Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests North Korea

Didn't want to hijack the other thread but NK was brought up and Andy said something about NK not being a problem because China and Japan would handle them if they got out of hand.

So, I'm curious as to what everyone thinks about this whole NK nuke situation, why it isn't more of an issue in the election, what can we do to fix it etc? It's a very important issue to me partly because I'm over here but also because I think it could erupt into a major problem later down the road.

And please, let's not turn this into another kerry vs bush bashing thread.

north korea is not more of an issue because even though it has a few nukes it is less likely to actually use them. china and russia have historically supported the dprk. the u.s. and japan have supported the rok. truth be told, nobody in this group wants to go to war.
china especially wants to keep the peace for economic reason if nothing else as the u.s and the dprk are china's number 2 and number 1 trading partners respectively. i think that the number 1 problem with the dprk is an exagerated sense of pride that would make them do something stupid just to prove they could.
this (overly condensed and simplfied post) is partly why we want china and russia involved in taming kim jong il. they were instumental in creating and supporting the dprk. both kim jong il and kim il song(sp?) looked to them for support and advice. if china is telling them to do something it is more likely kim jong il will do it then if we are telling him to do something. currently we can be fairly confident that china doesn't want to go to war with us. so long as we can agree not to try to kill each other it is safe to let china pressure the dprk to do what we want.

just my simplified and condensed opinion

oh yeah, for a good book try "the two koreas." very informative

I think the multi-lateral talks are going just fine. All N. Korea wants is a guarantee that the US won't attack and then they will disarm. I do think however that if we were to cut China, S. Korea, and Japan out of the talks that if it did escalate we could run into a problem of them not wanting to help us and possibly even siding with N. Korea (ex. China) since we cut them out of the peace process.

Nutshell..

North Korea is a backwards country that cannot make it on their own with that half-wit midget dictator with the bad hair cut.

Starting in the 1990s, the midget figured out that he could get stuff from us (food, money) by threatening to build nukes.

Clinton bought it hook line and sinker..gave them "stuff" and hoped it would go away. It did'nt. They kept on working toward Nukes secretly.

Forward to 2000. Bush elected. Names N. Korea as part of "axis of evil" after figuring out that the midget had played Clinton like a violin. The midget does not appreciate this and plays the NUKE card again..looking for more "stuff".

2001-2. We invade Afganistan, then Iraq. "Gene pool reject guy" determines NOW is a good time to pressure us for "stuff" because we are tied up militarily. He demands two way talks. Bush, knowing FULL WELL that China has THE only leverage with this mental and physical midget refuses. Dems go wild (remember?).

2003 and patience has paid off as 6 way talks begin. It is clear, again, that blackmail is bad haicut boys plan. Dems are silent....Oh and BTW, now that the midget KNOWS we are not screwing around, part of the "STUFF" he wants from us is assurance that we will not kick his ass. Which is a better bargining chip to have at the table...

2004 Mini-me getting stressed that we have not caved on 2-way talks. And militarily we are getting closer to..freeing up some muscle. Now says he will agree with 6 way talks only after election...hoping for a democrat like Clinton to be elected. Kerry (re)proposes BACKWARD step of 2 way talks saying "China wants it". (P.S. OF COURSE China wants the US in two way talks...its OUR money N. Korea wants after all and anything that weakens us or makes us pay is, well, not a bad deal for China . Meanwhile, Bush is applying pressure behind the sceens to make China apply pressure behind the sceens on the midget. Clear?

Thats it...not a real threat in the classic sense, just a high stakes game of blackmail.

I can't really say why it isn't a big issue in this election because it would be perceived as Bush vs. Kerry, and bigMoneyRacing would spazz out again with the nature of my analysis.

I think it's a tragedy that the Clinton Administration gave communists the tools to make nuclear "energy" in the name of peace. I mean, why didn't we give the Indians guns in exchange for peace treaties, and say we suggested they use the guns to make hunting easier. The ONLY reason we are in that mess is because of the "peace deal" signed by Clinton in 1994. It's not because Bush forced them to violate the agreement, like some of you may have heard. They completely ignored the terms of the agreement from the moment it was signed.

I echo what the others said, that at this point we can be optimistic that diplomacy will fix the situation.

