Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 01:33 pm

Quote:

North Korea defiantly told the world Thursday it does have nuclear weapons and that it's not interested in restarting disarmament talks anytime soon.

The communist nation argued it needs protection against what it considers an increasingly hostile United States.

Pyongyang's pronouncement was the first time it publicly confirmed what other nations suspected, but its claim could nevertheless not be independently verified.

Now what do we do?

On the one hand, this is the sort of situation the Bush Doctrine would demand an attack on the North Koreans.

On the other hand.. what a mess a war would be.

Seoul SK is less then 50 miles from the border with NK and has a population of around 9 million people, rather tightly packed in...

NK has over 10,000 artillery tubes and rocket emplacements trained in on the city. They have made it quite clear that in the event of war, Seoul would be lashed, heavily. I read, though I cannot find the link off hand, that it is estimated that 50% of the city population would be killed in less then 30 minutes with JUST a convential assualt. NK has Chem and Bio weapons, now they have nukes.

Joy.

NK also has a few long range ballistic missiles, and should they have advanced to the point of being able to lob a few at the western US.. it's possible they could even hit a populated city. This just makes bringing the fledgeling US missle shield up to operational readiness, that much more important.

They also have a decent stock pile of medium range missles, all potenially could be tipped with WMD, and could easily hit Japan.. Guam...

Not a pretty picture.

So what can we do?

G. Adams · Feb 10, 2005, 01:45 pm

Assassinate Kim. The beuraucrats surrounding him would scramble for power, the US could support a more liberal one. Even if you didn't support them directly, chances are somebody sane would rise to the top and would look outside NK for help. Or you could try and infiltrate the peasents of NK. They have a particularly hard life, and if you could plug them with some food and maybe a luxury or two you could get their hearts and minds. Do that, then help support a revolutionary movement. Even if the revolutionary leaders turned against the West, their position would be unconsolodated for a few years, making it easy to destabilise again.

I'd advocate trying both courses of action. Once diplomatic channels have failed, of course

I'd also stop it with the anti NK rhetoric. If they feel safer they may relax their guard, perhaps enough to make them agreeable to the west in a decade or so. NK is not going to be bullied into doing what is against it's interests.

tinybear · Feb 10, 2005, 01:46 pm

Nothing. Just wait until even Beijing can't stand it any longer and see what happens then.

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 01:52 pm

G. Adams, how do you propose infiltrating NK??

That is a rigid communist system. If you did manage to get food and "luxeries" into N korea, and if you DID manage to gain anyones trust (assumeing that didn't think your agents were really N Korean agents trying to trick them into going against the state) All you would manage to do is get the peasents killed when, and oyu would be discovered, the military went in and smashed the uprising.

Spec Ops guys to kill Kim Il Jong? Watch many 007 movies lately?

bishop · Feb 10, 2005, 02:09 pm

i'm with tinybear.. we shouldn't do anything. we should accept the fact that they have them, as we've accepted other countries of possessing them in the past. in both pakistan's and india's case, they've become allies, not that i suspect n.k. will ever be our friend.

maybe some fool out there thinks we should increase sanctions on them, starving their people and baiting them to launch an attack out of desperation.. or maybe someone thinks that we should risk nuclear war and launch a pre-emptive attack (gotta wonder what china's response would be - definitely wouldn't be good).

and the bush doctrine is nothing but a hypocritical bunch of b.s.. following that in this case will put humanity's existance at stake. if bush actually began to advocate attacking n.k. i'd be convinced that he's the anti-christ, and hope that someone come to save us from him.

G. Adams · Feb 10, 2005, 02:11 pm

I think you might be overestimating the ability of a state that can't keep the lights running at night.

As difficult as it would be, and I agree it would take years of preperation, I believe it would possible assassinate pretty much anyone.

How to infiltrate NK? Well I'm not in secret service (as far as you know) so it's not an area I'm familiar with. However, much of NK is lacking in infrastructure, I'm sure there would be areas of country that are quite cut off from the constant control of the state.

Besides, the CIA has toppled enough democracies, it's about time they toppled a dictatorship and prove its usefulness.

