Preemptive Strike On North Korea Is ‘Ill-Conceived’ and ‘Factually-Flimsy’
Preemptive Strike On North Korea Is ‘Ill-Conceived’ and ‘Factually-Flimsy’
Former Secretary of Defense William Perry is one of America’s great national defense assets. So it is difficult to understand his lapse in judgment in proposing, with Harvard’s Ash Carter, to start a war with North Korea. Perhaps it is an attempt to position themselves to the right of President Bush, but their plan is ill-conceived, factually flimsy, and feeds directly into the crisis atmosphere that dictator Kim Jong-Il wants to create. Their June 22 Washington Post op-ed, commits five basic errors:
1. They exaggerate the threat. Calling North Korea’s test launch an “intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead on U.S. soil” is a huge analytical leap unsupported by any evidence. The last time North Korea fired a long-range missile was in 1998, it went about 1300 kilometers and failed to put its tiny payload into orbit.
2. They adopt the Bush administration’s deeply flawed preventive war strategy. The view that we have to go to war before “the threat has matured” is precisely what sent us into Iraq. The 1998 test was not an imminent threat and this one is no different -– certainly not the “race to threaten this country” that the authors suggest.
3. They justify the attack on flimsy intelligence. The very first sentence of the op-ed – “North Korean technicians are reportedly in the final stages of fueling a long-range ballistic missile” –- is in error. South Korean intelligence officials, who were the first to report the missile fueling, have now rejected the reports.
4. There is little calculation of the next move. Perry and Carter assume that once the U.S. attacked North Korea, Kim Jung-Il will do nothing. This assumption is convenient, but unsupported. Do the authors really think that Kim can afford to lose massive amounts of face and still maintain his grip on the military? What if he launches a missile at a U.S. facility in South Korea in a tit-for-tat exchange? Never count on winning a chess game with one bold move.
5. Finally, this whole approach plays directly into Kim Jung-Il’s hands. This test is aimed at increasing North Korea’s bargaining leverage, as shown by North Korea’s simultaneous calls for one-on-one discussions with the United States in order to resolve issues over the missile launch. Exaggerating its importance does just what Kim wants: makes him appear a more dangerous foe than he is. It also helps conservatives who have hyped the North Korean missile threat for years as a way to pour money into the anti-missile sink-hole.
Rather than the pre-emptive strike path suggested by Perry and Carter, the wisest course is to join with our allies in opposing any new missile tests, insist that North Korea return to the six-party talks, and indicate that if they do they will find a United States willing to negotiate a final solution to end these programs, as former US ambassador Jack Pritchard recommends. Kim Jung-Il is a petty dictator that we should be perfectly capable of maneuvering into surrender. We should not let his cheap stunts terrify us into playing his pathetic game.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yu are pwaying wight into my hawnds you stuwpid qwazy wight wing Amewacins.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:34 pmthe problem with lunatics, is they will respond in an unknown way. This guy Kim is a loony.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:36 pmYep. It fits that Kim Jong would think the right is crazy.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:39 pmditto! no strike ! go,hillary ,go1
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:44 pmditto! no strike ! go,hillary ,go1
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:44 pmhey flash, it’s always funny to watch two retards fight.Timmaaaagh
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:45 pmKim is upset cuz his name is Kim.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:46 pmTerrified States of America is at it again….
When Michael Moore exposed the truth about Americans living in fear of everything in ‘Bowling for Columbine’, I wonder if he ever considered it going to this kind of an extreme?
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:53 pmgood one
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:54 pmWe need to take a chill pill. How our administration thinks it has an ounce of credibility left is beyond me.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:57 pmThe post incorrectly characterizes the Bush Doctrine (first detailed in the 2002 National Security Strategy) as supportive of “preventive war”. It, in fact, does nothing of the sort.
Mr. Joseph Cirincione commits the same error as less-knowledgable Bush critics: there is a definate and easily-discernable distinction between “preventive attacks” and “preemptive action.” The Bush Doctrine (rightly) asserts the legitimacy of preemptive attacks. President Bush, in invading Iraq, invalidly invoked his own doctrine. This invalid invokation does not, however, undermine the importance of preemption given the current, evolving climate of international affairs.
However, Mr. Cirincione’s underlying premise is correct: a “preemptive” attack on North Korea would be invalid per the Bush Doctrine (and unwise to boot).
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:01 pmI think this needs to be said here:
Kim Jong Il: Hans Brix? Oh no! Oh, herro. Great to see you again, Hans!
Hans Blix: Mr. Il, I was supposed to be allowed to inspect your palace today, but your guards won’t let me enter certain areas.
Kim Jong Il: Hans, Hans, Hans! We’ve been frew this a dozen times. I don’t have any weapons of mass destwuction, OK Hans?
Hans Blix: Then let me look around, so I can ease the UN’s collective mind. I’m sorry, but the UN must be firm with you. Let me in, or else.
Kim Jong Il: Or else what?
Hans Blix: Or else we will be very angry with you… and we will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:01 pmDidn’t we cut a financial deal with North Korea last year when they started talking nukes? What’s up, they need more cash?
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:02 pm#8 – Excellent point, unbelievable.
