Posted on 12/31/2002 5:42:36 AM PST by Happy2BMe
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:35:20 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
SEOUL, South Korea
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Wonder if S. Korea still wants our 37,000 "undesireables" thrown out of their country?
In Moscow, North Korea's ambassador to Russia said that the U.S. had threatened his country "with a pre-emptive nuclear strike..."
This is absolutely true. I don't doubt for one second that the North Korean ambassador said this. But the US threatening a pre-emptive nuclear strike? What complete and utter bull$h!t.
That, as the man said, can be arranged.
--Boris
That will be one day's work for the USAF and Navy when the sh*t hits the fan.
Worse, because we're sending everything but the kitchen sink to the sand box.
Best, because in Romsfeld and Powell we have the military and diplomatic moxy to smudge Kim Jong il off the face of the map.
Had this occurred on Clinton's watch, these fools would be right at our doors.
STOP!
You hear that!?
It's silence coming out of the protestors demanding U.S. troop withdrawl from South Korea.
What a difference a week makes.
Chernobel II?
Make that Chernobel II,III, IV and IX!
The ancillary nuclear contamination from us nuking N.Korea would make Chernobel look like a controlled college science project.
Rabid, indeed. After reading their rhetoric over the last few weeks, and in your article, I was wondering if maybe we could spike their rice shipments with Prozac (if they're resumed, of course).
I've got this gut feeling what we lob into Pyongyang next time will be slightly more potent than rice.
The man is clueless. Worse, few seem to grasp the directly conficting interests of South Korea and the US in the short term. South Korea wants to appease because they want to avoid an immediate war at any cost. They want us to pay more tribute to keep the dictator happy for another five minutes. Because they do not expect to be attacked (today), and as for the future they prefer to just hope and do nothing. If attacked, of course, they expect us to rescue them.
But North Korea will expand its nuke arsenal if nothing is done. And that will not just increase the risks in a future war, and make such a future war more likely. It is worse than that, and the threat is not the same to us and to the South Koreans. The North Koreans have sold every weapon they have ever developed to some of the nastiest people on earth. There is no reason to believe they would not sell nukes. To our enemies, not South Korea's enemies. Who would use them on us, not on South Korea.
Do nothing, and the nukes come to us, indirectly. Do something, and the few they may already have come to the South Koreans. That is how allies are seperated - seperate rather than united threats. The South Koreans are pretending the former threat, the one directed at us, does not exist. They are selfishly asking us to expose ourselves to future North Korean proliferation and eventual nuclear terrorism, to save themselves from immediate threat. They are not simply making their own call about how they'd like to play appeasement vs. dealing with the problem (foolishly, of course). They want the bad guys shooting at us instead of at them.
Which is called cowardice. Cowardice in military allies needs to be called what it is, and the shame of it rubbed in their faces. After saving their freedom, for 50 years we have stood beside them and faced off common enemies, putting our own men at risk to keep them secure. The first time there is any hint of a risk to us rather than them, they turn tail. They should be told we expect solidarity with the risks we face, as a condition for a continued commitment to their defense. Which means no more appeasement, no more payoffs.
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.