North Korea at it again..

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Anyone following NK with their nuclear test and now testing more missles?

 

what do you think of the situation? how should the US and the world respond?

[VABills]

Anyone following NK with their nuclear test and now testing more missles?

 

what do you think of the situation? how should the US and the world respond?

We should invite them to a cook out, sing kumbaya, give him and ipod a dozen pro v1's and a really stern letter from the UN telling him he's been a very bad boy.

 

That should do it.

[/dev/null]

We need to send Gary Johnston to put the F back in Freedom

[NavyBillsFan]

We should help North Korea test nukes on their surface. Along with the Middle East and every illegal drug producing country in South America

[IDBillzFan]

NK will stop this as soon as someone reminds Kim Jong Il that the US has decided to end its nuclear weapons program. When he sees that we're stopping, and then everyone else is stopping, well...dagnabit...he'll stop, too, because it's the neighborly thing to do when we're a nation intent on healing its soul.

[Jim in Anchorage]

NK will stop this as soon as someone reminds Kim Jong Il that the US has decided to end its nuclear weapons program. When he sees that we're stopping, and then everyone else is stopping, well...dagnabit...he'll stop, too, because it's the neighborly thing to do when we're a nation intent on healing its soul.

How complicated. Simply send over Michale[with her shapely arms] to admit how ashamed she is of the US and the NKs will eat it like candy. "Boy this starving sucks, but at lest I don't live in a slavery hell hole like America"

[Dwight Drane]

Who fires the first shot?

 

1)NK

2)US

3)SK

4)Israel

5)Iran

6)Japan

7)Other

8)None

 

Winner gets a bowl of Kimchi Ramen

[/dev/null]

Who fires the first shot?

 

1)NK

2)US

3)SK

4)Israel

5)Iran

6)Japan

7)Other

8)None

 

Winner gets a bowl of Kimchi Ramen

[Fastback]

Who fires the first shot?

 

1)NK

2)US

3)SK

4)Israel

5)Iran

6)Japan

7)Other

8)None

 

Winner gets a bowl of Kimchi Ramen

 

I would pick but I don't like the prize...

[DrFishfinder]

Anyone following NK with their nuclear test and now testing more missles?

 

what do you think of the situation? how should the US and the world respond?

And it's likely that Iran will follow suit in the not too distant future. Both of those countries are going to push the envelope to see what the response is.

 

Neither country cares about sanctions or condemnation, either from the US, UN or internationally. My guess is that they will produce a nuclear warhead to show that they are capable of producing more and then attempt to use it as leverage in negotiations.

 

The question is: what will they be negotiating for?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

The question is: what will they be negotiating for?

 

Tyrants don't negotiate. They make war. Ahmedjinidad will make war on Israel, if the Israelis don't beat him to it. You can't negotiate with Iran. I thought MAYBE it could happen with N. Korea with the five-party talks, but apparently not.

[DrFishfinder]

Tyrants don't negotiate. They make war. Ahmedjinidad will make war on Israel, if the Israelis don't beat him to it. You can't negotiate with Iran. I thought MAYBE it could happen with N. Korea with the five-party talks, but apparently not.

Iran will be committing suicide if they launch a nuke into Israel. Iran knows it, Israel knows it and everyone else knows it. Israel has an estimated 100+ nuclear weapons and would reduce Tehran and dozens of other Iranian military targets to molten glass in minutes. And that's not even taking into account the US stepping into the picture.

 

Is Ahmedjinidad crazy enough to launch a nuke, or even 2 or 3 into Israel and subject his country to annihilation? Possibly, but it would be a moot point as what is left of Iran would be reduced to stone age conditions for a very, very long time. Israel would strike back swiftly and devastatingly with or without anyone's approval, including the US and UN. End of story and end of Iran as we know it now, for years....perhaps decades.

 

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/israel/nuke.html

 

North Korea is different in that South Korea does not have the arsenal to retaliate.....assuming SK was the target. Who responds and with what, could trigger a real multinational face off. And what would NK really obtain that would be worth that risk?

 

Tyrants or not, the smart thing to do for both Iran and NK would be to use this as negotiational leverage. Committing an act of war with a nuclear weapon would cause Iran and NK to lose far, far more than they would ever gain.

[finknottle]

And it's likely that Iran will follow suit in the not too distant future. Both of those countries are going to push the envelope to see what the response is.

 

Neither country cares about sanctions or condemnation, either from the US, UN or internationally. My guess is that they will produce a nuclear warhead to show that they are capable of producing more and then attempt to use it as leverage in negotiations.

 

The question is: what will they be negotiating for?

