Between a rock and a hard place

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Frogger


Wouldn't it have been better to solve the problem there? They lose their nukes, get more stuff. Only way they agree to it...

Well they already "agreed" to it once, what assurances do we have they aren't BSing again?

[Ted Striker]

Remember, they only admitted it after we showed them satellite images of what they were doing.

[KrazyHorse]

Because you get them to let more inspectors in than the 3 (!) that were currently allowed. You do this by bribing them.

What you're asking is how the hell you're supposed to make sure they'll abide by anything they sign. Which is going to be a problem no matter what sort of solution is found (aside from a military one).

[DanS]

NK is under pressure too. They aren't getting badly needed fuel oil now. That's why they're pushing the issue pre-Iraq.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Remember, they only admitted it after we showed them satellite images of what they were doing.

If you think I trust the NK to stick by their word then you're mistaken. I do expect them to see what side their bread is buttered on, though, as long as you don't put their backsw to the wall in public.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DanS
NK is under pressure too. They aren't getting badly needed fuel oil now. That's why they're pushing the issue pre-Iraq.

Yes, they're under pressure. But remember that when it comes down to it they're willing to sacrifice a hell of a lot more for their pride than we are.

[Ted Striker]

But the point is that they had the first agreement done quietly yet they developed nukes anyway.

I don't buy that letting in more inspectors will do the job.

[KrazyHorse]

Then what do you buy? You've eliminated all choices with that attitude, other than fighting a nuclear-armed nation. Which, if necessary, is one thing. But if not necessary is a hell of a mistake to make.

[DanS]

"Because you get them to let more inspectors in than the 3 (!) that were currently allowed. You do this by bribing them."

Haven't we already established that inspectors are of limited value?

"You've eliminated all choices with that attitude"

No, it's just a recognition of reality. If the choices are fighting them or being their *****, then we fight.

[Ted Striker]

Inspectors are worthless.

The only reason the inspectors in Iraq in the 1990s were initially effective was because:

1) They were backed by several hundred thousand allied troops
2) The Iraqis weren't yet hiding the stuff at the time so it was easy to find.

[KrazyHorse]

Had we? Nuke plants aren't easy to hide. They had some sort of small-scale uranium-separation plant going and you still managed to find it with only satellite photos. Which is score one for the good guys and all, but again you have to ask what value the stick is when you're dealing with NK.

[Ted Striker]

No, it's just a recognition of reality.

Exactly.

[Ted Striker]

I would like to give complete isolation a try and then just ignore the ****er and let him rot.

[DanS]

"They had some sort of small-scale uranium-separation plant going and you still managed to find it with only satellite photos."

We found one uranium separation plant. Who's to say they don't have 1 or 10 or 100 others?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DanS
"Because you get them to let more inspectors in than the 3 (!) that were currently allowed. You do this by bribing them."

Haven't we already established that inspectors are of limited value?

"You've eliminated all choices with that attitude"

No, it's just a recognition of reality. If the choices are fighting them or being their *****, then we fight.

Is it reality? If so, then I agree with your conclusion. But that also means that you really are going to have to fight NK. Which will make for a hell of a lot of news...