May 30, 2009

Next Up: A Strongly-Worded Letter

Gates calls for more sanctions against North Korea:

Gates told Asian defense officials they were all familiar with North Korea’s tactic of creating a crisis and then demanding payment to end the crisis.

He said the United States and its allies were still open to dialogue with North Korea, but would not bend to provocation.

He said if North Korea would not conform to international norms, “painful” sanctions would be needed to end the nuclear program.

I just have to laugh — well, I would, if it weren’t so utterly tragic — at people who discuss evil dictators like they’re just wayward fellows who happened to accidentally stray from the norm. Hey, newsflash, genius: North Korea doesn’t give a flying crap about “international norms.” Call me nuts, but I don’t think that a lunatic dictator who starves his own people, plays war games, tricks American officials, and runs a police state is operating on the same plane as we are.

Yeah, but they’ll be back to “international norms” once they stop flinging rockets around.

by @ 7:12 pm. Filed under Uncategorized
Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42012.com/2009/05/30/yeah-thatll-work/trackback/

28 Responses to “Next Up: A Strongly-Worded Letter”

  1. Aron Goldman Says:

    U.S. to Respond to North Korea with ‘Strongest Possible Adjectives’
    Obama: We are Prepared to Consult Thesaurus

    One day after North Korea launched a successful test of a nuclear weapon, President Obama said that the United States was prepared to respond to the threat with “the strongest possible adjectives.”

    In remarks to reporters at the White House, Mr. Obama said that North Korea should fear the “full force and might of the United States’ arsenal of adjectives” and called the missile test “reckless, reprehensible, objectionable, senseless, egregious and condemnable.”

    Standing at the President’s side, Vice President Joseph Biden weighed in with some tough adjectives of his own, branding North Korean President Kim Jong-Il “totally wack and illin’.”

    Later in the day, Defense Secretary Robert Gates called the North Korean nuclear test “supercilious and jejune,” leading some in diplomatic circles to worry that the U.S. might be running out of appropriate adjectives with which to craft its response.

    But President Obama attempted to calm those fears, saying that the United States was prepared to “scour the thesaurus” to come up with additional adjectives and was “prepared to use adverbs” if necessary.

    “Let’s be clear: we are not taking adverbs off the table,” Mr. Obama said. “If the need arises, we will use them forcefully, aggressively, swiftly, overwhelmingly and commandingly.”

  2. JA Pruce Says:

    I’m sorry but we need to attack N. Korea. They have provoked war and thumbed their nose at international sanctions. In my mind those nuclear tests were a declaration of war and they represent a threat to our nation. All of the 2012 candidates must call for regime change in N. Korea and swift military action to disarm this foe.

  3. alaska jake Says:

    Aron. . .hahaha Ya know, if the adverbs don’t work, and I think we all know they won’t, we could always dangle some participles over Pyongyang. Or, dare I even suggest, split some infinitives (the nuclear option?). That’ll learn him.

  4. alaska jake Says:

    #2. . . Much easier said than done in NK. There’s a good reason we haven’t attacked yet after years of thumb-nosing by the two Kims (dad and boy). Check out a relief map of Korean geography and you’ll see why NK is so difficult to conquer, especially when they have several hundred thousand troops, and millions more in reserve (with little to lose) waiting to storm the border. Their weapons and military equipment are in laughable condition, and they have little fuel to spare or food to give the troops, so we have that going for us. But anyone who thinks this will be another hop/skip/jump to Baghdad doesn’t understand Korean realities.

    I would suggest that Kim has no reason to ever use nukes unless we actually do attack. Right now he’s just posturing for financial aid and, more importantly, food and humanitarian donations. Using nukes against SK or Japan, or even the US (and remember I live in Anchorage – within range of his long-range missiles), serves no logical purpose for Kim, who clings to power as long as he can keep the rest of the world out of his little hermit kingdom. What good would a nuclear attack by Kim do for him or his nation? I actually think we’re following the best available course – scream and shout that we’re ready for anything while sitting back and allowing Kim to blow off a little steam. He’ll calm down, we’ll make an offer of aid, and everything will be back to normal.

    Or, he launches nukes against Alaska, in which case it won’t matter much if I’m wrong.

  5. alaska jake Says:

    Another thing – Kim can afford to thumb his nose at international sanctions because he is a man with nothing to lose. They have no exports to boycott, no trade of any kind with the West to cut off, no diplomats to kick out. Sanctions against NK is an empty threat. We know it and Kim knows it. This is all just a game that will go nowhere fast.

