North Korea: What to do?

So they set off a nuke, not really cause for panic.. everyone assumed they had built a couple.
- the upshot is, of course, that this means NK is escalating the game

Sift out the political hysterics to just look at milestones and possibilities:

NK has been using extortion to survive for decades

NK focuses on bi-lateral talks with US, instead of including its neighbors..why? For status. ie to elevate Il's image in his own mind.

US has always handled it in {arguably} the only way possible. This was the last time the UN took sides in a war and the solution was always seen to be a consortium of countries to effect containment and change.

Clinton was doing the same... Bush was following the same general strategy.

The problem is that Jimmy Carter got involved, in an 'un-official' one-one talk and gave away chips to the enemy. No matter WHAT the Dems say now, Clinton and the boys were really pissed when this happened.

So Dubya has been dealing with that. No matter WHAT Il, or some one in a campaign speech, says.. we cannot deal one-one with him.

His primary threat is to his neighbors and they must step up..especially China; because they are the ones who enabled him to keep things unsettled on the Pac-Rim.

But sanctions ... even if EVERYONE participates.. arent going to work. They only work if the country's people have a relative freedom to speak and act.
We know they dont.

And if the 'Glorious Leader' cares what other nations think of him.
We know he doesnt.

Unlike Moammar Quadaffy, Il doesnt care as long as they carry a good picture of him with the world leader and get his name right.

As for me, I'm really happy we have a missile defense system on the way

 

RE: Re: North Korea: What to do?

So you think that test of the prototype a couple months agon was smoke and mirrors? Why?

We'll see....

 

RE: Re: North Korea: What to do?

Don, that was all very good in husting to the Lib 'party line'... but you are talking about threats from terrorist groups and ignoring 'rogue state' paradigms; in this case we are not dealing with rational people.

Iran will participate in both methods of attack, N Korea isnt interested in 'container/suitcase bombs'... they want to pretend they are playing in the big leagues.

SDI is, in fact, QUITE feasible with current technologies. And was taken seriously by the soviets back in the 80's though it was really a 'down-card' in Reagan's poker hand.
{Oh.. and EVERY government program is a cash cow.. what's new! But that doesnt mean it isnt worthwhile.}
- - - - -- - --
But, on the diplomatic side:
Here's the Brookings Institute Abstract on problems, over time, in dealing with NK
- - - - - -
You are absolutely right about the intelligence problems though. Our difficulty.. and it was the 'elephant in the room' for the last 2 decades, is 'who can you trust?'

And THAT is not something that can be avoided by just 'withdrawing from the scene'.
We found THAT out, when we no longer accepted/bought info from 'nefarious characters', didnt we!

Something that is valuable in the extreme to local police and law enforcement, is prohibited in the international theatre.

 

Don... parse it out. Didnt SAY you were liberal.. said it was a liberal speaking point.

I dont acccuse anyone of being anything anymore.. well hardly ever.. but I HAVE noticed one thing. It USED to be conservatives that claimed they were independent.. because of fears of being labeled 'Goldwater?.. now it seems to be the man-on-the-street person who usually ends up adhering to the general liberal views. the reat call themselves 'progressives'
Noted: Big surge, lately, in 'Liberal Libertarianism'

I use logic and common sense, based on what I've observed. We BOTH cant be using it! The answer is 'it's spin' alright. But the proof is in addressing the issues.
To use the extreme example:
"War never solved anything"
So easy to debunk it's laughable, the lesser examples take a little more time.

But we digress on that dont we? All because I threw a barb.. should have known better.
Anyway, we HAVE exhausted the 'diplomacy test with Iran and N Korea, both.

Neither will negotiate in good faith and they have both proved it over and again.

interesting that J Carter was heavily involved in both! so if you support Jimmy's views on either, you have some 'splainin' to do!

Read the Brookings piece!

 

Oh Lord, Hannity! Would not surprise me if he is paid by the Grand Oil Party.

O'Reilly tries to maintian even handedness by referring to anti-Conservatives as secular progressives. Somehow, that seems just as childish.

For my money, the most entertaining and sometimes spot on conservative is Glenn Beck. He is hilarious sometimes, and there is just no way someone that funny can be all that evil, like his counterparts. Neil Boortz gets mention as someone who goes off the deep end, but at least came up with an interesting tax idea and wrote a book about it.

 

You're right on both Hannity and Beck..
Hannity is so damn elementary and jingoist he makes my teeth hurt. When he gets a lib on the phone he doesnt deflate his views with logical progression rebuttal just goes through the 'Who said...' routine. His WHOLE shtick is pointing out hypocrisy.

Pathetic and lives up to the Ed Shulz dismissal of him as same.

Boortz IS, from all accounts and from my experience a true libertarian.. he doesnt throw out ALL govt functions, though. Which is why he doesnt sit well with the namesake org. The tax thing SHOULD work well, but that's why it'll never happen.. too many people -lawyers and accountants- afraid of how it will affect THEM!

By the way... if you're anti-bush, I suggest you listen CLOSELY to Ed Schulz on this NK issue! He throws up the Clinton apologeia, {Why is that!! We tried it, we should have tried it, it FAILED!!!} but he is definitely worried and doesnt think that 'talking' is gonna solve either it or Iran.

 

Emmm Glen Beck, that guys insane, really. I've given up watching him at all. My favorite Republican pundit is prolly O'rilley and Democrat defiantly Carville. Also like Donna Brasil

 

JayZZZ!

Great example of thread hi-jack.. ANYONE have views on point?!!!!

 

Feel free to move mine (and others?) over to another more appropriate heading.

I knew I was getting off point, but just could not stop myself.

 

Petty, what are you suggesting we do with North Korea? Start a war?

 

No. I'm not. It's significant, both in itself, and as a measure of success in using diplomacy, that's why it should be discussed.

But if there IS military action, it SHOULD BE under the auspices of the UN finally living up to its own press and growing balls.

As if...

 

I would like to think the UN will head something up in dealing with North Korea, but I have no faith in that organization.

 

Ding, ding, Ding!

RIGHT ANSWER!

And the ONLY one can put this little pissant down is... gasp!.. China!

But that a problem in itself.. china never goes anywhere with its army without taking some land for its troubles.
Why North Korea is the Wrong Focus

 

Petty, in your opinion, what do you honestly think is going to happen with this matter?

China has come out against this as has most of the other countries around the world. Do you feel there will be a war of some sorts amongst those Pac Rim countries?

 

sorry, it's above.. took too long looking for another - anecdotal- piece on what actually happens at the China N Korea border. couldnt find it, but just take my word that regular chinese, even the military are horrified at how NK refugees are treated when they are handed back.

I feel that China cant be judged by it's snapshot on foreign policies and relations, but on the direction it is heading.

The Chinese middle class is key here.. they have achieved critical mass and identify more with western than marxist values.
added:
And, btw, I firmly believe Il will end up shooting a missile... and the US will knock it down.

 

Man.. you are REALLY going Stewart/Colbert on us!

But the point is we know that sanctions and resolutions wont work but we have to go through the motions, anyway.

If they dont have the bomb, they intend to and will have the bomb... ANYONE doubt that?

As to Bolton.. everyone with a brain, now admits the UN is dysfunctional.
Bolton thinks we need the UN, and is yelling long and hard to change it, and yet.....