What are your thoughts on the NKorea warning

[Saving Hawaii]

I can't go off, what if scenarios. I find that Russian roulette isn't all that appealing or with China.

These aren't exactly "what if" scenarios - if we go bombing into Iran, I think you can safely conclude that those two reporters are dead and that the artillery shells are going to be raining down in Soeul. That's not a "what if"... that's grim reality.

 

[Saving Hawaii]

I now feel like an idiot for not even noticing that. My geography teacher will not be pleased.

I'd keep it on the hush hush.

 

[LUColt27]

I'd keep it on the hush hush.

Good idea

 

[chaz345]

My thoughts are that until a US president has the stones to get tough with them or until Kim Jong Il dies and is replaced, it will be a problem with no solution. Clinton's appeasment didn't work, Bush's ignoring him didn't work, the question for today is will Obama learn from either of those and do something or will he try diplomacy which will argely amount to more appeasement?

I just hope it doesn't take a cloud of radiation somewhere to spur him to effective action but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Staccato]

My thoughts are that until a US president has the stones to get tough with them or until Kim Jong Il dies and is replaced

Despite the fact that all this posturing is, very likely, being designed to pass the baton of the cult of personality onto his son, in order to propagate the regime as it currently stands.

Is this another Fidel Castro solution? Let's let time do our work for us?

Clinton's appeasment didn't work, Bush's ignoring him didn't work, the question for today is will Obama learn from either of those and do something or will he try diplomacy which will argely amount to more appeasement?

So let me get this straight.

Diplomacy isn't an option. Ignoring isn't an option. Waiting for the grim reaper to strike isn't an option. What does that leave except some sort of military action?

 

[chaz345]

Diplomacy isn't an option. Ignoring isn't an option. Waiting for the grim reaper to strike isn't an option. What does that leave except some sort of military action?

I did a poor job of saying what I meant.

I should have said that diplomacy THAT amounts to more appeasement won't work. The usual "we'll give you _____ if you stop" diplomacy won't work. It's what Clinton did and as soon as they got what they wanted they started back up again. The only diplomacy that will work is the "stop or else" kind or maybe the "we'll give you _____ if you stop and we'll come in and verify that you stay stopped" kind. But do you really see that happening?

 

[chaz345]

I heard a quick little soundbite from Obama today that IF his actions reflect what he's saying, give me hope for how he'll handle the N Korea situation. The basic gist of was that N Korea is more then welcome back into the "international community" but basically the first move is their's to make. That we will not give them what they want in response to bullying tactics (and here's the part I actually liked) becuase that's been tried in the past and didn't work.


It almost sounds as if he learned from Clinton's mistakes.

 

[Kid Fish]

We better take lil Kim seriously and not write him off as a lone lunatic. Not only does he have an entire regime behind him, he is installing his 26 year old son to fill his little shoes.

He is testing the Obama administration, and as of now I'd say the president is scoring a D.

 

[Staccato]

He is testing the Obama administration, and as of now I'd say the president is scoring a D.

How would he score an A+ in your book?

 

[JustOneWay]

How would he score an A+ in your book?

Apparently Bush must have scored an F, because he did not invade N Korea, or get them to do anything else. They are still playing the same games. I chuckle when I remember back to all the republicans here who were attacking Clinton over N. Korea. Hey dems it looks like your turn to point out how Bush did absolutely nothing to N. Korea except call them names

 

[chaz345]

I chuckle when I remember back to all the republicans here who were attacking Clinton over N. Korea.

Why? Nearly everything they said would happen has.

 

[Staccato]

Apparently Bush must have scored an F, because he did not invade N Korea, or get them to do anything else. They are still playing the same games. I chuckle when I remember back to all the republicans here who were attacking Clinton over N. Korea. Hey dems it looks like your turn to point out how Bush did absolutely nothing to N. Korea except call them names

The fact that calling them names is construed as a positive but saying we might actually try to engage in diplomacy is a negative really tells us a lot. Yes, shoving the world's most isolated and introverted regime onto a list that basically says "You're nasty like Iraq. And your breath smells" really made massive strides forwards on defusing nuclear armament of the Korean Peninsula. All the sanctions we slapped on them, then removed, then re-added, then removed again really showed them we were serious.

