Anyone want to lay odds on Korea being for real? On them already having the couple nukes they said they have? On war?
Former Sec of Defense Perry was quoted by CNN as saying that he wasn’t sure what this administration’s NK policy was, and I have to agree with him. NK has been on our radar as an imminent threat for many months now and there is no sense that the Bush people have been doing anything to calm the waters.
Will there be war? God, I hope not. This would be a messy one unless the NK army overthrows Jong-Il. But the apparent refusal of the Bush administration to negotiate with the North Koreans in any serious or prolonged manner doesn’t bode well.
Are they for real? I suspect partially for real. A lot of NK’s bluster has usually been to remind us how dangerous they are and how we’d better negotiate with them soon or they’ll hold their breath and die and take Seoul with them. But even if they don’t have a feasible arsenal at the moment, they are well on their way to one. And NK, unlike Iraq, has a long and documented history of selling missiles to whoever wants them.
Troy
Negociate? We can’t just hand over our lunch money to the school bully so he’ll stop bugging us for a few weeks. He’ll keep coming back and demanding more. Maybe if we wait him out, their internal power structure will collapse and we can avoid capitulating to another american hater. Why is NK any more of a threat than Iran?
Augh.
Former defense secretary William Perry warned that the United States and North Korea are drifting toward war, perhaps as early as this year, in an increasingly dangerous standoff that also could result in terrorists being able to purchase a North Korean nuclear device and plant it in a U.S. city.
“I think we are losing control” of the situation, said Perry, who believes North Korea soon will have enough nuclear warheads to begin exploding them in tests and exporting them to terrorists and other U.S. adversaries. “The nuclear program now underway in North Korea poses an imminent danger of nuclear weapons being detonated in American cities,” he said in an interview.
Perry added that he reached his conclusions after extensive conversations with senior Bush administration officials, South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun and senior officials in China.
A few months ago NK basically offered to completely dismantle their program and submit to inspections if the US would sign a non-aggression pact with them. I haven’t the slightest idea why Bush is passing it up.
Perry does, though:
From his discussions, Perry has concluded the president simply won’t enter into genuine talks with Pyongyang’s Stalinist government. “My theory is the reason we don’t have a policy on this, and we aren’t negotiating, is the president himself,” Perry said. “I think he has come to the conclusion that Kim Jong Il is evil and loathsome and it is immoral to negotiate with him.”
If you need me, I’ll be fleeing to Montana.
Wasn’t another stipulation in the deal the receiving of humanitarian aid from the UN? If yes, then why would we want to let him steal more money and avert the natural implosion of the government there?
Yes, when you have a government that posesses nuclear capability, what you really want is for it to implode, so that anyone can swoop in and take said nuclear capability for themselves. This is, clearly, sound foreign policy.
what, it happened in the Soviet Union and we all came out unscathed (so far). Besides, When it happens, were poised right on the border to do soime swooping of our own.
Apart from the dozens of nuclear missiles and warheads that are missing and totally unaccounted for, you mean. And apart from the cases where former military officers have actually been caught red handed SELLING nuclear technology, you mean.
I have a sneaking suspicion that we won’t come out of that anywhere near as “unscathed” as you seem to think.
Now you sound like Cleve. Actually, I’m more concerned with the unaccounted for radioactive material, which is much harder to track than a nuclear warhead with a missle attactched. Just think what spitbowl of strontium could do inside a dirty carbomb in the middle of times square.
http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2002/03/21032002101036.asp
Yeah, I’M A PARANOID NUT. Get outdoors more and look around.
(Sound of two ton vault door closing on hydraulics as klaxon sounds. Door slams into deep groove in floor, the tumbler flywheel turns and locks tight with gruesome finality. PT-312 military phone to our right rings with a sodden clatter and we pick up the receiver as a muffled voice on the other end speaks …)
“Yeah, that Cleve character just overreacts to world events! He is a paranoid nut who doesn’t have enough faith in shopping malls and cappuccino bars to save us from 50 megaton continent busting cobalt salted bombs! RRRRR-r-r-r-r-ight!!!”
