# When Bush goes Comanche on Korea **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 6, 2003, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182 "2003-02-06T12:33:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![welby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d78d45/32.png) [@welby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/welby)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/1 "2003-02-06T12:33:22Z")
What will happen? As much as I hate to say it, I think we’ll be landing troops and taking the fight to North Korea before long. The government of North Korea is essentially spoiling for a fight. (My opinion, based on a lot of thier rhetoric.) They’ve disregarded an agreement about nuclear arms, and said that sanctions would be tantamount to an act of war. So now I have to ask, what about the next Korean War? Will the next door neighbor with the biggest standing army in the world (China) back North Korea? If so, what will the world options be? I mean, you’ll have the usual countries on the U.S. led side of the game, and you’ll have China and North Korea on the other. Russia will probably stay out of it because they’re a pretty easy target militarily for the Chinese. So how will things fall out? World War Three? Or a smaller conflict? Little of both? ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/2 "2003-02-06T12:49:36Z")
North Korea has now [directly threatened US troops in the region](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2731305.stm). But they almost certainly have nukes: this could temper US action. In my opinion, what you’ve got to hope is that the US can sweet-talk China. Though somewhat supportive, the Chinese government isn’t blindly loyal to NK. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/3 "2003-02-06T13:02:25Z")
China has a lot more practical ties to the west these days than ideological ties to N. Korea. Hell, China has a lot more practical ties to S. Korea these days, although the Asian economic crisis did dent that somewhat. Keep in mind that Beijing is within target of those same potential nukes aimed at tokyo. If anyone knows what is going on inside N. Korea, it is China. I’d like to know what is really going on there and the deals being cut with the US. Otherwise, all we are doing is pure conjecture. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/4 "2003-02-06T14:21:05Z")
I don’t think they want to really fight. Rather, they are trying to look dangerous so as to get what they want without a fight (because they know we could well beat them in one). If the Koreans go out and start a fight, I doubt China will back them up. They’d have to balance fears of an American presence very close to their soil versus their dependance on our trade, and probably would decide on the later. They ultimately are as worried about Pyonyang as we are. ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/5 "2003-02-06T14:24:22Z")
Could we really beat them? They implied they would use a first strike. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/6 "2003-02-06T14:27:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by vanilla \* > \*\*Could we really beat them? > They implied they would use a first strike. \*\* I’d say yes, the US could whup anyone, but not without an immense catastrophe (if they have nukes and are as batshit as they appear to be). Pre-emption cuts both ways. ---
**Author:** ![Coda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Coda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coda)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/7 "2003-02-06T14:49:57Z")
I’ll check in as being around during the first Korean War and around after the fight for all the ideological sumo chest heaving. This is nothing new folks. We have known for some time what the deal is with North Korea. They have postured in the past to try and get oil, food, medical supplies, education reform etc…etc… Now that they have decided to tell the world that they have missle capabilities, they are only inflating their chest. I would be very very surprised if they drop a nuke. Their scientists know full well what the capabilities would be for mass destruction. The only thing I can possibly see happen is Rumsfeld flying over their with a powerpoint presentation saying if you do this, this will happen and many millions of people will die. You still won’t get your food, or your oil, and other nations you pissed off are going to make most of your country an international parking lot. And yes you will die. We will still be here, and will be very very pissed off. Similar tactic with defusing India and Pakistan. Show them what will happen and persued them otherwise. The slight caveat with this situation lies in aide to North Korea. I see Rumsfeld saying we will supply this amount of aide and for this amount of disarmament. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/8 "2003-02-06T15:27:01Z")
Given this statement– > [@](#): > > N. Korea issues war warning > Thursday, February 6, 2003 Posted: 8:15 AM EST (1315 GMT) > > S. Korean activists chant anti-US slogans during a demonstration in Seoul on Thursday > > SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea warned Thursday that any pre-emptive attack by the United States on its nuclear facilities will spark a “full-scale war” on the Korean Peninsula. > > \< snip \> > > “If the United States launches a surprise attack on our peaceful nuclear facilities, it will spark a full-scale war,” said Rodong Sinmun, North Korea’s main state-run newspaper, in a commentary carried by Radio Pyongyang. –and given the way that the Administration is very, very carefully attempting to win _some_ kind of world consensus that it’s okay with them, sort of, if we go Comanche on Saddam’s ass, I’d be very, very surprised to see them simply push the big red “GO” button for NK without a lot of speechifyin’ and saber-rattlin’ and consensus-buildin’ first. Why would they take the risk of personally creating one hell of a big radioactive mess, just out of spite, or impatience, or a cowboy need to go Comanche? And simply sending the 62nd Airborne after NK’s nuclear plants would look like the very worst sort of cowboy behavior, confirming the Rest Of The World in their belief that all the Americans are is a bunch of redneck rowdies looking to bust up the place. Naw, I don’t see it happening without a LOT of Iraq-style talky-talk happening first. [http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/02/06/nkorea.nuclear/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/02/06/nkorea.nuclear/index.html) > **[CNN International - Breaking News, US News, World News and Video](https://edition.cnn.com/)** > > Find the latest breaking news and information on the top stories, weather, business, entertainment, politics, and more. For in-depth coverage, CNN provides special reports, video, audio, photo galleries, and interactive guides. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/9 "2003-02-06T15:41:53Z")
