Point of Order

The more shrill opponents of the President claim that North Korea's nuclear test is a failure of President Bush and his failure alone.

So. If the test was truly a pure fizzle, is this failure--following on the failure of North Korea's long range missile test last summer--proof that the President's policy has choked off North Korean weapons development enough to lead to these failures?

Can we say that had we "engaged" the North Koreans (i.e., shoveled money at them), that North Korea would have likely had the resources to drop their missile in Hawaiian waters and detonate that nuke?

I'm just wondering. Because the critics were awfully quick to blame our current strategy of squeezing the Pillsbury Nuke Boy.

Discuss amongst yourselves.