North Korean missiles

Delegate of North Korea,
I think it’s safe to say that you've once again left the whole world befuddled...
Earlier this moth, all efforts were going to restart six-party talks on the nuclear weapons possession issue.... your country was willing to reinitiate these negotiations which you walked away from last year… and suddenly, today Monday, October 12th you shoot two short-ranged missiles that are capable of striking Seoul, South Korea’s capital home to around 25 million people.

So why does your country take a step forward and then always two steps back? … this time by showing flagrant aggression towards your neighboring country.




http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091012/wl_nm/us_korea_north

The delegate of North Korea feels saddened by the accusations of its neighbor SK, especially when takking into account that your country has created in our border one of the most militarized zones in the planet with the help of your "friend" USA. Because of USA's sponsored sanction and involvement, my people now suffer with povery and hunger...
Furthermore, my nation has agreed to treaties regarding only the testing of long range missile: Thereby, no accord has been violated by the earlier tests being them necessary for the maintaining of the security in my society.
Regarding one of your final quotes "capable of striking Seoul"! This type of angled opinion is the "fuel" to this conflict. My nation can't even conduct a test to grant security to its own population that dogmations such as yours strike us.
Concerning the six party talks: My nation does not want such conversations to be conducted before a single handed debate with the USA, for as creator of this dispute they should be the ones to negotiate first and until wealing to do so without the addition of more arms into the DMZ my nation will continue with its necessary tests!

Delegate of NK,
The delegate of the United States can merely say that you brought the sanctions upon yourselves. According to the Chinese ambassador at the UN, Zhang Yesui, said that the sanctions imposed by the world and further enforced this year were a "firm opposition" of the world to North Korea's nuclear provocation.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8097370.stm
So as you may see, it is not only the United States that provides North Korea with sanctions. The United Nations in almost its entirety is pushing for these sanctions, and they will not be removed until your nation proves to the world that it is trustworthy and will not try to unbalance the world with nuclear threats and missile threats.

Furthermore, what the delegate of South Korea presents are not merely words and "dogmations" (what does that word even mean?). South Korea is in iminent danger, since North Korea has tested short-range missiles capable of reaching Seoul, apart from long-range missiles, which place the world in a state of wariness.

Delegate,

Over and over again in history it has been proven that sanctions either fail to accomplish their goals or do so poorly putting a given population into unamendable sorrow. Give as an example Cuba; the goverment has not in any way lost its grip over its nation: Quite the contrary the sanctions "heat up the climate". So if USA judges itself capable of any guided decision it should note wise to exclude the sanctions from our nation...

Delegate, please do NOT overlook the fact that these sanctions on North Korea were imposed by the UNITED NATIONS, and not the UNITED STATES. In 2006, the SECURITY COUNCIL members agreed to impose sanctions on Pyongyang and this year, the SECURITY COUNCIL agreed to further enforce these sanctions. As can be seen from the delegate's last post, the Chinese ambassador herself said that the sanctions were a firm opposition to NK's nuclear provocation. And that's what North Korea has been doing: it has been provoking the world with its missile tests and with Kim-Jong's declarations of enmity. This type of event does not go unseen, and the WORLD cannot tolerate threats to the integrity of the United Nations and even the ecological balance of the world.

"Because of USA's sponsored sanction and involvement, my people now suffer with povery and hunger..."

Holding UN or U.S.A imposed sanctions responsible for the poverty, suffering and hunger of north Korean citizens is not entirely fair….

1. The United States has actually provided your country with $1 billion (since 1995) in foreign aid, 60% of this money went towards food aid and 40% took form of energy assistance.
2. You have received a number of requests for economic development and assistance (that would help your suffering people) but you’ve turned them down because these resolutions require the dismantlement of your nuclear program…
3. Your government actually restricts the ability of donor agencies to operate in NK, subsequently it is difficult to see how much of these donations actually reach the recipients and how much is misplaced… instead aiding your military.
South Korea and China (two of your most important food providers) send mostly all of our aid directly with no monitoring meaning we have no way of seeing it these donations reach your people.

If you are going to blame anyone for the determent of your people you should blame yourself or your military build up….

First of all who are you delegate of USA to talk about threats to the "integrity" of the United Nations when your nation has already failed to attend to over three Security Council resolution regarding the closiong of Guantanamo, which surprisingly remains open and the war on Iraq: Which raises a question; where are the "weapons of mass destruction"?

