North Korea talking war after being silent for 3 weeks

[Arizwx]

What that is 'all about' is frankly this.China is the only Nation WILLING to gve up airspace for such tests.There are no warheads on these missles..futhermore,they land out to sea.The Intl Boundries of soverign waters is 12 nm of the coast.Period.If they violate that,all hell could break loose.
I doubt the Bush Admin will do squat.He had his War.A slamduck.He'll take it as is and reap the benefits for re election,just like his Papa.
He'll send Powell over there with a blank check and ignore it.It would be Politial Suicide for Bush to go to War with a nation that actually has a Military...unlike Iraq,and he knows it.Thats a whole different ballgame.
Furthermore,the issue with Nukes aimed at the Left Coast is very real.
However,the threat is to S Korea and Japan at this time.That is the real problem.

[Skywatch_NC]

What that is 'all about' is frankly this.China is the only Nation WILLING to gve up airspace for such tests.There are no warheads on these missles..futhermore,they land out to sea.The Intl Boundries of soverign waters is 12 nm of the coast.Period.If they violate that,all hell could break loose.
I doubt the Bush Admin will do squat.He had his War.A slamduck.He'll take it as is and reap the benefits for re election,just like his Papa.
He'll send Powell over there with a blank check and ignore it.It would be Politial Suicide for Bush to go to War with a nation that actually has a Military...unlike Iraq,and he knows it.Thats a whole different ballgame.
Furthermore,the issue with Nukes aimed at the Left Coast is very real.
However,the threat is to S Korea and Japan at this time.That is the real problem.

Thank you for backing me up on the Left Coast issue, DJ. I agree though that presently the threat is towards S. Korea and Japan.

[cycloneye]

I also agree DJ that NK has the capability to fire a nuke to the west coast of the US but right now Japan and South Korea are more threatened.

[Lindaloo]

I believe the threat to the West Coast is real too.

[j]

wouldn't it be a nice to be a minority partner in a coalition for a change?

If we take the threat of nukes out of the picture, it has been stated that the US could flatten N. Korea in 4-5 days if need be. We have closely monitored them since the end of the Korean War, and they are like sitting ducks. If they do decide to use Nukes...they might as well kiss their country goodbye, and I have to beleive they know this, and are not willing to die for the cause like the Islamic extremists!

[Arizwx]

wouldn't it be a nice to be a minority partner in a coalition for a change?

If we take the threat of nukes out of the picture, it has been stated that the US could flatten N. Korea in 4-5 days if need be. We have closely monitored them since the end of the Korean War, and they are like sitting ducks. If they do decide to use Nukes...they might as well kiss their country goodbye, and I have to beleive they know this, and are not willing to die for the cause like the Islamic extremists!

The problem is we can't take the threat of Nukes out of the picture.That IS the picture.If it were not,as you note,we could cross the 38th Parellel and repatriate the country as a Democracy.
I also agree that they are not willing to die as are the Islamic Fundamentalists.However,they have China to back their threats.They are also far more spohisticated in technology and Military methodology than most Arab nations.The Arabs use old Russkie Tech..70s vintage at best..and a poorly trained Military.They could not sustain any substantive War with anyone...with the exception of possibly Iran that has some Russkie backing.The Fundamentalists are crude.Using commercial aircraft as missiles and delivery systems.Old Scuds.Lousy C&C.No Nukes to speak of,albeit I suspect Iran may have a decent program.
Isreal rules the roost in that region,and the Arab world knows it.We back Isreal..no lo contendre.Therefore..pizzant Guerilla tactics are employed.
N Korea is differnet.Well trained Military.REAL C&C and Nukes on the stove with China supplying the goods...including MiG fighters upgraded for Chinese pilots and ICBMs.N Korea is not a sitting Duck.More like Peking Duck..as China would enter a War with us if we messed with thier buddies.

[j]

You are probably right about the China connection. Isn't it a shame that N Korea was allowed to get to this point (the nuke state)? I can't help but think if we had a leader in the 90's that cared more about the National interests of this country, vs a "leader" that was only concerned about his next encounter with the Monika Lewinski's of the world, we might not be in this pickle.

[Arizwx]

You are probably right about the China connection. Isn't it a shame that N Korea was allowed to get to this point (the nuke state)? I can't help but think if we had a leader in the 90's that cared more about the National interests of this country, vs a "leader" that was only concerned about his next encounter with the Monika Lewinski's of the world, we might not be in this pickle.

