Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the administration won’t give “North Korea the attention it craves.” “Their actions are continuing to further deepen their own isolation, from the international community,” Gibbs told reporters. The BBC said, “the White House accused North Korea of seeking attention.”
“We’re certainly concerned and take any threat seriously, but my sense is they’re trying to get renewed attention through sabre-rattling and bluster and threats,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
Meanwhile, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned North Korea in these terms. “North Korea has made a choice… There are consequences to such actions … There will be an opportunity for North Korea to come back into a framework of discussion within the six-party process and that we can begin once again to see results from working with the North Koreans toward denuclearization.”
Marc Ambinder in the Atlantic interviewed Asia expert Christopher Nelson, who says Obama is doing exactly the right thing by ignoring Kim. Nelson’s take:
Some experts argue that the “real message” of the aggressive words (so far not actions) is to say, “Just leave us alone for now.” …
Obama and his team have said all the right things in public (nuclear power status is not acceptable, we all need to consult and cooperate in containing the risks, etc.) In private, they are doing a good job of consulting, really consulting, with Japan, China and [South Korea], also the Russians to the extent that that’s useful. They are also doing a good job of reaching out to us and other experts to discuss all aspects of the situation… The renewed “UN Strategy” should be seen as part of this organic process of trying to meld an effective policy involving all the major players….
Obviously there is political theater involved in these statements … Personally, at this point, I would focus attention on accidental escalation risks. … That kind of thing…history is full of examples of disaster. So yes, you have to say that risk is increasing, and you have to trust that the US, Japan, [South Korea] and China are right now working on coordinated crisis response scenarios.
Nelson’s background suggests he may have good sources with Democratic politicians. If Nelson’s thinking reflects the inner logic of administration policy, then it suggests that they regard the North Korean belligerence as a conniption that will soon blow over, unless the US accidentally escalates it by actually doing something. Therefore the best and most sophisticated response to the North Koreans is to play golf and wait for them to come crawling back to the negotiating table. Which they will, won’t they?
The risk to this strategy is obvious: suppose North Korea isn’t trying to Washington’s attention but those of prospective customers? Customers for you-kn0w-what. Then the assumptions behind the whole “stand back” strategy falls apart. Everyone who has faced a dangerous man knows the problem. Ignoring him gives him a chance not only to surrender but to reload or center you in his sights. It would be nice if you could count on the international bad guy giving, awaiting only one more forceful condemnation from the international community to bring him to his knees. But can you count on it? Maybe the administration wants to. Maybe it is has to; making a virtue out of necessity.
My guess is that we have just witnessed the dreaded breakout. The nonproliferation regime is dead. It’s death throes began when the international sheriff was pilloried for sunsucessfully searching the arsenals of notorious malefactor known to be seeking nuclear weapons and publicly shamed for it. Whatever legitimacy the sheriff might have had to preempt tyrants like Kim vanished between 2005 and 2008; and Obama helped destroy it, a circumstance which he may or may not regret. But the nonproliferation regime was already in the process of dying. Technological proliferation and a weakening of Western will guaranteed that sooner or later more and more nations would get the bomb. Mohammed ElBaradei has already stated that the number of nuclear states will soon double. That’s the future. While North Korea itself may not be a proximate threat, the failure of the international community to stop even this impoverished and bizarre regime suggests that it is fundamentally toothless or has forgotten how to bite. What chance is there of blocking the stronger aspiring powers? None. It’s over. Ignoring North Korea isn’t a sign of confidence. It’s just whistling past the graveyard.
What happens next? I think there will be a gradual loss of confidence in the American nuclear umbrella. Even a Labor Prime Minister like Kevin Rudd has seen the handwriting on the wall.
Kevin Rudd is set to announce Australia’s biggest military build-up since World War II, led by a multi-billion-dollar investment in maritime defence, including 100 new F-35 fighters, a doubling of the submarine fleet, and powerful new surface warships. The new defence white paper will outline plans for a fundamental shake-up of Australia’s defence organisation to ensure that the nation can meet what the Prime Minister sees as a far more challenging and uncertain security outlook in Asia over the next two decades.
