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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107078)	7/22/2003 2:59:12 AM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

How about if we: 1. talk 2. make an agreement 3. keep the agreement We haven't tried that. Might just work.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107078)	7/22/2003 11:49:39 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

If "blinking" or "not blinking" is your only way of understanding our options, then so long as they don't blink and we don't blink we have three likely outcomes: (1) North Korea collapses -- a very real possibility, and one that China simply won't allow because of the consequences for them, or (2), North Korea continues to exist and to build nuke after nuke and exports nukes and materials to the highest bidder -- take your pick, there will be plenty of customers, or (3) We attack sooner or later, something North Korea recognizes is a very real possibility, and Kim gets to go out in style and take a lot of people with him, including tens of thousands of Americans in South Korea and Japan, and hundreds of thousands if not millions of South Koreans and Japanese. North Korea, more than any other country in the world, comes close to what might be called a "terrorist state". If the best mental model we can come up with is "blinking", there will be no peaceful end to this crisis.