Oh. Wait.

 

[chaz345]

All the sanctions we slapped on them, then removed, then re-added, then removed again really showed them we were serious.

Agreed that that wasn't terribly effective but neither was giving them what they wanted and accepting their word for it that they would do what we were asking which was basically Clinton's approach.

 

[Staccato]

Agreed that that wasn't terribly effective but neither was giving them what they wanted and accepting their word for it that they would do what we were asking which was basically Clinton's approach.

I don't know that much about Clinton's approach to be honest, but if it was akin to the flip-flop pandering of 'yes we mean it this time' sanctions that the Bush administration pursued then I have nothing but scorn for it.

We need to get tough on North Korea, through diplomatic channels, and to do this we need China on board. We quite simply can't do this by ourselves, and perhaps it's best to not try until the major players in the region are actually on the same page, lest we use up yet more political capital pursuing ultimately fruitless strategies. China does not want the DPRK to collapse, but I'm also pretty sure it doesn't want the quality or quantity of the nuclear weapons Kim Jong-Il possesses to increase much further.

The worst thing we could do is engage in military action, which some people seem to default to in situations like this.

 

[JustOneWay]

Why? Nearly everything they said would happen has.

Wasn't it Bush who lifted N. Korea some sanctions?

Why yes he did


Videos - Free video downloads and streaming video - CNET TV

 

[chaz345]

The worst thing we could do is engage in military action, which some people seem to default to in situations like this.

I agree that military action is often the worst thing to do, but some situations reach a point where it is the only thing that can be done. Not saying that that point has been reached in this case, but we seem to be headed closer and closer to that point every day.

An example of something that could be worse than military action is waiting until he's got the capability to hit LA or Seattle because then we're stuck with caving to whatever demands he dreams up.

 

[Kid Fish]

How would he score an A+ in your book?

He could start by putting missile defense back on the table, and encouraging openly a Japan alliance in which they go nuke.

That would be a start. As it stands, this man Obama is so profoundly weak and feckless, more interested in sucking up to despots and apologizing for us than standing strong against the cretins of the world.

But he sure gives flowery meaningless speeches.

 

[Maverick3000]

He could start by putting missile defense back on the table,

Why would he do something that not only is meaningless (They are not going to protect ROK or Japan anytime soon) and would just anger the PRC?

and encouraging openly a Japan alliance in which they go nuke.

That is by far one of the dumbest suggestions I have heard. Not only would Japan not go for it, it would (a.) Enrage every country in Asia including the ROK, (b.) Violate the NPT, thus ruining any legal standing we have against the DPRK and (c.) Just flare up an arms race in the Korean Peninsula.

 

[lemmings]

He could start by putting missile defense back on the table,

Our missile defense programs are a joke, after 25 years, we do not even have a 50% success rate at destroying missiles under controlled conditions. If North Korea where to launch anything at South Korea it would impact in minutes and they could be firing dozens of missiles.

and encouraging openly a Japan alliance in which they go nuke.

What good would that do? Mutually assured destruction only works against sane countries. If North Korea's leadership really is as irrational as the people supporting war says they are this would be useless.

That would be a start. As it stands, this man Obama is so profoundly weak and feckless, more interested in sucking up to despots and apologizing for us than standing strong against the cretins of the world.

But he sure gives flowery meaningless speeches.

Bush put North Korea on his personal naughty list known as the Axis of Evil in 2002. Four years later, they detonated their first nuke and launched a (failed) missile in the same year. Putting them on that list really helped our relations and since things were going so well, they removed them from the list when they became a real threat to peace!