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 02:11 pm

Clinton was 30 minutes from launching a pre-emptive strike on N Korea in 96 I do believe Bishop.

bishop · Feb 10, 2005, 02:20 pm

the situation in '96 was a bit different than it is now, don't you agree?

besides, that isn't true that clinton was about to launch a pre-emptive strike from all that i've read. there were definitely people in clinton's administration that did advocate war, but there were many others who sought a different approach. clinton eventually relied on begala's and carter's advice and appeased them.

looking back, this is a very complicated issue, and both republicans and democrats deserve their fair share of the blame. economic deals are always made with china, even though they assist n.k. in its military industry. we give pakistan rewards even though they enabled the koreans to develop their nukes. don rumsfeld, former head at ABB, certainly didn't have a problem setting up a nuclear reactor in n.k... etc...

cumulative fuck ups have led us to where we are today. one option will possibly lead to nuclear war, the other will possibly lead to nuclear blackmail... and then, there's the third option that nothing of much importance will happen and that this is all a lot of hype. remember, there was a huge stink when india/pakistan developed their nukes, but now everyone just accepts the fact that they have them.

Milton Bradley · Feb 10, 2005, 02:53 pm

I request that they be allowed to nuke DC before we act to disarm them. After Washington is a smoking crater, they would probably be more willing to negotiate with whatever less corrupt administration that finds itself elected.

allen · Feb 10, 2005, 02:58 pm

I think the solution for US is very simple: just give NK what she has always been wanting, a guarantee that US will not attack the north. In the last several years, the talks have fallen into stalemates because Bush insisted that NK should dismantle nuke arms first, while the north insisted that a gurantee should be given first. Considering the current situation and the fact that US is much stronger than NK, it won't hurt for US to back a step.

I don't know what China can do. I am chinese and I know china is in a very awkward position to organize six-party talks. My brother visited NK 2 years ago, and found average north koreans took china as an assistant of american hegemonist. Kim is very hostile toward China after China established diplomatic connections with South Korea in 1992.

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 03:10 pm

Give a mad man the promise we won't attack him..

errr. right.

ericsp23 · Feb 10, 2005, 03:22 pm

What evidence do you have that he is mad? I think his response to his current situation is a perfectly rational one for someone who feels that he is encircled by enemies and that his country is crumbling beneath him.

Nono · Feb 10, 2005, 03:46 pm

What is changed by the fact that the North Koreans now openly acknowledge what everybody already guessed? Perhaps one change is that it would now be harder to pretend that Toothless-on-the-Tigris or some other country whose oil you covet poses the real threat to US security and should be invaded. (Though the American people are obviously ready to believe anything.)

Maybe Kim can't keep the lights on at night, but that wouldn't make me sleep much easier if I lived in California -- there's always the freaky-fluky fact that one could get through.

About all you can do now is dangle credible and verifiable carrots while giving your stick a little pat from time to time (i.e. avoid openly antagonize the bastards) and hope for a peaceful generational shift.

And next time, listen to Scott Ritter. :)

allen · Feb 10, 2005, 03:51 pm

actually I think Kim is a sophisticated strategist. He knows how to play games among several parties, including US, Japan, SK, China and Russia, although each one is stronger than NK, but he decides the direction where to go. He dallies with the six-party talks like a mosquito plays with 5 elephants...

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 03:56 pm

No, I mean he is litterally a Mad Man. He may have brilliant ideas at times.. but he is still a mad man..

bugsbunny04 · Feb 10, 2005, 04:04 pm

Here's the thing guys, everything I have read about this Kim guy indicates that he is a narcissistic sociopath. It could all be wrong, or at least exageratted (you know how the press is), but I seriously doubt that it is extremely far off.

I do know that breaking off the disarmament talks is an indication that he knows what we have in our hand, and he knows we are over extended, over commited, distracted, and extremely vulnerable, and in no position to bring a significant military response to bear against him in anything less than a 2-3 week time table. I wonder what you guys who support our continued presence in Iraq and Afganistan think of that?

Me and Tom Clancy will stand together telling King George II "We told you NK was the real threat before you invaded Iraq you dumb mother fucker."

The Irony is, California will be the state he has put in the greatest danger, and they never wanted him.

bishop · Feb 10, 2005, 04:11 pm

gotta love those voters who rewarded him with another term. n.k. was always the immediate threat, along with al qaeda... just like bush puts off today's problems (debts) for future generations.. he likes to deal with distant threats while ignoring the immediate ones.

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 04:13 pm

King George..

Everytime I read that... I burst out in gales of laughter.

Seriously.

bishop · Feb 10, 2005, 05:09 pm

yes, because somehow the namecalling makes bush's blunders irrelevant.

