Obama should appoint Cheney to negotiate with North Korea over hostages

Yes, only rarely to we get to shape foreign policy on this site. Con declares past policies towards North Korea a failure and proposes new policies of UN sanctions, cutting off food aid, and engaging China in pressuring North Korea. These alleged "new policies" are precisely the old policies that failed: "Bush Seeks China's Help on Halting North Korea's Nuclear Program" http://www.foxnews.com... "Following North Korea's nuclear test in October 2006, Security Council members imposed sanctions on Pyongyang. The 'financial sanctions. A month after the Council adopted the US-backed sanctions, " http://www.globalpolicy.org... 2003: "The United Nations dispatched a special envoy to North Korea today to assess the threat of humanitarian crisis in the wake of the United States' decision to suspend delivery of food aid to the impoverished country, which has suffered years of drought and famine. ... U.S. aid officials are demanding four reforms..." http://www.unwire.org... In my opening argument I asserted that past policies have failed. I said "Past negotiations have followed the pattern of Dear Leader getting the attention he sought, receiving payment through various concessions, and then reneging on his part of the deal." The pattern actually preceded Bush, having included the Clinton Administration who did all the same things, with the same results. Con's proposal thus brings to mind: "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." --Albert Einstein, (attributed) http://www.quotationspage.com... So sending Al Gore with same old message will not produce new results. I agree with Con in his assertion that, "Anytime someone makes physical threats they should be ready to act upon them." So if Cheney delivers a veiled threat, we must be prepared to act by doing something as follow up. With a veiled threat, the follow through action may be the minimum required to convince Dear Leader that much worse may follow. For example, the follow-up might be to shoot down one of North Korea's missiles launched over the Pacific. The goal is not just to impress Dear Leader. The reason that the Chinese are not acting is that they fear the collapse of the North Korean regime would send a flood of refuges across the border into China. That would happen if the US decided unilaterally to take out Dear Leader with a cruise missile delivered to his parlor. Currently, the Chinese have no worry of the US doing that, because the Chinese expect that the US will continue the same dance with Dear Leader. Sending Vice President Cheney to chat with Dear Leader would add gravitas to the message in a way that Al Gore could not. It would show that Obama is not a wimp to be toyed with, and it would show that Democrats and Republicans are united behind Obama on this issue. It's doubtful that Dear Leader himself would be shaken by Cheney's delivery of the message, although there is a much greater chance if Cheney delivers it than Gore. However, the Chinese are possessed of their mental faculties and might well act preemptively to stifle Dear Leader. If they do not, a follow up no more dramatic then sinking a North Korean paddle boat might well convey the message effectively. Con advocates sending Al Gore, probably in a Little Bo Peep costume, with the message that if Dear Leader does not behave then we'll repeat the same cycle of failed policy one more time. Con is right, we cannot fail to follow through this time. The establishment of North Korea as a nuclear arms merchant,with nutcase Dear Leader running the store is not acceptable. Our strategy therefore is to get the Chinese to act with our least physical intervention in North Korea possible. President Obama sending Vice President Cheney would show a resolve unmatched by previous Administrations, so that a minor action as follow up would send a convincing message. There is even a chance that the Chinese would be sufficiently impressed without any follow up. There is no chance that Al Gore, even backed up by his entire flock of sheep, could accomplish that. The resolution is affirmed.