If we pay attention at all, we would see that so many people operate from a base of fear. That’s dangerous in itself because we will eventually bring about exactly what we fear.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:04 pmMan, I was listening to Ash Cotter on NPR yesterday go on and on about how attacking North Korea would not be seen as an attack, you know, because we would warn them that we we’re attacking them. You have to be at Harvard to understand that logic–luckily the Supreme Benevolent Leader would no doubt take it take it that.
It took all of my will to not call in and tell him how great he is on the Punk’d show.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:04 pmIraq was a premptive attack moron.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:12 pm#12 LOL
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:13 pmMore crazy right-wing theocrats. These guys want Armaggedon and they want to help start it.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:14 pmIf Bush dummy attacks North Korea, then he will set off a nuclear war with China, which could kill millions in the United States and cause a complete economic collapse?! Dubya is insane!
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:14 pmI hate to break it to you, Iraq was a preventive invasion. No one ever made the claim that Iraq satisfied the conditions necessary to qualify as an “imminent” threat (the first necessary condition for preemption).
Personally, I think other circumstances permitted our attack of Iraq. But there can be no doubt that Bush violated his own Bush Doctrine of preemption – the document that obstenibly permitted the invasion.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:16 pmWell like DIck Cheney said last night, they’d have to be prepared to fire more than ONE.
Think about it people.
Does anyone really believe as soon as they have ONE missle capable of reaching US soil they’re going to fire it.
That would be like a skinny white boy walking into downtown Compton and shouting a racial slur. Its GUARUNTEED to get you killed.
It would be absolute and immediate suicide, and Kim knows it. So of COURSE he’ not going to fire it.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:18 pmLet’s launch a missile from the middle of the Untied States and see if it can reach North Korea.
I bet it can. My money is on the Untied States. It’s leaders are coming unglued, unhinged, and buzzard crazy. More moonshine for the Bush Cabal.
All of this talk of wars and rumors of war is just silly.
Toby Keith is out to lunch right now, he’ll be back to kick some ass.
I’m ordering some Kung Pao chicken from a Korean restaurant.
Let’s hear some more lies and propaganda from the US government. I haven’t heard enough yet from the lying propagandists.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:19 pmHans Blix: Or else we will be very angry with you… and we will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are.
Comment by Badmoodman
You are in a bad mood…
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:20 pm:-D
its, not it’s oops
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:20 pmBesisdes, last time I checked, its 6,943 miles from Seoul to Washington DC. That means IF Kim is capable of launching one functioning missle, with an actual warhead, he should be able to explode it somewhere about 600 miles out to sea off the Pacific coast.
Scary, huh?
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:23 pmThis is what they mean by “Fuzzy math”.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:26 pmbut clinton……
oh wait, that actually sorta works this time.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:27 pmstrike now for the sake of our children!!! it would be a great blunder to let this go unchecked!
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:27 pmCould it hit the United States?
Sure, if you consider the coast of Alaska the United States.
We could lose a lot of Penguins.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:28 pmThere are no penguins in Alaska.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:30 pmFLAVIUS WORFEUS –
If the missle lands in Alaska, North Korea is gonna be a world of hurt.
Thankfully, Fearless Leader (the real one) likes being in power and is just posturing. He’s missing the attention that has been recently diverted to Iran. He has no plans of actually firing this thing off.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:30 pm“We could lose a lot of Penguins.”
But Artic Penguins are endagered….possibly even extinct, or worse yet never even alive to be extinct. I blame Bush’s environmental policy.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:31 pma part of a fuselage from a missile fired by North Korea was found in Alaska in 1999.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:33 pmIt’s a really lucky thing for We the People that the rest of the world isn’t as paranoid and trigger-happy as the talking-heads pushing their memories and television shows.
But if we don’t do something drastic in November to remove these despots and silence their contemporaries, we might find ourselves learning what it’s like to be innocent civilians on the receiving end of our own torturific rhetoric.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:35 pmThe media has been preparing the American people for an attack on North Korea for over half a century. Especially in the last decade, think of all the movies that have North Korea as our “evil arch ennemy.”
I can’t believe trust what our intelligence services say! I’d like to know the source of this information. Perhaps the informer’s name is “sliding curveball?”
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:35 pmMan, got some spin off on that one.
I was being facetious chase, as I said earlier he would 1:18 post, he’d never fire it at us. Never. It would be instant suicide and he knows it.
Of course he wouldn’t be posturing like this if Bush’s policy actually included some “strategy” to deal with North Korea, back when Kim first told Bush he HAD nukes.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:37 pm“all the movies that have North Korea as our “evil arch ennemy.—
Team America, The Manchurian Candidate(the real one, not that hack remake), Mash, thats all I got.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:39 pmFair enough.
The problem with North Korea, they have shown again and again they refuse to abide by the terms of diplomatic agreements (see their 1994 agreement to shut down heavy water reactors in exchange for economic concessions).
I don’t see any way to reliabily negotiate with them with the hope they will uphold their end of any deal.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:41 pmDon’t one of the Tom Cruise or James Bond movies have a “North Korean Terrorist.”
Also, there video games with “North Korean Terrorists” as well.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:43 pmif they are aloud to perfect their weapons systems by “testing them” we will greatly regret not taking any action now. future action will be even more costly! somthing will have to be done , wether it be now or later.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:43 pmSimon. Trust me.
The LAST thing Bushy wants is to have to attack North Korea.
Does Bush love war? Sure. As long as we’re the dominating force on the battlefield.
