Important Program about North Korea Starting soon! Watch it!

I do want to clarify my position. I would support military action against North Korea in certain situations.

If it is certain the NK is developing in nuclear program (and this seems like a good bet). I would support a targeted airstrike against nuclear facilities backed up by a strengthening of defenses along the border. There is a calculated risk of war (which I still think would be disasterous) but this draws the line (no nukes) and puts the decision for war in the hands of NK.

One of the reasons I am upset with the war in Iraq is that it significantly diminishes our military options against North Korea. We are moving troops from South Korea to Iraq. North Korea knows we have less troops, less money and less public appetite for an action and they are taking advantage of this.

Ebrown, I never thought for a moment you'd start calling me names. That and my other pre-defenses were in anticipation of folks like Hobit. If we ever meet, the first round is on me.

Your Nuclear condition has most likely already been met. Actually, it quite likely was met some time ago. Saddam has to be the only despot foolish enough to bluff his way into getting invaded (ever think about it like that?). Kim is no bluffer. He is the founder of the Yong Byon processing center. I never bought it that his father passed "of natural causes" on the very day negotiations were to begin... after agreeing with Carter that negotiations could prevent proliferation. TOO BIG of a coincidence for me to swallow. Again... look at the "Agreed Framework" and tell me that isn't the collaboration of a fool and terrorist.

We give- 2 light water nuclear reactors and, until we do, 500,000 metric tons of heavy fuel oil annually.

In exchange: Kim agrees not to build Nukes to threaten his neighbors with.

Is this not the same as paying a criminal not to commit crime? Where is the fundamental difference between that situation and a hostage taker demanding money and safe haven in exchange for not killing his hostages? I'll grant you Kim was legally pulling out of the non-proliferation treaty, legally speaking, but only a fool wouldn't feel threatened by such a man making such a move. I see we agree that he should be prevented from obtaining Nukes (or in all likelihood, more Nukes). After all, he does have a history of terrorist behavior.

Clinton's own Defense counsel urged him to destroy Yong Byon, but he considered that the cost in human life would be too great. It had been estimated 100,000 would die as a result of Kim's reprisal. Hmmm, how humane. He managed to postpone that loss of life long enough for predictions to reach the millions with Kim's increased weapons potential, and simultaneously turned his back on the MILLIONS of North Koreans who would die at the hands of Kim or be starved to death by him. Those deaths are on the hands of 3 men. Carter, Clinton and Kim. The first I believe is a well-meaning fool. The second simply couldn't be bothered so he pushed it off on his successor and the third is an evil monster that should have been taken out one month after the "Agreed Framework" which, of course, never should have been agreed to in the first place. It was only a month later that the North Korean's shot down a US helicopter and refused to give over the pilot until we had expressed our "sincere regret" for the incident. That was in December of 1994 and marked the second time in as many months we had demonstrated that terrorist like threats would be rewarded. NOT the message we should have been sending.

Now, here we are a decade later, the problem is essentially the same only now the consequences are more grave than ever. A decade ago, the estimated loss of life was 100,000. Today, you predicted millions. Tell me will that prediction increase or decrease as Kim increases his quantity of WMDs? How much longer should we wait?

Meanwhile, North Korea's only real industry is building and selling advanced long-range missile technology to the highest bidder… and yes, guys like Saddam are his customers. This is a despot who once blew up a commercial airplane full of civilians in a pure act of terrorism, so why would anyone think he would hesitate to arm another terrorist?

Containing him, with the millions of victims who are guilty of nothing more than having been unfortunate enough to be born North Korean is a head in the sand solution that will only allow him to continue wreaking horror (killing millions), while he continues increasing his ability to murder those beyond his borders. Enough is enough and should have been a long time ago.

My views on this matter have convinced more than a few people I'm crazy… but frankly, I can't see how it can be viewed any other way. I see nothing silly in invoking the word evil when it comes to Kim. Evil is precisely what he is. Now lets go kill the bastard before he kills again. Sometimes you have to kill the killer.