 

Iran's ambitions are simple: regional hegemony. They see themselves as the cradle of civilization, and want to be the dominant power in the region. They are quite active in supporting insurgents and/or terrorists to extend their geopolitical influence. That can be risky - having nukes is additional insurance against action by the major powers.

 

North Korea, on the other hand, uses start-stop of the program to periodically extract aid and avoid punishment for their primary exports: missile technology, counterfeit currency, and drugs.

 

In both cases nukes serve as a shield for what they deem vital activities, and neither country is going to irrevocably give them up at the negotiation table.

[DrFishfinder]

Iran's ambitions are simple: regional hegemony. They see themselves as the cradle of civilization, and want to be the dominant power in the region. They are quite active in supporting insurgents and/or terrorists to extend their geopolitical influence. That can be risky - having nukes is additional insurance against action by the major powers.

 

North Korea, on the other hand, uses start-stop of the program to periodically extract aid and avoid punishment for their primary exports: missile technology, counterfeit currency, and drugs.

 

In both cases nukes serve as a shield for what they deem vital activities, and neither country is going to irrevocably give them up at the negotiation table.

No, not irrevocably. But negotiation makes more sense than ostensibly starting a war they simply cannot win with a nuclear weapon (or weapons). And in fact, the cons vastly outweigh the pros.

 

So.

 

It still remains to be seen what they will be negotiating for. I would love to hear what the real experts in this field have to say about it.

[pBills]

Anyone following NK with their nuclear test and now testing more missles?

 

what do you think of the situation? how should the US and the world respond?

 

 

 

We should invade and take over. Worked before.

[finknottle]

No, not irrevocably. But negotiation makes more sense than ostensibly starting a war they simply cannot win with a nuclear weapon (or weapons). And in fact, the cons vastly outweigh the pros.

 

So.

 

It still remains to be seen what they will be negotiating for. I would love to hear what the real experts in this field have to say about it.

 

Who do you mean by 'they' in the first sentence? Why would Iran start a war??

 

I guess I am rejecting the assertion that they are being built to be used as a chip in negotiation. What is there to negotiate? Nukes keep them safe and allow them to conduct their affairs as they see fit without fear of military retribution, and that is seen as more important than the lifting sanctions of dubious impact and staying power.

 

If Iran and North Korea felt anything not related to their nuclear programs were worth negotiating, wouldn't they be proactive in bringing it up?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Is Ahmedjinidad crazy enough to launch a nuke, or even 2 or 3 into Israel and subject his country to annihilation? Possibly, but it would be a moot point as what is left of Iran would be reduced to stone age conditions for a very, very long time. Israel would strike back swiftly and devastatingly with or without anyone's approval, including the US and UN. End of story and end of Iran as we know it now, for years....perhaps decades.

 

I don't think Ahmedinijad is crazy. I think he's following a logic based on Shiite Islamic eschatology that calls for a global conflagration before the hidden imam can return. He truly believes in this stuff, in my opinion, and is willing to sacrifice millions of lives and the peace to achieve the goal he has in mind.

 

So do I think he'd use a bomb? Absolutely. I don't think he'd give it away to Hezbollah or anybody else, but I do believe that one builds bombs and missiles for one of two reasons: to use them, or to keep someone else from using theirs. Like you said, iran could be building their one nuclear weapon to keep Israel from using their hundred or so. But I doube such a lop-sided equation has any merit.

[finknottle]

Tyrants or not, the smart thing to do for both Iran and NK would be to use this as negotiational leverage. Committing an act of war with a nuclear weapon would cause Iran and NK to lose far, far more than they would ever gain.

 

I think this is a dangerous misunderstanding of their intentions. They do not want to start a war.

 

They want to be free to

- extort money, sell missile technology, and engage in counterfeiting (NK), and

- gain political hegemony by destabilizing their neighbors (Iran)

without fear of military retribution.

 

That is the objective, not attacking their neighbors.

[finknottle]

So do I think he'd use a bomb? Absolutely. I don't think he'd give it away to Hezbollah or anybody else, but I do believe that one builds bombs and missiles for one of two reasons: to use them, or to keep someone else from using theirs. Like you said, iran could be building their one nuclear weapon to keep Israel from using their hundred or so. But I doube such a lop-sided equation has any merit.

 

The third reason for building a bomb:

 

To dissuade an opponent from using military force against you.

 

If Iran had had the bomb in 1980, would Iraq have attacked? If Iraq had had it in 1990, would the international coalition led by the US have driven them out of Kuwait?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

That is the objective, not attacking their neighbors.

 

Only Ahmedinijad knows what Ahmedinijad wants, in all fairness. Everybody else can just speculate. Now the North Koreans...they're about as transparent as can be for a hermit state. I think you're dead on with them. They may be off the chain, but at least they're not zealots.