  6. Tommy Boy Says:

    NORTH KOREA: THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING
    By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann
    http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2009/05/27/north-korea-the-whole-world-is-watching

    “If the United Nations, and the powers it represents, is as impotent as was the League in the 1930s, it will send the same signal to other would-be proliferators: that the rest of the world will sit by and do nothing. By so blatantly flouting international opinion and U.N. resolutions, North Korea has essentially said to the rest of the world: “put up or shut up.”

    The irony, of course, is that North Korea is probably the single state in the world most vulnerable to international sanctions. It produces no energy of its own. If China chose to bring the country to its knees, it could do so in a heartbeat. But will they?

    China is worried about triggering a flood of North Korean refugees across its borders and tends to be protective of its erstwhile ally.

    But the real pressure point on China is Japan. If the Japanese signal that they will respond to the North Korean nuclear test with a decision to change its constitution and develop nuclear weapons itself, the impact on both China and North Korea will be intense.

    But the most important actor is, of course, President Barack Obama. It is really he who is being tested. If he simply settles for ineffectual sanctions or a round of international condemnation, he will be showing a weakness that virtually invites exploitation by the rest of the world. If he only pursues diplomatic negotiations without economic or military clout behind them, the other aggressors – the latter day Hitlers and Tojos – will draw their own conclusions….

    Just as the key question for Bush was when would he resort to diplomacy, given his reputation for war? So the real issue with Obama is when will he fight given his penchant for negotiation?

    In the case of North Korea, of course, military action is off the table since it already has the bomb. But if the United States stiffens Japanese and Chinese resolve and takes the lead, there is no doubt that economic sanctions – real sanctions which include energy – would bring North Korea to its knees quickly.

    The whole wide world is watching.”

  7. Illinoisguy Says:

    Mitt speaks on N. Korea situation on Monday.

  8. JA Pruce Says:

    I hope that Mitt calls for forced regime change in N. Korea and supports arming Japan with nuclear weapons as a future deterrent. We could defeat N. Korea in a ground invasion in a matter of hours.

  9. alaska jake Says:

    JA. . .huh? hours? highly doubtful. care to explain how?

  10. Kevin Says:

    Attack North Korea? Really? Don’t you guys learn? *sigh*

    Also, 8, you are completely incorrect. U.S. has about 40,000 troops in South Korea I believe. NK has at least 400,000 on the DMZ alone. It would be a disaster. A DoW on NK would probably result in the 10000 + plus US troops dying, plus an North Korean invasion of South Korea. Considering how close Seoul is to North Korea, you’d probably face 1+ million deaths and a big blow to the world economy as Seoul, a global city, is nearly destroyed.

    I have no doubt America would win in the long run, but you’d have millions upon millions dead.

  11. alaska jake Says:

    Kevin. . .exactly. Most of our troops are near the border. That means many US soldiers killed. Seoul will be attacked immediately as it’s only about 35 miles from the border. All for no reason – NK is not a current threat to anyone despite its nuke program.

    People clamoring for a US/SK attack on NK don’t know anything about what’s going on there. Fortunately, so far, Obama seems to understand.

  12. Alex Knepper Says:

    Don’t pay attention to JA Pruce; he’s nuts.

  13. Heath Says:

    He is a troll like Greg (who I’m led to believe are the same person btw).

    He’s great value though I love him.

  14. Heath Says:

    By the way I agree with your post Alex but you didn’t offer a solution. What should Bush have done and what should Barry do now? If not war then what pray tell??

  15. Kevin Says:

    14. Yes. If war is nuts, than what do you propose Obama do that he isn’t doing?

  16. Kevin Says:

    14. Yes. If war is nuts, than what do you propose Obama do that he isn’t doing?

  17. Alex Knepper Says:

    It’s too late. We should have bombed them before it got this far. We shouldn’t do anything; we should just let it play out and stop giving them attention. It’s too late to deter, it’s too late to prevent.

    Apparently, a man once asked Napoleon how he’d deal with a particularly grim military scenario, given that he was a brilliant tactician and general. “My boy,” he replied, “I became known as a preeminent general because I never got myself into such situations.”

  18. Heath Says:

    As long as you realise bombing most likely = war and 1 million dead. Worth it? Hard to say.

  19. Heath Says:

    And are you comparing Obama to Napoleon?! What’s the point of this post if you agree we can’t do anything?