For those with short memories, or too young to remember, we didn’t “WIN” the Korean war. It was a Stalemate. Why? Well a 2 MILLION man army is a good place to start.
North Korea is a powerful nation in “conventional” terms. They have a real army, with real tanks, planes and guns.
We can barely handle the people of Iraq, and had to dig to come up with 150,000 troops to do it. We even had to delve into our National Guard reserve.
North Korea could meet us with 10 times the numbers on the battlefield and Bush knows it.
A war with North Korea would mean a forced draft. Something Bush doesn’t want.
A war with North Korea would most likely go Nuke, which would open the door for catastrophe with China and Russia, something else even Bushy doesn’t want.
Which is why when Kim told Bush , “hey, you went into Iraq because you THINK they MIGHT have WMD? Well we HAVE them NOW. So there tough guy” Bush did NOTHING.
Not a damned thing.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:45 pmI hate to break it to you, Iraq was a preventive invasion. No one ever made the claim that Iraq satisfied the conditions necessary to qualify as an “imminent†threat (the first necessary condition for preemption).
While it is true that no one used the word “imminent”, they said Iraq was capable of harming us and that the attack could come “at any time”, which is just another way of saying it was “imminent.” Maybe they didn’t use the word itself, but they used its definition to describe the danger from Iraq. And they knew then that it was a lie. (What else would they have been trying to imply by saying things like “We don’t want the proof to come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”?)
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:47 pm“Also, there video games with “North Korean Terrorists†as well.”
Woah now, way to change the goal posts, just like a liberal :)
So where up to 4 movies now? Not that much of a list. Theres more about Germany, are we attacking them soon? (At least we know we can beat them)
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:49 pmI hate to break it to you, Iraq was a preventive invasion. No one ever made the claim that Iraq satisfied the conditions necessary to qualify as an “imminent†threat (the first necessary condition for preemption).
Comment by chase — June 23, 2006 @ 1:16 pm
Are you freakin kiddin me?
All we heard was Mushroom clouds over DC, and Clear and Present Danger from the Reichstag gang.
What were you in a coma for the past 3 years, or in an underground bunker or something?
Was Iraq supposed to be pre-emptive? Sure. It was supposed pre-empt a “CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER” to the US.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:53 pmCheney had Soccer Moms all over the East Coast thinking Turban wearing Iraqi’s with hooked knives were going to come and force their kids to read the Koran.
He turned them into “Security Moms”.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:55 pmI don’t see it this way, and I think the theory of jus ad bellum supports my view.
Under this theory (which is the foundation of preemptive war theory) you need three things.
1. “a manifest intent to injure” – Hussein had the intent of injuring the U.S. or our interests abroad.
2. “degree of active participation that makes intent positive” – This is the condition I feel went unfulfilled. Hussein *probably* had the WMD material (or access to it) but was lacking the delivery mechanisms to strike.
3. “waiting, or doing nothing, would magnify the threat” – I think everyone agrees this was the case.
Nevertheless, by not fulfulling the second condition, it is obvious that other avenues could have been explored (had attacking the our interests been the only rationale for our invasion).
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:57 pmCivil Air Patrol enthusiasts all over DC were busy in their Pith Helmets scanning the skies over Washington looking for incoming Iraqi nukes.
It was a clown act.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:57 pmWe didnt break the ‘94 agreement first, they had started limited uranium enrichment, which wasn’t specified as a no-no specifically in the agreement, however it did violate the NNPT which they had to join as part of the agreement.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:58 pmI don’t see it this way
Comment by chase — June 23, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
Then you were living under a rock.
Cool.
Gonna start calling you Pete. As in Moss.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:59 pmFLAVIUS WORFEUS –
Hey dipshit – I said Bush’s invocation of his own Doctrine was invalid.
I find it funny that your hostility renders you incapable of reading for comprehension.
Why don’t you go the mountains, not bother anybody.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:59 pmOh, and Chase, for the icing on the cake:
The Bush Administration is now saying it never told the public that Iraq was an “imminent” threat, and therefore it should be absolved for overstating the case for war and misleading the American people about Iraq’s WMD. Just this week, White House spokesman Scott McClellan lashed out at critics saying “Some in the media have chosen to use the word ‘imminent’. Those were not words we used.”
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:00 pmDear Chase:
Thanks for your post. On the surface, you are correct. I’ve been following the issues with the DPRK ever since I was in graduate school (i.e. 1993).
While your point is well taken, I must disagree with the conclusion.
Yes, the DPRK is a far greater threat than Iraq or Iran. And yes, they have nukes, they have the Taepodong II missle (which can hit as far inland as… say… Boise, Idaho or Salt Lake City, Utah). And yes, they are complete xenophobes who view the USA as Public Enemy #1, the Japanese as Enemy #2 and the South Korean “puppets” (per the KCNA webpage) as Enemy #3.
But, you must understand how desperate they are. Their people are starving to death slowly. There is very little economy there. There is even less food. Severe droughts of the 1990’s and horrific mismanagement of the food distribution system by both the “Great Leader” Comrade Kim il-Sung and his son, the “Dear Leader” Comrade Kim Jung-il, have conspired to threaten even meager subsistence of the people (all 23 million of them… including members of Comrade Kim’s family!) The general public are down to eating grass and tree bark.
They can (and likely will eventually) attack us with nukes as they get more and more desperate for basic sustinance each day.