China’s steadily growing military might and the prospect of sharper strategic competition among Asia’s great powers are driving the maritime build-up, which will see new-generation submarines and warships equipped with cruise missiles, and a big new investment in anti-submarine warfare and electronic warfare platforms, including new naval helicopters.
The alternative to a nuclear monopoly by the great powers isn’t a “world without nuclear weapons”. It’s universal armament. The White House may wish to ignore North Korea, but they’ll be the only ones. It is more likely that the time will come when they will eventually realize that they are no longer the center of the universe and that “ignoring” cuts both ways.
Tip Jar or Subscribe for $5
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
41 Comments
1. MG:Perhaps the “International Community” will quit free-riding the U.S. while simultaneously blaming the U.S. for the world’s ills.
And perhaps monkeys will fly out of my butt.
May 27, 2009 - 5:11 pm 2. rickl:This may or may not be off topic, but I posted the following comment at Dr. Sanity a little while ago:
I think it should be pretty obvious by now that Obama, true-blue leftist that he is, wants to weaken America. Like all leftists, he resents that America is so rich and powerful and believes that we need to be cut down to size.
But apart from that, lately I’m starting to wonder whether he actually wants to get us involved in a war, so he could label any dissent or criticism as “divisive” and “unpatriotic”.
This idea has been percolating in my head recently. If a couple of our cities get nuked, then what would be the implications of holding tea parties to protest the lawless, runaway Federal government? Would dissent be body-slammed to the ground and criminalized as it was during the Wilson administration?
May 27, 2009 - 5:19 pm 3. Willie G:Right…go point a gun at a cop or a member of the US military and see what an invitation to negotiate really looks like….if you live long enough.
This isn’t whistling past the graveyard.
It’s tempting fate.
Reality bites. Hard.
May 27, 2009 - 5:24 pm 4. heathermc:the times are so interesting that I have sympathy for “rickl’s” speculations. Ordinarily, I would dismiss them as paranoid.
However. There is another beast on the horizon: the boomers are retiring, and the pension plans are imploding. When the choice is a comfortable retirement or controlling the China Sea, well, I think there is no contest, does anyone?
I note also that after a few headlines about the NK Nukes, most sites are back to some Latina going to the Supreme Court. Oh Well.
May 27, 2009 - 5:40 pm 5. Doug:Cheney ‘tried to block North Korea nuclear deal’
Vice President Dick Cheney fought furiously to block efforts by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to strike a controversial US compromise deal with North Korea over the communist state’s nuclear programme
“The exchanges between Cheney’s office and Rice’s people at State got very testy. But ultimately Condi had the President’s ear and persuaded him that his legacy would be stronger if they reached a deal with Pyongyang,” said a Pentagon adviser who was briefed on the battle.
Mr Cheney’s office is believed to have played a key role in the release two months ago of documents and photographs linking North Korea to a suspected nuclear site in Syria that was bombed by Israeli jets last year.
—
Mr Cheney was so angry about the decision to remove North Korea from the terrorism blacklist and lift some sanctions that he abruptly curtailed a meeting with visiting US foreign experts when asked about it in the White House last week, according to the New York Times “I’m not going to be the one to announce this decision. You need to address your interest in this to the State Department,” he reportedly said before leaving the room.
The surprise deal was condemned by both neoconservative hardliners and mainstream Republicans who argued that it left North Korea with nuclear weapons and rewarded Pyongyang’s intransigence.
“Usually the word ‘meltdown’ applies to a nuclear reactor. In this case it applies to Bush administration diplomacy which once aimed to halt the North Korean programme and has now become an abject failure,” Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon defence policy board in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion, told the Telegraph.