  20. MetroIndependent Says:

    #19:

    (1) No, Alex was using Napoleon as an example of the opposite of Obama’s approach, saying we should take action to make sure rogue nations don’t have nukes — BEFORE they have them. This meant doing something about North Korea 10 years ago and something about Iran right now.

    (2) The point is not to repeat the mistakes of history.

  21. ogrepete Says:

    The reason we haven’t done anything substantial up to now is the same reason we didn’t “win the war” against North Korea back in the 1950′s… China.

    If China wants North Korea to “step in line,” they can bring a whole lot more pressure to bear than the United States can. Kim Jong Il seems to be trying to blackmail the world for more goodies. China can stop the blackmailing a whole lot more easily than we can. If we were to invade, as JA Pruce suggests above, it would be very, very bloody and very, very expensive. And then China could stop us from “winning the war” all over again.

    Not a whole lot of options here, folks, but ignore all demands for aid by North Korea. If he wants to starve/enslave his people, he’s an idiot, but there’s no reason we should be idiots, too.

  22. Illinoisguy Says:

    Its a very complex issue, and its not easy to figure out exactly what to do. But, one thing is clear, the answer is not to reduce our missile defense capabilites while we have a stimulus package of 800 billion dollars. Something is really wrong with that picture. It even cuts Alaska’s missile defense by 33%…and they are most vulnerable to an idiot ruler like this.

  23. Aron Goldman Says:

    Japan panel wants “first strikes” against enemies: report
    http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE54O04S20090525

    Will Japan go nuclear?
    http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/05/25/will_japan_go_nuclear

    North Korean Atomic Tests Lift Lid on Japan’s Nuclear ‘Taboo’
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aXh3PWpXzEk0&refer=asia

    Dmitry Medvedev had a telephone conversation with Prime Minister of Japan Taro Aso
    http://www.kremlin.ru/eng/text/news/2009/05/217031.shtml

    US to Reaffirm Nuke Umbrella for S. Korea
    http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/05/205_45980.html

    Britain hopeful on U.N. action over North Korea
    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE54U0E620090531?sp=true

    US and China must stand up to N. Korea
    http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/05/31/us_and_china_must_stand_up_to_n_korea?mode=PF

    Daniel Sneider: How to deal with North Korea
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/opinion/story/69011.html

    MIKE BAKER’S ‘THE PEOPLE’S WEEKLY BRIEF’: Kim Jong-Il and a Two Year Old…
    http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/05/30/peoples_weekly_brief/

    North Korea could opt for devastating land assault
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2009/May/29/north_korea_could_opt_for_devastating_land_assault.html

  24. Citizen K. Says:

    “I’m sorry but we need to attack N. Korea. They have provoked war and thumbed their nose at international sanctions. In my mind those nuclear tests were a declaration of war and they represent a threat to our nation. All of the 2012 candidates must call for regime change in N. Korea and swift military action to disarm this foe.”

    We tried this once and it was a catastrophe. China would likely regard any attack of any kind on North Korea as an attack on China. We don’t want to go there. Bombing them would invite an invasion of South Korea. We don’t want to go there, either. Even in the extremely dubious case that China stood aside, the Koreans have a reserve in the millions that they will commit in the defense of their homeland. The people of the United States will never at any time be willing to sacrifice a million American lives in an Asian ground war.

    Ease off on the testosterone and try thinking for a change.

  25. wisetrog Says:

    Gates came up with a “strongly worded” statement hours after Gov.Palin released a statement urging Obama to be tough on N.Korea. I think this belated policy reversal by Gates is a panicked reaction to Gov.Palin’s statement.

  26. Citizen K. Says:

    ” I think this belated policy reversal by Gates is a panicked reaction to Gov.Palin’s statement.”

    LOL. Who says conservatives don’t have a sense of humor.

  27. SteveS Says:

    #17, “It’s too late. We should have bombed them before it got this far.”

    When? How is the current situation any different than at any time in the last 15 years?

    The two major events of the last 15 years were in 1994, when Clinton entered into the agreed framework and kept their plutonium locked up, and in October of 2002 when NK kicked out inspectors and removed the locked up Plutonium and the Bush Administration did nothing.

    When should the bombs have dropped? How would bombing then not have led to significant war and death?

  28. Xanax. Says:

    Xanax withdrawal symptoms….

    Xanax xr crushed. Xanax. Cheap generic xanax 2mg bars. Xanax dosage. Xanax for sale….

State of the Race


Obama Approval


Support R4'12

Meta

Recent Posts

Buy This Book

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main