http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/13055532/n-korea-halts-nuclear-tests-for-food-aid/

In a deal with the United States, North Korea has agreed to a moratorium on nuclear enrichment and testing in exchange for food aid.

The announcement follows sit-down negotiations between the US and North Korea last week in Beijing.

In return for 240,000 tonnes of food aid, Pyongyang has agreed to suspend uranium enrichment and long-range missile tests, and allow United Nations inspectors to monitor the Yongbyon reactor.

North Korea says the US is also holding out the possibility of lifting sanctions once formal disarmament talks resume.

The UN nuclear watchdog is calling it an important step forward, but US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has been more cautious in her response.

"Today's announcement represents a modest first step in the right direction," she said.

The two sides were believed to be close to a food exchange deal back in December before the death of Kim Jong-Il.

The fresh development paves the way for a possible resumption of the six-party disarmament talks that North Korea abandoned three years ago.

But US officials like White House spokesman Jay Carney remain sceptical of Pyongyang's commitment.

"The agreement that the North Koreans have made [is] very welcome but obviously they need to be followed up by actions," he said.

"Commitments to do something are one thing, actually doing them are another."

The deal is also a boost to America's efforts to reign in renegade nuclear programs around the world and comes as the Obama administration intensifies pressure on Iran over its nuclear ambitions.

Patrick Cronin, a senior director at the Centre for a New American Security in Washington, says Iran will be watching what happens in North Korea closely.

"What it does mean to Iran is that now there are no other distractions at least on the nuclear proliferation front so that the international community can focus on Iran," he said.
"I would expect that could increase the chances of some kind of a dialogue but whether that dialogue really has traction, whether it really is serious, those are much harder judgements to make that this point."

Whatever you might think of the 27 years old - the new leader and his people is showing signs of putting it's citizens ahead of its ego. That can only be a good thing

Good to see him getting aid to his people.
I think if NK had gone down the path of western leadership just as many people would be starving anyway.
Given the world economy it would be impossible for NK to feed its entire people.
I think it’s sad they are letting down their nuclear ambitions tho, unless this is just a show. I think of it like us exercising our freedom of speech; what right do we have to nukes over them? They should have the ability to protect themselves and we all know if they actually get rid of the nukes the US would probably come in a blow them all up, including women and children.

Maqqa wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 8:43am:

In a deal with the United States, North Korea has agreed to a moratorium on nuclear enrichment and testing in exchange for food aid. The announcement follows sit-down negotiations between the US and North Korea last week in Beijing. In return for 240,000 tonnes of food aid, Pyongyang has agreed to suspend uranium enrichment and long-range missile tests, and allow United Nations inspectors to monitor the Yongbyon reactor. North Korea says the US is also holding out the possibility of lifting sanctions once formal disarmament talks resume. The UN nuclear watchdog is calling it an important step forward, but US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has been more cautious in her response.

NK signed the NPT which enabled them to get assistance with their nuclear program then they broke the agrement by producing weapons.

The sanctions are a result of them breaking the NPT which they have since withdrawn from.

His old man did a bit of sabre rattling to get food for his starving people we have to wait and see if they are serious about dropping their nuclear weapons program.

North Korea has 17,000 artillery pieces dug in and all have the capital of South Korea in range.

Why does the west have to support the starving people who are in that position because of a dictator?

They should have the ability to protect themselves and we all know if they actually get rid of the nukes the US would probably come in a blow them all up, including women and children.


Oh jesus another looney.

blackadder wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 5:53pm:

They should have the ability to protect themselves and we all know if they actually get rid of the nukes the US would probably come in a blow them all up, including women and children. Oh jesus another looney.

Right and its normal to let the US have them considering they are the only nation to have used them and who continue to threaten nations with them and are invading other countries for no reason and killing millions of innocent people.

Why should NK not have the right to protect themselves..
Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes?

Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes?



By asking that question proves you are a looney.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option


Quote:

" In 2003, Martin van Creveld, a professor of military history at Israel’s Hebrew University, thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel's existence.[19] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's "The Gun and the Olive Branch" (2003) as saying: We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.

blackadder wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 7:53pm:

Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes? By asking that question proves you are a looney.

Saying that proves you have no argument

bobbythefap1 wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 8:20pm:

blackadder wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 7:53pm: Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes? By asking that question proves you are a looney. Saying that proves you have no argument

Saying that says I can't be bothered with a looney.

blackadder wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 8:21pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 8:20pm: blackadder wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 7:53pm: Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes? By asking that question proves you are a looney. Saying that proves you have no argument Saying that says I can't be bothered with a looney.

Quote:

Right and its normal to let the US have them considering they are the only nation to have used them and who continue to threaten nations with them and are invading other countries for no reason and killing millions of innocent people. And lets not get started on Israel

Quote:
Right and its normal to let the US have them considering they are the only nation to have used them and who continue to threaten nations with them and are invading other countries for no reason and killing millions of innocent people.
And lets not get started on Israel


That's why you are a looney.

blackadder wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 8:25pm:

Quote: Right and its normal to let the US have them considering they are the only nation to have used them and who continue to threaten nations with them and are invading other countries for no reason and killing millions of innocent people. And lets not get started on Israel That's why you are a looney.

Right so its ok for them to do it but not those damn asians

bobbythefap1 wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 8:20pm:

blackadder wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 7:53pm: Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes? By asking that question proves you are a looney. Saying that proves you have no argument

He means to say your moral relativism stinks.
The USA has every right to attempt to deny North Korea nuclear weapons because it is superior in every way.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 9:58pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 8:20pm: blackadder wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 7:53pm: Likewise why should nations like the US and Israel be allowed to have nukes? By asking that question proves you are a looney. Saying that proves you have no argument He means to say your moral relativism stinks. The USA has every right to attempt to deny North Korea nuclear weapons because it is superior in every way.

Riiiight
How so?

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 1^st, 2012 at 12:38pm:

Maqqa wrote on Mar 1st, 2012 at 8:43am: In a deal with the United States, North Korea has agreed to a moratorium on nuclear enrichment and testing in exchange for food aid. The announcement follows sit-down negotiations between the US and North Korea last week in Beijing. In return for 240,000 tonnes of food aid, Pyongyang has agreed to suspend uranium enrichment and long-range missile tests, and allow United Nations inspectors to monitor the Yongbyon reactor. North Korea says the US is also holding out the possibility of lifting sanctions once formal disarmament talks resume. The UN nuclear watchdog is calling it an important step forward, but US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has been more cautious in her response. NK signed the NPT which enabled them to get assistance with their nuclear program then they broke the agrement by producing weapons. The sanctions are a result of them breaking the NPT which they have since withdrawn from. His old man did a bit of sabre rattling to get food for his starving people we have to wait and see if they are serious about dropping their nuclear weapons program. North Korea has 17,000 artillery pieces dug in and all have the capital of South Korea in range. Why does the west have to support the starving people who are in that position because of a dictator?

With a country like NK - the only way to change it is through economics

Like you said they have weapons so a frontal assault will not work.

NK is no fool. Firing any weapons at SK will mean the end of NK. Retaliation from SK and the West will wipe them out.

China and Russia will not come to their aid because both countries have to much at stake in the West.

The new leadership team knows this and this may be it's only way it can gracefully save face