Now, according to your last statement, you would support a tactical strike against all nuclear installations in NK right about now. I think we all know how Kim would respond to such a strike. The only true difference in our solutions, then, would be my assumption that a simultaneous decapitation strike would stand a better chance of preventing a major retaliation against South Korea. Not only do I believe there is a better chance of Kim's successors surrendering, before major damage is inflicted on the south… I also believe that the North Korean's would warm to there brothers in the South leading them back to civilization far faster than we can even dream in Iraq.

Where you think we are viewed as too weary to fight anymore… I think once Bush is re-elected the despots will have no choice but to consider the arrogant bastard's (Bush's) threats as sanctioned by the people of the most powerful nation on earth. One must fear the beast that bites. Once again, an American threat cannot be assumed to be so much hot air. Interesting times we live in, no?

Oh my god, I think I agree with Bill. The guy is a f*cking scumbag. I think your overly optimistic about your decapitation strike, but something has to be done. I also think that it has to wait though, at least until we get that whole Iraq thing much more cleaned up. The only thing I would be worried about is who the hell gets in there after he's gone? And how long would we have to keep a large military force there?

Over all though, I think the guy is a complete piece of **** who needs to be flushed.

Not as long as you might think. I doubt we'd be in charge for any real length of time, if indeed we had to take control on the ground at all. I can see the South negotiating a cease-fire on behalf of the North. In the short-term, we will of course be the hated bad cop but I believe the South Koreans would fill the position of good cop, ground cop and be accepted in all the ways we're not in Iraq relatively quickly. After all, the 38th parallel literally divides brothers. Before they were North and South they were just Koreans and will be again one day. Their brothers in the south will very quickly teach them the truth about Japan, the U.S. and how it doesn't necessarily suck to be our defeated foe.

No, my pie is not in the sky and yes; I know there will be horrific bloodshed. I submit however, that the death toll will go down and a peaceful, productive, palatable "Korea" will be the result. One more necessary step in the direction of world peace.

Bi-product? 100% of the doubt will be removed about whether or not the U.S. needs to be taken seriously. I predict other despots will anxiously accept exile after witnessing Kim, like Saddam before him, go down in flames. This dirty work… can be done… once and for all! Oh-hhh say can you see...

Bill,

I think you are being overly optimistic.

The US is the dominant military power, but we are not God. We do not have unlimited resources, nor do we have unlimited will. I do believe that after a war in Korea, we will be on the ground for a very long time. We will be successful militarily, but will we have what it takes to create a peaceful, productive and palatable "Korea"?

The killer is the uncertainty. How much resistance will there be? We don't know. How much loyalty will North Koreans have to the system they have been indoctrinated in? We just don't know. What will China do? We just don't know?

I am most incredulous of your prediction of other Despots anxiously accepting exile. There is no reason to believe this will happen.

Despots are not stupid. They know that each war drains the American people of resources, troops and will. You know that after a long protracted battle in North Korea leads to another costly occupation, it will be very hard for Americans to accept yet another war. The Despots know this as well.

Historically speaking, have you ever known a time where a military power could stop all rebellion by overthrowing leaders who dared to defy them? The Roman empire tried this. Yet, they continually faced defiance inspite of military routs and brutal supression. They ended up being unable to support these tactics economically or politically.

Reason and history suggest the opposite result. Other despots will see weakness in the American military machine. They will understand that we can't take them all out. This will make them more defiant and more confident.

This is already happening from our campaign in Iraq. North Korea and Iran are both showing more dangerous defiance than ever.

(To head off a fallacious argument here, Libya is a good example that supports my case. The warming in Libya was happening before 9/11 and certainly before Iraq. It was due to sanctions and negotiations with Europe not to military bravado).

For the sake of argument, let's assume I am right:

What if your military "decapitation strike" leads, as I fear, to:

- Billions of dollars of expense (to American taxpayers).
- Thousands of US lives lost.
- Millions of Korean lives lost.
- A long protracted occupation requiring 200,000 troops with a significant number of citizens hostile to the US and a continuous drip of US casualties.
- Strengthing of US enemies, and perhaps creation of new ones including other despots and China.
- A final outcome that is considerably less than a united democracy.

If these did come to pass, would you still feel it was worth it?

