OT: A Nuclear North Korea

[Atrocities]

So the latest news is that Kim Jong-il has said that unless the US returns to one on one talks with NK, they will launch a nuclear tipped warhead.

This just proves that he intends to black mail the world into giving in to his demands. "I want my cakes and I want too be able to eat it too."

Simply put, this is all about the all might Kim Jong-il and his desire for power and respect. He got away with murder by lying to the world, and now he, like a modern day con man, wants the good times to role yet once again.

If there were ever a need for the open contract for assissination of a standing head of state, this bastard would be prime target number one. Just think, if someone would have had the balls to waste that puke Hitler early in the 1930's, how many lives would have been saved. This is a no brainer. Lets put a 1 billion dollar bounty on the head of Kim Jong-il and let the cards fall where they may.

[rdouglass]

I agree with all those that talk about China. We need to somehow make China lean on NK a lot harder than it has been. One thing that hasnt' been mentioned (or at least I didn't see it) is that NK gets 70% of it's food and 50% of it's energy from China. Let China tighten the screws a little and see what kind of political upheaval Il sees.

[RonGianti]

Whatever happens, the USA can't get involved.

We got involved in Iraq, haven't stopped listening to how we've screwed up the region since.

The US should pull all troops out of South Korea and ship them to Iraq immediatly.

When Kim il Jong calls the White House, they should say "And you are.. who again? What do you want? A Peace Treaty? With someone on the other side of the world??? Good heavens what for? Call your neighbors, we're too far away to care what you do."

We let the Kim family have safe exile in China in exchange that he turn over everything to the SK authorities,

This was tried with Saddam and sons just before the invasion of Iraq. No dice. These guys dont want money and to live a life of ease. They want the power that only a dicatator has. Mussolini once said "It is better to live as a lion for a day than as a sheep for a thousand years" Maybe he would reconcider on the day the mob was stringing him up by his toes though...

[Artaud]

What should the US do?

Nothing.

North Korea has had the bomb for years. Israel, too, has had the bomb (about 200 of them, in fact) for years, and is subject to no international inspections at all. Neither is the US.

Inspect everybody, or inspect nobody.

And by the way, Pakistan has the bomb, and the technology to mount it on missiles. Pakistan's intelligence service is closely allied to the remnants of the Taliban. Who, then, is more likely to give or sell nuclear technology to terrorists?

Yet Pakistan is regarded as a "friend" of the US.

As for North Korea being a bully, how many soldiers do they have stationed outside their own borders? How many does the US have?

What gives the USA the right to give orders to other countries? The US has said repeatedly that it intends to "end" the North Korean state. Any North Korean leader would be irresponsible for NOT taking any steps necessary to ensure his survival. MAYBE "THEY" ARE SCARED OF "US."

And please, don't bring up North Korea's aggression in the Korean War, because there is plenty of not-so-distant US history that is equally disgusting. Americans are very quick to howl about somebody else's crimes and develop amnesia when reminded of their own. The US is not the only country on Earth, and its people need to stop thinking they are. Why does the US feel the need (and the right) to meddle in the internal affairs of countries thousands of miles away, while denying that those countries have legitimate interests in what goes on RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THEM. (see: Iranian and Syrian "interference" in Iraq...am I the only person who laughs out loud when Bush's representatives complain darkly about foreign "interference" in Iraq????)

The North Koreans have long pressed for direct talks with the US. Why not talk to them directly then? Is it really better to keep issuing threats? (by the way, Syrian President Asad has repeatedly approached the US for talks on all outstanding issues, on the grounds that the two countries have common interests in many areas, including working against Islamic extremists, but Bush has refused to even reply...the Syrians have even offered to end their rather chilly alliance of convenience with Hezbollah as part of a broad agreement to join with the US on a number of issues...but I digress...)

The only reason the US has not invaded North Korea yet is that South Korea is desperate to avoid an East German-style collapse. They fear that their economy would not be able to survive such an event.

Does anybody out there really believe tiny North Korea is going to commit suicide by attacking the US with a nuclear weapon? It's downright racist to think that somehow "we" (who have used the bomb and still have thousands available, and a new warfighting doctrine that explicitly allows their future "first use") can be trusted with The Bomb, while "they" (that "crazy" Stalinist Asian) can't be trusted.

There's a book called "North Korea" by Bruce Cumings. EVERYBODY should read it.

