Text 10005, 114 rader
Skriven 2005-03-18 10:10:00 av VERN HUMPHREY (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av GARY BRASWELL
Ärende: HAVE YOU SEEN CATCH 22 OR
=================================
GB> VH> Then ask yourself this -- do you think we SHOULD invade North Korea?
GB> VH> Today?

GB>Today? If we did they would probably use the nukes. I was talking about befo
GB>we did Iraq.

How do we know they REALLY have nukes?  They haven't tested one.

GB> VH> China considers North Korea as dangrous as we do.  China wants Taiwan,
GB> VH> but not so much she's willing to risk her own existance for it.

GB>If China does consider North Korea in that way, they are awful quiet about i

Just because the media isn't covering it, doesn't mean China is not
putting pressure on North Korea.  If they were sitting on your doorstep,
wouldn't you?

Do you recall the famous sattelite photo of Korea, showing the South
ablaze with light, the North completely dark?  Why do you think that is?
If China is a generous big brother, North Korea should be more sparkly.

GB>As for China/Taiwan, they get frisky every 15 years or so and so far, nothin
GB>I hope this one is the same.

It is -- Taiwan will join China when THEY decide to join.

GB> VH> Why?  North Korea isn't amenable to persuasion, and China doesn't want
GB> VH> to fight there.  So China steers a middle course -- not trying to
GB> VH> control North Korea, but keeping her from going totally out of control.

GB>From my understanding, China is about the only friend North Korea has.

That's correct -- which is why we can expect China to keep them in
check. China doesn't want a nuclear war on her doorstep.

GB> VH> Do you want to invade North Korea?  Today?

GB>Yesterday.

Why didn't you? :-)

Have you ever been to the DMZ in Korea?  It's the most heavily-fortified
area in the world.  The North Korean Army is the worlds 5th-largest.

It doesn't make sense to tackle something like that, when we have other
means (like China and South Korea) to keep the lid on.

GB> VH> All such situations are chancy.  But it appears that chance may be
GB> VH> running in our direction.

GB>Lets hope they do not go the Muslim Republic route.

Iraq does not have that tradition -- and from what we see in
Afghanistan, they aren't willing to go that way again, either.

GB> VH> We didn't ignore that -- had they had no such program, we'd hardly have
GB> VH> been on the border.  We've been engaging them over nuclear production
GB> VH> for longer than I can remember -- certainly since the early '80s.

GB>I thought we were there because it was a ceasefire.

Why do you think it's ONLY a ceasefire, and not a peace?

GB> VH> Remember that Carter wanted us to pull out of Korea?  Reagan reversed
GB> VH> that.

GB>I remember Carter was pulling us out of Korea when they found all of those
GB>underground tunnels going into the South. That stopped that pull out.

No -- that's only part of the picture.  The tunnels were known before
Carter announced his intention to pull out.  On the other hand, at no
time during the Carter Administration did he allow our troops to take
basic safety precautions.

Because the 2nd Infantry Division is within range of North Korean guns,
already laid on target, the plan was to move the division when things
started getting hot.  During the Carter Administration, we were not
allowed to do that.

It was in February, 1981, that we rolled the first unit -- and found
that because we lacked block heaters, oil circulators, etc., etc, we
couldn't get our vehicles started.

Carter had us hanging out there completely helpless.

GB> VH> If their society and government is totally irrational, then we have to
GB> VH> hit them -- are you willing to do that?  Today?

GB>I think not only is their government, such as it is, is irrational, but so i
GB>most of their population.

GB>Irrationality in and of itself does not require invasion, but if we think th
GB>are about to go over the edge, that would be a prime example of pre-emptive
GB>being perfect.

How do we think an irrational society is about to go over the edge?
Irrationality is by definition unpredictable.

GB>However, I worry if we could do it with our commitment in Iraq.

If you'd seen the DMZ, you'd know we have two choices there -- nuclear
war or containment with the help of the Chinese.

GB> GB>> Hit them with what? Air strikes?

GB> VH> With everything we've got -- when you use force, never skimp.

GB>And what do we have?

An enormous capability in precision-guided munitions, first of all.  We
can block the passes, take out their air defense, and generally keep
them busy.  Invasion would follow only after a looooooong softening up.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)