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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (3362)	2/5/2003 5:55:33 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15987

Instead he called it a "big problem" and insisted direct talks between the US and North Korea were the way forward. I guess I'm missing something here... As far as I'm concerned, China is the integral political force that should be required to "contain" N. Korea. They didn't have any problems defending Kim Il Sung back in 1950. From our perspective, I would see that we might be required to counter-escalate and consider the potential of assisting S. Korea to develop nuclear weapons. It would be a SERIOUS escalation, but it might be enough to persuade Jong Il that nuclear weapons is not the means to guarantee his regime. I certainly disagree that direct US and N. Korean negotiations are required. After all, the US only has 37,000 troops in the south, compared to more than 1 million sitting across the 38th parallel. If anything, there should be direct negotiations between the North and South... Letting Jong make this a US-NK issue permits him to have more credibility than he deserves. Hawk