May 27, 2009 - 5:40 pm 6. JFSanders:2.rickL:
“If a couple of our cities get nuked, then what would be the implications of holding tea parties to protest the lawless, runaway Federal government? Would dissent be body-slammed to the ground and criminalized as it was during the Wilson administration?
He best be careful with that scenario as it is a very double edged sword. Sales of guns and ammo are still going up as production rises. And this is while there is real inflationary pressure in the gun market to bring prices down. An AK clone today is going for $700 in gun friendly states and for much more than that in unfriendly ones. These are the same guns that could be had less than two years ago for a street price of $350. And ammo for that rifle if you can get it has tripled in price.
So the masses he thinks would be cowed by martial law may not see it his way…
Besides, nuking a major metropolitan area would only kill his supporters for the most part and we all know that he aint gonna have votes wiped out like that unless they are R.
May 27, 2009 - 5:44 pm 7. rickl:4. heathermc:
Yes, I would also consider that comment paranoid, in ordinary times. But these times are far from ordinary.
6. JFSanders:
May 27, 2009 - 5:53 pm 8. whiskey:One thing I forgot to mention in my earlier comment: Apart from Obama’s own reaction, a sufficiently devastating attack on American soil could have the effect of making American patriots temper our criticism of Obama and circle the wagons around him. A kind of ’self-censorship’, if you will.
Obama has few allies in the Military and declaring Martial Law only empowers well, military men and defense workers. Something his base detests. Since Martial Law would require him to do something.
No. Obama and his supporters dream of “Vichy America,” surrendering to Islamists, dismantling the military, being helpless, the victim, and of course destroying domestic power rivals. This is Obama’s dream, and that of his backers.
He WANTS America nuked. Not so he can declare martial law, but so he can declare surrender and achieve a military defeat. Yes he’s that stupid, and so are his supporters. Since the attack will not stop at one, and will simply roll on with city after city falling, until Obama is simply removed from the White House and military commissions rule during the duration. Which is likely to be wiping out half the Muslim world for survival.
Nuclear proliferation was always going to happen, absent Bill Clinton seizing the moment and explaining clearly the danger in the 1990’s about the slipping of the Cold War leashes. The need to pre-empt to save US cities. We will now inevitably lose US cities. Several. And with them, the comfortable, post-War existence we’ve known. FEAR will rule us, and survival will be the only goal.
Lose a couple of cities, and people will demand a restoration. By the simple expedient of wiping out all threatening nuclear proliferators, North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. Not with boots on the ground but nuclear missiles flying. And a new, post-Nuked NYC policy of wiping out without warning any threatening proliferator.
This was always the danger. That the deeply feminized, pacifist West, fearing it’s own internal power struggles over male-female social domination, would swing female and remain wedded to “Hope and Change” until it’s pure survival, and female oriented status mongering and power manuevering, would become irrelevant as in JG Ballard’s “Empire of the Sun” where only survival skills of scrounging and theivery were important.
May 27, 2009 - 5:55 pm 9. JFSanders:7.rickL:
That is some good stuff there! IN A PIG’S EYE! Will any one I know do that!
May 27, 2009 - 5:55 pm 10. Annoy Mouse:Sometimes it’s difficult to remember how the present nuclear standoff was dealt with in the past decade. Every act of acquiescence has spawned new demands…
“North Korea has made a choice… There are consequences to such actions … There will be an opportunity for North Korea to come back into a framework of discussion within the six-party process”
and again, a totally garbled message is issued forth; “Get closer to a bomb for export, der volks-bomb, and we will give you more hugs and goodies and a chance to start over again.”
The US is really the cat killing observer in this experiment.
We will only see change when Kim makes his swan song or when China decides that they have less to gain than to lose in starting a conflagration at this time. If China wishes to assert primacy over Asia this amounts to no less than pissing in the soup.
” Whatever legitimacy the sheriff might have had to preempt tyrants like Kim vanished between 2005 and 2008; and Obama helped destroy it, a circumstance which he may or may not regret.”
