Posted on 10/19/2006 8:16:01 PM PDT by blogblogginaway
Maybe, but I think that China began to fear the monster they created, and realized that if they don't get tough, and really mean it, that North Korea's one million man army, backed with modern equipment and nuclear bombs, would perhaps in the near future, (after they built up their nuclear arsenal) decide to take China on and stretch their border.
The bottom line though, is that China got tough and NK responded. America spoke tough and NK called our bluff. This is the embarrassing part of the equation, and it shows Iran and other enemies that we lack a serious political will to use the weapons we have at our disposal, and to back up what we say. Conquering Iraq and Afghanistan is great, but until we topple the government of our far more dangerous enemy, Iran, and begin seizing some N. Korean ships suspected of carrying banned cargo and the like, we will be viewed as a paper tiger.
We'll look just fine when we kick his ass in a couple years.
Answer: the same president who allowed N. Korea to continue building a nuclear arsenal and detonate a test nuke, and who went to the U.N., (of all places), to ask for a wrist slap on North Korea, and then begged China to stop NK from detonating yet another nuke because he felt the cost of stopping NK himself would be too expensive politically and militarily.
As for China's alleged 'reigning in' of North Korea, do you really think it will be lasting, or even that it's real? So I have a quiz question for you:
"What would have been better, the U.S. bombing North Korea's nuclear arsenal and setting them back at least ten years or more, or China "talking" with their Communist friends in private and claiming that they have 'sovled' the problem?"
Oh sure; here is Condi's "big stick".
Condoleeza Rice: "I don't know what more North Korea wants, the President has guarenteed them that he won't attack or invade them".
Condi's other "big stick": "We are going to the U.N. Security Council over this, and we're going to ask for strong sanctions, including the stopping of shipping luxury items to NK".
When did the euphemism "big stick" come to mean "politically correct passiveness"?
Here is the quote from the article, indicating that China has pressured NK into submission with threats of serious economic consequences, (unlike those the U.S. signed on for with the U.N.).
"China is viewed as a key nation in efforts to 'persuade' the North to disarm, as it is the isolated communist nation's main trading partner.", (empahsis mine).
The latter, so far.
"North Korea's one million man army, backed with modern equipment and nuclear bombs, would perhaps in the near future, (after they built up their nuclear arsenal) decide to take China on and stretch their border."
You aren't serious are you ?
Just where would this "modern equipment" come from ?
Just how do they transport this million man army without the oil from China ... besides walking ?
LOL ---
"China is viewed as a key nation in efforts to persuade the North to disarm ..."
translates into
"China has pressured NK into submission with threats .."
?
I disagree. It makes the Chicoms look like there are scared to death that Japan would go nuclear. The US comes off looking like it made China get control of the little runt out of fear that the US would allow Japan and SK to go nuke.
unfortunately, it does so appear - across the threads. It's discouraging - have the serious Freepers been falling away because the discourse has been 'disintegrating'? or is FR being infiltrated? a combination?
There used to be a majority of posts seemed more in depth and informed - not just shoot off the mouth missiles...?
The only problem with that analysis is that I don't believe there are many, if any, targets in North Korea that would be "nuke-worthy" in any case.
It would be like Clinton using cruise missiles to take out tents and camels.
Clarification: By SK and Japan going nuke, I meant they would become nations with nukes. The perceived threat from them having nukes would be on the part of China, not NK.
"The perceived threat from them having nukes would be on the part of China, not NK."
? would either of them being perceived as having nukes be a threat to China ?
Both of them have major nuke power in operation, so hiding a bomb project would not be a big deal.
I suspect that either of them could pop a nuke blast within months.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.