However, in 2000, President Clinton began easing the tensions on the Korean Peninsula. He was very successful…. at one point, in September, 2000, there was talk of peaceful reunification of the 2 Koreas… and in October, 2000, we talked of opening diplomatic offices in each other’s countries. The neo-cons in Congress were LIVID… they said Clinton was surrendering to the will of the DPRK… and that we could be blackmailed successfully.
Then Bush came in and turned back the clock on diplomacy 25-30 years.
Without diplomatic exchanges, the DPRK is back to their usual threats.
I support a preemptive war in North Korea… after all, they actually DO have nukes (unlike Iraq or Iran) and the DO sell them to terrorists and terror-supporting states.
However, if I had my choice, I’d ask President Bush to send his “Poppy’s” new buddy, Former President Bill Clinton, to reinitiate diplomacy… and quickly… BEFORE we here in Seattle see a mushroom cloud (with Comrade Kim’s name written on it) appear.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:00 pm3. “waiting, or doing nothing, would magnify the threat†– I think everyone agrees this was the case.
Comment by PeteMoss — June 23, 2006 @ 1:57 pm
LMAO.
Tell us another one Petey.
That ones funny.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:02 pmTaepodong II missle (which can hit as far inland as… say… Boise, Idaho or Salt Lake City, Utah).
Comment by MrBlueSky — June 23, 2006 @ 2:00 pm
No it can’t.
On a good day it could possibly land somewhere about 500 miles out to sea off the Pacific coast.
It could NOT reach inland. By a calculator.
And a globe.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:04 pmI hate to break it to you that invasion and attack are synonymous.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:04 pmThis is not an exhaustaive list, but just the tip of the iceberg of the propoganda war that has been waged against Korea. Complete saturation. This is why when the name “North Korea” is spoken people think “WAR.”
Video Game 1997: “Nuclear Strike” — You invade a North Korean city to destroy, shoot, etc
Movie 2002: “Die Another Day” — “Plot Outline: It’s up to James Bond to discover the connection between a North Korean terrorist and an adventurous diamond broker whose looks may be deceiving.”
Movie (TV) 1974: “Pueblo” — “Plot Summary: Dramatization showing the 1968 seizure of the spy ship, Pueblo, by the North Koreans and the treatment…”
West Wing (Season 5) 2003: “Han” — A North Korean concert pianist informs Bartlet with a secret note that he wants to defect to the United States during his visit (1). Bartlet is torn between wanting to avoid a diplomatic incident that could wreck negotiations in Geneva with North Korea over its potential nuclear weapons (2) and wanting to grant the pianist asylum (3).
Mad TV (TV) 1995: North Korean Soldier in skit
JAG (Season 9) 2003: When a US submarine rescues 10 North Koreans after their vessel sinks in South Korean waters, Cmdr. Turner arrives from Washington to determine their purpose.
Video Game (2001): “Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2″
Home Alone 3 (1997): Plot Outline: Alex Pruitt, a young boy of nine living in Chicago, fend off thieves who seek a top-secret chip in his toy car to support a North Korean terrorist organization’s next deed.
Provacateur 1998: Plot Summary: Sook Hee (aka Miya) is a North Korean agent who has infiltrated into South Korea in order to steal US military secrets…
Behind Enemy Lines-Axis of Evil 2006: Plot Outline: Navy SEALS, headed by Lt. Bobby James, are dispatched to North Korea on a covert mission, all in an effort to take out a missile site…
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:08 pmI am curious why the Chinese don’t view Kim as a threat. I know that he so far has not claimed they were an enemy, but anyone as usntable as Kim cannot be good for the region. How long will it be before he goes even more bug nuts and claims the chinese are the enemy? I can see why the US would not want the Chinese to invade North Korea, but what would we do if they did. I know that tension along the border between china and north korea is pretty high. Alot of North Koreans have taken to sneaking into china, and black teams, have been accused of entering china to kill any defectors.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:09 pmHowever, if I had my choice, I’d ask President Bush to send his “Poppy’s†new buddy, Former President Bill Clinton, to reinitiate diplomacy
Comment by MrBlueSky — June 23, 2006 @ 2:00 pm
But I DO agree 1000 percent with that Idea.
Clinton could schmooze an Iceberg.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:11 pm#58
Spudge:
Or the same. From dictionary.com’s thesaurus; take your pick:
Main Entry: invasion
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:12 pmPart of Speech: noun
Definition: attack
Synonyms: aggression, assault, breach, encroachment, entrenchment, foray, forced entrance, incursion, infiltration, infraction, infringement, inroad, intrusion, irruption, maraud, offense, offensive, onslaught, overstepping, raid, transgression, trespass, usurpation, violation.
Preemptive:
marked by the seizing of the initiative : initiated by oneself
Preventive:
undertaken to forestall anticipated hostile action
I was a little confused with all of this fancy talk trying to describe how we invaded another country that had not done any harm to the US, had not threatend to do any harm to the US, and did not have the ability to do any harm to the US, so I went to the dictionary.
Therefore, I believe anyone who voted for preemtive wins!!!