(Phone clicks and line goes dead, noxious capsicum sprays out of overhead nozzles)
Remember, fresh minty tasting fallout ash contributes to fresher breath and whiter teeth! It also helps control cavities and cold sores through hormesis!
Most honest line you’ve ever spoken. I may quote this instead of dog pictures from now on.
If we went to war over WMD that we couldn’t then find, then this “Pyongyang admitted to having a covert nuclear weapons program – in violation of a 1994 pact.” Seems like a platinum plated invitation. However, N. Korea are renowned for brinkmanship along the lines of,
‘we plan to do (insert threat)’
world panics
(a few days later) ‘however, if we don’t. what will you give us?’
Therefore I don’t think this one will kick-off. Hope not anyway, I’ll be in the immediate vicinity for the next few months!!
If Bush actually settled the problem with North Korea, he would take away the sole justification for the non-functional National Missile Defense boondoggle that they are already building in Alaska.
Let’s not forget that before September 11, National Missile Defense was the centerpiece of Bush’s security policy. The centerpiece of Gore’s, according to statements he made during the campaign, would have been counter-terrorism.
No, theres still Iran, China, and Pakistan who all have some ballistic missile capability.
Anyone want to lay odds on Korea being for real? On them already having the couple nukes they said they have? On war?
Judging from our history with North Korea, I’d lay the odds at around 100-1 against, with the one chance in a hundred being largely due to error.
A lot of NK’s bluster has usually been to remind us how dangerous they are and how we’d better negotiate with them soon or they’ll hold their breath and die and take Seoul with them.
A good, if obviously simple, analysis, though I’d amend “a lot of NK’s bluster” to “all of NK’s bluster.”
Former Sec of Defense Perry was quoted by CNN as saying that he wasn’t sure what this administration’s NK policy was
I find that hard to believe, since this administration’s NK policy is loudly announced all over every issue of the journal Foreign Affairs. For the same reason, it’s hard to believe most pundits express confusion over the NK policy.
Negociate? We can’t just hand over our lunch money to the school bully so he’ll stop bugging us for a few weeks.
A vote against appeasement? I’m impressed – that’s a rare thing on this board.
(Reality, as always, will be more muddled. We will negotiate with Kim, only because the other option is so horrific, but there are time-honored ways to negotiate without caving in to blackmail. More on this in a second.)
A few months ago NK basically offered to completely dismantle their program and submit to inspections if the US would sign a non-aggression pact with them. I haven’t the slightest idea why Bush is passing it up.
We’re passing it up because it would be submitting to blackmail, in a manner very similar to the second-act break in any James Bond movie. A massively destructive war on the Korean peninsula would be preferable to an announcement to the world that we can be cowed by WMD.
Luckily, this apocalyptic dilemma is a theoretical one only, suitable for fretting over on Internet forums but not having much to do with the real, pragmatic world of international diplomacy. The US will get its disarmament and NK will get a version of its “non-aggression pact” – in the form of a multilaterally-guaranteed regional security condominium involving Russia, China, Japan, and South Korea.
No, theres still Iran, China, and Pakistan who all have some ballistic missile capability.[/quote]
The Alaska NMD isn’t designed to stop an attack on the scale China could launch; China could also attack from submarines.
Iran and Pakistan’s ballistic missile capability is quite far from being able to get near the U.S., and the Alaska NMD isn’t well placed to stop attacks from those countries anyway.
So the Alaska facility is there for North Korea and perhaps some sort of “unauthorized launch” scenario from China.
Of course, the primary problem with the Alaska NMD is that it doesn’t work at all.
And the worse problem is that its definitely going into service in 2004, working or not!
Guess what day its going into service in 2004. Guess. :D
Wow. What an admirably cavalier attitude you have, Daniel. I doubt you’d find many Koreans, South or North, who’d agree with it, but, what the fuck, right? They’re only Koreans, after all.