About NK being a nuclear power, how is it any different from the USSR being one during the Cold War? Nuclear Weapons are only a detterent. India and Pakistan haven't used them and I feel the weapons have prevented many possible full scale wars. My opinion probably doesn't matter to the readers though, as I also support a nuclear Iran.
Unfortunately, proliferation of nuclear weapons will someday lead to their use. As it is, look back in history and see how close we came on several bleak occasions. Deterance is one thing, but nuclear winter cannot be undone. I would be for an agreement with the People's Republic of China, Russia et al to take out North Korea's (and Iran's) nuclear reactors (since they can't be moved) with surgical strikes. Again, unfortunately, that is not a viable solution because we would only cause more Chernobyl disasters.
Are you serious!!?!?!? We propped up leaders who did a lot worse than let their people suffer. We set up, paid up, and propped up several leaders who killed their people by the hundreds of thousands. All around the world, with the likes of Noriega, Marcos, Batista, Pinochet, Hussein, the Shah of Iran, and countless others, we have made a common practice of putting down popular leaders and/or propping up murderous tyrants as long as the former leaned left and the latter leaned right. In this manner we are accountable for literally millions of murdered civilians, which is a lot more realistic grounds for the hatred of the US around the world than jealousy. I can't believe people pretend this didn't happen. It's one thing, albeit a pretty low one, to claim Cold War Excuses All...but to say it never happened is ridiculous.
At the risk of posting an article from Fox News, The Dennis Miller take on things... Saturday, August 30, 2003 By Dennis Miller Fox News Hey, get this... I want to talk about North Korea. We’re having multilateral talks with Kim Jong’s ilk in Beijing this week along with representatives of Russia, China, South Korea and oddly enough, Gary Coleman. We want the NK to apply the Bat Brakes to their uranium enrichment program and North Korea, in return, wants us to stop referring to them as a charter member of the “Axis of Evil” and notch it back to the “Axis of a Wee Bit Naughty.” Folks, there’s only one reason North Korea has come to the table now and that’s Iraq. Forget WMDs. This is why Saddam and his boys drew the Wonka Ticket in the Punk Lottery. Pancaking Iraq got us six-way talks and six-way talks got us a valuable one-on-one date with Erin/North Korea where I’m pretty sure we reminded them to cool their nuclear jets or we just might have to beat them to the e=mc² punch. Think of Iraq as "East Korea," because it was a shoot the cuffs war for the edification of Kim Jong Il (search) to let him know we’ve now circled the SUVs. Iraq was about breaking adhesions, getting lean, staying frosty -- in short, getting ready for the big Doug MacArthur Memorial Cage Match to come. Kim Jong Il must be ruthless because you usually don’t get to head up a country when you look that freaky. He’s like the Buddy Holly of the Pan-Pacific Rim. Weird hair -- like a Chia-Dictator. I hope if they eventually blow that head off, somebody has the good sense to put it in a jar and bring it back home, because I know I’d pay a nickel to see that up close in a tent. Listen, North Korea has been begging for it since ‘68 when they filched Lloyd Bucher and the boys off the Pueblo. Add the fact that I don’t like the way they march and mix in reneging on a promise to pull the plug on their nuclear program and you’ve got the hat trick. It’s time to put our cards on the table with North Korea and when we fan our hand it should read, “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice... well that’s just not gonna happen now is it?” Got that? I’m Dennis Miller. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96076,00.html
This is the "new" Dennis Miller? Folks, there’s only one reason North Korea has come to the table now and that’s Iraq. Forget WMDs. This is why Saddam and his boys drew the Wonka Ticket in the Punk Lottery. Pancaking Iraq got us six-way talks and six-way talks got us a valuable one-on-one date with Erin/North Korea where I’m pretty sure we reminded them to cool their nuclear jets or we just might have to beat them to the e=mc² punch. Who needs the White House? For the lastest spin, just... "Got that? I'm Dennis Miller." And he re-invents himself yet again.
