<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DPRK set to wave dick - spokesman</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rjkoehler.com/2003/10/17/dprk-set-to-wave-dick-spokesman/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2003/10/17/dprk-set-to-wave-dick-spokesman/</link>
	<description>Korea... in Blog Format</description>
	<pubDate>Fri,  5 Dec 2008 09:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: usinkorea</title>
		<link>http://www.rjkoehler.com/2003/10/17/dprk-set-to-wave-dick-spokesman/#comment-369</link>
		<dc:creator>usinkorea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjkoehler.com/?p=160#comment-369</guid>
		<description>The demonstration of nuclear weapons fits into one of the two 
strategies experts have suggested for building nukes but not the 
other.

It fits with the blackmail thesis.

But it does not fit the idea the North is planning to sell the 
nukes or material, at least in my opinion.

Getting caught selling nukes or material to make them would be a sure 
fire way to start a war.  China would really turn against the North.  
Japan would harden its stance even more.  And maybe even South Korea
would raise an eyebrow.

So if they wanted to deal in nuclear material, the best plan would be
to keep it extremely quiet and covert.

They wouldn't announce it to the world.

But using nukes as a deterent and way to gain concessions does fit 
with a desire to publicize the nukes.

And it works.  In a poll taken by a group in Chicago - before the big 
spike in hate last year - some 45% of Americans said they would not 
support a war defending Korea even with UN backing!!

With verified nuclear weapons, how many Americans will agree to 
seeing US soldiers potentially glow in the dark to defend South Korea -
with or without anti-Americanism?

This is why it is insane for the Korean media and politicians to 
continue to say "the US-NK nuclear crisis"....

Another poll in Korea said that only 9% of SKoreans said believed
the nuclear crisis should effect government policy.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The demonstration of nuclear weapons fits into one of the two<br />
strategies experts have suggested for building nukes but not the<br />
other.</p>
<p>It fits with the blackmail thesis.</p>
<p>But it does not fit the idea the North is planning to sell the<br />
nukes or material, at least in my opinion.</p>
<p>Getting caught selling nukes or material to make them would be a sure<br />
fire way to start a war.  China would really turn against the North.<br />
Japan would harden its stance even more.  And maybe even South Korea<br />
would raise an eyebrow.</p>
<p>So if they wanted to deal in nuclear material, the best plan would be<br />
to keep it extremely quiet and covert.</p>
<p>They wouldn&#8217;t announce it to the world.</p>
<p>But using nukes as a deterent and way to gain concessions does fit<br />
with a desire to publicize the nukes.</p>
<p>And it works.  In a poll taken by a group in Chicago - before the big<br />
spike in hate last year - some 45% of Americans said they would not<br />
support a war defending Korea even with UN backing!!</p>
<p>With verified nuclear weapons, how many Americans will agree to<br />
seeing US soldiers potentially glow in the dark to defend South Korea -<br />
with or without anti-Americanism?</p>
<p>This is why it is insane for the Korean media and politicians to<br />
continue to say &#8220;the US-NK nuclear crisis&#8221;&#8230;.</p>
<p>Another poll in Korea said that only 9% of SKoreans said believed<br />
the nuclear crisis should effect government policy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
