BREAKING NEWS: North Korea claims nuclear test!

[DRoseDARs]

I can't believe that this "second test" nonsense still has legs in the media. It isn't that difficult to go to the USGS's website and see that this was an unrelated, natural earthquake.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


Evaluating whether the Dems would have had a better solution is an exercise in alternative history, and not very productive.

But that's not why my knickers are in a knot.

They're in a knot because, regardless of whose plan was better, the administration has been massively distracted from dealing with NK at all because of its all-consuming debacle in Iraq. And I do mean all-consuming; all manner of diplomacy has been shelved, and funds to pursue it cut, so that everything can be funneled Baghdad-ward.

The Bushies knew what was going on in NK the minute they took office; that's how NK ended up as part of the Axis of Evil. They've had six years to actually deal effectively with NK. And have they? No. Why? Because everything necessary to deal with Dear Leader -- robust diplomacy, military capability backing that diplomacy, and the ability to forge coalitions with other nations to make that diplomacy stick -- all of it has been squandered on Iraq.

When the history is written, the tragedy of Iraq won't just be that we lost, or that it was pointless, or that it actually helped fuel Islamic terrorism; it will also be that it shifted the focus away from real problems that required serious attention until it was too late. NK will be Exhibit A.

That's what pisses me off about this. The attempt to fob off blame on the Clinton administration is just the shabby, pathetic icing on the cake, and par for the course for this Administration (whose talking points I'm sure McCain was reading).

I'm not finding the election year finger-pointing by the Dems to be any more satisfying. As with Adam Smith, I'm not convinced that any policy followed to its logical conclusion with or without the full attention of the administration would have yielded different results. But we'll of course never know, which opens up the discussion to all sorts of demogoguery.

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
It was a 6.0 (current estimate) in the Sea of Japan, nothing more.

The earthquake happened east of Honshu, which places it in the Pacific Ocean, not the Sea of Japan...

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
It was a 6.0 (current estimate) in the Sea of Japan, nothing more.

The earthquake happened east of Honshu, which places it in the Pacific Ocean, not the Sea of Japan...

Please notice the "current estimate" portion of that post, then read a little further down the thread...

[Drake Tungsten]

I'm sure that the USGS knows where the Sea of Japan is. Just not convinced that you do...

[DRoseDARs]

F*ck off, Drake.

Edit: Seriously, I could have taken the snarky route and called into question your reading comprehension, but then I thought better of it and gave you the benefit of the doubt - that you just hadn't read that far in the thread yet and had not seen the updated info. Nope, you were just looking for an excuse to take the low road. Glad I was wrong.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Sikander



I'm not finding the election year finger-pointing by the Dems to be any more satisfying. As with Adam Smith, I'm not convinced that any policy followed to its logical conclusion with or without the full attention of the administration would have yielded different results. But we'll of course never know, which opens up the discussion to all sorts of demogoguery.

I don't mean to exonerate the Dems, particularly after they've spent the last 6 years aiding and abetting.

But to make an only slightly facetious analogy:

You leave your kids (America's best interests) with a babysitter (W).
The babysitter is supposed to watch the kids.
Instead, the babysitter ignores the kids and spends all night fighting with her ex-boyfriend (Saddam).
While she's on the phone fighting with the ex-boyfriend, the house burns down.

Was the fire inevitable? You'll never know.
Would a different babysitter have prevented it, or limited it? You'll never know.
But, even so, do you wish the babysitter had been doing what you actually hired her to do, instead of being distracted by her own agenda? Oh, hell yeah.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
It was a 6.0 (current estimate) in the Sea of Japan, nothing more.

The earthquake happened east of Honshu, which places it in the Pacific Ocean, not the Sea of Japan...

Or to sum it up:
Kim Jong Ils scientists conducted their second test,
this time a thermonuclear device with a yield in the Megaton range
in a secret underwater base located deep within the pacific seabed near the coast of japan.

[Arrian]

I don't think the "Agreed Framework" or whatever was the right policy, and it pretty clearly DID fail (although as I recall, it failed in part because of Republican obstruction in Congress - in part, mind you). NK cheated, and I'm convinced they would have cheated no matter what, to get more stuff. The regime's whole strategy relies on blackmail.

Threaten to make nukes
Get stuff to stop
Threaten to make nukes
Get stuff to stop
Make nukes
Get stuff to not make more or sell them
Make more...

-Arrian

[Lord Avalon]

You forgot: Threaten to go to war if sanctions are imposed because you haven't lived up to any agreements.

[Elok]

So: what would our best move be, now that we're stuck here? My money's on "attack as fast as possible," which is a crappy option but better than the alternatives. Diplomacy obviously ain't working and every attempt to continue this farce just gives them time to improve their nuke technology. Right now I imagine they'd have to scramble to get a successful nuclear strike given how pitiful the Taepodong performed earlier (and how new they are to nukes), and AK doesn't have too dense of a population if worse comes to worst.

On the plus side, it would give us an excuse to pull our guys out of Iraq and allow what we all know is going to happen there to happen. Even if a lot of them would just be stuck going into another war zone...well, it's something. And would the DPRK really be harder to take down than Iraq? From what I've heard, I doubt it. They might be militarily superior to Iraq but they also have a whole lot of prison camps underfoot and they're utterly dependent on foreign aid for survival.

EDIT: ....aaaand Bush takes a strong stance by pledging to continue diplomatic efforts while forcefully stating, "we will not attack North Korea." Splendid.

[LordShiva]

Unfortunately, Seoul is within striking distance of their conventional weaponry. SK would never let the US consider force against NK.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Elok
And would the DPRK really be harder to take down than Iraq? From what I've heard, I doubt it. They might be militarily superior to Iraq but they also have a whole lot of prison camps underfoot and they're utterly dependent on foreign aid for survival.

My bet would be yes, it's harder.

-Unlike Iraq, NK isn't largely flat.
-Unlike Iraq, the military won't desert their leader that quickly. Amazing what 50 years of brainwashing can do.
-Unlike Iraq, the NK is a garrison state with 50 years to dig into fortified positions.
-Unlike Iraq, the NK has numerous conventional weapons and bio/chem weapons that can strike and if not devastate, at least cripple, two of the most powerful economic drivers in Asia for a prolonged period.

[Q Classic]

Oh, also, I forgot. Not only is SKorea going to be dead set against any military action, you can bet China, as angry as they are now, will take a very dim view towards the US making any sort of aggressive play in the NK.

[Arrian]

Never fight a land war in Asia.

-Arrian

p.s. Of course, Afganistan is in Asia, and so is Iraq, technically...