NORTH KOREA: MAKE ONE MOVE AND THE KOREA'S WILL BE IN ASHES...

Ugh:

<I>The 35-nation board is expected to refer the dispute to the Security Council, which could lead to economic sanctions or other punitive measures against the North. </I>

One of these days, the world is going to learn that sanctions against totalitarian regimes don't do anything (Iraq, Cuba, North Korea, etc...) except get civilians killed while empowering the governments themselves even more.

 

I still have some serious misgivings about what we're about to get ourselves into, but that's probably the best argument for war with Iraq that I've heard yet.

 

It's almost as if these type of dictators want to go down in combat...

I am sad for the innocent subjects which dwell in the depressed countries.

 

Ridiculous threat.

'We'll wipe our whole race off the planet if you increase your troops'

Yeah, right.

 

What works?

 

Major,

The funny thing about sanctions is that I am not sure we are looking at it long term enough.

I think they do work, but it takes years for them to work.

During those years, the populace suffers until they get mad enough to overthrow the government.

There has to be a better way.

DD

 

What works?

Good question - I don't know. I would think it depends on the particular regime. Long-term, I think the best general policy (and it certainly doesn't apply to all cases) is economic engagement. Build economic ties deep within a country that American culture seeps in (McDonalds, etc) and such that war with the US ould be unfeasible because they would become dependent on us for whatever goods we trade them.

The purpose of sanctions is to pressure leaders into caving on whatever issue you're dealing with. However, in most totalitarian regimes, the leader's goal is simply to maintain power. Put sanctions on Iraq and it doesn't affect Saddam Hussein one bit. Sure, his people starve, but does he care? He just wants to stay in power.

In a situation like North Korea, it just lets the leader tell everyone in the country that the US is evil and is starving them, and they're going to rally around their leader since they have no other information source.

It's one thing in democracies where you can put pressure on the people to remove the leader, but dictators will just carry along more often than not.

DaDakota may have it right though -- in the long run, perhaps it will eventually piss the people off enough that they'll overthrow their leader. But is it worth waiting a few decades and costing potentially millions of lives? Cuba is no closer to getting rid of Castro than they were when trade restrictions started.

 

I think Bush is playing a terrible game with North Korea.

They basically believe in their own rights to do what the hell they please.


Imagine if you will......what if Iraq were a more powerful nation than it was. Hussein says "You freaking americans are white devils, evil to the world...dismantle all your nuclear aresnal or have us invade your country"

We'd probably have a lot to say to this.


But for some reason, we can do it.


Please don't use the "Iraq is an evil dictatorship with bad agenda's" excuse. To Iraqi's, we are the axis of EVIL, so they can simply reverse the rolls. Remember, of all the nations that have had nuclear technology, only one has ever used it. Twice to be exact.

We damn near used it on at least one other occasion in the sixties. We built up an array of nuke's in the 80's just to stay ahead of the game. If anyone has the impression of being capable of using them it is definately the US.

 

It ultimately depends on the scenario. I mean there are so many different ones. But the goal is to get the society to become a liberal democracy like America and Europe and Japan. Like with Iraq I think regime change is necessary and then ensure that the country is rebuilt with international funding and help. You need people to go in and try to rid the country of fundamentalism and human rights abuses through education and ensuring that rights are extended to everyone in society. Iraq needs regime change because Saddam is highly militaristic and he shows no signs of losing his control there.

With places like North Korea I think engagement would have been a better policy for the US and world to persue because even though we don't support the regime if we traded actively with it but ensured that it did not pursue militarism then the people would have a much better chance at a better life and changing the government. Also North Korea has the prospect of coming back together with the South which would most certainly be good for the world. If they did reunite then that would mean one less militaristic, authoritarian, failing state and it would be assimilated into a stable, liberal democracy.

With places like Cuba I think the US would be better off if they started to embrace Cuba and started to open up trading. The embargo is useless and Cuba is not a militaristic state hell bent on acquiring WMD's like North Korea and Iraq. I think if we began to embrace Cuba then something like the situation that is occuring in China will happen. The country will slowly become capitalist and democratic when Castro dies.

 

That is just simply nieve and stupid to say. When has the American government called the Iraqi people evil towelheads that need to be destroyed? The American government has never said that...they said Saddam is evil not the people quit skewing things. Second you are basically defending their right to have nukes by saying it is ok for a militaristic dictator to have and pursue them and that it is wrong for the rest of the world to disarm them. America has to use the threat of force because all other threats have failed. We have been using all other threats for the past 12 years so don't say we haven't given peace a chance. You cannot appease forever.

Why would America be the axis of evil to Iraqis over say the real evil in their country Saddam? Do you really believe all of the freaking propaganda out of Iraq and do you think that the Iraqi people actually believe everything Saddam says? Get a brain. The Iraqi people should be pissed at what America and the UN did in the first Gulf War by not removing Saddam when they had the chance, but I am going to guarantee you that the Iraqi people hate Saddam a hell of a lot more than they hate America. Remember Saddam does torture and kill his people and that his ruling party is a small minority of the population. If Iraq is having problems it is not America's fault it is their leader's fault. Iraq has significant oil wealth and should not have any problems feeding its people, but it does because they are lead by a repressive dictator who insists on militarism over building a strong economy.

