NK: What Should be Done?

[Willem]

Originally posted by DanS
Willem: Well then, don't you think that's sufficient enough of a beef?

Well yes, but have you heard them threaten SK in any way? All their "proclamations" have been aimed at the US, not SK. They're just using SK as leverage. If they were to invade, they'd lose their bargaining tool.

[David Floyd]

He is not mad. It's simple trade- "hey George, will stop our nuclear programm (we don't have $$$ for it anyway), if you'll start to send us fuel again.

Actually that's silly. How do you think they got oil in the first place?

We're agreed that the US should just in general **** off, but that comment is totally backwards.

[DinoDoc]

Given the results the [Sunshine] policy has given both Korean Peninsula and the world, is it time for the South to reasses its utility?

[KrazyHorse]

Given the results the [Bush] doctrine has given both the Korean Peninsula and the world, is it time for the US to reassess its utility?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Serb


He is not mad. It's simple trade- "hey George, will stop our nuclear programm (we don't have $$$ for it anyway), if you'll start to send us fuel again. And remember Korea isn't desert and our army isn't Saddam forces, so save your tricks for him, we are not afraid"

What he's really after is a non-aggresion pact with the US. That was one of their first demands. They're afraid that since they're one of the "axis of evil", the US might turn on them when it's finished with Iraq.

[DanS]

We were thinking NK was third on the list. He's bucking for #2. Not quite sure why.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Frogger
Given the results the [Bush] doctrine has given both the Korean Peninsula and the world, is it time for the US to reassess its utility?

Forgive me for trying to extract some real discussion from a thread topic I started a few days ago. Jackass.

[ixnay]

Bush on North Korea: 'We must invade Iraq'

WASHINGTON, DC—With concern over North Korea's nuclear capabilities growing, President Bush reassured the American people Monday that "extreme force" will be used to remove Saddam Hussein from power if the Iraqi president fails to give up suspected weapons of mass destruction.

"For years, Kim Jong Il has acted in blatant disregard of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation Of Nuclear Weapons, and last week, he rejected it outright," Bush told reporters after a National Security Council meeting on North Korea. "We cannot allow weapons of mass destruction to remain in the hands of volatile, unpredictable leaders. Which is exactly why we must act quickly and decisively against Saddam Hussein."

A member of Bush's "axis of evil," North Korea sparked international outcry in October 2002 after announcing that it had a uranium-enrichment program. After ousting U.N. inspectors, leader Kim Jong Il has continued to defy orders to halt the program.

"I applaud the International Atomic Energy Agency's condemnation of North Korea's nuclear efforts," Bush said. "I trust that the world community will act capably and decisively in this matter—as capably and decisively as the U.S. will act against Iraq."

According to Bush, North Korea and Iraq both pose "significant threats" to important U.S. allies.

"Our friends South Korea and Japan are justifiably fearful of North Korea's emergent nuclear and chemical-weapons technologies," Bush said. "These nations are forced to live with the constant threat of aggression looming over their heads, just as our friends Saudi Arabia and Israel do. The time has come to complete the unfinished business of a decade ago and oust Saddam Hussein."

Added Bush: "This man tried to kill my dad."

U.S. intelligence experts say North Korea likely has one or two nuclear bombs, with plans to rapidly expand its arsenal in the coming years. With two nuclear reactors under construction, the nation could have a system to enrich uranium by 2005, producing enough plutonium for two bombs a year.

"North Korea has a full-scale nuclear program underway, one which may even now have the capability of striking the western U.S.," Bush said. "Even more alarming, Iraq is actively trying to scrounge up enough money to buy something nuclear on the black market, ideally something that can fly through the air."

Bush outlined his administration's plan for the crisis in North Korea, which includes maintaining an open dialogue with Pyongyang and deploying massive troops and materiel to the Gulf region.

At a Jan. 10 press conference, Bush had strong words for the North Korean dictator.

"Kim Jong Il, you have withdrawn from international nuclear treaties and cruelly starved your own people," Bush said. "The world at large will not let your evil deeds go unchallenged. Someone, somewhere will hold you accountable, sooner or later. I do not know who this person is, but somebody will."

"North Korea has been pouring its limited resources into development of a huge military force at the expense of its own people's well-being," Bush continued. "Somebody should take decisive action against this, just as the U.S. did in stopping the Taliban and will soon do in ousting Saddam Hussein."

Seeking to pressure North Korea, a communist nation since the end of the Korean War, into compliance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation Of Nuclear Weapons, the U.S. has cut off all economic and humanitarian aid.

"By providing support to North Korea, America was indirectly propping up an oppressive regime," Bush said. "That food and fuel will be much better used by the proud men and women of the U.S. military—such as the 45,000 members of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, who at this moment are in California preparing for deployment to the Middle East."

"You have my prayers, Camp Pendleton," added Bush, giving an officer's salute. "Now, let's roll."

From the Onion, obviously.

[KrazyHorse]

On the contrary, Washington began its backdown several days ago, starting with what was a non-aggression pact in all but name (was it Ari Fleischer who was the one who stated explicitly that the US had no intention of invading the North?). This was followed by a promise of the resumption of food and fuel if the North would drop its nukes and hints at talks (but, God forbid, no negotiations!).

The US got played on this one. They should have kept up the military bluster in private (do you know how fast we could be across that tiny little country of yours?) and never left the negotiating table in the first place...

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Forgive me for trying to extract some real discussion from a thread topic I started a few days ago. Jackass.

Forgive me for taking exception to the assumption included in your question, Dino.

[DinoDoc]

What assumption?

[KrazyHorse]

That SK's position over the last few years caused NK to continue its nuclear program.

[DanS]

Well, it certainly didn't stop it.

[Serb]

Just answer the question. What would you do, if you were in the US position? The SK position?

Fortunately I'm not in US position.
But if I was... it should be peaceful solution- for US own sake, because:
1) War vs. Korea will cause more anti-Americanism around the world. It's very serious political step. Your future campaign against Iraq will have negative impact on US internetional image. Is it so necessary to make it worse?
2) Russia and China wouldn't be pleased to see a full-scale war near their borders. They will arise this issue in UN security concil for sure.
3) There is no need for such war, because there is nothing to take in North Korea (hint: no oil there).
4) North Korean army is more then able to strike back. Korea it's not desert Iraq and their AA defences nowhere near Iraqis, without ground campaign you'll gain nothing. And ground campaign means casalities among US military and it could fail. Considering state of NK military and fanatical support of local population there is a probability that it could become a second Vietnam.
So, I predict it will be trade (perhaps secret deal). US will start to send fuel to NK, NK will stop its nuclear program.

As for SK...
They don't want war, I'm sure 100% about this.

[KrazyHorse]

It's my opinion that the US needlessly broke from the talks they were holding with NK and almost caused a lingering problem to develop into a full-scale nuclear confrontation.

They shouldn't have done nothing, but they should have done their bluffing/blustering in private first before resorting to a public standoff.