For whatever reason the American people demanded an abrupt end to America. Voted for it and Obama is its face. The people have spoken and as Pogo once said “We have seen the enemy… and they is us.” The American consumer has been voting with their wallets for the end of America for the past 30 years. The votes have been tallied; We want our stuff made with slave labor and we want it cheap. Screw my neighbor and his children. Let them eat cake, I got my cheap crap and it will comfort me as the dark pall of hell descends upon us.
War is really, really good for business. Not so good for warm fuzzy animals and the environment though. Too bad there would be no compromise that all should be lost.
May 27, 2009 - 5:59 pm 11. Doug:Obama and the ‘South Park’ Gnomes
In a speech last month in Prague, right after North Korea had illegally tested a ballistic missile, Mr. Obama promised a new nonproliferation regime, along with “a structure in place that ensures when any nation [breaks the rules], they will face consequences.” Whereupon the U.N. Security Council promptly failed to muster the votes for a resolution condemning Pyongyang’s launch.
Now Kim Jong Il has tested another nuke, and we’re back at the familiar three-step.
Phase One: Propose a “structure.” . . .
It was also in his Prague speech that Mr. Obama repeated his pledge to “confront climate change by ending the world’s dependence on fossil fuels, by tapping the power of new sources of energy like the wind and sun.”
Never mind that neither the wind nor the sun are new sources of energy. It so happens that the U.S. gets about 2.3% of its energy resources from “renewable” resources of the kind the president advocates while fossil fuels account for about 70%.
In Gnome-speak, then, Mr. Obama’s energy policy goes something like this:
Phase One: Inaugurate the era of “green” energy.
Phase Two: Overturn the first and second laws of thermodynamics.
Phase Three: Carbon neutrality!
Take any number of Mr. Obama’s other initiatives. Rescue Detroit? Phase One: Set a national mileage standard for passenger cars of 39 miles per gallon and force auto makers to make the kind of cars that drove them to bankruptcy in the first place.
Reduce the deficit? Phase One: Approve $3.5 trillion in government stimulus, and then await the mythical Keynesian multiplier.
Pay for a $1.2 trillion health-care reform? Phase One: scrounge around for about $60 billion in new “sin tax” revenue.
May 27, 2009 - 6:53 pm 12. Annoy Mouse:At what point do the gnomes start stealing the underwear?
May 27, 2009 - 7:02 pm 13. Walt:Our Secretary of Deference says
May 27, 2009 - 7:12 pm 14. sf:We are saddened now to see
The PRK just won’t take yes
For answer and so we
Must take a firmer stand and let
The North Koreans know
That we’ll not let the sun to set
Before we strike a blow
For peace and honor and that stuff
And so we say today
That a strong note should be enough
To make the Kim folk pay
They only want attention so
Ignore and we’ll be fine
So long as we don’t mention though
Their crossing of the line
For nothing makes them crosser than
For us to criticize
The actions of the little man
Who leads them till he dies
>>Meanwhile, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned North Korea in these terms: “North Korea has made a choice… There are consequences to such actions … There will be an opportunity for North Korea to come back into a framework of discussion within the six-party process and that we can begin once again to see results from working with the North Koreans toward denuclearization.”<<
This is a statement of such astonishing naivete (or idiocy) that I thought the speaker had to have been president Obambi. For the supposedly more seasoned Hillary to say something this stupid–and apparently with a straight face?–it’s evident that no one in the ranks of Dem “leadership” (quotes intended) has even a vague grasp of reality when it comes to international relations.
So…what’s the over/under on when North Korea comes back to the table for more six-nation talks, Hillary? Do you think if you promise them ten million tons of wheat, 200,000 tons of heating oil and two light-water reactors for electricity that they’ll come back? How’d that work out for your husband, by the way? As I recall, about a year into his first term he announced a similar deal, and said the Norks had *promised* that in return, they’d abandon their own nuclear program.
They really, really *promised.*
Fool a Dem once, shame on you. Fool a Dem twice, make her Secretary of State.
