Under no circumstances should we give anything to North Korea. They are going to develop nukes no matter what we do, so we might as well make sure they don’t get any reward for it. We should also make it clear what the consequences of proliferation will be.
I was in Iran as a worker, not a govenment official, 2Thick. And I met other Iranian workers and people, not Mullahs. 
The people seemed friendly to me, even when they found out I was an American…which surprised me. Many told me that things were becoming more open in Iran, and that the grip of the mullahs was lessening. No idea if that was a load or not, you are right…I never deeply researched the thing but took what I was being told at face value. Still, it was a pretty consistant theme over all.
From 2Thick
Or, again, they might not have any yet. Or maybe they have one but are unsure if it will work properly. Certainly, afaik, they haven’t TESTED one yet…and they would have to do that, wouldn’t they? Maybe they don’t, I’m not sure. I seem to recall both India and Pakastan did though.
All the other things though…booming economy, well-educated, etc, are all indicators that maybe they are moving away from the paranoid hording of weapons, and moving towards being a trading partner. Perhaps. Usually trading partners don’t like or want to go to war with each other…its bad for business. It makes relationships, if not friendly, at least business like…which is a vast improvement. I see that as a good sign to be honest.
Again, I find it just as plausable that Iran wants assurances they won’t be next on the US hit parade, and the best way to do that is to go to the UN and show what a good boy they are. I could be totally wrong about all this, as I’m not well studied with the Iranian situation, just read a few articles and as I said, visited there for a few months to do some work there.
Cyberpunk, I seem to recall that they can trace where a weapon is produced by the trace elements in the radiation. I know that the US can trace its own weapons, and those of the USSR by this, so I’m assuming (if I’m even remembering properly in my current haze) that they can for other countries too. If I’m wrong about this then I’ll withdraw the comment. Too drunk to find out tonight though.
From Cyberpunk
Which is exactly what happened last time. The US cut off money and trade when they reneged on the treaties last time. Thats where we are today.
I don’t think they will ‘cheat’ per se…I merely think that, at some future time, they will simply pull this same stunt again. Create a crisis, throw out inspectors, restart their programs, demand more money…rinse and repeat. Maybe I’m being overly paranoid.
From Cyberpunk
I’m not busting on Clinton here. It was a good attempt, and wasn’t his fault it failed IMO. I put no blame on the man for the attempt whatsoever. But now we’ve learned a lesson…what was tried once and didn’t work, is unlikely to work a second time. Unless you want to simply pay of NK indefinitely at higher and higher rates. To me, as written (unless I’m missing detailed parts of it) Weldon’s (Wheldon’s??) plan smacks of appeasement, with no teeth.
If we do it again, I say we do it with bared teeth…so that NK understands that if they try this shit again, the world will literally fall on them and their government will cease to exist. Maybe we can make sure there is a proviso that KjI gets HIS teeth checked on CNN 50 times a day for a week or so.
And the other powers in the region are not yet at the point where they are ready to committ to such a thing. Until they are, its foolish IMO to rush into anything unilaterally, IMO.
From Cyberpunk
Well, I disagree obviously. IMO, the strategy is not basically to do nothing…its to wait and see, to work with China and the other powers in the region and get them totally involved in the process. There is a big difference between doing nothing (i.e. ignoring the problem) and being patient, observing and keeping an eye on things, working with the other powers in the region and encouraging them to fully engage on the problem, etc.
Again, the other powers in the region (SK, China, Japan, Taiwan, etc) have as big a stake in this (if not more so) than the US…they should shoulder some of the burden and the responsibility too. Why does the US have to do everything? Why should the US act unilaterally in this instance, if the other powers aren’t ready or willing to fully work the problem and find a solution?? Why SHOULDN’T China/SK/Japan take up the burden and do their parts? Especially China, which has a great deal of influence with NK.
I don’t understand this strange reguard people have for the US. On the one hand, when the US acts (like in Afghanistan or Iraq) people go ape shit over it. On the other hand, they want the US to unilaterally fix problems like NK, instead of working with the actual powers in the region who have a stake in it. If China isn’t concerned enough to push this thing through, make suggestions, pony up money, etc, then why should the US push this thing??
I still fail to see how NK having more nukes is ‘pretty much a guaranteed disaster’ to be honest…unless you are right in your speculation that NK would give/sell nukes to other countries and/or terrorists (I don’t know how credible this is, or how much it factors into the decision process to be honest).
If your thought was nuclear blackmail of the other countries in the region, certainly China won’t be feeling the heat from how ever many nukes NK manages to piece together (I seriously doubt they could make more than a dozen or so…I think its simply too expensive for them, but thats just my opinion) as they have nukes of their own…and lots more than NK is likely to build. South Korea also has nukes afaik, and a mutual defense treaty with the US (who has gobs of the hateful things…gobs being the technical term for lots :))…any attack by NK on SK will get an immediate response from the US. Japan is the same. Taiwan also. IMO, if NK attacked ANY of them, their country would become a smoking hole in the ground…and they know it. China won’t protect them from such a move.
-XT
I don’t know about tracing nuclear weapons but since the US knows extremely little about what nukes, if any, North Korea has I doubt it can do this (obviously it knows a lot more about its own weapons). Unless you can produce a cite I will discount this claim. So yes, if North Korea is allowed to remain a nuclear power for a long time there is a possibility it will give nukes or nuclear fuel to terrorists or other countries. Obviously the longer it is allowed to keep them the larger the chances. I will only note that North Korea is already a leading proliferator of missile technology.
No one, least of all me, is demanding that the US act unilaterally on this issue. However whether you like it or not North Korea considers the US its primary threat. And certainly the Bush adminstration with its “axis of evil” rhetoric has contributed to this. The US can’t now run away from its centrality to the dispute
About the Clinton agreement once again it failed only that it didn’t last forever. If Clinton hadn’t made the deal North Korea would likely have dozens of nukes by now instead of maybe one or two. It wasn’t perfect but it worked better than any likely alternative. Another such imperfect deal is certainly better than allowing North Korea to continue building nukes.
"There is a big difference between doing nothing (i.e. ignoring the problem) and being patient, observing and keeping an eye on things, working with the other powers in the region and encouraging them to fully engage on the problem, etc. "
There is actually very little different between doing nothing and your “strategy”. What will the US do if North Korea doesn’t back down and keeps building nuclear weapons. How long are you going to wait? How many nuclear weapons will you allow North Korea to build? I am getting tired of repeating this but the longer the US waits the more difficult it will be to verify any deal. North Korea will have more time to hide nuclear facilities, fuel and maybe even bombs.
A rather NASTY form of wait and see:
Millions of North Koreans Could Lose Food Aid - UN
To inject some levity into this very serious discussion, this (slightly un-worksafe)
http://www.yhchang.com/CUNNILINGUS_IN_NORTH_KOREA.html
has been making the rounds on the net. Allegedly, it’s the text of a speech Kim Jong Il gave, set to music and Flash by some joker. I have severe doubts, but it’s a good laugh at any rate.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/21/1071941611806.html
An interesting article which describes how Cheney undermined the latest negotiating efforts. It underlines the fact that the administration not only doesn’t have a serious negotiating strategy; it doesn’t even seem to see the need for one. They are dealing with one of the biggest crises in US history with little more than hot air about defeating evil and the like.
And what is the point of negotiating? They won’t keep any agreement we negotiate and they’ve made it clear they won’t accept verification. The way I see it, there isn’t anything to talk about.
So if your not going to negotiate… what are you going to do ? Wait for them to give up by themselves ? Or nuke them first ?