Mr.Vicchio · Feb 10, 2005, 05:20 pm

No, because of how absolutely ludicrious such is.

It's bumper sticker forum posting.

And it make me laugh.

The original subject is what to do with NK, not whether the Bush Doctrine is applicable (I all ready showed it is not)

Feb 10, 2005, 01:45 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,174	Assassinate Kim. The beuraucrats surrounding him would scramble for power, the US could support a more liberal one. Even if you didn't support them directly, chances are somebody sane would rise to the top and would look outside NK for help. Or you could try and infiltrate the peasents of NK. They have a particularly hard life, and if you could plug them with some food and maybe a luxury or two you could get their hearts and minds. Do that, then help support a revolutionary movement. Even if the revolutionary leaders turned against the West, their position would be unconsolodated for a few years, making it easy to destabilise again. I'd advocate trying both courses of action. Once diplomatic channels have failed, of course I'd also stop it with the anti NK rhetoric. If they feel safer they may relax their guard, perhaps enough to make them agreeable to the west in a decade or so. NK is not going to be bullied into doing what is against it's interests. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Feb 10, 2005, 01:52 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,335	G. Adams, how do you propose infiltrating NK?? That is a rigid communist system. If you did manage to get food and "luxeries" into N korea, and if you DID manage to gain anyones trust (assumeing that didn't think your agents were really N Korean agents trying to trick them into going against the state) All you would manage to do is get the peasents killed when, and oyu would be discovered, the military went in and smashed the uprising. Spec Ops guys to kill Kim Il Jong? Watch many 007 movies lately? Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

Feb 10, 2005, 02:11 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,174	I think you might be overestimating the ability of a state that can't keep the lights running at night. As difficult as it would be, and I agree it would take years of preperation, I believe it would possible assassinate pretty much anyone. How to infiltrate NK? Well I'm not in secret service (as far as you know) so it's not an area I'm familiar with. However, much of NK is lacking in infrastructure, I'm sure there would be areas of country that are quite cut off from the constant control of the state. Besides, the CIA has toppled enough democracies, it's about time they toppled a dictatorship and prove its usefulness. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Feb 10, 2005, 02:11 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,335	Clinton was 30 minutes from launching a pre-emptive strike on N Korea in 96 I do believe Bishop. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

Feb 10, 2005, 03:10 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,335	Give a mad man the promise we won't attack him.. errr. right. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

Feb 10, 2005, 01:46 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
tinybear Volcanic Erupter Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 7,334	Nothing. Just wait until even Beijing can't stand it any longer and see what happens then.

Feb 10, 2005, 02:09 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	i'm with tinybear.. we shouldn't do anything. we should accept the fact that they have them, as we've accepted other countries of possessing them in the past. in both pakistan's and india's case, they've become allies, not that i suspect n.k. will ever be our friend. maybe some fool out there thinks we should increase sanctions on them, starving their people and baiting them to launch an attack out of desperation.. or maybe someone thinks that we should risk nuclear war and launch a pre-emptive attack (gotta wonder what china's response would be - definitely wouldn't be good). and the bush doctrine is nothing but a hypocritical bunch of b.s.. following that in this case will put humanity's existance at stake. if bush actually began to advocate attacking n.k. i'd be convinced that he's the anti-christ, and hope that someone come to save us from him.

Feb 10, 2005, 02:20 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	the situation in '96 was a bit different than it is now, don't you agree? besides, that isn't true that clinton was about to launch a pre-emptive strike from all that i've read. there were definitely people in clinton's administration that did advocate war, but there were many others who sought a different approach. clinton eventually relied on begala's and carter's advice and appeased them. looking back, this is a very complicated issue, and both republicans and democrats deserve their fair share of the blame. economic deals are always made with china, even though they assist n.k. in its military industry. we give pakistan rewards even though they enabled the koreans to develop their nukes. don rumsfeld, former head at ABB, certainly didn't have a problem setting up a nuclear reactor in n.k... etc... cumulative fuck ups have led us to where we are today. one option will possibly lead to nuclear war, the other will possibly lead to nuclear blackmail... and then, there's the third option that nothing of much importance will happen and that this is all a lot of hype. remember, there was a huge stink when india/pakistan developed their nukes, but now everyone just accepts the fact that they have them.

Feb 10, 2005, 02:53 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Milton Bradley BANNED Location: Ohio Province, Rep. of Comerica Posts: 7,320	I request that they be allowed to nuke DC before we act to disarm them. After Washington is a smoking crater, they would probably be more willing to negotiate with whatever less corrupt administration that finds itself elected.

