Posted on 05/05/2003 12:29:07 PM PDT by Enemy Of The State
In sharp contrast with his past practices, Dr. Kim states that he is speaking for North Korea: he is relaying North Korea's official message to the Bush administration. During the last meeting of North Korean and American officials in Beijing, the North Korea's chief delegate told his American counterpart that North Korea had at least one nuke. The US CIA estimates that North 'may have one or two crude nuclear devices.'
Dr. Kim states that the nukes were built in the 1980's before North Korea signed the Agreed Framework in 1994. It is likely that the US CIA knew about North Korea's nuclear capability but decided to cover it up with its persistent "North Korea may have 1-2 crude devices." It should be recalled that the US CIA failed to predict the Korean War of 1950 and also the intervention of Chinese forces. The failure was due to not any lack of intelligence but incorrect analysis of the mountain of intelligence.
Dr. Kim stated that North Korea's technical capacity of delivering nuclear weapons on missiles was proven by Pakistan's nuclear tests and missile test-fires. Pakistan claims that it has developed its nukes and missiles on its own. The bottom-line is that neither North nor Pakistan has violated any international agreements.
US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld believes North Korea does not have the capability to strike American cities and North Korea is bluffing. Dr. Kim believes that North Korea will demonstrate its capacity to strike America: it may conduct a series of nuclear explosions and test-fire an ICBM over the US homeland. The US CIA claims that North Korea's ICBM, Taepodong II, failed in its maiden test and that North Korea's ICBM test site was destroyed in a failed engine test. Recently, the warhead of North Korea's 'failed' ICBM was discovered in Alaska.
The US hawks led by Rumsfeld believe that Kim Jong Il and Saddam Hussein are cut from the same cloth and that Kim will go the way of Saddam. It should be noted that when the chips were down, Saddam's 'supporters' deserted his sinking ship and few Iraqis opted to die for him. The fact of the matter is that the great majority of Saddam's supporters were opportunists and sycophants out to make a fast buck using Saddam's name. Rumsfeld is convinced that few of Kim's supporters will die for him and that shake Kim's regime a little and he will be gone.
Dr. Kim asserts that Kim Jong Il is no Saddam and that North Korea's military and people will fight to the end and die for Kim; and that unlike Iraq, North Korea does have the military capability and the will to inflict fatal blows not only to the US bases in Japan, Okinawa, and Guam, but also the US homeland. According to Dr. Kim, North Korea will demonstrate its military capability to hit the US homeland in the very near future.
i am certain that your assessment is also correct. i am getting my information from Col David Hackworth, who fought in Korea for two years, 4 purple hearts, 5 silver stars, etc. (eventually finishing his career with 2 DSC's, 10 silver stars, 8 purple hearts, 8 bronze stars, and is under consideration for a Medal of Honor for Vietnam, etc). He saw Uijiimbu when it was nothing but rice paddys and villiages. According to him, the South is not good tank country, and there is a limit to how effective armor can be and where it can be used. It was almost completly un passable then. At any rate, i am dealing with a secondary source, i haven't seen it with my own eyes.
The "starving in the North" reports are the ones that puzzle me - with half the population and almost twice the arable land there is no reason for this.
This is curious to me. From the media reports i've seen, and some of the threads i've lurked here, i was under the impression that the DPRK didn't have as much arable land as the South. i have heard stories about the NK's eating grass and tree bark. It is my understanding that most of the nation's resources have been diverted to army use. You know, it may be possible that with the centralised planning of the Stalinist Wacko state they have taken arable land for other use. That's probably good supposition, if Cuba and the old Soviet Union are valid examples.
I believe Kim Jong II knows his system is a failure. If Pres. Bush can keep the lid on, Kim will eventually bail for the south of France.
What i'm hearing from media, particularly Japanese media is that they're worried about Kim. i don't see him giving up power if he's as nutty as advertised. i do see the day that one of his generals puts a couple of bullets between his eyes.
My pet theory on a war with the DPRK is that the DPRK generals, not being stupid, realising that they only have 60 days of logistics, not having sufficient forces to take the South (the rule of thumb is that an attacker needs at least a 3:1 advantage, and in this case probably more due to the superior fire power of the allied forces they would face), and inferior equipment (even if they have a lot of it), will do the math, and realise they can't win, finish off "Dear Leader", and cut a deal as fast as they can.
i still would be real careful about trying to invade the north. It has been my understanding that all Koreans are very touchy about their land, and will not give it up without a fight.
Any merit to those ideas?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.