This article points out some of the delusion that has been coming out of our State Department. I have to admit that most of the foreign policy “experts” have a very unique world view. They do not see the world as it exists. They see a delusional world of what should be, because apparently in their world everyone is trustworthy and no one is evil. The State Department has been operating under the delusions of silly old women, or men who act like women for quite a while now. Caroline Glick isĀ one of the voices of reason in this delusional world.
Caroline B. Glick: The results of brilliant theories: “Given North Koreans’ abysmal track record it is far from clear why Hill thinks they can be trusted now. But beyond that, it isn’t even clear that dismantling or disabling Yangbyon today will make much difference. As former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton wrote in August, Yanbyon ceased to be the central component of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program several years ago. In recent years Pyongyang scattered its nuclear program to secret sites both inside and outside the country. And those sites are overlooked in Hill’s agreement. This again this returns us to his statement on Wednesday. How can the State Department’s point man on North Korea claim that the US has no ‘political issues’ with North Korea less than two months after Israel reportedly destroyed a North Korean nuclear installation in Syria modeled after the Yongbyon complex?
Given North Korea’s apparent nuclear collaboration with Syria and its well-documented nuclear collaboration with Iran, to claim that the US has no political issues to discuss with North Korea is to suspend disbelief. So Rice’s State Department insists on moving forward towards implementing an agreement predicated on a denial of reality. Perhaps worst of all, it is an agreement which leaves Japan, America’s most important Asian ally and North Korea’s most vulnerable target high and dry. “
Naivety. Seems to be a trait of many women and men with too much oestrogen. I often notice that when having group discussions about political issues and things like war, violence, authority. The women are way too emotional. They always either tend to see too much good in a person or they hate and despise a person. They’re always either soft or they’re made of iron. They can’t or refuse to see who’s the enemy and if they do know their enemy they don’t respect them. These women traits can all work very well in nurturing their family and kids but not when they’re determining the foreign policy of a nation. I don’t like women to be in charge of governmental institutions to be frank. I don’t vote for women. So far I haven’t seen much women in politics that I found to be reliable, diplomatic, principled and steadfast. Unfortunately the number of men meeting those qualifications is also close to zero these days.