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:12 pmTo those of you arguing whether the term “imminent” was used before we attacked Iraq, it was used by Donald Rumsfeld. The other terms used were “immediate threat” and “direct threat”
Here is a whole web page filled with those quotes:
http://zfacts.com/p/304.html
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:13 pm“This is not an exhaustaive list, but just the tip of the iceberg of the propoganda war that has been waged against Korea. Complete saturation. This is why when the name “North Korea†is spoken people think “WAR.—
First off, I think Poofy Hair before I think WAR, but you could compile a list like that for nearly any nation/region. I think you might be grasping a bit much for this one. Also, I see your including TV shows now. Perhaps books next?
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:14 pmShould Kim Jong Il ever try to perform a preemptive strike on US territory, we have two things going for us. First – he can’t shoot straight and runs the risk of having the weapon come down in any one of several neighbor states, secondly – he needs weeks to set up each weapon and all of North Korea would be fused into a layer of glass about 20 cm. deep before he could fire a second weapon.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:14 pmFor those with short memories, or too young to remember, we didn’t “WIN†the Korean war. It was a Stalemate. Why? Well a 2 MILLION man army is a good place to start.
North Korea is a powerful nation in “conventional†terms. They have a real army, with real tanks, planes and guns.
Comment by FLAVIUS WORFEUS — June 23, 2006 @ 1:45 pm
Now now let’s not give them more credit are due. First of all, the Korean War was classified as a police action by our government, we were never at war so to speak, similar to what we have going now in Iraq, we never ever put our full weight into the conflict like WWII.
Secondly, NK was losing and losing badly prior to the intervention of China who threw about a million soldiers over the border in the matter of a few days. We never committed the troops necessary to combat this and Truman was getting beat up at home over an increasingly unpopular “war”. Additionally, he handcuffed MacArthur and I’m not just talking about preventing the use of nukes.
Also, let’s not forget that Russian pilots were flying many of the Migs for NK and we kicked their butts.
I’m not saying that we should attack, but let’s not make them out to be “all badass” and stuff because they really aren’t. The only thing the North has going for them is that they have 10,000 artillery pieces dug into the mountains aimed at Seoul and would level it at the first sign of hostilities. Aside from that, we would mow them down in short order.
In summary – they are not powerful by any stretch, we have nothing to fear from them. We should leave Kim to his high heels and his popular TV show, “Keeping your hair cut in accordance with the Peoples Communist Lifestyle”.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:20 pmIn summary – they are not powerful by any stretch, we have nothing to fear from them. We should leave Kim to his high heels and his popular TV show, “Keeping your hair cut in accordance with the Peoples Communist Lifestyleâ€.
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 2:20 pm
Nice interpreation Onthefence (doesn’t that hurt your gnads?).
Tell it to my uncle who fought in Korea. Tell HIM they’re not powerful.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:28 pmAnd when you leave your enemy on the battlefield, fully armed and outfitted, I got news for you.
You did NOT win.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:29 pmAnd if you don’t think Russia or China would help them “again” given their strategic location to both countries, then I’ve got some land for sale for you in Memphis.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:30 pmAside from that, we would mow them down in short order
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 2:20 pm
Now where have I heard that before?
Hmmm….
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:32 pmI’m not saying we won, but your inflation of NK into the big bad boogeyman is a joke.
My point is……..China’s entry is what caused the stalemate, not the vaunted DPRK army.
China would not enter any conflict on the Korean peninsula, their economy would collapse without our trade and their rising middle class wouldn’t stand for that.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:36 pmAnd BTW, for those of you in LA and Seattle rushing out to buy duct tape, let me explain something else to you, about what is known as “Air Miles”.
The dorkdong missle has a range of “just about” 3000 miles, (depending on the wind direction:), which is NOT how far it is from LA to North Korea from the Air.
Air Miles from Seoul to Los Angeles is 5,956 “Air Miles”.
Now he might scare the crap out of some whales and dolphins, and there could be an impact to the deep sea fishing industry off the pacific coast, but he aint hitting the Golden Gate bridge anytime soon with it, and I wouldn’t sell my shares in Microsoft just yet.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:37 pmI’m not saying we won, but your inflation of NK into the big bad boogeyman is a joke.
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
No its not. You obviously know no one who actually “FOUGHT” in Korea.
If you did, they’d say you were a joke.
Underestimating ones enemy is the sign of arrogance, and what causes most campaigns to fail.
Like Iraq.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:39 pmChina would not enter any conflict on the Korean peninsula
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
Yea they said that in 1950 and they said it again in 66 with Vietnam.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:41 pmDear FLAVIUS WORFEUS (Post #56):
You’re right… that was my bad. I went back to research and found that TIME magazine was referring to Taepodong III missile which, at the time, was in the initial stages of research.
Taepodong II can only hit Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and (maybe… if the guidance systems are working perfectly) possibly here in Seattle.
But, beware the Taepodong III… coming soon!
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:41 pmI’m not saying we won, but your inflation of NK into the big bad boogeyman is a joke.
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
No its not. You obviously know no one who actually “FOUGHT†in Korea.
If you did, they’d say you were a joke.
Underestimating ones enemy is the sign of arrogance, and what causes most campaigns to fail.
Like Iraq.
Comment by FLAVIUS WORFEUS — June 23, 2006 @ 2:39 pm
*YAWN* don’t pretend to know me, my father fought in the war. I’m taking you to task on your version of the history of that conflict, otherwise we are on the same page.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:43 pmYour right BlueSky about Alaska and Hawaii and Guam.
We’ve known that for a long, long time however.
Seattle however you are incorrect on.