Delegate of South Korea: Your first point, seems to me, lacks the understanding of my nations dilligence with USA. Yes, they have donated some money which has not yet reached the 1 billion mark but was supposed to be a multi billion dollar contract of the construction of nuclear power plants which have not yet been concluded and run 7 years behind...

(2)Yes delegate I have and will continue to refuse treaties that get me food in exchange of exposure! I will not risk my population by weakening my military enough to allow for a direct attack of both you and the USA!

(3) Delegate I thought you had just stated in your previous posts we simply refuse aid!? Now the delegate accuses our leader of being corrupt?!

Furthermore, delegate, as NK has previously stated; the capacity of our missiles of reaching Seoul have not only not been proven but are not built for that intention. Also considering the fact that our Nuclears are still too large to acomodate in such carriers the missiles shouldn't be seen as a threat.

Delegate of USA, we are here dealing with an international situation and your preucupation divulges to semantics?!

NKorea_PauloC wrote:First of all who are you delegate of USA to talk about threats to the "integrity" of the United Nations when your nation has already failed to attend to over three Security Council resolution regarding the closiong of Guantanamo

I don't know if you have been following the news, delegate, but President Obama has already made plans to close the Guantanamo Bay prison.

And furthermore, regarding the financial assistance described by the delegate as insufficient, you cannot expect any nation to be willing to aid yours in return for nothing. Our aid comes with a price: You must comply with the international community's requests! Otherwise, you cannot complain that our aid is behind and treaties were broken if your nation itself does not comply with Security Council resolution 1887, for example, on the topic of nuclear non-proliferation. It seems that North Korea does not WANT aid, because you refuse all that is proposed and make little or no efforts to come to agreements.

In the six-party talks, you had agreed to shut down your nuclear facilities in exchange for fuel aid and stabilization of relations with the United States and Japan. However, you did NOT shut down your nuclear facilities and then pulled out of the six-party talks. After such behavior, how may the delegate expect to receive as much aid as desired with nothing in return?

Delegate,

First of all, the United States of America made a direct deal with my "eternal president" to provide us with nuclear facilities capable of producing energy without the production of harmfull byproducts. When the administration of your country was changed, over 4 years ago, your president refused to continue with the deal leading us to today's defiance! So before accusing my delegation of lacking data understand the very basis of our animosity!

Regarding the issue of Obama, yes, he has made deals to close Guantanamo but keeps pushing the dates forward ignoring popular opinion and integrity of the prisoners that continue to suffer from torture and inhumane conditions. Delegate, you are a large country that for long, now, has "bullied" the world; does the delegate really believe there will be any change simply because of a new president who has barely assumed his post. For troops still remain in Iraq, Guantanamo is still opened with its shut down date postponed once more and more of your troops arrive at SK now with the addition of a USS carrier!

The issue of Guantanamo bay and the postponing of its dates is an issue that cannot be solely blamed upon the United States, because of these reasons:
1. Some countries have refused to accept detainees as their citizens or even recognize that they were once citizens of their countries;
2. There has not been a place found, or determined, by the UN as to where the detainees will be sent.

The troops in South Korea are an effort of protection against your threats of bombing. The United States has no interest in waging war against North Korea.

On the question of Iraq, you yourself said, delegate, that our new president has barely assumed his post, yet he already assured that the troops in Iraq will be mostly out by next year, and completely out in two years. However, the reconstruction and the establishment of the Iraqi government is up to the citizens of Iraq, since the United States cannot impose a government there. The United States's job was to eliminate the oppression and control the insurgencies in Iraq. This goal was achieved with some success, and now Iraq has a chance to create a strong, sovereign, and stable government.

This is the beginning of change, delegate: for all those who said the United States was the "Great Satan" or represented evil in the world, this is a change for the better.

However, instead of focusing the spotlight on the United States of America, let's turn it to the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. Your nation has been changin as well - however, your changes are for the worst. You have been threatening the international community repeated times and have shown to be a nation that inspires fear and causes a need for wariness.

So this is my proposal to the skillful (debatewise) North Korean delegate (who has been giving me quite a headache) - instead of complaining repeatedly about the international community, the United States in specific, why doesn't the delegate attempt to work out a treaty bearing in mind the desires of the involved nations? Old animosities can be solved, and new ones do not have to be created.

Is the delegate saying that the most "powerful" nation on earth can't handle the closing of a simple facility a few hundred miles from the coast of Florida! But still considers itself capable of judging a friendly nation which has only engaged on a single significant conflict in the past century.