Everybody should also read the book "Afghan Guerilla Warfare" by my friend Col Les Grau, who is probably the leading US expert on Afghanistan. He was traveling covertly to and lecturing on Afghanistan looooooong before September 2001, and if you want to know how silly it is for the US to think it can hold Afghanistan with 20,000 soldiers (or 100,000, for that matter), you need to read this book.

Anyway, you guys can flame me if you want, but I'm not returning to this thread to read them.

[Ludd]

It's okay to have an opinion. Why would you be flamed?

[RonGianti]

Artaud said:
What gives the USA the right to give orders to other countries?

The North Koreans have long pressed for direct talks with the US. Why not talk to them directly them? Is it really better to keep issuing threats?

So, the US should get out of all international affairs, unless a petty low life dictator demands an audience and economic assistance to enable him to continue abusing his own people?

Which is it? What gives the US the right or responsibility to deal directly with NK over the heads of his immediate neighbors? As usual, if the US moves, they are criticized. If they don't dance when told to, they are criticized. If they sacrifice a few billion dollars and a few thousand young men and women to kick the Taliban out of Afghanistan, they are criticized. If they do nothing in Sudan, they are criticized.

I'm beginning to see a pattern...

The US should move the UN off its shores. Argentina wants it, they should fund it. Then the US should pass a law:

No US citizen or company can do business with any country that is not a full democracy. Anyone breaking this law will be deported to the country in question with all their assets taken by the US government.

Then every US serviceman should be shipped back to the USA.

[Ludd]

I guess I was wrong.

[AngleWyrm]

Sixteen opinions of a Nuclear North Korea, from journalists around the world. This is an interesting read from three years ago.

[StarShadow]

I thought Artaud made a very good arguement for his point of view. It's a shame that the first response to it only addresses a tiny fraction of it, and completely misinterpets it to boot.

[RonGianti]

StarShadow said:
I thought Artaud made a very good arguement for his point of view. It's a shame that the first response to it only addresses a tiny fraction of it, and completely misinterpets it to boot.

To be fair, he has a couple good ideas, but neglected to mention it, my bad.

All nukes should be accounted for = great idea.
Heck, lets ban nuclear weapons all together, that would be grand.

The US makes some strange allies and sells out its principles by dealing with the likes of Pakistan. Well, debatable, but certainly has some truth to it.

As for North Korea being a bully, how many soldiers do they have stationed outside their own borders? How many does the US have?

The US troops are in South Korea at the behest of the South Koreans. Tell them to tell the US to leave. Tell Japan and China too for that matter. Like I said, I do agree, in practice if not principle. I'd like the US troops to leave too, but the South Koreans, Japan and (secretly) the Chinese would rather they not. The only reason that fruitloop in NK isn't the "Fruitloop of all Korea" is because of the US troops there. When the US leaves, will you go guard their border for them?

The only reason the US has not invaded North Korea yet is that South Korea is desperate to avoid an East German-style collapse. They fear that their economy would not be able to survive such an event.

In the event of a war against NK, Kim Il Jong has enough artillery to flatten the SK capital and kill 10's of thousands.

It's downright racist to think that somehow "we" (who have used the bomb and still have thousands available, and a new warfighting doctrine that explicitly allows their future "first use") can be trusted with The Bomb, while "they" (that "crazy" Stalinist Asian) can't be trusted.

The US, for all its mistakes and even (if I may be so bold) sometimes selfish interests, is still a democracy. There is a big difference between a democracy getting nukes (funny, SK doensn't want them, why do you think that is?) and a petty dicator getting them. How is this a race issue? Lets get rid of all nukes, thats a great idea. How is KIJ getting nukes a good idea?

if you want to know how silly it is for the US to think it can hold Afghanistan with 20,000 soldiers (or 100,000, for that matter), you need to read this book.

Again, agree in practice if not principle. The US makes its mistake when it seeks to keep peace and bring stability. It should get in, kill the petty dictators then get out. But then, they would be critizised for not cleaning up after themselves. As usual, an impasse.

And how is this flaming? He said the US should keep its nose out of other nations affairs, then in the same rant said its wrong of the US to NOT go around NK's neighbors (as if they don't count!) and meet with him directly to discuss our surrender to his threats! This is inconsistent and unfair and illogical. Pointing that out is not a flame.