I don't think so, but I'm worried about the vague similarities the situation has to WWI, with a system of aliances, the brinkmanship (i.e. well, maybe we can just threaten to arm Japan and that will diffuse everything), and a generation that has not had access to the full horror of all-out war (i.e. some people involved may romanticize war in a way similar to folks in the early 20th century).
i do not mean to disparage your post at all...or your point...but have you ever noticed how often people say, "this situation really reminds me of the events leading up to WWI?"
i mean i don't totally disagree with you...i see what you're saying without a doubt... but i can't tell you how many times i've heard the wwI comparison to current events!!!
I research things and weigh the possibilities. DPRK would be much more of an unknown. Some of the things that standout about the DPRK. 1) Much more missile technology/capability than Iraq. Definitely capable of reaching most of Japan. <A HREF="http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2001/4304.htm"> U.S. Policy Toward the Democratic People's Republic of Korea</A> <i>...... <b>Missile Issues</b> Missile issues are important and we will seek to address them in talks with the North. Our concerns can basically be divided into two areas: indigenous missile development/deployment and missile exports. North Korea's own missile development/deployment efforts already threaten U.S. forces and allies in East Asia. Its efforts to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles pose direct threats to the United States and thus are extremely destabilizing. We have taken note of Chairman Kim Jong Il's statement that he will maintain until 2003 the long-range missile launch moratorium. It should be clear that North Korea's launching of a long-range missile would have serious consequences for regional security, return the Peninsula to a state of high tension, prompt widespread international condemnation, and do grave harm to North Korea's relations with the United States. North Korea's missile exports, which arm states in already-tense regions, threaten U.S. forces and friends in the Middle East and are irresponsible. Missile exports provide the D.P.R.K. a key source of hard currency, ways to cultivate outside relations, and a means to support R&D on more advanced missile systems.......</i> 2) DPRK quite possibly has two nuclear weapons with Iraq more on the <i>dirty bomb</i> level. 3) Major city (Seoul) targeted (and in range) by massive miltary buildup by DPRK. Iraqi <i>SCUDS</i> for Saudi Arabia & Israel are just a blimp compared to the weaponry that DPRK has aimed at Seoul. <A HREF="http://www.worldexecutive.com/cityguides/seoul/orientation.html">Seoul Korea</A> <i>Seoul is the capital city of South Korea and is situated in the northwest corner of the country, 25 miles away from the North Korean border........ Seoul Population – 12,215,000 (Source: UN Population Division 2000 estimate) </i> <A HREF="http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oplan-5027.htm">OPLAN 5027 Major Theater War - West</A> <i>.......<b>Pyongyang can credibly threaten the prompt destruction of Seoul with conventional arms alone.</b> The North Korean military could also establish a shallow foothold across the DMZ. However, the DPRK's ability to sustain these offensive operations, or advance its forces further to the south, is questionable. South Korean and American air forces could quickly establish air supremacy and destroy North Korean ground forces. The ensuing buildup of US forces in Korea could reverse any remaining North Korean advances into the South, and unlease offensive operations into the North. North Korea does not require long-range missiles with nuclear, chemical, or biological warheads to devastate Seoul or to make a land grab across the DMZ. Such weapons are needed to deter or defeat an American counteroffensive into North Korea. North Korea has about 500 long-range artillery tubes within range of Seoul, double the levels of a the mid-1990s. Seoul is within range of the 170mm Koksan gun and two hundred 240mm multiple-rocket launchers. The proximity of these long-range systems to the Demilitarized Zone threatens all of Seoul with devastating attacks. Most of the rest of North Korea's artillery pieces are old and have limited range. North Korea fields an artillery force of over 12,000 self-propelled and towed weapon systems. <b>Without moving any artillery pieces, the North could sustain up to 500,000 rounds an hour against Combined Forces Command defenses for several hours</b>........</i> 4) Proximity to China and the uneasiness that it caused when UN forces were engaged on the Korean Peninsula five decades ago. 5) Even after the eventual defeat of DPRK, there would be a massive & expensive revitalization project at hand for the Northern part of the Korean Peninsula. <A HREF="http://lxmi.mi.infn.it/~landnet/corea/proc/033.pdf">Revitalising North Korea’s Energy: Based on pipeline gas option</A> <i>A prime target of South Korea’s current sunshine policy is to prevent the collapse of North Korea, which has suffered from widespread famine and a deteriorating industrial base. Recently Goldman Sachs estimated it would cost South Korea more than USD 1,000 billion to revive North Korea in a German-style unification against the USD 600 billion Germany has spent over the last decade. According to Barclays Capital, it would cost USD 563 billion for the convergence of North Korean income to 50% of South Korean income after 20 years and the figure could be USD 798 billion for the convergence of North Korean income to 75% of South Korean income. These estimates confirm the scale of financial burden of unification.......</i> 6) There would be a likely influx of refugees to Northeastern China which is something that China would probably like to avoid.
