<<<About all we can do now with them is isolate them, know that South Korea will pay them off, and tell them, "If you use or sell one that is used, you are history." And say further, "No excuses that it was somebody elses Nuke." >>>
I like it- could work. Two things would happen
1. Kim would have to keep very close watch on his programs, employees, and security, which should be done anyway
2. He would think seriously about his family members and what his position and employment would be without a country to live in.
He might then change his mind and accept the nuclear power plants offered in lieu of nuke development.
The country or organization that tells him or warns him, and enforces the decree would have to be believable.
The US is in that position, after the recent demonstrations in Afghanistan and Iraq
I think Powell could make it quite clear and he seems to be respected
Today the UN is not in a trustworthy position
Should we chance it - that the UN would enforce a decree and win back some respect ? Who thererin could swear to actually interpret a Resolution the way it was written and take action - make the critical decision- without argueing that words in the resolution could be re-interpreted ?
How about NATO. ? The job should be right down their ally. A coalition already in place. Divide the responsibility, send in missiles from 3 different directions if comes to that stage.and never know who killed many
But the UN should get involved also, so all countries know where they stand
" Use a nuke- receive a rebuke "
Kim must guess by now that if a nuke is launched from his country that he is dead so no need to re-tell him.
But we have to be ready and decide who will respond and in what manner- will it be a Regime change, one city missing , or an entire country.?
Need some straight talk,of the Dubya type, none of the "serious consequences" bit
"Pyongyang and all nuclear facilities will be targeted"
No human being wants to make decisions like that
I spent 8 years on missile programs, quit Boeing when they decided to Mirv the Minutemen, put 3 warheads on each of 1050 missiles.
Insanity - would be no good place for any survivors to live
We should make every effort to control the situation without using nukes. Send in 5000 cruise missiles if thats needed.
But the talk should be, as it was, "all available force", while hoping, planning, praying that no nukes are needed.
And I am not sure of any of this- what happens to non-proliferation concepts if Korea is allowed to keep any nuclear program.?
If anyone asked, I would say draw the line, close the door, no arguments permitted, no more nuclear powers
allowed. There must be over 100 countries ruled or controlled by drug lords, by power alone who seek more,
willing to destroy people of other religious faiths, by unstable personalities incapable of standing by agreements
. Is the timing right to draw the line ?
Its very close.We have the perfect example, a warring leader who chose not to abide by agreements on a very important matter, spending 70% of the countries income on armmament while people starve, refusing to talk except on his own terms, engaging in illicit trade including drugs, selling or re-selling offensive armaments to countries with evil intentions.
The part of the timing not perfect for the US is the heavy engagement of our Military, but timing can never be absolutely perfect anyway.
We could at least support those who are willing to implement solutions.
Regards
Sig@opinionsgalore.com
. |