It is a mistake IMO to lay blame on the Clinton Admin...This goes back to post Reagan.R Nixon opened the door and Bush Sr slammed it shut.
This latest War with Iraq would not have been an issue had he taken care of business.That was 1991.Unacceptable.
Moreover,we have allowed China free reign in that part of the world for far too long,thinking they would soften their stance.Wrong.If anything,they have outsmarted us.Give Clinton some credit BTW.He knew that Taiwan was up Sh!t creek without our Aegis Destroyers and went way out on a limb and got it done.It was Gore that messed up..big time.
Lastly,the Brits handed over Hong Kong without so much as a whimper or a Cheerio...giving China Billions of US Dollars and Brit currency to reinvest in N Korea.Our Foreign Policy is abhorrant and we MUST take a look at a complete overhaul,no matter the Party in Office.

[j]

the only point I would argue is that Bush Sr. ("He")screwed up in 91. The UN resolution called for the liberation of Kuwait, which was acheived.

[Stephanie]

You are probably right about the China connection. Isn't it a shame that N Korea was allowed to get to this point (the nuke state)? I can't help but think if we had a leader in the 90's that cared more about the National interests of this country, vs a "leader" that was only concerned about his next encounter with the Monika Lewinski's of the world, we might not be in this pickle.

It is a mistake IMO to lay blame on the Clinton Admin...This goes back to post Reagan.R Nixon opened the door and Bush Sr slammed it shut.
This latest War with Iraq would not have been an issue had he taken care of business.That was 1991.Unacceptable.
Moreover,we have allowed China free reign in that part of the world for far too long,thinking they would soften their stance.Wrong.If anything,they have outsmarted us.Give Clinton some credit BTW.He knew that Taiwan was up Sh!t creek without our Aegis Destroyers and went way out on a limb and got it done.It was Gore that messed up..big time.
Lastly,the Brits handed over Hong Kong without so much as a whimper or a Cheerio...giving China Billions of US Dollars and Brit currency to reinvest in N Korea.Our Foreign Policy is abhorrant and we MUST take a look at a complete overhaul,no matter the Party in Office.

THANK YOU!!!

Both sides had their glories and problems. Period. GWB may have this war won and he can proudly hang his hat on it, but there are still questions that will follow him and this war into history, just like Desert Storm, Vietnam, etc.

[Arizwx]

the only point I would argue is that Bush Sr. ("He")screwed up in 91. The UN resolution called for the liberation of Kuwait, which was acheived.

Not true.We were to render Saddam i'ncapable' of reinvasion,which we did not.Moreover,we re patraited Saddam's Helo Gunships to lay waist more Kurds,who we left behind to fight alone.No Fly Zones for 12 yrs resulted.
Lastly,it is inconcievable to anyone familiar with the Region,that Saudi Arabia would welcome any true democracy in the Region.This is partially why they were less than warm to the idea of Gulf War2.They knew,a Regime change was needed,just not a democratic one.

[Steve H.]

Have to agree with j, in 1991 the UN resolution was to liberate Kuwait, not take out Saddam. In 1991 that would not have flown. Many of our troops and commanders wanted to take out Baghdad, but the UN forbid it. A much different time. Hindsight is 20/20.

[Arizwx]

Have to agree with j, in 1991 the UN resolution was to liberate Kuwait, not take out Saddam. In 1991 that would not have flown. Many of our troops and commanders wanted to take out Baghdad, but the UN forbid it. A much different time. Hindsight is 20/20.

Let me clarify.Saddam was to have been rendered incapable of re invasion.He was not.Moreover,the UN resolution argument is weak,given the ppandering we witnessed over the past months.Furthermore..we went to the UN recently to get 1441 passed and did.It was NOT about a regime change either!Suddenly that is what it became.It was intended to disarm Saddam.Weeks later,that all changed,didnt it?20/20 is hindsight.

[streetsoldier]

It should be of note that the original UN resolution authorizing the first Gulf War was NEVER RESCINDED, and was conditional on Saddam's regime disarming WITHIN 45 DAYS...not 12 years plus.

All that happened at the "conclusion" of Gulf War I was a "cease-fire"...and if Kofi Annan knew his own organization's resolutions as well as he should, he could never have called this "an outlaw" war.