Sure we could “win,” if by win that means we stand on the dead bodies littering the charred and mangled soil that was once the Korean Peninsula after the fighting is over. I’ll make one little wager, the US has no, zero, nada plans for offensive action against North Korea right now. I’m sure they are cooking up contingency plans by the dozen, but no sane person wants to start a ‘hot’ war over there. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/10 "2003-02-06T15:55:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose \* > Naw, I don’t see it happening without a LOT of Iraq-style talky-talk happening first. Well, the US going at Iraq without the UN will have set a nice precedent. For your next war the reasoning might well be: ‘Why bother with talks.’ ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/11 "2003-02-06T16:05:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Latro \* > \*\*Well, the US going at Iraq without the UN will have set a nice precedent. For your next war the reasoning might well be: ‘Why bother with talks.’ \*\* Alternatively, NK might go “err… um… us? Nukes? Oh _these_ - yeah, sorry, don’t know where _they_ came from. We just found them down the back of the sofa yesterday. Must have been left behind by a house guest. Here you go Mr Blix, please take 'em away with you.” Or at least that’s what I imagine the hawks think will happen. ---
**Author:** ![Fang](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/96bed5/32.png) [@Fang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fang)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/12 "2003-02-06T16:27:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Latro \* > **the US going at Iraq without the UN** I don’t recall this happening. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![welby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d78d45/32.png) [@welby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/welby)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/13 "2003-02-06T17:26:15Z")
I think that talky talky is good, but there’s something in the rhetoric that strikes me funny. For example, the statement about the U.S. striking at one of NK’s “peaceful” nuclear plants being an act of war. I don’t recall (maybe I missed it) any U.S. official threatening a quick strike military action at all, but NK seems to almost be daring the U.S. to do so. And the level of rhetoric also should be looked at carefully. It’s very pointed and very aggresive, kind of like a bully in the playground at school. Something rings funny to me. May be the real question is “The NK’s want to give a war, are we going to go?” ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/14 "2003-02-06T17:44:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Fang \* > \*\*I don’t recall this happening. Cite? \*\* Hypothetical, d’you see? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/15 "2003-02-06T18:01:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by welby \* > \*\*For example, the statement about the U.S. striking at one of NK’s “peaceful” nuclear plants being an act of war. I don’t recall (maybe I missed it) any U.S. official threatening a quick strike military action at all, but NK seems to almost be daring the U.S. to do so. \*\* I don’t think the US has said it will strike the reactors and if anything has probably said we wouldn’t (if we mentioned it at all). However, I think it is a safe bet that it has been considered and that a contingency plan for doing just that has been worked up and is lying about somewhere. NK is merely saying “Here’s what we’ll do if you strike our nuclear plants…just saying in case you were wondering.” NK has always been full of over-blown rhetoric. Unfortunately the government there is nuts…as nuts as any government on the planet today. That’s what makes them scary…you never really can tell for sure what they might do next. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/16 "2003-02-06T23:08:55Z")
You mean Bush is going to reserve Korea for the North Koreans, then [allot Korean territory](http://www.indianz.com/News/show.asp?ID=2002/11/14/allottees) to poor North Koreans in fee, and allow South Korea to take title to the land for lack of payment of property taxes? ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2003, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/17 "2003-02-06T23:18:35Z")
…I suppose that makes sense, since they’re already talking about taking [Iraqi oil](http://europe.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/23/iraq.powell/) in [trust](http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0%2C1413%2C36%257E417%257E1134340%257E%2C00.html). Okay, I’ll go away now. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/18 "2003-02-07T04:43:37Z")
North Korea is now saying that it reserves the right to launch a first strike against the United States if it thinks the U.S. is in any way preparing for war. So now they’re not just challenging the U.S. not attack them, but challenging the U.S. that it had better not deploy forces to the region. In response, the U.S. is sending the _Carl Vinson_ carrier group to the waters off of the peninsula. And the other day, Bush order 24 armed bombers within range of North Korea on alert. I don’t really understand what’s going on here. The U.S. has been giving North Korea what it wants, and yet North Korea is responding by ratcheting up the rhetoric and making threatening moves. Is it possible that North Korea and Iraq have a mutual defense agreement, and North Korea is simply trying to destabilize the support for a war against Iraq? Or does North Korea see the U.S.'s commitment to Iraq as an opportunity to re-assert itself as a major player while it feels the U.S. is too busy to respond militarily and has to cave to their demands? Or is this just desperation by the North Korean leadership because their economy is falling apart? If so, then these threats need to be taken very seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/19 "2003-02-07T07:09:01Z")
Any war with NK is going to be a bloody, nasty thing. As several Dopers have pointed out in previous threads on this subject, Seoul is within easy shelling distance of the North. Not to mention that some of the largest shipyards in the world are in SK. There’s also large portions of the world’s electronics produced there. _If_ a war breaks out, you can expect the world’s economy to take a very rapid nose dive, and not have much chance of recovery in a short period of time. Despite the US’s overwhelming advantages, I can’t see the war being a quick one. _If_ the US goes to war with NK, I have to think that it’ll be because the North has decided to attack first, and we _won’t_ go it alone. We’ll _have_ to have Chinese support if we expect the North to surrender rapidly. And I don’t doubt that the US will do everything it can to ensure China’s support. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182/20 "2003-02-07T07:15:54Z")
to look up the word [“robust.”](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2733839.stm) > [@](#): > > BBC: > The United States has shrugged off a threat from North Korea that any decision to send more troops to the region might prompt it to make a pre-emptive attack. > “Obviously the United States is prepared [with] robust plans for any contingencies,” White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said in a briefing on Thursday. > > “But this type of talk and the type of actions North Korea has engaged in - or says it is engaging in - only hurt North Korea.” > > US officials announced this week that Washington was considering strengthening its military forces in the Pacific Ocean. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-bush-goes-comanche-on-korea/153182.md?page=2)