Delegate, your third paragraph made me laugh "the reconstruction and the stablishment of the Iraq goverment is up to the citizens of Iraq". So basically the USA is asserting that after completely destroying the nation of Iraq, againt the security council and its people, it is simply going to leave and hold the people of Iraq responsible for reconstructing a nation out of ashes?!

Considering your final quotes, the only real goal of the delegation of North Korea is to solve this conflict but your country has repreatedely refused to cooporate ignoring my president's plee for a conference with your president alone! Otherwise insisting for "Six party talks" with nations which nothing have to do with the conflict!

Unless the USA decides to finally engage in an unilateral reunion with my president and remove its troops out of DMZ my state has no other choice than to continue with its nuclear programs...

The task is not as simple as the delegate of North Korea says! There is a large amount of detainees and they cannot just simply be placed anywhere. These people held at the Guantanamo Bay prison are terrorists and criminals. They cannot be released and must be treated with wariness to ensure that no incidents or criminalities occur.

The "third paragraph" is not saying that the United States destroys Iraq and then leaves it up to them to rebuild it. The United States is willing to supply Iraq with some financial aid to rebuild the country structurally and economically - however, we CANNOT impose any form of government upon them. Many nations today complain that the United States uses its best efforts to impose capitalism and democracy, the "American" system of government, upon the world. It is the Iraqi people's responsibility now to rebuild a GOVERNMENT out of the ashes - not an entire nation. The Iraqi war's result was removing an unjust and inhumane regime from Iraq - now, Iraq has the duty to create a government that does not commit human rights atrocities and crimes against humanity.

The issue of "one-to-one" talks can be debated, however, the United States will not remove troops from South Korea UNTIL North Korea terminates its nuclear armaments program.

The delegate of North Korea has not affirmed that the task of clearing Guantanamo will be easy but that the responsibility resides only upon USA's will. Furthermore delegate, do you actually believe that all of the prisoners are there because of a fair trial? Why can't the detainees be transfered to other national prisons in USA which have the capacity for such?!

The delegate of USA impresses my delegation once again when saying that the war on Iraq was a question of freeing a population of a tyrant when your president clearly stated it was a failed attempt to capture weapons of mass destruction!

Delegate we are here to debate; therefore, will the delegate accept the "one to one" talks proposed by my nation to try and minimize the harms you have for so long perpetrated over the planet?

Delegate of the US, first of all Venezuela would like to state that it believes that no nation in the world should be developing a nuclear weapons program and that NK's nuclear weapons development is a serious mistake. However, all nations have the right to develop a PEACEFUL nuclear POWER for the well being of the nation and the citizens within it.

Nuclear weapon was a very high measure token by NK's government, but in the other hand it is understandable. For as long nuclear history began, US has put himself in a position where it is strictly against any nuclear POWER development in any nation non-aligned to them. USA has made-up excuses and created tensions between nations just to prohibit any nuclear development - for example: when US accused Iraq's government of possessing weapons of mass destruction, which was proven to be a lie. US ended up invading Iraq's territory, and THE LIVES OF THOUSAND IRAQUI CITIZENS AND SOLDIERS WERE TOKEN UNDER A LIE. -

Yes, it was the United Nations who agreed upon the sanctions, however it wasn't the one who imposed them, it was the US. Delegate, the Venezuelan delegation is deeply concerned with the sanctions and their affects in NK's economy. SANCTIONS DON'T HELP; THEY WORSEN THE COUNTRY'S ECONOMY AND END UP AFFECTING THE INNOCENT CITIZENS MORE THAN THE GOVERNMENT. Take for example the situation in Myanmar: US, the EU, UK, Canada and Australia had imposed sanctions about 12 years ago so democracy would rise in Burma. Well, Burma is still a communist country and now it’s extremely dangerous to live there.

The delegate of Venezuela understand the delegate of US' concern, however the US should stop thinking only about itself and begin to realize the effects of the sanctions in the innocent north Korean citizens who have no involvement with the nuclear weapons program.

Delegate of North Korea:
The difficulty of the task relies not only upon the relocation of prisoners. It also depends on the safety process involved, since we cannot merely put them on a plane from Cuba to elsewhere. There is much danger of a rebellion, an outbreak, an attack, or a planned escape to try to effectuate such relocation with no care.

The delegate will put off discussion about the war on Iraq, but will just say this: the delegate did not try to justify that the war on Iraq was made for a just cause, but tried to explain that the United States can and WILL help Iraq financially to rebuild the structure of its own country. However, it is up to the Iraqis to create a government of their choice. Countries many times complain that the United States imposes the "American" form of government on the entire world; now that we are trying to not impose it you also complain saying that we are not helping enough.

