Once again, we know that people who say it don’t really mean it. In fact, many of them would be happy to see it happen again in Israel.
23 thoughts on ““Never Again””
Comments are closed.
Once again, we know that people who say it don’t really mean it. In fact, many of them would be happy to see it happen again in Israel.
Comments are closed.
I would like clarification on this: weren’t Clinton and Albright responsible for giving North Korea nukes? They allowed them to get the technology because they would only use it for peaceful purposes.
The USSR and China both refused to help with nuclear weapons, but both assisted them with nuclear reactor technology. Pakistan assisted them with nuclear weapons. The US light water reactors came much later and were not to blame — the nuclear weapons program was well established by then. If you want to blame someone other than the North Korean government, blame Pakistan.
The nuclear weapons are almost beside the point though — Seoul’s vulnerability makes intervention in North Korea awfully difficult.
” The US light water reactors came much later and were not to blame”
Seems helping them at all makes us partly to blame.
Even giving them food aid helps keep that monstrous regime in power.
I don’t think we know that. Suppose a whole bunch more people starve. Kim Jong-un appears to not care. The people in the North Korean government or military who might orchestrate a change of government also might not care, since they are the ones who have succeeded in the system created by Kim Jong-un father and grandfather. The starving people care, of course, but they won’t be able to overthrow the government.
You might hope that denying food aid will actually starve the military, or you might hope that the military would be concerned that the people back home are starving, but I bet Kim Jong-Un is smarter than that: pick a scapegoat group, starve them, feed the families of the military who all come from a favored group. Something horrid like that.
I don’t know, but I think it is possible that denying food aid simply prevents innocent people from starving.
Whoops, I meant: Food aid might simply prevent innocent from starving.
The only people prevented from starving by providing food aid are those favorable to the regime.
How do you know?
In communism, the authorities try to co-opt innocent people into acceptance of the party line, but such people aren’t guilty of anything more than simply trying to live normal lives. Think of Vaclav Havel’s green grocer. I have no problem with food aid going to such people even if the regime thinks it is coopting them — they aren’t going to be able to overthrow the regime and they certainly aren’t guilty of any crime. And then, of course, there are children. Do you know that either group isn’t the recipient of donated food?
I’m not arguing for food aid or no food aid – I’m just suggesting that we don’t know where the food goes.
Rand, sorry, I think I read more into your words then you might have meant. You didn’t say that the favored group, the ones receiving the food, didn’t include children, nor did you say that all adults receiving food were guilty of anything.
Jeez Bob-1 you said giving them nuclear technology was no big thing. Now, you are saying food aide will go to the “innocents”. Just admit Clinton flubbed this one and move on. Or don’t admit it and move on instead of digging the hole deeper.
pick a scapegoat group, starve them, feed the families of the military who all come from a favored group.
That’s pretty much standard practice in Third World dictatorships.
The only way food aid would do any good is if we handed it directly to the starving innocents, then stood there and watched them eat it. Otherwise the government would get ahold of it, and would distribute it as they saw fit, which would typically be to soldiers, police, bodyguards, and their families.
In 1994, faced with North Korea’s announced intent to withdraw from the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which requires non-nuclear weapon states to forswear the development and acquisition of nuclear weapons, the United States and North Korea signed the Agreed Framework. Under this agreement, Pyongyang committed to freezing its illicit plutonium weapons program in exchange for aid.
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron
This was arranged by Jimmy Carter.
Never again is why I tend to be an interventionist. I’m in favor of all sorts of interventions. But I can’t figure out how an intervention in North Korea could go well. What can we do that would work?
I’m in favor of all sorts of interventions.
In my limited experience, I find that people who make that statement have a compelling need to do something but lack the moral convictions to follow through with a hard choice that might involve a bad option that is still better than the reality that is worse. I am not saying this applies to you at all Bob, but I do wonder what the scope of “all sorts” means.
Since we can count out anything effective from the United Nations, and in all honesty the people of the United States no longer have a sufficiently long attention span to learn or care about Benghazi or Iran, much less NK,, what interventions remain?
Partner with China and South Korea.
While it would be trivial to “cause a collapse” of the Un-Government. (I’ve been wanting to say that for years),
it’s what you do next that’s such a big problem.
I know the George W approach would be go riding in with B-52s and Tanks, but, say you hit with shock and awe and the NoRk’s fold up. Then what. The ROKs don’t want millions of refugees and
They don’t want to take over administration and pay to rebuild the North. The ROKs’ don’t want the
Chinese taking over and being sitting on the 38th parallel with the Chinese Army staring at them
seems even more uncomrfortable. The Chinese absolutely don’t want the American Army sitting
on the Yalu river staring at their Industrial zones.
We are already partnered with South Korea. China has not given me any reason to trust them, particularly with NK.
We have the advantage of knowing what Bush would do by having already lived through it and that was to use diplomacy, something Bush was criticized for by the Democrats. Those criticisms seem rather hallow these days.
I do agree that no one wants to deal with building NK after the current government is gone.
I agree completely with Bob-1. You see, I live with my Korean wife in Seoul north of the Han River, which puts our houselhold and the Korean University where I work within easy range of all the heavy artillery and rocket launchers the Norks have positioned just above the DMZ. This makes people think very carefully about how to handle North Korea. The standard scenarios for a war with the Norks all have the USAF and the South Korean air force knocking out much, if not most of the these weapons during the first two or three days of the war, Unfortunately, by that time the Nork army wll have dumped umpteen thousands of shells and rockets on Seoul, carrying out the Nork regime’s threat to turn Seoul into a “Sea of Fire.”
As for forcing China to veto any UN human rights resolution on North Korea multiple times, this would
definitely deeply and extrermely humiliate the Chicoms, and may very start the clock clicking down for a major confrontation with China, something which I feel is almost inevitable, but it’s an event I have no wish to hurry along.
Mike Gallagher
“within easy range of all the heavy artillery and rocket launchers the Norks have positioned just above the DMZ.”
SK should partner with Israel or just buy their missile defense systems. Missile defense is a bit of a misnomer and maybe there is a more correct term that I don’t know but they are working on systems to deal with all incoming projectiles, mortars to missiles.
That Artillery may be over-rated. If the North Koreans aren’t doing top level maintenance
and oiling all the pieces, they could well be inoperable.
“….may be….If the North Koreans……..they could well be…”
Unicorn thinking. No sensible planner would make any of those assumptions.
Come back to us when you have some verifiable facts. Otherwise you are just trying to sway with fantasy.
To dn-1
Accuracy is not an issue here. If the Norks did open fire they would be going for terror, not military effectiveness. This would be especially true if they mixed in gas rounds with conventional
ones. Seoul has a very extensive and efficient subway system. Force panicky civilians to dive into the subway stations., some of which are quite deep, and then lay on the gas, which is heavier than air. Yes, the Norks are sick%☆&#@₩. The artillery might not be as ineffective as you’d like to think. At first, the Norks would be firing at, apart from Seoul, fixed US and ROK military targets, which the Nork army has probably had registered for years. Getting back to Seoul, tp increase their accuracy there all they would have to do would be to send agents into Seoul with GPS locators. And it’s almost certain the Norks have agents here.
Michael,
Do you have an opinion on what the US and South Korea should do with respect to the suffering in North Korea? Should we constructively engage? For example, should there be more projects like the Kaesong industrial zone, and more food aid? Or Should we refuse to engage at all? I assume you’re not a diplomat or military strategist, but since you live there, it would be interesting to hear any further opinions you have regarding this thread. Thanks!