Yes Clinton knew they would back out on that deal.:rolleyes:

And since he can predict the future he is a bad man. ;) What has Bushdone about North Korea?

Clinton was was doing the the rest of the world was doing about Iraq, nothing. He had faith in the UN. Even before 9/11 Bush gave Iraq more time as well to comply with the UN. If Clinton waited to long why didn't W go in right away?

And on Iran like you said what has Bush done?

Its not about predicting the future. Its about assigning credibility to a government that wasn't credible. They should have known better than to trust North Korea. There was absolutely no precedence for that nation acting in a resposnible way. Clinton ignored what was known, and allowed North Korea to develop nukes. That makes Clinton complicit, and incompetent.

What has Bush done about North Korea? He's formed an ad hoc regional coalition to deal with it. Time will tell, and Bush may prove to be inadequate, but at least he hasn't done anything as stupid as signing a treaty with North Korea, and then not enforce it. Stupid, stupid, stupid. This is part of the Clinton legacy. Absolutely stupid.

The time for Clinton to go back into Iraq was 1993, or 1994 at the latest. There were at least two genocides going on, and Iraq was in violation of UN treaties. Clinton was very tolerant of genocide. That's also part of his legacy. Should Bush have gone in right away in 1993? Prior to 9-11, it wasn't that urgent. After 9-11, the Bush administration set out to remake the Middle East. Iraq could have been left alone, except Iraq suddenly was pooring money into regional terrorist groups, and doing everything possible to be a road block to the US. The Baathists asked for a war, and they got it.

Clinton had faith in the UN? BS. The UN does not do anything about genocide. When Clinton finally committed to stopping the Bosnian genocide, it was performed through a coalition that was outside the UN.

Bush has done little about Iran. Part of the blame, again, can be placed on Clinton. For almost a half century, it was US policy to maintain a military that could fight in two theaters at once. Clinton scaled back American capability to 1 1/2 theaters. We have been stripped of the military option, which is needed to deal with Iran.

Please stop reading MoveOn.org. Its a propaganda site that is devoid of contextually accurate facts.

Clinton had surgical strikes prepared for N. Korea. It was considered the closest we've come to war in recent years with that country but he didn't follow through. Right now N. Korea actually has nuclear weapons so war isn't exactly the easiest option anymore. War is never a joy, but this would be a nightmare. What has Bush done? Bush has pressured the country through the use of its Asian allies, most prominently China. Bush has allowed for talks.

On Iraq: Clinton and Bush knew the UN was useless on Iraq. Both wanted to act on it. One didn't because he knew it would be a PR debacle that he didn't want to deal with so he just left it to Bush.

As for Iran? Well Bush has pressured the UN to find that they are in breach of nuclear violations. Have they found them to be? Of course but has the UN or any country done anything about it? No. Can Bush just attack Iran as well? No, because people like you will talk about where are the WMDs? War is no good? Etc.

-Rudey