Rumsfeld and N. Korea's nuke program

In summary, a Fortune article reveals that a Bush administration official, Donald Rumsfeld, had a financial stake in a company that was doing business with a country, North Korea, that the administration has publicly denounced. The deal in question was originally made by the Clinton administration in an effort to stop North Korea's nuclear weapons program, but it ultimately failed. While some may see this as a conflict of interest, it is not uncommon in politics. Rumsfeld has not publicly commented on the matter and it is unclear if he has spoken out against the Clinton deal.
  • #1
Zero
Here's another case of a Bush administration official making cash while doing business with the 'evil regimes' that they 'hate' so much:

http://www.fortune.com/fortune/articles/0,15114,447429,00.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This thread should be titled "Clinton and NK's nuke program" since Clinton and Albright made the deal. At most, Rumsfeld didn't make a public outcry when the company got a contract -- he wasn't an administration official at the time -- so I guess he's not an idealist adamantly opposed to any sort of dealing with NK. Shocking, that.
 
  • #3
Originally posted by damgo
This thread should be titled "Clinton and NK's nuke program" since Clinton and Albright made the deal. At most, Rumsfeld didn't make a public outcry when the company got a contract -- he wasn't an administration official at the time -- so I guess he's not an idealist adamantly opposed to any sort of dealing with NK. Shocking, that.

No, he is perfectly willing to provide nuclear capability to dictators for monetary gain, then use the presence of that capability for his gain as well. He wins both ways, huh?
 
  • #4
Clinton's administration made the deal, hence provided the capability. In fact, if you recall, the deal was civilian reactors and was specifically intended to get NK to stop their nuclear weapons program. No nuclear fuel was ever delivered -- NK already had that. If the deal had succeeded, there would be no NK crisis now. Since it didn't, the taxpayers are out some money, but that's it.

Why not attack real conservative hypocrisy, like the Bill Bennett thing? I'm no member of the Rummy Fan Club either, but grasping at straws like this is kinda embarrassing.
 
  • #5
How could anyone believe an article in Fortune magazine? It is, after all, a propaganda arm of the evil and corrupt corporate America.

Regards
 
  • #6
Originally posted by damgo
Clinton's administration made the deal, hence provided the capability. In fact, if you recall, the deal was civilian reactors and was specifically intended to get NK to stop their nuclear weapons program. No nuclear fuel was ever delivered -- NK already had that. If the deal had succeeded, there would be no NK crisis now. Since it didn't, the taxpayers are out some money, but that's it.

Why not attack real conservative hypocrisy, like the Bill Bennett thing? I'm no member of the Rummy Fan Club either, but grasping at straws like this is kinda embarrassing.

Hmmm...like I should care about Clinton? Didn'tI start a thread about that?


And Billy "Let it ride' Bennett is just too easy!
 
  • #7
My only concern about rumsfeld being involved in the construction of the plants is that it seems like a conflict of interests for him to be in such a high-ranking government position and also be involved with such companies...but it's not like that isn't prevalent in politics, and it's not like we don't already know that rumsfeld, cheny, and bush all have lots of connections like these.

I just find interesting that rumsfeld refused to comment. I suppose that you could find it contradictory with his hardline approach, but I haven't read any comments of his being against the Clinton deal. Maybe he has made such comments, but I don't know of them.
 

1. What is the connection between Rumsfeld and North Korea's nuclear program?

Rumsfeld, as the former Secretary of Defense under President George W. Bush, played a key role in shaping the US's foreign policy and approach to North Korea's nuclear program. He was a strong advocate for taking a hardline stance against North Korea and believed in the use of military force if necessary.

2. Did Rumsfeld's actions have any impact on North Korea's nuclear program?

It is difficult to determine the exact impact of Rumsfeld's actions on North Korea's nuclear program. However, it is believed that his approach of pressure and isolation may have further fueled North Korea's desire to develop nuclear weapons as a means of self-defense.

3. Was Rumsfeld involved in any negotiations or agreements with North Korea regarding their nuclear program?

No, Rumsfeld was not directly involved in any negotiations or agreements with North Korea. However, he did play a role in the Six-Party Talks, which aimed to address North Korea's nuclear program, as a representative of the United States.

4. How did Rumsfeld view North Korea's nuclear program?

Rumsfeld viewed North Korea's nuclear program as a serious threat to regional and global security. He believed that North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons would destabilize the region and potentially lead to a nuclear arms race in East Asia.

5. Did Rumsfeld's approach towards North Korea's nuclear program change over time?

Rumsfeld's approach towards North Korea's nuclear program remained consistently hardline during his time as Secretary of Defense. However, after leaving office, he expressed regret for not engaging in more diplomatic efforts and acknowledged that his approach may have exacerbated the situation.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
48
Views
7K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
48
Views
7K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
96
Views
11K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top