That one would land somewhere next to Davy Jones Locker.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:44 pm*YAWN* don’t pretend to know me, my father fought in the war. I’m taking you to task on your version of the history of that conflict, otherwise we are on the same page.
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 2:43 pm
I’m not presuming to know you fence. I’m just pointing out that MY uncle DID fight in North Korea, and if you told HIM that the North Koreans were not strong, he’d laugh you out of the room.
He calls them yellow devils, and said they fought like the devil himself.
Also you are completely ignoring their strength. It would be no problem for North Korea to overrun the DMZ, take out or 38,500 troops stationed there, and we’d be forced to respond with tactical nukes. I KNOW people stationed there now, and they agree with this scenario, as they are staring down about 10 times their own numbers.
Right now we had to tap into our National Guard units to come up with 150,000 battle ready troops in Iraq.
North Korea would have NO problem putting 10 times that amount in our path.
You keep on underestimating them, and believing in our supreme might. But I think thats a mistake. I think thats been our mistake since Dubya took office.
But you’re right, we’re on the same page that we do not need to attack them over this. Well said there.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:50 pm2 years ago we were bragging how we crushed the Taliban in Afghanistan too.
If thats true, who are all those guys shooting at us there?
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:53 pmNO OIL NO ATTACK WE ONLY ATTACK COUNTRIES THAT HAVE SOMETHING WE CAN STEAL. THE FACT THAT NORTH KOREA HAS A DICTATOR MEANS NOTHING THE BUSH POLICY IS LIE CHEAT AND STEAL BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. PROPAGANDA WORKS BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE WHAT WE TELL THEM.
POLICY OF BUSH/CHENEY/RUMMY
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:55 pmThe radical right keeps saying that the left is making us more dangerous by critiquing the President.
I would think them (the right) waging an attack on a country with a B-league – no make that little-league military and being unable to win the battle after three years is far more dangerous. It not only shows the rest of the world that we aren’t the super military we power we claim to be – it shows them why not.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:01 pmThe Bush Administration is now saying it never told the public that Iraq was an “imminent†threat, and therefore it should be absolved for overstating the case for war and misleading the American people about Iraq’s WMD. Just this week, White House spokesman Scott McClellan lashed out at critics saying “Some in the media have chosen to use the word ‘imminent’. Those were not words we used.â€
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:01 pm==============================
…and millions of kool-aid drinkers say,”That’s right!”
is making us more endangered
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:03 pm2 years ago we were bragging how we crushed the Taliban in Afghanistan too.
If thats true, who are all those guys shooting at us there?
Comment by FLAVIUS WORFEUS — June 23, 2006 @ 2:53 pm
Well there’s a big difference between “we” as in the USA and “we” as in Fox News and the Administration who made that declaration.
We never made the commitment necessary to defeat the Taliban completely or capture OBL. As soon as they fled Kabul we declared victory and didn’t really spend a lot of energy mopping up because we had to get ready for Iraq. When you are dealing with a largely rural population in rugged territory taking the few major cities that exist doesn’t really matter, that’s the mistake the Russians made.
Had we made a real commitment to locking that place down and actually put the resources in place to accomplish our goals then things might have turned out differently. But just like Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq – we win just about every battle but lose(or tie) the “war”.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:11 pmI would think them (the right) waging an attack on a country with a B-league – no make that little-league military and being unable to win the battle after three years is far more dangerous. It not only shows the rest of the world that we aren’t the super military we power we claim to be – it shows them why not.
Comment by unbelievable — June 23, 2006 @ 3:01 pm
Exactly!
Its what I’ve been saying all along.
If we can’t handle a few guys running around in rags, sporting Viet Nam era weapons and using homemade landmines, how the hell do we expect to fight a “real army”?
Is our military technologically superious? Sure. But that edge only works so far when the enemy is rooted into the mountain side, and when they have jets too.
Its a whole new ballgame then..
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:18 pmWell there’s a big difference between “we†as in the USA and “we†as in Fox News and the Administration who made that declaration.
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 3:11 pm
Agreed.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:19 pmHad we made a real commitment to locking that place down and actually put the resources in place to accomplish our goals then things might have turned out differently
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 3:11 pm
Perhaps.
But the might Soviet Union tried for 10 years unsuccessfully, so I don’t think it would be the cakewalk the arrogant right wants us to believe.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:21 pmBut just like Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq – we win just about every battle but lose(or tie) the “warâ€.
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 3:11 pm
Kind of like how we beat the British to establish our country in the first place, right?
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:22 pmLike UNB said, Iraq was the stupidest military blunder we could’ve made.
Going into Iraq accomplished exactly what Bush Senior KNEW it would.
It showed our enemies our ASS.
And now they all want a peice.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:24 pmKind of like how we beat the British to establish our country in the first place, right?
Yeah well since we went to the British Empire School of Imperialism we are making the same mistakes now that they made then.
Perhaps.
But the might Soviet Union tried for 10 years unsuccessfully, so I don’t think it would be the cakewalk the arrogant right wants us to believe.
Comment by FLAVIUS WORFEUS — June 23, 2006 @ 3:22 pm
Well I would say we had a pretty big role in that whole affair, being as rugged as it is….the only way to effectively move troops in Afghanistan is by helicopter. Our Stinger missles inflicted terrible losses on the Russians and effectively rendered them unable to move around the country. This caused them to be bottled up in the cities and large bases which negated their numerical and technological advantages.
