesterday, I listened to various “experts” on Fox News.Com Live give their opinions on what this agreement means. Without exception, they all said that the agreement was probably meaningless because our experience with North Korea is that they never keep their word. Even Hillary Clinton described this “diplomatic breakthrough” as a “modest step in the right direction”. And that is pretty much where all the news stories ended: we have a “maybe breakthrough”. I didn’t here a single discussion about what the United States was giving in exchange for this modest step in the right direction.

Go back and read again the last quote above. The US is to provide 240,000 metric tons of nutritional assistance along with the intensive monitoring required for the delivery of such assistance.  We are told nothing about what this will cost the American taxpayer. Do you think that $1.00 a pound to purchase, collect, package, ship, and monitor intensively the delivery would be out of line? At $1.00 per pound, the price tag comes to $528 billion. The last I heard, we don’t have that kind of loose change lying around. Whatever it will end-up costing, the money will have to be borrowed. Oh, this expense is not in any of our budget forecasts either.

Less you think otherwise, let me be clear that I think exchanging food for the outside chance  that the DPRK will keep its promises is worth the gamble. We are talking about augmenting World Peace, after all. But, here is my question. Where in the hell is the rest of the world in this deal? Shouldn’t the rest of the world be willing to share in this cost? Is the US the only country that would benefit from this deal?

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

24 thoughts on “World Peace is Expensive. Who Should Pay?

  1. It’s like how the EU was formed in 1957, but the Insiders only let the citizens of Europe know about the EU in 1993. We are living in a world government, they just haven’t bothered telling us plebes yet, as we like to hold on to the illusion of control. The Establishment is fine with that as long as they get to move forward in the goal of collectivizing all of us.

    I’m so cynical at this point, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if they were sending weapons in with that food. These Establishment people thrive on war and the threat of war, as documented in the Reece Committee findings of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Korean War began with a UN Counsel Resolution, just like pretty much every war since.

    What’s sad is that Korea was once known as the Jerusalem of the East, for their many churches.

  2. It’s all BS. All this means is that North Korean people are starving and the government is hiding its nuclear program deep enough that inspectors won’t find it.

    My opinion? Not one damned US dime to that gulag state. Make the South Koreans and the Chinese pay for it.

  3. The only way I would give them food is to air drop it on the population with some access to the internet– some of those $200.00 computers, wrapped in the USA flag. Otherwise we only feed the military.

  4. My concern is that we would be feeding the military, not the people of North Korea. I am all for helping people, but as you pointed out, why are we having to pay for this? Why not the Chinese and the South Koreans?

  5. I got a laugh out of “DPRK” which I assume stands for Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, a fitting name for a dictatorship under the rule of a single family now in the third generation. The only gratification is knowing that it’s another example of a dictatorship (the natural outcome of technocratic elite progressivism/communism) that can’t even feed its own people. They have to resort to this kind of blackmail.

    Gives me hope, though. When we run our economy completely into the toilet, perhaps we can bribe the rest of the world into giving us stuff because we have lots of nukes.

    1. “Gives me hope, though. When we run our economy completely into the toilet, perhaps we can bribe the rest of the world into giving us stuff because we have lots of nukes.”

      God bless you,Pat. You always deem to find the silver lining in the black cloud.

    1. In case you can’t see it clearly (why didn’t I think of that?) it’s Obama standing among smoldering ruins and the caption is, “My Job Here Is Done”.

  6. It’s blackmail pure and simple. We have to give them food to shut the North Korean up (temporarily). And yes, all agreements with North Korea are meaningless. And the food won’t go to the 90 percent of the country that is starving and eating grass but to the military and the communist party.

  7. The moratorium only means North Korea will stop its mischief while the food is being delivered. Once it’s delivered, they’ll tell the inspectors to – f*** off or we’ll fill you with lead – and what’s anyone going to do about it, nothing.

    They do this all the time, it’s not even a modest step in any direction, well actually it’s a good step for North Korea, they get food for a while and time to rest before starting their crap again.

    “Shouldn’t the rest of the world be willing to share in this cost?”

    Yes, but they’re thinking why should we when that stupid Sam is always willing to push more debt onto his future children. In the end Sam will pick up the cost and no one will thank him for it.

    The west won’t get it, you can’t negotiate with evil, you have to confront it and destroy it.

  8. Not sure what we are to gain keeping North Koreans from starvation. Somebody has to keep them from death, but considering that their nukes can reach the West Coast, perhaps we need to care of our own citizens.

    1. China has been feeding North Korea (more or less) for years. If there is anything to be gained with this deal, which I doubt, it is not just the US that would be gaining. The US is broke so others need to step up to the plate, in my opinion. As another commenter said: “you can’t negotiate with evil.”

  9. The State Dept. has been infested with leftists (and worse) since at least the days of FDR. I wouldn’t believe anything they said. If they’re promoting this as a good deal for us, then the opposite must be true.

  10. Non-interventionism needs to be considered once again. We are paying too much for defense, at the expense of our actual defense (our debt makes us beholden to foreign countries and we can’t even patrol our own border).

    1. It is hard to make a sound argument that the US has in fact been making the world a safer place. Unfortunately we have made enimies that we may now be forced to deal with whether we like it or not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s