And then that crap about the nukes again...We were the only nation to use the weapon because we were the first to have it and have the opportunity to use it in a wartime situation. If you haven't noticed the tactics of war have changed significantly since World War II where it was thought that terrorizing the civilian population was the best way to win a war. No it was not right what the US did to terrorize the civilians, but it wasn't right what the rest of the world did either. Revisionist morality doesn't work very well. Also, the US did not believe the Japanese would give up unless they were completely beaten down because of a racist flawed view of the Japanese/Asian mind as something like little rabid machines that would obey their emperor to the death. They were 10000% wrong. Anyhow...nukes will not be used again contrary to what you think. There is no way they could even be used to attack terrorists. Terrorists are small groups, not large organized armies where a nuke would be useful. So even though you don't want to believe the US Army uses logic they do know that the wars against terrorists will be fought with speed and precision and not brute strength and trying to terrorize civilians in return.

 

Very good thinking , if using the same logical reasons the american is using i would think america is 1 millions times more of a threat than the iraq !! if i am the iraqis i see bush is more evil not saddam becuz the bullets n bombs that kill the iraqis are american made n from america not from saddam!!! more than half of the world population is againist the war but bush n american still do it becuz its the american interest , pretty soon more of the world will see american is more like the axis of evil !! and what is the united nation good for if they say no to the war n usa still do it!!! now the north korea situation , this is getting closer to the world war 3 becuz of this stupid fxxking usa president ,gwb!

 

I wil be the first to say...WTF???

 

Respectfully, I think that when people attempt to reverse the "Axis of Evil" thing on the United States it rings hollow. A position of this type involves following a moral relativism in which no one side can take any sort of moral high ground --

The reason that it is unacceptable is that people like Kim and Sadam have proven histories of acting in irrational, aggressive, and without the advice of calming influences. Small-time dictator/thugs are probably equaly as far in ideology from the Al Qaedas of the world as they are from the stability of the United States -- by this I mean that there is an inherent irrationality that comes to omnipotent dictatiors who enforce their will through violence. The world is becoming small enough that it may soon be possible for one unhinged individual to kill the entire world population, and if this were to happen, I think the balance of craziness and wherewithall favors these petty dictators to be
e the culprit.

On the other hand I do find these arguements less compelling when it comes to applying the same principals to India, etc...

Given that, if I were Kim, and GW got up and recited the Axis of Evil speech, and followed it up by moving in on one of those members (Iraq), I would begin to develop the type of paranoia that would lead me to believe that having a credible nuclear threat would be the only thing to prevent GW from unseating me.

In many ways the whole Axis of Evil speech summed up everything good and bad about GW, as well as helping me to define whom it is that I see as GW's presidential predicessor when it comes to temperment.

If you were to create a model of all of George W's strengths and weaknesses using a past president as a template, I have to think that the model for that template would be Teddy Rosevelt.

Though I find Rosevelt a much more compelling figure I can't help but think that they have the same temperment. Both men were somewhat like big children. The both wanted to paint the world in black and white, and both seem to be more intrested in action than introspection. Teddy's big duality was that by always acting on emotion instead of thinking all angles of a situation as a diplomat, he would always charge first, not being afraid to ruffle feathers. This lead to both great gains for this country, as well as the commission of many evils.

GW's Axis of Evil speech was as blunt as anything ever said by Rosevelt, and like was so often the case for Rosevelt, Bush charged forward lead only by a romantic sense of rightness, and probably ended up causing the North Koreans to become beligerant.

 

fatfatcow, thank your lucky stars you are not in Iraq saying those things about sadam or you would be dead. The US is the best country in the world giving everyone the most freedoms. God Bless America and God Bless GWB and the decisions he has to make.

 

How sad.

NK is a loser of a country. It is a dictatorship with a wacko leader who oppesses his own people. It has no economy other than selling weapons or blackmail.

It's China's little loser satellite there fatfatcow. China created it.

Who's more responsible for it, the US or China?

Stop trying to blame everything on the US. It's getting tiresome, and no matter how many exclamation marks you use, it won't change the truth.

 

Oh yes,

the US is the most prosperous country in the world where the people determine its leaders and NK is a country that lets its people starve to death just to build weapons.

From any objective standpoint, we're the axis of evil.

Get a clue!

 

first chinese didnt create north korea , if the american didnt jump in 50 years ago to fight communism there will be only one korea today, if ur stupid presidnet didnt threaten n prepare to invade iraq no matter what ,the north korean will not do what they are trying to do today!!! only nuclear weapoons will stop the american n gwb from invadeing north korea that how the north korean see it!!! whos more responsible if there is a war of course its your president gwb! as i said before vote for him for another term the then the world is not too far away from ww3!

 

Oh please give me a break.

Talk about your communist propaganda.

Tell me what the average North Korean feels? Hungry.
These people are starving to death. You think they care that their gov't spends all their money building weapons while they're eating grass?

The US donates more $$$ to the UN food fund than any other country.

If I were GWB, I'd say F*** You and stop all food shipments.

Then what are the North Koreans going to do? Declare war on the US because theyre not giving them free food?

Give me a break.

North Korea is a country of beggars and theyre trying to blackmail other countries into giving them free supplies, equipement and money.

Basically, North Koreas' govt officials are theives.