I agree with a lot of what was said but I also look at this from the perspective of the NK peopple not just their leader. In the past, we gave food to NK but the people never got it and probably were told that the evil Americans were letting them starve. People who are starving to death will do anything because they know they are going to die anyway and that to me makes them extremely dangerous. We did a poor job of making sure the things we gave to NK were distributed properly...a problem we've had in other regions of the world with similar problems as well.

I tend to disagree with both Bush and Kerry on how to handle NK. I don't think we should just ignore them and not talk to them as Bush more or less stated in the debate but I also don't agree with a U.S./NK only talk situation as it seems Kerry is in favor of. I think it needs to be an open talk forum with all the countries in that region with the goal of hopefully one day getting Kim Jong Il or whatever his name is to stand down and join the rest of countries in the region in a peaceful manner. May be a bit optimistic (or even a dream) but I think it COULD happen.

Also, I don't think it was ALL Clinton either: this "rattle the sword to get some stuff" or "baby style policy" with NK has been going on a lot longer than that. The plan now is for the U.S. to slowly start drawing down and letting the ROK handle their own country. Won't happen overnight obviously but within the next 10 yrs you will see a significantly smaller number of U.S. troops over here. Wouldn't surprise me if shortly after that NK and SK sit down and talk things over and unify...if they do they'd be a major player in the world rather quickly I think.

Even though no one wants a war over here I still think this is a much bigger issue than people think because no one really knows what Kim Jong Il (or whatever his name is) is capable of if he continues to develop nuclear weapons. I just don't think this is the time to turn our backs and downplay this issue.

This may not be a popular idea but I think that we can solve the NK issue through time ECONOMICALLY easier than through political means. If we loosen up a bit and allow NK to become more part of world trade maybe they will see that "playing by the rules" has a huge payoff and they will change their policies and ideas for the economic betterment of their country. Conformity through economic change I guess. Again, might be a bit of dreaming but nothing has really worked up to this point.

lol....china and japan taking korea out.... yeah right. JAPAN? has no military they are alotted a small militant security corps. china has the manpower but is still communist and wont do anything about korea at all. the us can but will never get supported by china. russia sells jets to china who sells jets to korea.... who also has the most powerful and biggest special forces in the world. Korea is hiding nukes in mines and such underground so we cannot detect them from satelites. and kerry wonders why we are making bunker nukes..... duh. Korea will not let go of their nuclear stock pile and no one but the us will do anything to disarm them.... they say they will but they wont. that is why we will be going to war with korea if bush is re elected..... if kerry gets elected we face a problem with korea supplying nukes to terrorist or trying to get an icbm over the pacific to the states. we cant embargo them or they will sell plutonium and uranium for dirty bombs and nukes. why not pull our forces out of every country in the world and regress to our own soil?????? then wed have nothing to do and who wants to copy the british anyways..... there as bad as canada. jk

Man, I can't WAIT to see Team America: World Police!

On the same note, what about Cuba? Why do we let China have really crappy human rights practices and get MFN status (Most Favored Nation), but yet this little island with some old grumpy dude gets the big embargo shaft!? China makes CRAPPY cigars!

On North Korea:

China does have a moderate amount of sway with DPRK, if one can say that about ANY country. I think the consensus is that it's not a matter of IF the current form of government in DPRK will fail, it's a matter of WHEN. Rampant famine and massive shortages of just about every type remain a staple of economic situation there; unfortunately so does a rabid faith in Kim Chong-il, a nutcase if there ever was one...

I see Iran being a bigger issue, though. The pressures and situations that each are in are totally different, though they both tend to get lumped on the same "sh!t list" that Western powers keep.h

On Cuba:

Let's face it. As long as Castro is still alive, there simply is no real hope of dropping sanctions.

Futhermore, Cuba isn't financing US debt, proving massive exports and potentially huge import opportunities for stateside businesses, offering sustainable double-digit growth in just about every economic sector, somewhat tinkering around with a free enterprise economy, and in terms of being a world power, Cuba is pretty damn close to being on the bottom of the list (all totally unlike China).

Finally, Cuban cigars are a joke unless you age them at least a year or two; Cuba has figured out that the faster they turn their crops over, the more money they make. Cigar quality has suffered from this practice to the point that good Dominican and Honduran leaf (most of which are from Cuban seed anyway) are totally comparable...

...though I totally concede the point that I've never encountered a quality cigar that's been made in China.