Yes, the delegate of the United States will accept the "one-to-one" talks and I'll be sure to include this in my resolution; however, if and only if North Korea agrees to resume the six-party talks.
_______________________________________________________________________________

Delegate of Venezuela:
First of all, even though this has nothing to do with the topic, and many will criticize me for this, a TOKEN is a souvenir or a keepsake; the perfect form of the verb TAKE is TAKEN. (He has taken, it is taken)

Grammar lesson aside, the US does not "invent excuses" not to permit nuclear power. The reason for the United States being careful concerning nuclear energy is that nuclear power facilities produce plutonium from their quantities of Uranium-238. Plutonium, as I am very much sure the delegate already knows, is a fissile material and can be used for an atomic bomb. Thus, as in the case of Iran, without complete and safe IAEA inspections, what seems to be a safe nuclear energy program COULD turn into something worse.

"innocent north Korean citizens who have no involvement with the nuclear weapons program." Delegate, a government is the representation of the people. By saying that North Korean citizens have nothing to do with their nuclear weapons program, the delegate is inferring that North Korea has an oppressive regime which does not abide by its people's wishes. It is what happened in the Soviet Union, where premier Stalin created a totalitarian regime where freedom of speech was not only limited, but eradicated, and millions were executed for speaking out against the regime. It is, as the delegate has previously stated (quite a few times), what happened in Iraq, where Saddam Hussein was oppressing his people and committing crimes against humanity.

Furthermore, in 2006, following a North Korean nuclear test, the Security Council voted and decided to impose sanctions on Pyongyang (which means that it was not the US which went alone and imposed sanctions; the five permanent members voted in favor of the resolution). This year, the Security Council decided to further the sanctions on North Korea, and what was unusual about this resolution is that it was approved unanimously. So don't blame the United States of America for imposing sanctions on North Korea, since the entirety of the Security Council voted in favor of this resolution.

The delegate of USA seems to misunderstand the essential point that the delegate of NK brings: Our delegation does not want for the prisoners to be transfered or realeased, but for fair trials to be held accounting every detainee.

Finally the USA admits to have invaded Iraq over an unjustified cause! Delegate, again, when refering to the imposal of a goverment, you demonstrate your countries distorted logic! When we, repressed nations because of your hegemony, pleed for your country to hault any forcefull intervention in the creation of a goverment, we are not questioning actions done over anarchies but over already established goverments!

Delegate our engagement or not in the "six party talks" will be debated in our conference which will be included in my resolution...

______________________________________________________________________

Delegate of USA, when you refer to the possible rendering of an energy producing nation into a nuclear power as a possibility, you seem to be affirming that no nation should be trusted!

There seems to be no reason to contest your argument over "innocent people" as you have already done it yourself, but here it goes: one year back, your nation was ruled by one of the most derisive leaders the planet has ever seen, today some changes have been made to the country which some judge are for the best... All of this changes in your goverment have happened under the same "rulled", as they remained the same when the goverment changed it is noticiable that they do not participate in a direct relation!

In your final paragraph your arguments seem to excuse your nation from the role of "imposer of sanctions"; but, as permenant member of the SC and most influential nation it is evident that your country had significant importance in such imposal. The real question would reside in whether or not your state is stubborn enough to consider, sanctions, as a solution after so many demonstrations of failure?!

NKorea_PauloC wrote:The delegate of USA seems to misunderstand the essential point that the delegate of NK brings: Our delegation does not want for the prisoners to be transfered or realeased, but for fair trials to be held accounting every detainee.

The delegate of the United States is curious to know what the delegate of North Korea considers a fair trial, since it does not believe in the International Criminal Court. Should our nation conduct these trials? We have already named them as terrorists, thus making these trials irrelevant.

Regarding nuclear energy - it is not that we do not trust the nations themselves, we are wary about the inspection systems present in the world today. The delegate of the United States believes they must be more effective, and furthermore, that nations must comply fully with inspections.

Regarding the "innocent people" - the ruled are the same, but their opinions may have changed from experience.

About sanctions - sanctions are effective if properly enforced and properly followed. As in the problem of small arms in Africa, sanctions have been and are being effective, but would be more effective if properly followed and conducted (more about this will be in my resolution).

Regarding Iraq (this is my FINAL statement) - that is exactly why troops are being removed from Iraq. To "halt forceful intervention."