Plus you can’t forget the politics of the time, the USSR was on the verge of collapse before Gorby decided that the whole affair just wasn’t worth it.
If George and company were of the reading persuasion or in the least bit intellectually curious they might know these things and therefore would have prevented us from making the same mistakes.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:54 pmPlus you can’t forget the politics of the time,
Comment by onthefence — June 23, 2006 @ 3:54 pm
No I don’t. I remember them well.
And the fact that we had a role in that is exactly why I brought it up.
Because you can BET YOUR ASS that Russia and China are going to have a role in Iran.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:59 pmIt seems the repug motto is “when in doubt start another war
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:16 pmBecause you can BET YOUR ASS that Russia and China are going to have a role in Iran.
Comment by FLAVIUS WORFEUS — June 23, 2006 @ 3:59 pm
Well Iran is whole different matter, we have no justification for acting against them and the international community wouldn’t stand for it a second time. This is off topic but I’m a big proponent of letting Israel stand on it’s own two feet. We give them more aid than any other country, they have most of our most sophistcated weapons, and are a nuclear power. They are more than capable of fending off an Iranian attack. So let them worry about Iran, many of our problems in that region stem from our unending support of Israel.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:27 pmlets see the administration is considering attacking Iran and North korea, where do they plan on getting the troops to do this, or will they try to do it the easy/quick and dirty way like they do everything else and just try to nuke them without committing any troops.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:33 pmWell said onftheence.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:42 pmMike.
They can’t nuke them. Its too close to Russia and China.
Our detonating a Nuke in North Korea or Iran, would be perhaps the single most ignorant suicidal stunt we could make.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:43 pmThey’d have to institute an emergency draft, and draft men up to the age of 40 to fill the ranks.
Considering Iran has 500,000 boots ready to hit the ground, and North Korea has as many, with another million or so in reserve, and Russia has 250,000 ready to go, and China? Well lets not go there…
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:45 pmI know they can’t nuke them, and you know it, but I dont think the Bush admin are among the great thinkers and planners, afterall, werent they the ones that thought the war would pay for itself and the Iraqi’s would welcome us with open arms?????????
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:48 pma draft would be political suicide for the repugs.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:51 pmAn excellent point.
I imagine we have to hope that there is going to be some congressional oversight before they let Bush play with his toys.
Course, if you listen to some of the people who were there, they’ll tell you we detonated a tactical nuke at the battle for the airport on the 3rd day, which is why the fierce fighting suddenly “stopped”.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:52 pmWhat we’re going to find out, is that Russia and China are the ones egging on North Korea, “behind the scenes”.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:17 pmMike
No, they never really believed in that. It’s just how the war was sold.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:58 pmUh, yay-ah, I guess so…. because they’ll fight back. We only pick on countries who can’t kick our ass.
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:19 pmI don’t think you guys are taking NK seriously enough, but I don’t think attacking them pre-emptively would really do anything other than what Kim Jong Il wants. I think most of you will be singing a different tune when you suddenly find out that NK can launch a nuke right into San Francisco…
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:20 pmSeixon,
It is our side that has been shouting about North Korea being the real problem in the world. We have been pointing out that this maniac has nuclear weapons, while your side is so focused on Iraq and needing their oil. Sorry, we beat you to it. Now, what are you guys gonna do about it? Since, it is the republicans that control all three branches of government.
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:31 pmI think most of you will be singing a different tune when you suddenly find out that NK can launch a nuke right into San Francisco…
Comment by Strapion — June 23, 2006 @ 6:20 pm
No they can’t Oppenheimer.
The distance on a good day with the wind to their backs is just under 3000 miles for their dickdong 2 missle.
Air Miles from Seoul to Los Angeles is 5,956 miles. Air Miles.
Missles travel by the air. Thats why their called missles.
Now if the dickdong 2 is also a torpedo, then gee, maybe they could slam it into the pier at fishermans wharf, I don’t know.
But its not a torpedo. Its a missle.
And this missle will land in the sea, about 500 miles from the mainland.
Buy a globe.
June 23rd, 2006 at 8:48 pmNorth Korea will only use their 6to 12 estimated nukes as Doomsday devices, if they are attacked by the United States first! They would most likely shoot them at South Korea and/or Japan, but it’s possible one could be launched to hit Hawaii or Alaska! The real danger is NOT from the NK, but from President Bush, if he retaliated with nukes and one fell into China or the fallout drifted into China, which would enrage the Chinese to hit the US with nukes in revenge!
The NK if attacked would also send one million troops across the DMZ into South Korea, with orders to kill every American soldier in their path, so most likely 50,000+ of our soldiers would be slaughtered in the conflict, and all of South Korea destroyed with hundreds of thousands slain! Both Koreas would cease to exist in the end and would be a wastelands!
June 24th, 2006 at 12:22 amI agree with your scenarios Jay. I think its more like 38,500 troops on the DMZ, but I do think you’re right and if attacked there is little doubt we’d be giving up our troops on the DMZ.
Also I cannot imagine them firing one at the US. Dick Cheney said it last night.
They’d have to be able to fire more than one.
They won’t be. And they cannot hit inside the continental United States, unless you want to consider Alaska, where they could take out that bridge to nowhere.
But notice how the right wingers are ALL talking about his missle like they were going to hit LA with it or DC. They KNOW it can’t reach that far, but they tell the people this ANYWAY!!!!!