God, what a bunch of *morons* we have running the government now.
May 27, 2009 - 7:18 pm 15. davidt:When will Venezuela nuke up?
May 27, 2009 - 7:21 pm 16. PA Cat:When will Venezuela nuke up?
Right after Cuba.
May 27, 2009 - 7:32 pm 17. viktor silo:#5 Doug
“Cheney ‘tried to block North Korea nuclear deal’”
Thanks for that link, Doug.
The Bush-Cheney relationship, especially during the last term, is one of the great untold stories of Bush’s last term. It certainly seems acrimonious.
You know the “high regard” I have for Bush, Doug. The more I know about Cheney, the more I like him.
Jay Leno is always joking that Cheney was the actual president during the Bush years.
I wish.
May 27, 2009 - 7:37 pm 18. rickl:17. viktor silo:
Right after the 2000 Republican convention, I thought that Cheney/Bush would have been a stronger ticket than Bush/Cheney.
He wouldn’t have won, though. Gore was better looking and that matters to a lot of voters, alas.
May 27, 2009 - 7:42 pm 19. Caton:I wonder how long it will take Japan, South Korea and Taiwan to start their own nuclear weapons program.
May 27, 2009 - 8:00 pm 20. erc rodson:Secretary of State Clinton today reassured the South Koreans and Japanese the the US would continue to protect them against the North Koreans. I suspect that both countries’ leaders can read the tea leaves as well as anyone, so they will both dust off their weapons blueprints and start nuking up. Before they get thrown under the bus. Six months for Japan, maybe a year for South Korea. Maybe less if they already have the plutonium stockpiled.
May 27, 2009 - 8:01 pm 21. Caton:rodson, so about 6 months for Taiwan, too. I hope the PRC enjoys the new neighborhood.
May 27, 2009 - 8:08 pm 22. davidt:It has long been a concern that rogues would aquire nukes from rogue nations. Wouldn’t it be interesting if a ‘rogue’ organization aquired a nuke from Iran or North Korea, and that nuke then ended up detonated in Iran or North Korea?
May 27, 2009 - 8:23 pm 23. bob:If it’s D.C. that gets the nuke….
May 27, 2009 - 9:02 pm 24. exhelodrvr:davidt,
May 27, 2009 - 9:11 pm 25. john lynch:Yes, or if there was an unfortunate mishap at an Iranian nuclear weapons facility.
I worry about a war.
We’re not doing the normal military movements in response to this. Shouldn’t we at least move a carrier or something?
What if Seoul gets nuked one day? Are we going to do anything about it?
We know that the NK regime has nothing but contempt for the SK government and military. If they stop fearing us they won’t be deterred any more.
May 27, 2009 - 9:45 pm 26. Ned:Wretchard
Is it my imagination reading your last paragraph or is it history repeating itself in the build-up to WWI? I certainly hope not.
Ned
May 27, 2009 - 10:32 pm 27. The Strategic MC:“Shouldn’t we at least move a carrier or something?”
We already have a Carrier Strike Group (USS George Washington and escorts) stationed in Japan (Yokosuka). I’m sure that we’ll move another one into the region as things hot up.
May 27, 2009 - 11:43 pm 28. njcommuter:If Kim Jong Il had merely “flipped the bird” at the USA, there would have been an international scandal. The photo might have made the front page of the NY Times. There might even have been some mild criticism of his faux pas on the editorial pages.
But if he detonates a nuclear bomb? Well, gee, we know how to respond to that. We dither. And dither some more. And then give a master class on dithering.
China is a player here, and their interest is geography. By taking Tibet, they closed a gap in their control of the ring of mountains on their frontier. Keeping NoKo as a dependent state has the same effect. Any political solution must either acknowledge or defy China’s deeply felt need for impregnable borders. Any military pressure must either use this to its advantage or face large consequences in China’s short term and long term responses.
In this situation, goodwill counts for less than skill in political and military maneuver.