Again the USA demonstrates slew of arrogance: "we have already named them as terrorists"! Delegate a fair trial happens when the judicial branch, which in your case should be separate from the executive, decides after a hearing with a lawyer and jury that a person is or not guilty of whatever crime he commited. Not simply an arbitrary decision!

Delegate, by the moment you require inspections to determine ones stability it can be determined that you do not trust that nation!

Yes, delegate, but our regime has not [changed]!

The delegate of NK would be interested in hearing about any case where sanctions were sucessful in achieving ones goal...

Again you seem to miss my point...

Once again, the world community seems to faulter when it comes to sanctions. Sudan itself, in an instance, is an example of how terrorizing and maleficent sanctions can be. Cuba, as a second example, seems to have stopped in time, with antique cars and falling buildings, all due to sanctions and more sanctions.
"We have already named them as terrorists" - Keep in mind, American delegate, there is no international acceptable or precise definition of what a terrorist is, so therefore, revise your words in order to not profane nonsense. And although there are plans from the former government to close Guantanamo, it is still running, and such action does not erase the condemnable past of the USA.

All the delegate reads is complaints, complaints, and more complaints. The delegate of the United States does not wish to spend time arguing about topics and trying to find out "who's right" and "who's wrong." The delegate wants to find solutions!

The delegates of Sudan and North Korea are complaining about the fair trial now. However, both of your nations have complaints against the ICC, which, if the detainees are provided a trial, should be the one to perform it. And furthermore, the delegate is sure that, if the United States provided these criminals with trials, they would be found guilty and then the delegates would complain that the trials held in the United States were not fair (which they would be). So instead of complaining, delegates, why not come up with solutions??

The delegate of Sudan said "although there are plans from the former government to close Guantanamo." The actions are from the CURRENT government.

Regarding sanctions, the great problem in the world today is that countries who have sanctions imposed on them demonstrate non-compliance to these sanctions. Liberia, for example, has an arms sanction due to the small arms problem there. However, its non-compliance with its sanctions does not allow for their removal, since these same sanctions were implemented to ensure the protection of the people who were having problems with attacks and violence.

Delegate, again you surprise us with your unbounded supremacy. I did not refer to an ICC trial in any of my posts! As both Sudan, NK and your nation would greatly opose that! My proposal is that you take every prisoner to be trialed at your courts with, depending on the case, a jury representation from the respective country!

Yes delegate, Actions that keep being postponed!

Now this "people" who before could legally buy wepons for their own protection will perish under attacks made by armed man who acquire their weapons illegally!!!

Actions that keep being postponed? Our president has expressed his wishes to evacuate and shut down Guantanamo as soon as possible. However, due to the great division of our country on this issue, a Congress vote and some complications were required, which added to the problems involved in the shutting down itself - the delegate cannot simply blame the United States for every delay! Shutting down Guantanamo will not be an easy task, and the United States is handling it with extreme care out of fear from a terrorist break-out or rebellion. After the subsequent attacks on 9/11, delegate, we do not deal with terrorism lightly.

Correction, delegate: MY nation would not oppose that. And the United States will not negotiate a re-trial, since these detainees have already been deemed terrorists. Again, after the subsequent attacks on 9/11, delegate, we do not deal with terrorism lightly.

Correction 2: the "people" could NOT legally buy weapons. The small arms trade was something illicit and rogue, and the terrorist/paramilitary groups were acquiring arms from the government itself or from other nations. The citizens of Liberia never had a fighting chance.

Delegate, the United States is not taking the role of Pinky and the Brain, trying to dominate the world every night. Rather, we are trying to take the steps of Spider-Man; while he has his flaws, he tries his best to use his powers to help all of those in need.

Yes, the delegate of Egypt made a very important point that will be proposed in one of my resolution’s clauses: not only to provide humanitarian and energy assistance to NK but to reimburse them for the huge amounts of money put into their nuclear program…how to go about this im not sure yet, maybe by financially aiding other investments and programs in NK not necessarily handing over all the money to the government and military…..

Let the delegate make this very clear: The United States is willing to resume its deal with North Korea on nuclear energy in exchange for it to stop its nuclear program. However, delegates, do NOT consider this a sort of "reimbursement," because the United States is not congratulating North Korea on its efforts to build together a nuclear program. Rather, we are willing to cope with their demands of nuclear energy so that we can mend past mistakes and breakings of treaties and so that we can find a peaceful alternative to solve so imminent a crisis.

The United States believes now is not the time to be selfish and self-centered - now is the time to solve problems. Cheers