They lie like Nazi’s.
June 24th, 2006 at 1:19 amGWB has voiced his willingness to ‘nuke’ Iran, if he thinks he has no other option, because he knows future administrations would ‘lack the courage to act.’ This from the same person who said he would leave the resolution of our occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan to these same future administrations. The story of his life, make a big fat mess, and walk away, expecting someone else to fix it for him, while he finds a new disaster to create, knowing he will never have to worry his empty little head about the consequences, because for him, there never are any. And as long as we continue to do weapons testing, and building our own nukes, while at the same time dictating the actions of other countries, our blatant hypocrisy will speak louder than words. Not that they care, mind you.
June 24th, 2006 at 4:08 am[...] Preemptive Strike On North Korea Is Ill-Conceived and …Think Progress, DC - 20 hours ago… Korea s bargaining leverage, as shown by North Korea s simultaneous calls for one-on … We should not let his cheap stunts terrify us into playing his pathetic … [...]
June 24th, 2006 at 8:48 amMost interesting to me in this situation, is that when 3 of our US Naval vessals parked off North Korea’s coast, which are part of the defense shield program, North Korea blinked. You just have to understand how to deal with the Asian mindset, they ONLY respond to power.
June 24th, 2006 at 12:06 pmPost 109 WORFEUS > there was over 50,000 US troops on the DMZ, but you are correct that Bush supposedly has drawn that down to about 38,000 now! NK plan, if attacked is to flood the south with hundreds of thousands of troops within the first hours of the conflict to slaughter all our troops > no prisoners taken alive! So if Bush wants to go down in history as the president who caused the slaughter of 38,000 Americans in 48 hours, then he can go attack the NK! Also all of North and South Korea would be destroyed in the conflict, so any US corporations in the South would lose all their investments and personnel as well! A new war in Korea would kill millions in the first week alone, so Bush would become a mass murderer like Adolf Hitler!
NOTE: NK Dong 3 missile can only reach as far as Alaska or Hawaii > unknown how acurate the missile guidence system is, so if shot at Hawaii it might miss Honolulu and hit Maui or some other unpopulated location! One shot at Alaska would probably take out a bunch of wildlife, but the radiation would end tourism to Alaska for a long time! NK would only use their nukes if attacked by the Bush Regime, so Dubya would cause the disaster!
June 24th, 2006 at 12:34 pmThey theoretically could also hit our missle bases in Guam, but they’d have to have about 10 years of development and testing on a real guidance system, and get a few more geopositioning satellites up before they could be so precise.
In other words, this is all a stunt, and Bush, as always, is swinging at a feint.
June 24th, 2006 at 12:44 pmYes WORFEUS > the accuracy of the NK Dong 3 missiles are in doubt, but they would have better luck with the Dong 1 fired on South Korea and the Dong 2 fired at Japan! NK has enough nukes to wipe out South Korea, and to cripple Japan, but any fired at Alaska or Hawaii would be more symbolic! If they got lucky and did hit Hawaii it would cause panic there and most of the population would try to flee back to the US mainland! Bush is an extremely dangerous fool!
June 24th, 2006 at 12:54 pmThe only reason North Korea is posturing right now is because Russia and China are egging them on behind the scenes.
While its true they might be able to Nuke Japan, they also know that they’d be wiped off the planet before they had time to open a bottle of cheap champange.
Their posturing at the will of the new Chinese-Russo alliance.
June 24th, 2006 at 1:03 pmBut if China or Russia wanted to take out our missles in Japan, (err…I mean “their” missles), then North Korea having nukes capable of doing so would be a nice edge.
June 24th, 2006 at 1:10 pmWORFEUS > the NK leader knows the day he fires his nuke missiles will be his last one alive on Earth > that is why they are Doomsday devices, to be used only if attacked by the Bush Regime dummies!
June 24th, 2006 at 1:29 pmYou know it.
Mutual destruction is a great deterrent. Even if he gets nukes, I mean real ones, ones that can blow up junk and stuff, he knows that firing them is last day.
Right wingers love to scare people and say, “but he’s crazy, if he gets one he’ll use it.”.
Course these are the same mooks who said the Russians and the Chinese would too. And India and Pakistan would too.
No one wants to destroy their own country. If he does end up with them, it just means we’ll have to be nicer to him.
June 24th, 2006 at 4:35 pm[...] More judiciously Joseph Cirincione at Think Progress has more on why the Perry-Carter nutjob proposal to pre-emptively attack North Korea is just bad policy. [...]
June 29th, 2006 at 9:18 pm[...] Here’s an excellent reply to Carter and Perry from the Center for American Progress. Meanwhile, DC journalist John Feffer is a voice of reason amidst the confused warblings of some liberal bloggers who ought to know better: [...]
July 5th, 2006 at 5:09 pm[...] Joe Cirincione explains why a preemptive strike on North Korea’s missles would be a disastrous blunder. [...]
July 9th, 2006 at 10:14 am[...] More judiciously Joseph Cirincione at Think Progress has more on why the Perry-Carter nutjob proposal to pre-emptively attack North Korea is just bad policy. [...]
August 2nd, 2006 at 1:41 amHello! I am Billy Johnson Nice design. Enjoy! Good site! OK. 0n79p7k .
January 23rd, 2007 at 2:17 am