Chipper? Who's chipper? But if we push against North Korea enough maybe they realize they better back off.
I'm not sure if this is what Dick and Rummy wanted.... We burnt a lot of money and political favors in sending our troops and getting other countries to allow us to base there. And whether Saddam exiles himself or not, our PR to the international community took a hit. It's like no one was happy that Saddam didn't have proof he had nukes (doesn't mean he doesn't). If it saves innocent lives and our soldiers lives, then it's the better situation. But that's only if you assume that Saddam is a sane man who genuinely loves his country enough to give up his power.... Just like we've pushed them into leaving the NPT treaty and turning on their reactors. Strong-arming countries isn't necessarily diplomacy. The people in Communist countries are generally strong in nationalism. They will not like an Imperialist power invading them and telling them what to do. Even if they're starving and in squalor, they still love their Kim. There could very well be another situation where our soldiers get spat upon the very people they're trying to liberate....
America can't act unilaterally forever. We can fight wars pretty damn well, but for the past 30 years we have been notoriously horrible at rebuilding the country we conquered. If we want the Euros and the rest of the world to be sold on this idea that they should foot the bill in reconstruction, then they need to be treated as willing partners who don't feel conscripted. The world we live in is getting smaller. It was Powell who pushed for going at Iraq through the UN first. Cheaney and Rumsfeld considered it a waste in valuable time and a possible red herring. They still push for striking unilaterally. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/01/13/international1449EST0591.DTL "* Kim Jong Il, 60, took over power after his father and national founder, Kim Il Sung, died in 1994. Kim heads the National Defense Commission. He bolsters his authority with a personality cult and is believed to have consolidated his control of the military, the powerful prop of his Stalinist regime. " http://www.sanmateocountytimes.com/Stories/0,1413,87%7E11268%7E1109148,00.html ""Kim Jong Il rules the communist world's only father-to-son dynasty with an ironclad cult of personality, but what's not clear is to what extent he rules alone. Experts say Kim also consults his cadre of aides on the bluffs, threats and olive branches extended in the current nuclear crisis -- and simultaneously plays them against each other. ... He's known as the "Dear Leader"...."" Cults of personality usually mean that the leader is propped up into some demi-god status so while the government can do wrong to the people, the leader never does. Stalin was pretty good at this, and it seemed to last for a while after their deaths. Even Castro enjoys some status. Kim is popular because despite the N. Korean's squalor and despite their famines, it is considered "their country" and they're equal people in Communism. The defectors are looked upon as traitors of the Korean people who are "giving up". America is viewed as some millitaristic superpower who's solely bent on destroying the Korean people. Instead of America toppling down Communism, it's America toppling down N. Korea. When Bush made public comments about Kim being a horrible leader who starves his people, there was reaction among the people for him singling out Kim. This charade is easy fodder for the N. Koreans to "show some defiance" at evil America. It's us against them. So despite the fact that the N. Korean people could live better lives, they're sold at this "system of the people", and they won't be forced to give it up. Their pride won't let them because they think that their own countrymen can fix it themselves. We didn't invade Russia, China, or Cuba. And strong arming tactics of diplomacy didn't crack them into submission either. They just became one long and uneasy standstill.
I agree, the US should start thinking about putting more into nation-building. Will it work? I don't know. Sometimes it seems like the countries we give more aid to hate us the most (Saudi Arabia, Egypt) while countries we don't help (Iraq, Iran) have pro-American populations. I don't see where the evidence is in what you wrote. I really don't buy that the North Korean people like the system they are living in. They are brutally oppressed, poor, isolated and I think they know it. I am sure many of them love their country but at the same time would love to see Kim go.
