SI
SI
discoversearch

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 ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Dayuhan who wrote (108468)7/28/2003 5:59:04 AM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
The risk lies more in what might happen if one of their bombs were to show up elsewhere.

There's more risk in a Pakistani Nuke falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda (or someone else), than a N. Korean warhead.. Kim Jong Il isn't likely to sell them since he wants them for his own deterrence program and defense shield from which to hide his regime behind.

To sell them to terrorists would insure nuclear response against Pyongyang, were they to be used against us..

but the appearance of paralysis doesn’t look good either.

Not if you're China and Russia, and are trying to avoid getting involved in admonishing a former client state...

But it looks good to me, as someone who is sick of the US being required to lead the way on these issues with unruly rogue states.

There are contrary interests at work: neither Russia nor China has any interest in seeing N. Korea expand its nuclear capacity, but both know that the US want their cooperation, and both want to use that desire to their benefit, just as we would in their place.

And if their price is too high, we let events run their course until they are forced to take on their responsibilities (after likely economic turmoil erupts again in Asia).

Hawk@sharethewealthandtheproblems.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext