OT: A Nuclear North Korea

[Atrocities]

Wow! I guess the world didn�t see this one coming. Sarcasm aside, this is one nation that ought not have the bomb. Why do I say this, well it is my sincere belief that the leaders of North Korea, specifically Kim Jong-il, are the kind of people that don�t care about the moral implications of having the bomb. This is evident by the fact that while his nation starves, they spend more and more money on armament.

I firmly believe that Kim Jong-il will sell either the technology, a weapon, or God fearing both, to any one who will pay. Those among his client list would most assuredly be terrorist groups and or nations. (Iran for one)

I believe that neither Clinton nor Bush is directly to blame for this, both did what they thought was right given the information at hand at the time. Clinton was lied too, and Bush simply can�t abide a lair. As far as the blame game goes, at least for this thread, the blame for North Korea having nukes rest squarely around the neck of Kim Jong-il himself. The guy is simply a slimly sneaky lying weasel out to boost his own ego and pocket book at the expense of his nation and people.

Now that North Korea has the capability to make nuclear weapons, what should the world community do about it?

Edit:
For the purpose of this thread I ask that those who choose to participate please focus on the question of what to do next now that North Korea has the bomb. I am sorry that I did not make this distinction sooner. Thank you.

[dogscoff]

and Bush simply can�t abide a lair.

Then why does he spend so much time hanging around Tony Blair? Or himself, for that matter?

Now that North Korea has the capability to make nuclear weapons, what should the world community do about it?

More to the point, what *can* they do? Invade? Not a good idea. Even if China doesn't intervene militarily or economically, this ain't no Iraq. Kim is well-armed, and even if he couldn't hope to hold off the rest of the world indefinitely, he could probably make any attempt at invasion painfully slow and messy. Besides, the coalition of the 'willing' has enough trouble getting popular support and troops for its existing wars.

Nuke 'em? Even worse idea. Quite apart from the hideous death toll in largely innoent North Koreans, the Japanese, South Koreans and Asia in general will be most upset about radioactive fallout, and it will only encourage Kim to fire his own nukes at... well, whoever it is he can actually hit with them (NK, probably.) Apparently he has invested heavily in putting his command and military facilities underground.

Sanctions? I don't think they will bother old Kim one bit.

Ask nicely? Worth a try, but don't hold your breath.

Try to decapitate the regime with some sort of James Bond action? Makes for good films, but unlikely to work and will probably cause more trouble (political vacuums suck) than good.

Sit it out, try to contain the threat & control movement of technology at the borders and wait for Kim to die/ get deposed? I think that's the course the world will take, simply because it's about the only one left. Of course it's hard to settle on such a patient course of (in)action while talking tough, and Bush does like to talk tough. I guess he'll hope he can put a hard-man facade on inactivity (shifting blame for the lack of action to the UN is my guess) until his term is up, then leave his successor to worry about it.

[Thermodyne]

dogscoff said:

Then why does he spend so much time hanging around Tony Blair? Or himself, for that matter?

More to the point, what *can* they do? Invade? Not a good idea. Even if China doesn't intervene militarily or economically, this ain't no Iraq. Kim is well-armed, and even if he couldn't hope to hold off the rest of the world indefinitely, he could probably make any attempt at invasion painfully slow and messy. Besides, the coalition of the 'willing' has enough trouble getting popular support and troops for its existing wars.

Nuke 'em? Even worse idea. Quite apart from the hideous death toll in largely innoent North Koreans, the Japanese, South Koreans and Asia in general will be most upset about radioactive fallout, and it will only encourage Kim to fire his own nukes at... well, whoever it is he can actually hit with them (NK, probably.) Apparently he has invested heavily in putting his command and military facilities underground.

Sanctions? I don't think they will bother old Kim one bit.

Ask nicely? Worth a try, but don't hold your breath.

Try to decapitate the regime with some sort of James Bond action? Makes for good films, but unlikely to work and will probably cause more trouble (political vacuums suck) than good.

Sit it out, try to contain the threat & control movement of technology at the borders and wait for Kim to die/ get deposed? I think that's the course the world will take, simply because it's about the only one left. Of course it's hard to settle on such a patient course of (in)action while talking tough, and Bush does like to talk tough. I guess he'll hope he can put a hard-man facade on inactivity (shifting blame for the lack of action to the UN is my guess) until his term is up, then leave his successor to worry about it.

Sometimes I have to just shake my head and wonder about the state of the world.



1st, any nuclear deterrence gets its strength from the creditable ability to follow through if required. The actual use of the weapons would be a failure. The idea is that should the bad guys create a situation where the only option was nuclear weapons, then they would be used. This deters the bad guys from crossing the line. This has been the case in Korea since the 50�s. It�s just not talked about much and people have forgotten.

War between the US and North Korea is not a decision that the US is free to make. The South would be the ones putting it on the line, so the call is theirs. And they are fat and happy, so why would they opt for war? If the North invaded, they would take all of South Korea in two weeks, they have to. After two weeks they are out of fuel and food, having to rely on captured stocks to supply their army.

Should it come to war and in such a way as to allow the US to move ground forces into the region, then North Korea becomes a footnote of history in less than thirty days after the start of hostilities. While the north�s army is large and has big numbers on paper, they are not combat effective. They would do little more than create a target rich environment on a modern battle field. It would be a standard battle. AA suppression, followed with decapitation of the command and control. Then what remained of the air force would be eliminated. After that we would probably hold them in place with arty and air strikes until evidence of starvation among the ranks became visible. Then the armed forces of South Korea would move in and provide humanitarian aid. Wild cards would be gas and/or biological, but then you only ever get to use that stuff once. The real reason we don�t go to war is the cost to the US tax payer. There is very little to gain, and it�s not really in our backyard.

As to decapitation, we don�t do that anymore����But all things change. If the north invades the south, the US will respond with TNWs. Both Koreas know this. China knows this. The North Korean military knows this. There will be no war. A hard look at the NK�s military will show you that it is modeled on that of China. The primary threat is seen as coming form the local population, not an outside invader. Sure they talk the talk, but what are they really saying? �The US will invade us so we need a big army.� But the army is just a bump in the road against the power of America, so what is its real reason to exist? Its reason for being is to insure the continued existence of the North Korean dictatorship and the elite society that allows a few to benefit at the expense of many. North Korea is no longer a communist state; they have used the threat of war to become a hereditary military dictatorship. Those at the top live well, those at the bottom starve. The army�s main job is to keep the people in line, suppress the food and energy protests and prevent exchanges of information with the rest of the world.

[Randallw]

I saw a newstory about this on tv a short while ago. There was an expert explaining what could be done.

1. Something to do with North Koreas foreign account. I assume getting a bunch of bankers to put the squeeze on them

- North Korea doesn't have a foreign account. After all who would buy anything from them (except of course the terrorists) and they don't actually buy anything from the outside world I assume.

2. Economic sanctions (not sure of the difference between 1 and 2)

- This would achieve nothing. The only people who would suffer are the NK people, and certainly not the leaders.

3. Military action.

- I actually was busy doing something else so I sort of missed this bit. I presume he would say something like "could we actually invade NK?"

His final opinion seemed to be something like we just have to put diplomatic pressure on them. Yeah right like that would work. The problem I see with the UN is they are entirely too ready to stick to talking. Doesn't work when the other guy has no interest in listening.

Another thing I saw was the UNs NK ambassador doesn't see why we are criticising them. He reckons we should be congratulating them on their engineering achievement

[Atrocities]

Hey lets keep the recriminations and anti-Bush/Clinton comments out of it. The problem is North Korea and that bastard Kim Jong-il

[Atrocities]

1. Embargo and blockade. Prevent North Korea from obtaining any more nuclear material. Granted this won't take care of the material that they already have, but it will help keep them from getting more.

2. Bored every ship coming in and out of North Korea. This is an act of war if not sanctioned by the UN. North Korea exports two things, missiles and Opeum. Cut off a primary source of income.

3. Additional Financial Sanctions. While we all know that Kim never spends a dime to feed his people, so sanctions won't hurt them any more than they have already been hurt, but Kim does have to have cash to pay his Generals. Take away his ability to pay his Generals, and just perhaps they will take care of Kim.

4. Avoid a military response at all costs but make it clear that if North Korea sells or even attempts to sell either nuclear technology, weapons, expertise, or materials to any one there will be a harsh military response. Perhaps stratigic strikes against North Korean Military targets.

5. North Korea is China's dog. Make them asert themselves as the master and put that mut down once and for all. China is the new world economic super power and that little ***** in North Korea could cost them a lot of money. Evidence being the Chines Stock Exchange and its negative reaction to North Korea's nuclear test.

Kim Jong-il has a million man army and the desire, if not the will to use them. He now has the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons. Weapons that he will use to his advantage by black mailing the world. "Put up with me or else."

Even worse, he could attack South Korea as evidence shows he is very inclined to do under the pretense that "the evil US was going to attack me." No evidence of this but if we have to strike his military infastructure, then this is certainly an option that he will use.

Even worse yet, he could simply invade and use his nukes to keep the world from stopping him. "Stop me and I will nuke Japan, South Korea, and any one else who interfears.

Lets face it, Kim is no Saddam, he actually has the capability to do great evil and the will and determination to do so.

North Korea is a bully and we all know that the first kid thats going to get beaten up is the kid closest to them on the play ground; South Korea. South Korea has the most too lose here so a lot of what happens is going to depend upon them and the new Secretary General of the UN. Ironicaly enough, a south korean. Chances are they will choose to appease his demands for economic support and aid. Aid that won't go toward feeding his people, but instead will help to fund his ever groing military might and desire for nuclear weapons. Weapons that he will then export to the world at large with no regard to how those weapons are used.

I firmly believe that Kim Jong-il only wants to keep his power. If the world bows down to his nuclear black mail, and we have before, then he might keep his cool. If we the world choses to say no this time, he will act out and that will lead to full scale war. Perhaps even nuclear war.

America might have been the first, and thus far the only nation in the history of the world to ever have used nuclear weapons against another nation, but rest assured, it will be Kim Jong-il who will be responsible for what comes next.

[Atrocities]

AMF, it should be noted that CHINA is the nation that is primarly responible for North Korea. Any action taken against North Korea would have pissed the Chinese off. So again, lets keep the Bush bashing out of the topic and stick to the current problem at hand.

The "I told you so" and "Its all Bush's or Clinton's fault" really don't have a place in this discussion.

But, golly gee, maybe if Bush hadn't refused to talk to them at all for the past six years, we wouldn't be here today. Sputing off about an "axis of evil" is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I would hope that you are informed enough to know that despite his promise to the world, and very favorable treatment by the US, Kim Jong-il continued to covertly research nuclear weapons. He lied. He flat out lied to the world and made a fool of the US and our efforts.

So I ask you to please keep your hatred of Bush out of the discussion and remember that it is Kim Jong-il who bares all of the blame here. If you want to Bush bash please start your own thread.

[AMF]

Atrocities said:

So I ask you to please keep your hatred of Bush out of the discussion and remember that it is Kim Jong-il who bares all of the blame here. If you want to Bush bash please start your own thread.

AT,

My point is simply this: Bush chose to do nothing regarding the DPRK. At the very least he should have engaged them diplomatically, as they respond to it (albeit not as much as we would like). "Let's do nothing and hope they don't get the bomb even though we call them evil and they say they're working towards a bomb" is NOT a mature, or even reasonable strategy. To say Bush doesn't bear some responsiblity for this is just ill informed wishful thinking arm chair diplomacy.

My "hatred" of Bush has nothing to do with my point. Just as your love of him has nothing to do with this either. I'm calling a spade a spade. Don't 'ad hominem' me. And don't censor me either, you're the one who started this OT thread.

[AMF]

Unfortunately, getting 'the bomb' is a perfectly rational response for most nations in today's world. Living in a world where the only remaining superpower calls you part of the axis of evil and pre-emptively invades another nation, while simultaneously ignoring those nations that have developed nukes, then the message is clear: the only way to protect yourself against the aggressive superpower is to develop nukes. So, Iran and the DPRK develop nukes. And no one is surprised. Except perhaps Bush.

But, golly gee, maybe if Bush hadn't refused to talk to them at all for the past six years, we wouldn't be here today. Sputing off about an "axis of evil" is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is what happens when you put a dum@ss cowboy into a man's job. Bush is clearly the worst president in then history of the US.

[Randallw]

I wrote up a big rant voicing my opinion since others seemed to think it ok. Well I let off my steam and then I saw ATs latest post, so I'll remove the stuff I said.