Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: LindyBill who wrote (63261)	12/28/2002 12:19:40 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Lindy, As much as i hate to accept this, a NKorea with many nukes may become reality now. There are four major nations in the Pacific that are far more at risk than the US. Dealing with NK will like the early days of dealing with a Nuclear soviet union. And those were not fun days. It was only in 1962 after going to the brink did US and USSR implement the means of preventing nuclear war. In Korea, this is the equivalent of 1952. So the next 10 years will be the riskiest over there. A policy of containment and engagement might be best although it might initially be viewed as appeasement. What we fear most is nuclear proliferation. What we do in Iraq in preventing future NKs is more important now than ever because it is clear that when a threshold is reached and circumstances dictate a military option becomes unacceptable. Also perhaps we can now begin to discuss the strategic difference between nuclear WMDs and the others. Once a nation has nukes it has to be treated with far more restraint. Others might do better than i in explaining this phenomena or disputing it. Mike

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next