So with all the recent activity in N.Korea how should the international community respond?

__________________
Originally Posted by Melangwanja
And usually, peeing on your plant = bad.

Well for starters perhaps you could pop some links up to exactly what you are talking about...

... but at a guess, unless they've invaded South Korea (They'd be insane to go after China) then why do anything.

Now, if they've fired rockets over Taiwan or Towards Japan, perhaps we can send a couple boomers to one side of North Korea and let them practice lobbing missiles across North Korea. You know, remind the North Koreans that they aren't the only ones that can be assholes...

__________________
Libertas inaestimabilis res est - Liberty is a thing beyond all price. | Sic Semper Tyrannis

people need to wake up, these people are ready to nuke someone. say goodby to your KIA cars, cause there gonna take S. korea off the map, and an attempt for U.S is a #2.

Lets just go talk to the guy... i have predicted this will be the start of WW3.

once S.korea is attacked, the U.S will get involved, and i believe the U.S will not like the fact that china sold them the plutonium... AND dont forget about Japan, there sweating bullets right now, but ready to level them too...

__________________

Its no big deal really. They only blew up an atomic weapon the size of Nagasaki..

Yea, what to do. These guys are crazy..

Yeah...

Though it doesn't sound like it was the size of the Nagasaki Event, but slightly smaller.

Though, I think the only option that is left is to welcome them back into the community of nations on the condition that they permit inspections of their nuclear facilities and inventory by the international community.

We have tried to make them international pariahs.

Perhaps Obama will prove that he meant what he said about reaching out to nations like Iran by actually reaching out to a nation like Iran (North Korea.)

Screw the $25 Billion in aid to Africa, if it's necessary to give that money to North Korea to get them to allow inventorying of their nuclear arsenal and their weapons production facilities and to not sell on the black market it is a cheap price.

I can not bear to think about the Kharmic Debt that the United States would have on its soul if through our grandstanding we lead to the usage of a Nuclear Weapon against ourselves, against Europe, against Japan, against South Korea or against Israel.

To paraphrase a book I read recently (Empire by something Card (same guy that wrote Ender's Game))

If you are dealing with a dog that bites and snarls at you there are few good options open to you. Firstly, if you beat the dog then you are just left with a beaten dog, and the problem is not resolved. If you kill the dog then you have a dead dog, but if you remove the reasons why it bites and snarls at you the problem is resolved. The dog is still alive and isn't even your enemy.

The only course we have is to sit down and find out exactly what the North Koreans want and if it is with in our power give it to them.

While the above may represent a great expense it is ultimately better than having the blood of millions on our hands through our failure to act.


Or we can say fuck all that mushy bullshit and erase them from the map, but then we are no better than they are, and thus that is ultimately not a solution.

Perhaps Obama will prove that he's not a bigot by reaching out to the North Koreans

__________________
Libertas inaestimabilis res est - Liberty is a thing beyond all price. | Sic Semper Tyrannis

let em nuke south korea, china would step in and probly help then maybe russia would nuke china and korea. hell it could be a hell of a time.

__________________
A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.
Thomas Jefferson

We could give South Korea Nukes and thus allow North Korea and South Korea stare at each other over the tips of their Nukes.



http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapc...ef=mpstoryview


If that's all they want then why not extend it to them?

Oh, for that to work South Korea would have to recognize them, which means they would have to recognize South Korea. However, if both NK and SK are willing to do that then I do not see any reason why we wont give them Normal Diplomatic Relations and a NAP (a promise not to attack them with out provocation.) A NAP would not necessarily mean that we wouldn't be able to carpet bomb them with nukes if we find out that they sold nukes that were used to terrorists, because by selling those nukes to a nation that was going to attack us they would have been creating a reason for us to go to war with them.

Could even have that spelled out in the Non-Aggression Pact. The United States will not attack North Korea unless they attack any other nation first, or provide nuclear weapons to states or other entities that then use them against any other nation.

__________________
Libertas inaestimabilis res est - Liberty is a thing beyond all price. | Sic Semper Tyrannis

We have nukes. Many other countries have nukes. Even though I hate Kim Jong Il, why can't they pursue nukes if we have them and everyone else has them?

It's like gun control. The US would have a very hard time (rightfully so) outlawing the manufacture and sale of guns, but if they did, then you wouldn't be able to own a gun. If you tried to own a gun (North Korea), the government would punish you. Even though you're simply trying to level the playing field in the purchase of your gun, and taking into account the fact that you may be a back-country racist redneck (not alluding to anyone here) or that you may be an upstanding citizen, the government would then make a judgment and take your gun. How would that make you feel? Who are they to take your right to bear arms?

Of course, this logic is contingent upon the fact that pursuing nuclear weapons in a sovereign state is a right (which I think it is).

What do y'all think?

Technically speaking I believe N.Korea and S.Korea are still at war. A cease fire was negotiated in 1953 but there was no peace treaty signed. Far as I know the U.S.A. has had a military presence in S.Korea since 1950...I wonder what the cumulative cost of this has been for almost 60 years. I have a son in the marines, stationed in Japan and possibly some time in S.Korea so any input I have about what we should do over there may be skewed by my desire to
avoid armed conflict in the far east. His "specialty" is amphibious assault ... I hope we're not planning a ground invasion.

First I'll play devils advocate - Why should we do anything? We have plenty of nuclear weapons what gives us the right to deny them to anyone else? The USA is the only country that has nuked anyone else when we fried hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens in Nagasaki and Hiroshima during WW II.

Maybe we should let China and Japan take care of their neighbor and stay out of it, but then how could we maintain being the world police so THAT isn't gonna happen.

A pre-emptive strike by us against N.Korea may wake up China which could be bad for us militarily...besides who'd make the crap that we buy at Walmart if we were at odds with China?

Why not stage a military coup, whack the leader of N. Korea and put in our puppet? Be alot cheaper than a long drawn out war...course the military industrial complex wouldn't make much money then so maybe we won't do that.

So that leaves us with diplomacy, sanctions and wagging our finger saying tsk tsk.

Let the United Nations handle N.korea they have done such a good job in the past.

Sarcasm

__________________
The Bill of Rights.....Void where prohibited by Law.