<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Two Myths About North Korea, Iran, and Disarmament</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.sojo.net/2009/06/17/two-myths-about-north-korea-iran-and-disarmament/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.sojo.net/2009/06/17/two-myths-about-north-korea-iran-and-disarmament/</link>
	<description>A Blog by Jim Wallis and Friends</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:27:14 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: samchully</title>
		<link>http://blog.sojo.net/2009/06/17/two-myths-about-north-korea-iran-and-disarmament/comment-page-1/#comment-89243</link>
		<dc:creator>samchully</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 20:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sojo.net/?p=9431#comment-89243</guid>
		<description>A mistake was made, in haste, in the closing days of the Second World War (August 1945). To accept the Japanese surrender, Korea was arbitrarily divided by the victorious Allies, and partitioned into separate occupation zones north and south of the 38th parallel of latitude.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Korea had been one country for over a thousand years. &lt;br&gt; &lt;br&gt;This lead to civil war – and undemocratic regimes both north and south. Quite apart from the nuclear threat, or economic collapse, perhaps it is time to get at the root of the problem, which is the artificial division of the country. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In the Middle East, and Central Asia, the United States is responding to crises by building up its military forces and waging war. But in East Asia, despite the Axis-of-Evil rhetoric, they have been pulling out their troops! This has lead to some nervousness in South Korea. But perhaps they should take this idea out for a spin. Use it to provide some leverage – obtain concessions from the North, and provide the South with security. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Not a Peace Treaty, nor the provision of another nuclear reactor. But rather re-unification of the peninsula.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Perhaps the idea could be floated of nation-wide elections. Offering the Pyongyang regime the withdrawal of all foreign forces in Korea, in return for them agreeing to nation-wide multi-party elections.  My suggestion is that both sides (North and South) agree to submit to fair and free elections, the winner forming a government for the whole country. That is, both governments should step down and submit to elections in order to form one nation again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A mistake was made, in haste, in the closing days of the Second World War (August 1945). To accept the Japanese surrender, Korea was arbitrarily divided by the victorious Allies, and partitioned into separate occupation zones north and south of the 38th parallel of latitude.</p>
<p>Korea had been one country for over a thousand years. </p>
<p>This lead to civil war – and undemocratic regimes both north and south. Quite apart from the nuclear threat, or economic collapse, perhaps it is time to get at the root of the problem, which is the artificial division of the country. </p>
<p>In the Middle East, and Central Asia, the United States is responding to crises by building up its military forces and waging war. But in East Asia, despite the Axis-of-Evil rhetoric, they have been pulling out their troops! This has lead to some nervousness in South Korea. But perhaps they should take this idea out for a spin. Use it to provide some leverage – obtain concessions from the North, and provide the South with security. </p>
<p>Not a Peace Treaty, nor the provision of another nuclear reactor. But rather re-unification of the peninsula.</p>
<p>Perhaps the idea could be floated of nation-wide elections. Offering the Pyongyang regime the withdrawal of all foreign forces in Korea, in return for them agreeing to nation-wide multi-party elections.  My suggestion is that both sides (North and South) agree to submit to fair and free elections, the winner forming a government for the whole country. That is, both governments should step down and submit to elections in order to form one nation again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SisterMarie</title>
		<link>http://blog.sojo.net/2009/06/17/two-myths-about-north-korea-iran-and-disarmament/comment-page-1/#comment-89187</link>
		<dc:creator>SisterMarie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sojo.net/?p=9431#comment-89187</guid>
		<description>As the only nation that has actually used a nuclear weapon, the United States is in a poor position to be telling other countries what weapons they are allowed to posess. Our moral leadership is also exacerbated by our decision to invade a country that did not attack us and lacked the wherewithal to do so.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;However, none of that should deter us from the ultimate goal of ridding the world of all nuclear weapons. For anyone who has ever viewed pictures or video of nuclear detonations or have seen the aftermath of children with the skin coming off of their bones, there is no moral justification for retaining this awful capability. I appreciate the progress that has been made in reducing the stockpiles of nuclear weapons since the height of the cold war. As Christians, we cannot accept anything less that total elimination of these weapons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As the only nation that has actually used a nuclear weapon, the United States is in a poor position to be telling other countries what weapons they are allowed to posess. Our moral leadership is also exacerbated by our decision to invade a country that did not attack us and lacked the wherewithal to do so.</p>
