Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Magnum44
I am sure of certain points in your analysis, but not sure in other areas you posit.

The fact remains that the North will continue to develop capabilities that will allow for longer range and more targeted capabilities, as well as rapid production of nuclear weapons both for their own use as well as for uncontrolled, massive proliferation throughout the world to any rogue nation or terrorist group willing to purchase from them.

This simply is an unacceptable situation any way you look at it.

Negotiating, good will, economic support, light water reactor construction, special economic zones, etc. have all shown that it will not retard nor conclude nuclear and strike missile development by the North Koreans. I believe much of your position is based on wishful thinking regarding that regime, which cannot be trusted in small or large matters. A line must be drawn. Unless your premise is they could halt such development and expansion based on more 'carrots' (the Carter approach) or diplomacy.

124 posted on 12/23/2002 10:22:06 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]


To: AmericanInTokyo
Unless your premise is they could halt such development and expansion based on more 'carrots'

Not at all. I do not trust the NK can be trusted any more than Saddam. My point was simply that much of the conversation on the thread (not necessarily yours) was going off in the nuclear brink direction.

A few have gotten it correct that these developments have the effect of removing several options we might otherwise have for dealing with rouge states. The military option is still there, but the risk is much greater. The option of 'punishing' NK militarily may be palatable, but the cost of a regime change strategy in NK is now far greater (where NK would use their WMD if they realized the outcome of a conflict was not in their favor.)

The SK (and Japanese) have the most at stake in a conflict and it will be even harder to get them behind us if the US deems a military strike is required.

134 posted on 12/23/2002 10:44:49 AM PST by Magnum44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson