PDA

View Full Version : No Easy Answers to Situation in North Korea


Terri
01-05-2003, 11:14 PM
Bobby Eberle
January 6, 2003
http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/gopusa.gif

As thousands of U.S. troops head toward the Persian Gulf, a situation is brewing which might ultimately be more dangerous, more destabilizing, and more complex than the current conflict with Iraq. As with Iraq, the North Korean regime is hostile and oppressive; as with Iraq, North Korea possesses weapons of mass destruction; unlike Iraq, North Korea's weapons are nuclear.

This past October North Korea admitted that it is conducting operations to enrich uranium -- a vital process in the manufacture of nuclear weapons. These operations are in direct violation of several treaties and agreements signed by the North Korean government.

First, North Korea's actions are a violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968 which North Korea signed in 1985 and which, under Article III, requires inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify nonnuclear weapons states are using nuclear technology only for peaceful means. Second, in 1991, North Korea signed a treaty with South Korea in which the entire Korean peninsula was to remain nuclear-free. Third, North Korea's actions violate the Agreed Framework negotiated with the United States in 1994.

Full Article (http://www.gopusa.com/bobby/bobby_0106.shtml)

This is a very difficult situation but there are some interesting thoughts here.

I'm definitely against the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries in the region. We would live to regret that just as we have the proliferation of conventional weapons.

pRIMrose
01-06-2003, 02:17 PM
Very good article. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/twothumbsup.gif

No sane person wants to see the proliferation of nuclear weapons ~ that's for sure. However, we survived many years knowing that Russia had them. Is Korea a bigger threat now than the USSR was 30 years ago?

Pandora's box was opened long ago and now we get to try and contain her. Other countries will eventually get nuclear weapons. There will be countries who will continue to pursue superiority through nuclear weapons. Like cloning, it will happen.

What are we going to do when there are more than three members of the "Axis of Evil" ~ what about 10 or 20 or more? China is not our friend ~ they are a trading partner only. Nothing has changed in China humanitarian wise.

The only thing I can say, I hope we have some very smoothe fast talkers if they think we can "rhetoric" our way out of this sticky situation.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> In essence, the Clinton Administration agreed to deliver nuclear technology to North Korea if North Korea promised to be good and cease its nuclear weapons program.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

The techology that the Clinton administration delivered to North Korea and his &quot;loving&quot; relationship and technology transfers to the Chinese have placed this country in a very precarious position, to say the least.

We've lost high tech secrets via espionage and more through pure negligence and the dismantling of our own security. 9/11 was only a wake up call.

Israel has nuclear power and is helpless to eliminate the continuous onslaught of a bunch of stone throwing human bombers. This is a problem that predates 9/11, Iraq and NK. It has been allowed to fester into a seemingly unresolvable (diplomatically) joke. Except it isn't a joke when innocent people must live in fear for their lives, day in and day out.

The whole world seems to be dictating terms to us. We retaliate by shouting &quot;sanctions&quot; and begging our allies to cooperate with us. Meanwhile, Iraq is in blatant &quot;material breach&quot; with no intention of cooperation. The UN is doing it's perfuctory daily routine and Iraq is slamming them as spys. Yada, yada yada. North Korea threatens us with nuclear proliferation and the AlQaeda is still out there biding their time.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The situation is grave and will take the use of all our options including that of military force, if necessary, in order to work it out.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

IMO, it matters not who fires the first shot. Only who wins the war.

We must remember, we have nuclear power. They are trying to build nuclear power. Time is on their side.

Like Winston Churchill once said, &quot;appeasement is feeding the alligator in hopes he will eat you last.&quot; http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tqrolleyes.gif

Floridaguy
01-06-2003, 02:51 PM
Good article by Bobby, and good response by RIM. Particularly in that, the strategy of trying to destroy every nuclear plant that we suspect might one day be used to fire a missile at us first, is ill-advised. If we knew proof-positive that a country absolutely intends and is preparing to fire that missile, then it is a different story. I don't think we &quot;know&quot; that to be the case anywhere yet. This is why building our missile-defense system is so critical, so we do have something we can do about the shot &quot;out of the blue&quot; one day. IMO, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is a farce, and there are probably few countries that signed that do not have nukes (including us, of course). The Cold War may be over, but the WMDs are probably spread out in more hole in the walls around the world than we can ever imagine.

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag19.gif

DMae
01-06-2003, 06:10 PM
Excellent article!

I heard a comment today that made me pause and consider for a moment. *The comment made was: &quot;What with N. Korea having a power-hungry looney in charge, and Iraq having the same, it almost seems that if there's war with both, call me nuts, but it just puts me in mind of WWII.&quot;

I guess in a way, he has a point.

Anyway, the article as well as news reports have mentioned a &quot;million-man&quot; army. *I wonder if the N. Korean army would be quickly willing to surrender when the going gets tough (as in Suddam's men in the Gulf War) or if they are actually dedicated fighters?

I guess all mad dictators have a penchant for abusing their own population, or certain members of same, ( Jong, Hussein, Hitler, et. al).

Evil truly does exist in the world --- and it seems to be manifesting itself more and more lately.

About the food shipments -- I wonder if those poor &quot;just plain&quot; folks trapped in N. Korea are actually getting any of it? *Somehow, I doubt it. *Although I'm sure Jong's army is well-fed.

I agree that building nuclear capability for S. Korea and Japan is not the best idea. *Missile defense seems much more appropriate.

And finally -- if Jong (or Saddam) starts firing, I pray that the USA and our allies (we do still have some, right?), hit 'em fast and hit 'em hard!