[Peace-discuss] Tim Shorrock on Korea & American pundits

Thu May 3 03:04:03 UTC 2018

This is typical of many “pseudo left” groups as well, they are on target in relation to Korea, and Israel, but Syria, and Russiagate is another story, because they are the necessary steps in relation to Iran, and our eventual goal of control over China.

On May 1, 2018, at 20:00, David Green via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:

No, still good on Korea and Israel;  not so good on Syria & Russiagate.

On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Brussel, Morton K <brussel at illinois.edu<mailto:brussel at illinois.edu>> wrote:
So Democracy Now! has not completely gone off the rails…

On May 1, 2018, at 10:55 AM, David Green via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:

AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask you about the issue of media coverage of the possible rapprochement on the Korean Peninsula. In a recent article<https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/28/us/politics/trump-north-korea.html> in The New York Times headlined “As Two Koreas Talk Peace, Trump’s Bargaining Chips Slip Away,” Mark Landler expressed skepticism that the meeting between the South and North Korean leaders could be beneficial to the U.S., concluding, quote, “The talk of peace is likely to weaken the two levers that Mr. Trump used to pressure Mr. Kim to come to the bargaining table. A resumption of regular diplomatic exchanges between the two Koreas, analysts said, will inevitably erode the crippling economic sanctions against the North, while Mr. Trump will find it hard to threaten military action against a country that is extending an olive branch,” unquote. Meanwhile, Brookings Institution senior fellow Michael O’Hanlon had this to say on Friday.

MICHAEL O’HANLON: President Trump’s going to have to rein in his more ambitious goals and yet still drive a relatively hard line and not give away too much for an interim or partial agreement. … The denuclearization idea, however, is a long ways from even getting seriously started, because we’ve heard this kind of talk before. We know that North Korea means something else by the concept of denuclearization than we think we hear with our Western ears. And I haven’t seen even any realistic discussion of what would be the first steps or any kind of an interim deal along the way.

AMY GOODMAN: Tim Shorrock, your response to all of these comments?

TIM SHORROCK: Well, Michael O’Hanlon has been so wrong on so many things, like Iraq and Afghanistan, for so long, I don’t know why anybody is listening to him. But he’s completely wrong. He apparently has not read this Panmunjom Declaration, for one thing.

But let me get back to that Times piece. I mean, you know, I quoted from that—I quote from that in my next article and my last one in The Nation. I also talked about his reporting. I mean, that statement, that somehow it comes out that, you know, a peace agreement is bad for the U.S. national security because it will prevent Trump from taking military action, what kind of talk is that for a reporter? He depends on all the establishment, you know, pundits and experts in town, rounds them all up to make this analysis.

It’s just amazing to me to see the Washington consensus. I mean, people here in Washington, in the press and in the pundit class, they make fun of North Korea for being this totalitarian state where everyone thinks the same and has to do what the leader says. Well, the lockstep groupthink here in Washington is very similar. It’s just they all say the same thing. You can read the same analysis that you just heard from Brookings, that you just saw in The New York Times, you can see that, you know, in Post, in all these hot takes that appear in the Post, The Atlantic, The New Yorker. Everybody thinks the same way in this pundit class here in Washington.

Nobody takes Korea, South Korea, seriously, nobody takes North Korea seriously, that South Korea and North Korea mapped out a procedure, a plan, to denuclearize and to decompress and to move toward a peace regime and decrease the tensions. And South Korea took steps today, for example, that they said they were going to end all hostile acts. One of those hostile acts is these huge speakers they have set up in the DMZ to broadcast propaganda and broadcast K-pop into North Korea. They’re taking them down today. They’re taking these steps, one by one, to move toward this peace that’s been denied to Korea for so long.

And I think American pundits should be—you know, applaud South Korea for taking these steps, and applaud North Korea. You see these—you see these stories like, you know, eight months ago, North Korea must denuclearize, must say they’re going to denuclearize. You see this all over. And then, all of a sudden, they say they’re going to denuclearize, and then the headline is “U.S. Wary of North Korea Saying They’re Going to Denuclearize.” I mean, you know, give it a break. You know, open your eyes. Try to understand what’s actually happening in North Korea and South Korea. And the fact is, the United States cannot control Korea anymore. The United States has been in Korea militarily since 1945. And it’s time to end this colonial-like relationship the U.S. has with South Korea.

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20180503/cd9aa5ce/attachment.html>