Feb 10, 2005, 02:58 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
allen Igneous Magma Posts: 199	I think the solution for US is very simple: just give NK what she has always been wanting, a guarantee that US will not attack the north. In the last several years, the talks have fallen into stalemates because Bush insisted that NK should dismantle nuke arms first, while the north insisted that a gurantee should be given first. Considering the current situation and the fact that US is much stronger than NK, it won't hurt for US to back a step. I don't know what China can do. I am chinese and I know china is in a very awkward position to organize six-party talks. My brother visited NK 2 years ago, and found average north koreans took china as an assistant of american hegemonist. Kim is very hostile toward China after China established diplomatic connections with South Korea in 1992.

Feb 10, 2005, 03:22 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
ericsp23 Pragmatic liberal Posts: 421	What evidence do you have that he is mad? I think his response to his current situation is a perfectly rational one for someone who feels that he is encircled by enemies and that his country is crumbling beneath him. Economic Left/Right -5.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarion -4.41

Feb 10, 2005, 03:46 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Nono Throbbing Member Location: Old Europe Posts: 7,446	What is changed by the fact that the North Koreans now openly acknowledge what everybody already guessed? Perhaps one change is that it would now be harder to pretend that Toothless-on-the-Tigris or some other country whose oil you covet poses the real threat to US security and should be invaded. (Though the American people are obviously ready to believe anything.) Maybe Kim can't keep the lights on at night, but that wouldn't make me sleep much easier if I lived in California -- there's always the freaky-fluky fact that one could get through. About all you can do now is dangle credible and verifiable carrots while giving your stick a little pat from time to time (i.e. avoid openly antagonize the bastards) and hope for a peaceful generational shift. And next time, listen to Scott Ritter. :) "I wish I was as cocksure of anything as Tom Macaulay is of everything." -- Viscount Melbourne

Feb 10, 2005, 03:51 pm	#14 (permalink) (top)
allen Igneous Magma Posts: 199	actually I think Kim is a sophisticated strategist. He knows how to play games among several parties, including US, Japan, SK, China and Russia, although each one is stronger than NK, but he decides the direction where to go. He dallies with the six-party talks like a mosquito plays with 5 elephants...

Feb 10, 2005, 03:56 pm	#15 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,335	No, I mean he is litterally a Mad Man. He may have brilliant ideas at times.. but he is still a mad man.. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

Feb 10, 2005, 04:04 pm	#16 (permalink) (top)
bugsbunny04 Untrained Fodder Location: Alabama Posts: 1,354	Here's the thing guys, everything I have read about this Kim guy indicates that he is a narcissistic sociopath. It could all be wrong, or at least exageratted (you know how the press is), but I seriously doubt that it is extremely far off. I do know that breaking off the disarmament talks is an indication that he knows what we have in our hand, and he knows we are over extended, over commited, distracted, and extremely vulnerable, and in no position to bring a significant military response to bear against him in anything less than a 2-3 week time table. I wonder what you guys who support our continued presence in Iraq and Afganistan think of that? Me and Tom Clancy will stand together telling King George II "We told you NK was the real threat before you invaded Iraq you dumb mother fucker." The Irony is, California will be the state he has put in the greatest danger, and they never wanted him. Clean toe caps and a filthy mouth! Low morals and high morale!

Feb 10, 2005, 04:11 pm	#17 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	gotta love those voters who rewarded him with another term. n.k. was always the immediate threat, along with al qaeda... just like bush puts off today's problems (debts) for future generations.. he likes to deal with distant threats while ignoring the immediate ones.

Feb 10, 2005, 04:13 pm	#18 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,335	King George.. Everytime I read that... I burst out in gales of laughter. Seriously. Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?

Feb 10, 2005, 05:09 pm	#19 (permalink) (top)
bishop moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184	yes, because somehow the namecalling makes bush's blunders irrelevant.

Feb 10, 2005, 05:20 pm	#20 (permalink) (top)
Mr.Vicchio Navy Veteran Location: Texas Posts: 6,335	No, because of how absolutely ludicrious such is. It's bumper sticker forum posting. And it make me laugh. The original subject is what to do with NK, not whether the Bush Doctrine is applicable (I all ready showed it is not) Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" is still being challenged to this day, but by consensus Global Warming is a fact... that's REAL science at work, why didn't Albert just go that route?