That could be… but not enough to offset your pessimism. :wink:

As I said before; I don't think we'd have to. Koreans are Koreans regardless of which side of the 38 they happen to reside on. In the North they've been brainwashed into thinking that the South both hates and envies them… which is of course ridiculous and is so utterly false that the truth will have a profound immediate affect on those who actually believe such nonsense. I have friends who were born in South Korea and they exemplify everything I've read about the South. They'd like nothing better than to help free their brothers from the monster Kim. I have little doubt that the South Koreans will volunteer to do the post war work and that the incredibly poor, starving majority in the north would appreciate it as soon as Kim's lies were exposed.

Resistance by the military would be severely crippled by a vicious decapitation strike. In my book… we couldn't hit them too hard because in many cases we're up against 3rd generation brainwashees, who will no doubt think we are there to annihilate them. Those who can't or won't be persuaded otherwise, will be dead right. Beyond the Military and the isolated few haves… I would expect very light resistance if any. How hard would you fight to protect the sonofabit that's left you to die of starvation? And again; I don't expect there to be too many Americans on the ground, anyway.

China is scheduled to be the last ass kicked on my "if I were King" sh!t-list". I truly believe they've matured to the point where they would stand down knowing it was in their best interest to do so. If they did interfere; that ass gets kicked sooner rather than later at horrific expense in terms of life lost. Bye bye Beijing… and yes, I'm quite serious. Said seriousness I'm confident would keep their noses clean for the time being.

Yes. That's quite a statement, isn't it? Keep in mind this is fantasyland where a major unannounced decapitation strike successfully routes NK, Kills Kim and rapidly turns the rebuilding over to other Koreans. Afghanistan, Iraq, and then the mighty, absurdly defiant North Korea gets a regime change forced down their throats. Which leader do you think would tell Bush to go screw himself next? I am certain if Saddam knew then what Saddam knows now; he'd be living the rest of his life in comfortable exile.

You make an excellent point here… but you forget that this discussion is in light of the hypothetical overthrow of North Korea. You have to admit that would make Bush scarier than a platoon of berserkers, Huns and Vikings standing side by side, to the next despot he addressed.

This is an oft repeated point that historically is incredibly accurate, but has no bearing on modern times. The Romans were scary like a non nuclear China would be today. Masses of asses don't add up to sh!t in the high-tech world of WMD. Never in the history of mankind did a country overmatch all others so severely as the United States does now. In an all out confrontation with China; China MIGHT get a few shots off in the 30 minutes or so it would take us to end all life in China. I'm not suggesting we would or should do any such thing. I'm simply reinforcing my concrete assertion that history tells no tales of a nation with such overwhelming military power. This is truly uncharted territory.

History yes, reason no. To what weakness are you referring?... Unless your lengthy occupation prediction bears fruit, the next despot looking down the barrel of the gun will see nothing but the unmatched, unmatchable strength that is the American Military Machine.

What are you talking about? Kim has done an about face… Sat down to multi-national talks that he'd previously said he'd never attend… and when is the last time you heard him threaten anyone? I believe this guy is actually scared.

Surely you jest. Kadaffi would have informed us of programs we weren't even aware of and invited us to collect all of his WMD, even if we hadn't attacked Afghanistan and Iraq? You can't believe that.

I couldn't rightly care less. I'll happily pay my share. How much are 2 million innocent, starving North Koreans worth these days anyway?
Using my strategy, such a number is highly unlikely, but ultimately would be acceptable to save millions of lives.
Been there, done that while we paid Kim handsomely to increase the credibility of his threats. Are you asking me if I'd condone killing millions of North Korean military men, to save the millions of starving civilians? YES.
I honestly cannot fathom a situation that would call for such a measure. NK isn't Iraq.
? I'm not following you here.
South Korea is one of the most rapidly accelerating success stories you could name. Nothing will stop them from continuing to grow. I assure you they would be eager to share what they've learned with their brothers, sisters, aunts and uncles in the North.

If all that was to hear me say that any cost was a bit over the top, okay. ANY cost was a bit over the top. However, you have stated no reasonable prediction that would be to expensive for my taste.

Phew! That was a lot of work, but something has to keep my mind off cigarettes. :wink: Now you tell me, please: If you don't think this can be done militarily, then how? 2 million already died from our inactivity. Would you have us stand by and watch him repeat that over the next decade? No? What would you do to stop him if we elected you King?