 |
| |
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:29
|
|
In a few months North Korea will no longer be part of the NPT: once it is outside of that framework, the US has no legal justification for anything, anymore than we can talk to India, Pakistan and Israel for their nukes, since they never agreed to sign the NPT.
As for attacking the nuclear facilities; as time goes, the effectiveness of this declines markedly: once the North has the fisionable material for several bombs, they can assmeble anywhere else. We would slow thier ability to make more materials, but only temporarily, unless we plan to bomb suspected sites every few weeks.
And as for "pther carrying thier weight": the interests as they see them of China, South Korea and Japan are not 100% like those of the US: The US has to do what it can to meet its interests, because it can not count on the interests of hese three states to be ours.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:29
|
|
The problem we are facing, of course, is that as soon as North Korea has a sufficient number of nuclear weapons to pose a serious threat against the large Japanese cities, they made may be able to successfully invade South Korea while holding the US military at bay with the threat of a nuclear attack on Japan. In a short number of years, the North Koreans may also be able to threaten US cities when they develop missiles that will reliably hit American cities on the West Coast. In other words, a North Korea armed with nuclear weapons is tremendously destabilizing.
Facing the realities of such a situation, the Japanese and South Koreans may want to develop nuclear weapons themselves in order to provide some measure of deterrence. Since this alternative is probably politically unacceptable in Japan, the Japanese and perhaps a South Koreans may be forced to take unilateral action well before North Korea becomes an unacceptable threat. If they do not, they will have to continue to rely on United States to provide a nuclear deterrent.
But just how reliable an ally are we? Given that our armed forces are temporarily overextended due to Iraq, we probably will do nothing militarily to correct the situation until it is too late to act. Realizing this, we seem to be deploying our forces away from the DMZ and perhaps even out of South Korea in order that the North may attack the South without us necessarily being obligated to intervene. Increasingly, it looks like the South Koreans have a very dim future. Ditto, Japan.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Q Cubed
|
 |
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:29
|
|
quote:
Since this alternative is probably politically unacceptable in Japan, |
althought it's tremendously unpopular, i do believe that the people will go along with it if only to deter the nkoreans.
unfortunately, that would have the added effect of increasing china's number of missiles, and forcing skorea and taiwan to join the race. even worse, japan, skorea, and taiwan could all develop such weapons on a very short time scale, since all have high levels of technology, are capable of machining all the parts required, and have plenty of nuclear plants.
quote:
Realizing this, we seem to be deploying our forces away from the DMZ and perhaps even out of South Korea |
as far as i see it, deploying americans away from the dmz means that they'll have a fighting chance in the first few hours of any coming war. the troops along the dmz are called speed bumps for a reason.
nobody expects them to survive. they expect them to die, and delay the enemy as long as possible.
it doesn't look like we'll be leaving the area any time soon. to do so would not be in american interests, as it would leave china as the sole great power in the region, and leave it in quite a good position to become another regional hegemon, thereby undermining the us's security.
quote:
in order that the North may attack the South without us necessarily being obligated to intervene. |
do you think the us would renege on its treaty of alliance with the republic of korea?
quote:
Increasingly, it looks like the South Koreans have a very dim future. Ditto, Japan. |
i'll have to disagree. the future is much cloudier, yes, but i think things will turn out all right if a) the skorean youth get their heads out of their asses, realize that although reunification is good and they are all family, nkorea will treat them exactly as they would an american in the even of a war; b) japan remilitarizes in a limited sense, with limited power-projection capabilities: enough to help dominate airspace, and ensure shipping lanes are safe; c) skorea and japan bury the hatchet, as they have been, in fits and starts; d) the japanese economy recovers, either by government military spending or through government and economic reform revitalizes the deeply ill japanese economy; e) skorea maintains its growth rate, ensures that its spy agency isn't still demoralized and completely defanged, and continues its progress.
lots of conditions. c) i don't hold out exceptional hope for, nor do i see d) coming unless they face the brink of disaster. a) will be the trickiest to acheive. since most of the youth don't remember the korean war have have expirienced nothing much outside of affluence, they haven't truly tasted fear. this crisis isn't doing it quite yet, but i'm sure it will soon as its effects on the economy are felt and more belligerent statements come over the border.
i honestly don't quite understand this lack of fear, however, especially since every korean male is to serve in the military for over two years...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
World - AP Asia
U.S. May Make N. Korea Nonagression Vow
Tue Jul 22, 9:17 PM ET
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration might be willing to give North Korea (news - web sites) a written guarantee that the United States has no intention of attacking without provocation, the State Department said Tuesday.
AP Photo
At the same time, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the administration is working for a diplomatic solution to the impasse over the North Koreans' nuclear arms program but said it would not give inducements to achieve it.
Spokesman Richard Boucher was asked about a statement early this year by Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage that the United States was willing to put in writing an assurance against unprovoked attack. "That still stands," Boucher said.
The issue "is not whether the United States provides a piece of paper; the issue is whether North Korea stops developing nuclear weapons, and that's where the focus has to be," Boucher said.
In January, Armitage said: "We have no hostile intentions toward North Korea, and we're not going to invade North Korea. We believe that there is a way to document this, whether it's an exchange of letters or official statements or something like that."
Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) spent 2 1/2 hours last Friday in talks with a senior Chinese Foreign Ministry (news - web sites) official, but Boucher said Tuesday they did not discuss how a pledge not to invade North Korea could be put in writing.
China, which hosted U.S.-North Korean talks in April, has been pushing the Bush administration to hold a new session next month in Beijing aimed at getting Pyongyang to stop its nuclear weapons program. The United States wants five-party talks that would also include Japan and South Korea (news - web sites).
"We were sitting down with the Chinese and others to talk about how we can get these talks started so we can get rid of this nuclear weapons program," Boucher said.
"We think it's time for others to join these talks," he said. "We think it's time to have larger groups present at the talks."
The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the Bush administration is considering granting North Korea a formal guarantee not to attack as part of a verifiable end to its nuclear weapons program. At the White House, McClellan said the administration was not considering that.
"Our position remains the same: We continue to seek a diplomatic solution, working with the countries in the neighborhood," he said. "We've made it very clear that we will not give in to blackmail, we will not grant inducements for the North to live up to its obligations."
He said North Korea needs to end its nuclear weapons program irreversibly.
On Monday, a high-ranking South Korean official predicted a possible breakthrough in the nuclear standoff, saying the United States, China and North Korea will hold talks in Beijing soon.
The nations are "in the final stage of arranging a new meeting," said Ra Jong-il, President Roh Moo-hyun's national security adviser.
McClellan was noncommittal on when talks will resume.
"We remain in close consultation with China, Japan, South Korea on the next round and how we proceed on talks, so that North Korea will verifiably, irreversibly and completely eliminate its nuclear weapons program," McClellan said.
He raised the possibility that first there would be three-party talks involving China the United States and North Korea and before Japan and South Korea joined. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:29
|
|
and the South agreeing to remove American bases
Why on Earth would the South agree to that?
China doesn't have much problem with North Korea nowadays. Unfortunately, South Korea is too weak-willed to assert its interests with regard to North Korea with the Chinese.
Last edited by DanS on 24-07-2003 at 00:55
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-07-2003 18:48
|