In addition to power in general, yes. The alternative scenario is he would have used conventional weapons to kill millions and take S. Korea already and be on his way to Japan.
Peace through strength, weakness is provocative. These are basic brutal facts throughout history.
It's a false view to think we are the cause of tyrants escalation in arms. Of course we could easily avoid it: let Kim, and have let the Soviets, win militarily with lesser arms. But freedom and lives would have been lost.
This simplistic and I believe naive aspect of the Paul view is dangerous in this world we live in.
You know, you need to get out more.
You still think N. Korea is all-powerful and S. Korea is weak. You need to take another look. Additionally, China would not support N.Korea if it tried to overrun S.Korea.
If we left S. Korea, the S. Koreans would decide whether they needed more military or their current troop/weapons level was adequate to contain N. Korea. They are a prosperous economy and could afford to protect their own country.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/goldwater_is_to_reagan_as_ron.html
I’m a firm believer in peace through strength as well. Oddly enough it brings me to support the opposite view that you take.
Strength is the ability to exert force, not the haphazard application of it.(IMHO)