I'm sorry, I just couldn't let this one slide. North Korea never ended their nuclear program in the first place. The groundwork was actually laid for the reactors, and construction was ready to begin, but it was (wisely) called off because our intelligence began to realize that the North Koreans had never stopped work on their nuke program. They didn't even pause it so as to decieve us into thinking they had, as an intelligent liar would do. The North Koreans most certainly reneged on the deal, of that there is no doubt. They don't even really deny it. What would you have had us do, continue construction and oil shipments? So that we could say - "Hey, we delivered our half, so where's yours?" I hardly think that would have been necessary. Or wise. On another point - if the North Koreans ever actually gave a terrorist a nuke, and it was used against an American target, it would almost certainly spell the end of the North Korean regime. Nukes have signatures, and it wouldn't be all that hard to figure out where it came from. Especially now that they have stated that they would sell them, and that there is one less culprit to accuse (Saddam). The only two realistic choices left would be Iran and North Korea, so... Unless they are truly the dumbest people on the planet, or in reality suicidal, they will do no such thing.
The terrorists are more likely to get their nukes from out of work military personnel of the old Soviet Union. The signature would affix blame, most assuredly, but the thousands of dead Americans wouldn't care. I hope we will prove smart enough to eliminate all three sources of nukes.
Just came across this at CNN. I think this is the sort of thing that will get China a bit more active regarding NK. Japan feels N. Korea's long-term threat From CNN Tokyo Bureau Chief Rebecca MacKinnon GOTENBA, Japan (CNN) --They are constitutionally forbidden from waging war overseas, but Japan's self defense forces are among the best equipped -- and best funded -- in the world. The annual exercises that take place in Gotenba are open to the public, in part to show off how their taxes are being spent. But North Korea gave new ammunition to Japan's defense spenders last week in Beijing when it repeated a threat to test a nuclear weapon or long-range missile. Such threats have reinforced a growing sense of vulnerability in Japan despite the presence of 47,000 U.S. troops on Japanese soil. "This has been a great concern for the Japanese people," Masashi Nishihara, President of the National Defense Academy told CNN. "And this has contributed to the change in Japanese consciousness of the need to defend their own nation," he said. "I'm not sure if the U.S. and Japanese forces can really defend us properly," carpenter Masayuki Munakata says. In the eyes of most Japanese, North Korea remains a long-term military threat. So Japan's military planners are pushing to increase defense spending, especially on new, more effective technology. "Since they have long range missiles that can reach Japan, we have to, you know, speed up, to have our own system which can cope with such threats from North Korea," Nishihara says. Japan's defense chief has just requested a new $1.2 billion missile defense system. That price would include a Patriot PAC3 system to protect major cities, and a sea-based system as well. Japan's defense agency also wants close to a billion dollars to buy a helicopter carrier ship which would be Asia's biggest military vessel. That means more yen to defend the homeland in case a neighbor's threats turn real. Find this article at: http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/09/02/japan.defense/index.html
The Japanese already have the best military in Asia. I don't think their increase spending would make a difference to China. The more important aspect is how the Japanese use their armed forces. Right now, their military is used primarily for defense, but a proactive Japanese military would be worrisome. Plus they are probably capable of building nukes in a short period of time, which would be bad news to everyone. You don't want to give a rehabilitated ex-murderer the gun that you shot him with during his killing spree.
If I saw a maniac across the Gulf of Mexico with long range missles and publicy stating he was going to build nukes and put them on said missles, I'd want the best weapons I could get and I would stay close to a powerful friend. And if I were China, I wouldn't want Japan to feel the necessity for doing that.
