Text 9910, 119 rader
Skriven 2005-03-13 14:57:00 av VERN HUMPHREY (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av GARY BRASWELL
Ärende: HAVE YOU SEEN CATCH 22 OR
=================================
GB>I think we have already pretty much gone over this before and since we are
GB>beyond talking about if we should have been in Iraq or not, we are there now
GB>and have to win.

GB>But I do think the point itself is a good one.


Then ask yourself this -- do you think we SHOULD invade North Korea?
Today?

GB> VH> Not quite.  First of all, North Korea is pretty well check-mated by
GB> VH> China, who doesn't want them to spark a war.

GB>China may or may not want them to start a war, after all they are ramping up
GB>again for their talk of taking Taiwan.

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

GB>If China rally wanted North Korea shut down, I think it would have already
GB>happened or be happening.

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

GB> VH> Secondly, there IS a War Against Terror -- and while North Korea is
GB> VH> dangerous, and has supported some Middle Eastern governments and groups
GB> VH> the schwerpunct is the Middle East.

GB>Take your pick. I worry more about nukes in the hands of loons. We have to m
GB>than myopic in this world.

Do you want to invade North Korea?  Today?

GB>How it all comes out will determine how we view it ultimately. I am very hap
GB>for democracy in Iraq and fervently hope it spreads through the middle east.

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

GB> VH> No -- we've hardly ignored them.  We've had troops eyeball-to-eyeball
GB> VH> with them for half a century.

GB>Their nuclear program is what we are talking about.

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

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

GB> VH> Secondly, if they fired a nuke, what would they do for an encore?
GB> VH> They'd be incinerated in a heartbeat, and they know it.  Hell, half the
GB> VH> incoming missiles would probably be Chinese.

GB>You are also assuming their action will be governed by rational thought. Wit
GB>certified wacko in control, and a heavily indoctrinated population, who know
GB>if they care they will be turned into a parking lot.

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

GB>Have you read how North Korean society is made up?

I've been there.  Patrolled the DMZ.  Met North Korean officers
face-to-face.  Read all the current intelligence (when I was there.)
Watched their TV programs.

GB> VH> And if we're lucky, we can win the game without invading them.  If not,
GB> VH> then we'll be well-positioned to hit them from two directions.

GB>Hit them with what? Air strikes?

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

GB> VH> What he says, and what he can do are two different things.  And what he
GB> VH> WILL do, is something entirely different.  Like North Korea, Iran knows
GB> VH> that total destruction would follow a nuclear strike on another country

GB>I did not say a nuclear strike in relation to Iran. Read again. Sure he can'
GB>do it right now, but then neither could Saddam when we went after him, but s
GB>did it to supposedly prevent him from doing it and he and his were not even
GB>openly talking about it.

The question is, what do they REALLY intend?  When will they be capable
of it?  And what do we do about it?

There are a broad range of answers to those questions.  We have a lot of
options open right now, and ought to pursue them before resorting to
force.  But IF we have to resort to force, we're well-positioned to do
it.

GB> VH> That's right -- and when people in the Middle East like Whallad Jumblat
GB> VH> start saying the Iraqi elections are like the fall of the Berlin Wall,
GB> VH> we may just be doing the right thing, after all.

GB>I will certainly admit to that and pray it is and if it does go down that wa
GB>fantastic!

Sometimes the good guys DO win one. :-)

GB> VH> Just the contrary -- they don't know we WON'T.  They have clear evidenc
GB> VH> that when we feel the need to attack, we DO attack.

GB>What are you going to sail into their sandbox with, the boyscouts? We are sh
GB>of troops already. And from what I am reading Rummy wants to cut back even
GB>further which stands in contradiction of Bush's policy. Even Bill Kristol sa
GB>that.

First of all, we're not out of troops.  We have forces in place right
now that could be quickly ramped up from the States.

The Secretary of Defense is required to make recommendations to the
President.  Some of his recommendations are based on increased
efficiency -- fighting smart.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)