May 27, 2009 - 11:53 pm 29. wretchard:Is it my imagination reading your last paragraph or is it history repeating itself in the build-up to WWI? I certainly hope not.
I sure hope not. The big events are out of our hands as individuals. Watching history is like keeping one eye open to the horizon. If the rain comes there’s nothing you can do about it except maybe spot it just a few minutes earlier so you can get under the cover.
May 28, 2009 - 12:36 am 30. dtmack:#21 caton
“rodson, so about 6 months for Taiwan, too. I hope the PRC enjoys the new neighborhood.”
This puzzles me. The Chinese are in danger of being surrounded by potentially unstable or hostile nuclear regimes, and they seem to be relatively unconcerned. If this continues it will put enormous pressure on Japan and SK (and Taiwan) to nuke up. Can SE Asia and Australia be far behind? Does anyone in East Asia really want a militarily resurgent, nuclear armed Japan to move onto the world stage? Even a demographically challenged one? Do the Chinese think that a nuclear attack on, say Japan, by NK would have predictable results that would be in their favor?
I can only think that the Chinese are more concerned about reducing or eliminating the US influence in the Western Pacific, Southern Asia and the ME, and see this as something that will help them achieve that end. Maybe they don’t feel particularly threatened since the perceived target of a lot of this is the US. That could change in a hurry.
Maybe they’re content to sit in the background while the “hegemonic” US does all of the heavy lifting. Maybe we should force their hand in this regard. They hold a lot of the keys to this situation, and they have a least as much to lose, maybe more, than we do.
May 28, 2009 - 12:41 am 31. wildernesscalling:Here is the answer to the NoKo knot (this won’t happen as “0” and Hillary have no intention of doing anything except bribing “DEAR KIM” (why not bribe him, it ain’t their money) who is now convinced he can have his bread buttered on both sides and the Chinese who are the real mover and shakers are more than content to watch their puppet make Uncle Sam dance, by the way is it a coincident that when Washington does something to imperil the Chinese money reserves of US dollars suddenly the NoKo’s become very active? (Back to the answer)) with complete secrecy bring in to Taiwan a several captured or secretly purchased NoKo WMD (nuke if possible) mount them on NoKo missiles, then have Taiwan announce they have them are not afraid to shoot them at the Chinese coast if the Chinese don’t back off their war mongering and massive missile build up, Ahh you say the Chinese would lunch their missile first before they would back off, Well when the news from Taiwan is released the US would also informs the Chinese that we would deal with the NoKo’s the same way….Oh yes what high drama we would have now!
May 28, 2009 - 12:54 am 32. Annoy Mouse:China knows that SK and Japan already have the technology. Come on. Japan was almost there in WWII. Do you suppose that Pakistan can build a Lexus?
Let the big show begin.
May 28, 2009 - 1:01 am 33. dtmack:#32 Annoy Mouse
Yeah, no one doubts that these countries have the capability to produce nukes. It’s the public declaration of their intent to do so, and then the follow through, that should concern the Chinese.
That is why the Pakistani and Indian tests several years ago got everyones attention.
I would expect that, if NK were going about this in a very low key way, that it wouldn’t be as big an issue, even if the end results would eventually be the same. That doesn’t make a lot of sense, I know, but I think it’s true.
They are almost guaranteeing, by their very public and belligerent pursuit of this issue, that the entire East Asian region will, in the near future, become open, nuclear capable powers. That’s what I think should worry China, and I don’t understand why it doesn’t seem to.
May 28, 2009 - 1:21 am 34. RAH:Gibbs is right that the best response is to ignore the ranting by NK. But it is important that that is not the only reaction by the US.
But we did repond publicly despite what Gibbs said. Hilary already did in a moronic way by giving an empty threat there will be consequences and then promising that NK can come back to the table.
Why or why did the voters vote in an inexperienced child and his playmates?
