Posted on 04/18/2017 3:54:40 PM PDT by nickcarraway
A question that is just as important is whether assassinating Kim or the generals in charge of North Korea’s nuclear program, ballistic missile program, military or intelligence services would be a good policy. We tend to believe that if we just took out the top, bad guy in the regime, all of the other bad guys in that regime will be scared straight, change their behavior and suddenly turn their governments into bastions of human rights and democracy. We’ve had experience with his belief before: several days prior to major military operations in Iraq, Washington lobbed cruise missiles at Saddam and the Iraqi political leadership in the belief that perhaps further war could be avoided. Whether that hypothesis would have played out is unknown because Saddam survived those attacks—it’s comfortable to assume that the Baa’thist leadership would surrender to coalition forces the next day, but it’s just as likely that the war would go on.
North Korea is an entirely different situation than Iraq was in 2003. Kim Jong-un is solidly in power, having killed or marginalized anyone (including his uncle and half-brother) perceived to be even a minimal threat to his control. Unlike Iraq, whose military was demoralized and degraded by the Persian Gulf War in 1991 and by a sanctions regime over the next decade, North Korea is a nuclear-weapons state with ballistic missiles that have the capability to level Seoul quickly and target U.S. bases in the region. Killing Kim and banking on the idea that the regime would change how it does business after seven decades would be a high price to pay if that untested theory proved to be wrong. Because North Korea is such a black-hole in terms of human intelligence, the U.S. intelligence community wouldn’t be able to confidently assess that the man or woman (Kim’s sister, for instance) who replaces Kim wouldn’t be just as vicious or unpredictable. Assassinating a head-of-state is the definition of an act of war, and nobody can accurately guess whether cooler heads in Pyongyang would prevail over those who would be itching to demonstrate strength through retaliation.
Putting Kim six feet underground is only one choice in a set of options that the National Security Council will present to President Trump for his consideration. It may even be a policy option that is so far outside the mainstream that Trump’s national-security aides would disabuse him of studying it further. Reaction from Beijing would be swift and unyielding, and as much as the South Korean and Japanese governments would like North Korea to behave more predictably, it’s not at all certain that Seoul and Tokyo would believe that assassinating the men at the top would achieve that objective.
One hopes that all of this talk is more of political gamesmanship to goad the Chinese into cooperating with the United States, and nothing more.
Daniel DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities.
It would never go that far.
What if the Norks nuke Pearl Harbor or Tokyo?
Believe me, anyone but Kim Jong un in power is far better to deal with
This article articulates what’s called “wishful thinking” that some day Kim Jong Un would give up the bomb somehow.
The risk is that one day America has to deal with Kim Jong un with advanced nuclear weapon and delivery system
That may be kind of stalemate to create peace... if America let Kim Jong un take over the South Korea
That is what I remember too. I think Gerald Ford had a hand in legislation outlawing the assisination of a foreign head of state.
Kimmy’s lucky Trump didn’t MOAB his ass along with the rest of his posse of generals and lackeys and swooning crowds. Wham. Can we do it from space yet? /rhetorical
Not if they show up the next rally with a red dot painted on his chest.
IIRC it is against American law to assassinate a foreign head of state.
>>
Not if you’re Hillary Clinton.
We came, we saw, he died.
Exactly. and the witch laughed her wicked laugh.
IIRC it is against American law to assassinate a foreign head of state.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Unless there is a Presidential finding that it needs to be done and executive order 12333 ( Reagan) is revoked.(That executive order does not restrict military options.)
Good Read on the subject:
https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/26_1/01_TXT.htm
It is not illegal; Reagan signed an executive order against it, but it has never been codified into law:
https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bciclr/26_1/01_FMS.htm
It is true that those North Koreans that defected have not been crazy, but those defectors are not representatives of the country’s masses.
You cannot discount half a century of communist programming and propaganda. North Korea needs at least 1 full generation of effective quarantine and de-programming. After WWII, Germany and Japan unconditionally surrendered with their leadership either killed off (like Nazis) or neutered (like the Emperor). If North Korea does not go through at least that, there will be bigger problems at hand than the pork chop threatening to launch missiles.
This is similar to the "Nuke Mecca" mind set. Neither will stop the rest of the nut cases.
Then he completes the holy triad of war. Precise (Syria), Powerful (MOAB), and Decapitation of the enemy leadership) NK.
I wonder how it would sound in the media? NK leader dies in his sleep? Will he catch a disease that kills in 3-6 months?
North Korea remains in a state of war with the south, and the US through membership in the UN. No permanent treaty exists. Kim Jong Un is the head of the armed forces of NK so is therefore fair game. Giving the South Koreans a missile and coordinates would alleviate any legal handwringing.
Mr. B, your video is required svp.
>Believe me, anyone but Kim Jong un in power is far better to deal with<
.
Did you say the same about Saddam Hussein?
The Iraqi Christians have a very low opinion of GWB — Christians were not persecuted by SH.
China on the other hand has the intel and operation apparatus needed. China most likely already has a successor chosen.
That link is hideously fantastic..!
I have heard that whole beat over 20 times.
HUGELY appropriate, that woman is a MONSTER.
The North Koreans are deeply traumatize and brainwashed...and would be completely lost if and when Kim is removed.
A massive humanitarian effort will be required.
That said, people heal quickly.
Better to free them than to let them die or be killed.
Kim is a Jim Jones on a much larger scale.
This might sound contrarian, but I would imagine Kim surrounds himself with the most zealous military commanders. That’s who he would want if it comes to a fight. Keeping with that theme...and certainly in a relative sense...Kim is the voice of moderation. So, he has to portray a high level of bluster for his insanely loyal cadre that wishes to kill the capitalist pigs with plans hatched daily or hourly.
Upper management has to go.
Let’s not forget Kim has at least two fission reactors deep in the North, their scourched earth policy could be two Chernobyls...in every way exasperated and unmitigated for months or maybe years. The Russians didn’t have to fight a war to get to and mitigate the Chernobyl disaster.
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.