Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 8:46:34 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

If U.S. decides to go nuclear up front, does it save millions of lives, no warning, preemptive strike. Sounds unconceivable but the scenario discussed on "nightline" seems like a worse approach... Let's hope nk is not nuts.. close but not totally and we come to an agreement.

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 9:30:36 AM
From: Sig	Respond to of 281500

Re Nightline Dale Brown wrote a book in 1999 to cover that one , called Battle Born Wonder if they gave hm credit?

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 9:32:05 AM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

A hypothetical scenario , with side branches, was worked through by a general and a policy wonk as the 'USA' while an expert on Korea and an American professor for Korean Studies, he himself of Korean extraction, acted as the NK decision makers. any names? the scenario doesn't sound crazy (although precisely because it's imaginable I highly doubt we'll begin heading down that path), but not all "experts" are created equal, so I'd be curious who they got. Nightline is generally pretty top drawer, but you never know.... tb@dish.com

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 10:46:09 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

Hawaii. Yeah, I have been thinking about this. Not enough to make me move to the "North Shore" but the thought of an anonymous freighter in Honolulu Harbor has occurred to me. I spent some time teasing you guys on the East Coast. Not any more.

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 10:54:05 AM
From: Smiling Bob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Read something last night that made sense. We'd be hard-pressed to strike any NK nuclear facilty preemptively due to the fallout quickly spreading well beyond their borders. PS I know it's a typo, but in your opinion, do you think our "navel" forces would prefer lintballs or oranges as their primary artillery? :)

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 10:55:29 AM
From: Elsewhere	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

NYT editorial: At the Short End of the Axis of Evil: Some F.A.Q.'s By Bill Keller The New York Times January 11, 2003 nytimes.com ... <<Does anybody have a plan that makes sense? Actually, yes. Back in 1999 the National Defense University assembled a team of Asia experts to draft a strategy for dealing with North Korea. It came to be known as "more for more": we would expect more from the North Koreans, including rigorous inspections, a full accounting of their nuclear history, and an end to missile exports. We would offer more in return — financial aid (including speeding construction of the two promised light-water reactors, which are stalled), guarantees that North Korea will not be attacked if it keeps its promises, and eventually normal diplomatic relations. The plan contained a dash of testosterone — intercepting missile exports, even a cautious mention of "pre-emption" if all else fails — but mostly it depended on lots and lots of, pardon the expression, negotiations and quid pro quo. The proposal was comprehensive, hard-nosed, multilateral and level-headed. Maybe President Bush should hire the guy in charge of that report. He already has. It's Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Maybe what Mr. Bush should do now is listen to him.>>

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 11:40:18 AM
From: Ed Huang	Respond to of 281500

Seems "Nightline" did not mention the other possibility: NK may not necessarily fight against the U.S. attack all in head-on fashion. They may just smuggle a dozen of "dirty bombs"(if they do not have the suitcase atom bombs) or biochemical weapons into U.S. major cities and set them on during the war. Which could create even greater threat and damages. Some observers already mentioned this kind of war tactics in the recent years. The way a war is fought may be different nowadays.

To: FaultLine who wrote (65402)	1/11/2003 11:57:26 AM
From: epsteinbd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

My guess is that sometimes during the next year, Kim's plane will simply fall out of the sky, with a meteorite collision not to be totally excluded. The Aussies should invite him. Because of the sea legs. Epstein@ Yamamotoherehecomes.com