I have watched with amusement and frustration at all the commentary regarding North Korea's dear leader. And this not only goes for this nut, but a bunch of other nuts like Ahmadinejad and the like that somehow ended up in charge of countries.
Editors of newspapers, bloggers, the average Joe and Jane on the street have wonderful opinions on how to deal with these jokers. Some say engage with China and Russia. Others say bomb em. Others say negotiate or bribe em.
It comes down to this. These people are freaking nuts. Nobody knows how to deal with them because they can't be dealt with. Russia and China have the right idea in their sleazy way. They enable and encourage these clowns so they are a distraction and menace to us and our goodwill.
Continuing the same path with Kim Jong Il especially is borderline insanity. All this guy and his father before him have done is cost us money and grief. Cheney and others said Iran was training insurgents to go into Iraq and kill Americans and cause general mayhem. Yet, Tehran is still there instead of the Mideast Regional Parking Lot it should be if that were true.
It comes down to this. Nobody knows what to do about these radical regimes. Not George Bush or Dick Cheney. Not Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama.
The only suggestion I can think of that comes close to making sense is for us to do what Russia and China do. Pretend to be their friends and encourage them to cause grief for Russia and China. Or any other country that we want to see caused grief. It's a helluva lot cheaper than invading Iraq and none of our guys has to die to "free" a country which didn't do a goddamn thing to free itself from it's own fucking dictator.
14 comments:
You always seem to make a lot of sense, truth.
(Later, thanks to your influence, I will be writing on my blog again.)
Truth: Sounds like a plan to me! At least you have one. We haven't heard one from our leader, not that I really blame him, because like you said, what DO we DO? I'd rather eradicate this wacko off the map, but I'm sure that's NOT the answer. But then again...
Sue: I wish you would hurry up with that. There's a bunch of presidents I forgot everything I learned in college about them.
Pamela: Thanks for stopping by. But if that wacko was eradicated, I wouldn't cry.
kind and gentle - What I wrote tonight isn't about the presidents but it will be soon.
K>,
I would like to think that the international community would mobilize against these dangerous jerks, but the UN can't get out of its own way.
That leaves a dilemma for the US to contemplate. Does it take unilateral action which is derided on the left and loved on the right. Or does it sit back and wait for a series of 9/11s. Certainly a Gordian knot of a situation.
Like I tell my goalkeepers, when you are confronted with a breakaway threat, you can wait to get scored on or you can charge and go down with your guns blazing. I prefer the second option.
Good day, sir.
So we attacked a country that had nothing to do with 911 LaOT. I guess that showed Bin Laden.
Is Kim Jung Il worth a fight with China because they have to "save face"? If you're willing to reinstitute the draft and raise the necessary taxes to pay for invading North Korea. Plus risk war with China because China will have to "save face" I will respectfully disagree with your position. If you have a better plan that takes into the fact that Kim and the rest of the dictators and Ayatollas are nuts, I'd love to see it Brother.
Thank you for adding to the discussion.
K>,
I happen to think that China doesn't want to fight a war. Their support of NK is superficial. I think that if the US puts the chicoms on notice, they will quietly drop NK as useless baggage and force them to get into line.
The US interests in this part of Asia are much more important than China's. It will take some balls, but the US isn't facing another 1950-53 situation with China. They are an established world power that is becoming more capitalistic everyday. They don't want war with the US or the west. They're making too much money off of the west. Why kill the golden goose?
NK is a pimple on the ass of the world.
Good day, sir.
NK has a million man army. Life means nothing to the dear leader. Even if China stays quiet, are you still ready to reinstitute the draft and raise the necessary taxes to accomplish the invasion, conquering and rebuilding of NK? I have grave doubts the Japanese have the stomach for war. Seoul is less than 200 miles from the border. We're talking massive loss of life Brother. Even if all that is done is surgical bombing, unlike Iraq, NK has the means to retaliate.
NK is another pawn used by powers to drain our treasury and cause us grief. Just like Cuba and now, Venezuela.
Capitalism has taken hold in China. Be patient. It will take many more years for it to transform completely. But just as the Soviet Union crumbled, Capitalism will overcome the ruling cabal in China, without an American life lost.
K>,
I think NK is a paper tiger. Miltarily, I think we can bomb them into oblivion. I think before the bombs drop, China will call off the dog, NK. NK is economically a basket case.
It will cease to exist without the chicoms. I am convinced that if the chicoms pull out their economic support for NK it will collapse like a house of cards.
NK serves a purpose for China in that they bluster while China builds its economy. In other words, it's like a diversionary tactic. As for the draft, I think that's a non-starter. I was subject to the draft and it's a bunch of jack. I went in and fought. I felt that strongly.The volunteer military is a winner.
Your point is well taken, but I feel that this is all bluster. China doesn't want none.
Thank you, sir.
Should President Obama adopt your strategy of bombing and waiting for China do to nothing (Except the obligatory, desk pounding UN speech) I would have no problem with that.
Looking deeper into your posts, I think we agree on China and it's use of goofball regimes like NK, and I also think Venezuela, as diversions. (Good description LAOT. Thank you.)
Your plan is also similar to the one I offered on Iraq years ago. Why invade when 40 cruise missles at Saddam's palaces would have rid the world of this joker with no destruction of infrastructure.
Look how much one missle strategically placed in Qadaffi's living room did to get that guy straightened out.
Thank you for your visit.
K>,
I think what I admire about your thoughts is that you are an oldtime Dem. When we were Catholic kids, the nuns and our parents loved Kennedy. He was a real cold warrior and a tax cutter. Following Truman, these were manly men. Ah, the good old days. I may have went a bridge too far with Kennedy's tax cutting, but it was his policy.
Thank you, sir.
I think you've got the right idea on this one. The only thing I'd add would me a missile shield, then let Kimmy slowly rot like the miscreant sack of monkey crap that he is (my apologies to any offended monkey crap), as well as letting the Chicomms get eaten by the relentless greatness of capitalism.
Do we have a missle shield yet? Or do our ships have the capability to take out dear leaders missles as they launch?
somewhat. However, the Obama administration is cutting funding on missile shield stuff.
Post a Comment