<p>However, none of that should deter us from the ultimate goal of ridding the world of all nuclear weapons. For anyone who has ever viewed pictures or video of nuclear detonations or have seen the aftermath of children with the skin coming off of their bones, there is no moral justification for retaining this awful capability. I appreciate the progress that has been made in reducing the stockpiles of nuclear weapons since the height of the cold war. As Christians, we cannot accept anything less that total elimination of these weapons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jkc1945</title>
		<link>http://blog.sojo.net/2009/06/17/two-myths-about-north-korea-iran-and-disarmament/comment-page-1/#comment-89183</link>
		<dc:creator>jkc1945</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:15:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sojo.net/?p=9431#comment-89183</guid>
		<description>It seems futile to me to talk about &quot;nuclear disarmament.&quot;  The fact is, the ability to manufacture (and use) nuclear devices is stored within the heads of thousands of people, worldwide.  They transfer that knowledge to the next generation, and even if they didn&#039;t, the next generation would quickly recoup it from other archives.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;We cannot uninvent the wheel.  That being said, and knowing the nature of the &quot;world system&quot; as described by John in his letters, we can safely assume that nuclear weapons are here to stay.  So we might be better off talking about how we avoid their detonation for hostile purposes, rather than concerning ourselves about somehow &#039;getting rid of them.&#039;  We will not succeed in doing that.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The current method - - avoiding detonation by mutual deterrence - -- has worked very well.  As a matter of fact, it has worked perfectly.  I take no joy in saying that.  But it is true.  There has not been a hostile nuclear detonation on the planet since more than one country had nuclear weapons.  Is it a good way to live?  No!!  Christ has taught us a better way in His Kingdom.  Sadly, the world system is not a part of Christ&#039;s Kingdom.  It never has been.  It never will be.  And for these reasons, derived from the Truth of scripture, I would suggest that we need to address the problem differently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems futile to me to talk about &#8220;nuclear disarmament.&#8221;  The fact is, the ability to manufacture (and use) nuclear devices is stored within the heads of thousands of people, worldwide.  They transfer that knowledge to the next generation, and even if they didn&#39;t, the next generation would quickly recoup it from other archives.  </p>
<p>We cannot uninvent the wheel.  That being said, and knowing the nature of the &#8220;world system&#8221; as described by John in his letters, we can safely assume that nuclear weapons are here to stay.  So we might be better off talking about how we avoid their detonation for hostile purposes, rather than concerning ourselves about somehow &#39;getting rid of them.&#39;  We will not succeed in doing that.  </p>
<p>The current method &#8211; - avoiding detonation by mutual deterrence &#8211; &#8212; has worked very well.  As a matter of fact, it has worked perfectly.  I take no joy in saying that.  But it is true.  There has not been a hostile nuclear detonation on the planet since more than one country had nuclear weapons.  Is it a good way to live?  No!!  Christ has taught us a better way in His Kingdom.  Sadly, the world system is not a part of Christ&#39;s Kingdom.  It never has been.  It never will be.  And for these reasons, derived from the Truth of scripture, I would suggest that we need to address the problem differently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Palosaari</title>
		<link>http://blog.sojo.net/2009/06/17/two-myths-about-north-korea-iran-and-disarmament/comment-page-1/#comment-89170</link>
		<dc:creator>Palosaari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:35:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.sojo.net/?p=9431#comment-89170</guid>
		<description>I listened to an interesting segment Ira Flatow&#039;s Science Friday on NPR- how there may be greater limitations on uranium than we originally thought.  It is not a renewable resource.  We have only the uranium in the planet that was here when it was formed 4.5 bya, minus that which has degraded.  This got me thinking- if we build more nuclear power plants to help us out of the energy crisis and Global Warming, perhaps a positive byproduct of this would be to increase the demand and therefore the price of uranium.  Which would make it hopefully out of reach for weapons manufacture.  And as more and more of it is needed for clean energy production, there becomes greater and greater incentive to not use it for weapons manufacture- even by the wealthy countries.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I listened to an interesting segment Ira Flatow&#39;s Science Friday on NPR- how there may be greater limitations on uranium than we originally thought.  It is not a renewable resource.  We have only the uranium in the planet that was here when it was formed 4.5 bya, minus that which has degraded.  This got me thinking- if we build more nuclear power plants to help us out of the energy crisis and Global Warming, perhaps a positive byproduct of this would be to increase the demand and therefore the price of uranium.  Which would make it hopefully out of reach for weapons manufacture.  And as more and more of it is needed for clean energy production, there becomes greater and greater incentive to not use it for weapons manufacture- even by the wealthy countries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