May 28, 2009 - 1:56 am 35. ledger:“The alternative to a nuclear monopoly by the great powers isn’t a “world without nuclear weapons”. It’s universal armament. The White House may wish to ignore North Korea, but they’ll be the only ones. It is more likely that the time will come when they will eventually realize that they are no longer the center of the universe and that “ignoring” cuts both ways.” –Wretchard
That’s true.
But, it’s more about collusion of hostile countries who wish to snatch Iraq from the jaws of victory and harm the USA in the process.
It’s no coincidence that both Iran and North Korea conducted hostile military activities over Memorial Day.
If enough hostile adversaries see the US as weak they will certainly try another power grab. Where would they do it?
There are endless possibilities. They could start a rumble in demilitarized zone in South Korea while simultaneously starting an attack in the gulf. This would stretch the US very thin.
Once, one or more of new partners of the Axis of Evil joins the nuclear club the Obama Administration will surely not confront them militarily.
No two ‘nuclear countries’ have gotten into a “hot war” because it’s too dangerous.
After, two or more participants of the New Axis of Evil get the Bomb it will be impossible or the US to assure any Nuclear Umbrella to our allies. Our allies will cut and run. Then it becomes a war of attrition in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and probably in Iraq.
Obama will not confront any nuclear aggressor no matter how many US troop are killed in road side bombs or ambushes. It’s a downward spiral from there – including complete US withdraw.
Although it a humor site there is a grain of truth to the Ten point of appeasement plan by Obama.
[First Conservative]
1. “The United States and its allies must stand up to North Korea,” (Obama in the Rose Garden). Democrats are good at inspiring others to ‘stand up’ for their pet causes. Unfortunately, when the situation requires more than ‘standing up’ and making noise, Democrats are the first to turn tail and look for an exit strategy. That strategy usually includes appeasement. For Democrats, standing up to an adversary loses its luster as a strategy the second the adversary objects. Democrats then look to conservatives for the courage to take action.
2. “The United States and the international community must take action in response,” (Obama Himself). Obama has never understood that there is no ‘international community.’ In fact, most world leftists fail to grasp this. The very concept of a ‘world community’ implies that the citizens of the world are bound together by a common set of objectives and view of the future. Like closing down Guantanamo Detention Center without a workable plan Obama has now committed the ‘international community’ to some form of action – again without a specific plan or idea. This may be a moot point in the UN as the Chosen One will never motivate China and Russia to join with the United States in taking meaningful action. Here again, Obama’s words will only encourage North Korea to continue with its weapons program.
3. “It (DPRK) will not find international acceptance,” (Obama Himself). This of course presumes that North Korea values ‘international acceptance.’ Again, Team Obama must have been drinking beer at the student union when the lessons on negotiation were taking place. A successful negotiation requires that one provide something the adversary wants or provide a credible threat to something the adversary already has – like their very existence. The teen-aged wisdom currently guiding Team Obama holds that having the Chosen One recognize North Korea as a member of the world community (whatever that is) would be enough motivation to cease building and testing atomic weapons…
6. “Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea’s isolation.”(Presidential Statement). If isolation meant anything to North Korea, it would have capitulated after the fall of the Soviet Union. What does it mean to be ‘less isolated?’ North Korea is smack between thriving, market driven societies in Japan, South Korea and Communist China. The Chinese are actually pretty good market driven business people themselves, earning trillions of dollars selling the labor of its people on international markets. North Korea cannot become much more ‘isolated’ except by military blockade – with Obama in charge, DPRK knows this will never happen.
http://firstconservative.com/blog/political-humor/political-humor-north-korea-and-president-obama
[Debka speculates]
Most of the missile guidance technology which gave the long-range Seijl 2 surface missile tested by Iran Wednesday, May 20, its bull’s-eye accuracy came from Pyongyang. Iran’s long-range missile test was carried out less than a month after North Korea’s own internationally condemned missile test launch on April 5. Tehran may therefore be expected to be not far behind its nuclear partner in conducting its own first nuclear test. Not surprisingly, therefore, Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ruled out negotiations on its nuclear program…
Pyongyang announced early Wednesday, May 27, that its withdrawal from the truce that ended the Korean War in 1953 means that “the Korean peninsulas will go back to a state of war.” Thousands of US troops are deployed in the buffer zone since the war ended.