North Korea has to be handled Don to Don The US has to go to China and say Don China, your cousin Little Kim is a peeble in my shoe. If you cannot remove this peeble, I must. I would not like to do that, and I'm sure you would rather do this than for me to do it. So do me this favor, Don China.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-resign10sep10000435,1,4171368.story By Sonni Efron, Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON — The State Department's former senior expert on North Korea said Tuesday that the Bush administration's refusal to engage directly with the country made it almost impossible to stop Pyongyang from going ahead with its plans to build, test and deploy nuclear weapons. Six- nation talks are a good step, but not enough, said Jack Pritchard, who was the department's special envoy for negotiations with North Korea until he resigned last month. The United States should immediately initiate direct talks with the communist nation, he said. "The idea that in a short period of time you can resolve this problem" in talks where diplomats from six countries sit down with 24 interpreters and try to make a deal without private consultations is "ludicrous," Pritchard said. "It cannot happen." Pritchard's resignation came as current and former U.S. officials described bitter fighting in the administration over how to deal with the problems posed by North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Some in the administration have argued that all contact with North Korea, including negotiations, constituted a reward for the regime of Kim Jong Il, which has long seen better relations with the United States as key to ending its international isolation. These officials advocate taking a hard line against North Korea. The opposing camp has argued that even though the U.S. might like to hasten the collapse of the regime, while the nuclear clock was ticking the U.S. must instead seek the narrower goal of persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions. They agree that Pyongyang must not be bribed into such a move, but they say Kim must be offered incentives — and a way to save face. Each side claims to be implementing the policies laid out by President Bush. One official, who is in favor of negotiations, expressed frustration with the bickering, saying he did not believe the president knew what his aides were doing in his name. When Bush gives aides his views and they turn it into "guidance" for subordinates to implement, "it doesn't come out anywhere near what a reasonable person would say is what the president meant," the official said. "The secretary [of State, Colin L. Powell] got his marching orders from the president on this one," a senior State Department official said. The administration is willing to talk to North Korea directly within the context of the six-party talks, but because North Korea's nuclear ambitions threaten the entire region, its neighbors must be involved in the solution, the senior official said. Pritchard "says we have to have a bilateral or nothing ever happens. The secretary and the president say North Korea doesn't make the rules," the official said, adding that America will not come running every time North Korea "does something stupid. Our strategy is to say no." In an interview Tuesday, Pritchard, a 28-year veteran of the military, the State Department and the National Security Council, said he did not resign in protest, and did not have an ax to grind. Pritchard said he decided to speak out on policy issues because of the urgent need to stop North Korea's nuclear weapons program. North Korea has claimed to be reprocessing its 8,000 spent plutonium fuel rods, and U.S. officials believe that it might produce six or more nuclear weapons within a year. The CIA believes that North Korea probably already has two nuclear devices, and Pyongyang has said it might test or export its weapons depending on how the United States responds to its demands. At the six-party talks in Beijing last month, the Bush administration made an overture to Kim by saying it would agree to a step-by-step approach by which North Korea would not have to unilaterally disarm before seeing any benefits. Some news reports billed that as a major shift in U.S. policy. In remarks Monday at his new employer, the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, Pritchard called the movement "minuscule." Pritchard's departure made waves in Washington because he was the longest-serving North Korea expert in the administration. He has met with North Korean diplomats for years and accompanied former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to her meetings with Kim in 2000. In the Clinton administration, Pritchard was seen as a hard-liner, arguing, for example, that President Clinton should not visit Pyongyang, the North Korean capital. Later, his support for engaging North Korea, at least in direct discussions, placed him in the left wing of the Bush administration, and he was denounced in the conservative media as an appeaser. Pritchard argued Tuesday that mere contact with the United States did not affect North Korea's strategic decisions. In 2000, even as a senior North Korean military official was in the Oval Office handing Clinton an invitation from Kim to visit, North Korea was moving from dabbling with a research and development program in highly enriched uranium to a secret program to make bombs, Pritchard said. (Clinton declined the invitation.) The United States later received intelligence that Pakistan had provided North Korea with a large number of centrifuges for uranium enrichment, according to U.S. and Asian sources. When Assistant Secretary of State James A. Kelly confronted Pyongyang with the evidence in October, the North Koreans first denied it, then acknowledged the program and said they had a right to nuclear weapons. Since then, however, North Korea has been insisting that it does not have a secret uranium enrichment program and never told Kelly that it did. It has said that Kelly misunderstood what he was told, perhaps because of a translation problem. North Korea raised the issue again at the Beijing talks, rattling some of the other participants. U.S. sources including Pritchard, however, said the U.S. intelligence community was unanimous in its confidence that the intelligence on the secret program was solid, and that the message to Kelly was unmistakable. "The North Koreans are rewriting history for their own reasons," Pritchard said.