US spy planes reported that the plutonium separation plant at Yongbyon had been reactivated. North Korea repeated that Seoul’s decision to joint the US-led Proliferation Security Initiative was tantamount to a declaration of war. “Any hostile acts against our republic, including the stopping and searching of our peaceful vessels… will face an immediate and strong military strike in response,” the North Korean statement said from the North’s military representative at the border truce village of Panmunjom.
See: Debka
May 28, 2009 - 2:25 am 36. anton:http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6091
From little things come unexpected results, in 1914 no one thought that three bullets fired in Sarajevo could kill millions and destroy the culture and people of Western Europe. Everyone thought that if the “right people” had a “reasonable talk” with the other “right people” everything would settle down. Very few people wanted war but, once the process began, it was inexorable.
I think we are at a position of having two shots fired, and the hammer is being drawn back on the third.
May 28, 2009 - 4:49 am 37. Starko:Wretchard said: “While North Korea itself may not be a proximate threat, the failure of the international community to stop even this impoverished and bizarre regime suggests that it is fundamentally toothless or has forgotten how to bite.”
Absolutely spot-on. As far as the developed world goes, North Korea has nothing to sell (e.g. oil) and buys very little (they have little hard currency). If we can’t get our act together on a pariah state like North Korea, we can forget about a state like Iran that actually sells oil and has some money. Sadly, “the end of history” has reverted back to the law of the jungle.
May 28, 2009 - 5:24 am 38. RWE:In an earlier post Wretchard comapred N. Norea to a pervert arming himself and making threats.
But N. Korea is not like that. They are worse. He is like the guy who hacked the little girls arms off and after he got out of jail 20 years later killed a woman.
N. Korea essentially has already tried to rape and kill a little girl but botched the job and thus got off easy. Aside from the Korean War itself, in more recent years they grabbed an American ship, sent commando teams to S. Korea, kidnapped Japanese citizens to use as teachers for their spies, and blew up a South Korean airliner because they were infuriated over S. Korea getting the Olympics. There are reliable reports that they have been involved with various remanents of Warsaw Pact intelligence agencies in global counterfitting and phishing scams.
And their latest tactic is to insist the Sheriff stop driving past their house.
May 28, 2009 - 5:49 am 39. Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e69v4:[...] of failing to hold the line and North Korea. Iran [...]
May 28, 2009 - 5:56 am 40. aaron:Demands for attention tend to get more and more dramatic until they can’t be easily dismissed.
I once sat through some seminars on the nexus of gang culture and international terrorism in my particular state (NM). One repeated warning was to NEVER discount a thugs claims to be a gangster. If they say they’re a gangster, believe them, because if you disregard/disrespect their claim they will go above and beyond to prove it to you, dramatically. This usually means someone else dies.
May 28, 2009 - 8:24 am 41. Derek:I stated this in another thread, but to repeat.
The biggest danger comes not from North Korea. Or even Iran. They are watched closely and are playing a dangerous game.
The real danger is who we don’t know about. Who is buying Korean tech or hardware? Who among the US allies are arming up, or going to acquire nukes? The world has gotten used to the nutcases getting nukes, not even noticing them. What about the non nutcases?
This is a profoundly dangerous time. The US and Europe are profoundly indifferent to the threats. But who isn’t, and who is going to act on them? I’m not talking Israel.
Your neighbor who you don’t like may have a nuke in 5 years. You could nuke up in response. Or whack them right now. The US isn’t watching or caring.
But what cascading reactions will that create?
What better time to do it?
Derek
(when I hear ‘International Community’, I want to puke)
May 28, 2009 - 8:27 pm