By the way, I read a report that Pakistan may have tested a nuke for North Korea, so they may have a tested nuke at their disposal after all. With stakes like this, I wouldn’t invade this particular country for human rights issues alone, that’s for sure. Which I guess is the answer to the original post. Do a cost-benefit analysis, and conclude it’s too expensive to fix this particular problem. Wasn’t too expensive to “fix” Haiti though.

One other thing that should be on the de-communizing agenda is to acknowledge that dictatorship is simply modern day slavery.

I wrote an article about some of these issues if anyone is interested:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Spec.....r_paul.htm

1. I didn’t actually propose immediate military action against NK, just that the free world (including South Korea) have the right to do so, while not necessarily the obligation.

2. Instead of denigrating DPRK, you have instead decided that I am far worse, calling me “Rudyard Kipling” as if it is more honorable to watch horror in the world and ignore it, than to actually want to do something about, and god forbid a white man should do anything about it, horror of horrors.

3. You have decided that civilians in a democratic country have no right to use their military, instead, only soldiers have the right to an opinion. This hesitance to appear hypocritical is so dangerous that it has actually resulted in US civilians doing exactly that, holding back from using force, and wind up with 3000 dead civilians when it only cost a couple of dozen soldiers to take out Bin Laden’s camps all along. By the way, countries where only the military have the right to an opinion are generally called military dictatorships, in case you’re interested.

Now some misunderstandings. I’m talking about de-communizing western societies, not North Korea, in my original message. I’m pretty sure the Norks are completely de-communized already. Revolutionary zeal doesn’t last that long.

I didn’t actually specify what should be done about North Korea *specifically*, but since you brought it up, since South Korea has propped up North Korea and generally considers the Norks to be brothers, and is convinced USA is the enemy, well, you’ve made your bed (if you’re South Korean), you get to sleep in it if you’re wrong.

Militarily, I would probably be more inclined to withdraw all US troops and then use the carriers to destroy the oil pipelines and place an economic blockade on NK. Make it clear that the South Koreans aren’t taking part in this “adventure”, in fact, you can even burn the US flag in Seoul, that seems par for the course. Either way, this gives the best chance for your brothers to show their brotherly love by laying off Seoul.

Another option would be to see if we can persuade Russia to let us in from the North. I read a report recently that said Russia was of the opinion that military action may be required.

Anyway, none of these options are good. I’m not saying any particular action should be taken in North Korea, just that if we get the option to do something easy (like Syria), we have every right to do so. Only (highly successful) USSR propaganda has led us to believe that we’re the moral equivalent of despots like Saddam & co.

By the way, sorry if being white in a public place offends you. Some would call that racist. Not me though. Whites are fair game.

Gee, have you Rudyard Kipling in your ancestry line. Sounds pretty much like the “white man?쨈s burden”-march song. If you are the first armed- to-the-teeth “Rambo” to hopp over the DMZ to topple Kim Jong Il and risk your precious life and existence personally, I would happily follow your lead, Sahib! So show us Koreans how you would de-Communize North Korea with Western morality. No? U meant only pulling down the BUTTON (in your home bunker) to unleash a war inferno on the Korean peninsula. Hey, what about that: no, thank you, come back with a less deadlier solution or shut up.

But debating options is better than fact-finding, because all these emotive images kill the kind of debate this issue really needs. Let the Koreans assume the sentimental mantle! K-Bloggers should explain, not describe.

1. Acknowledge that it is acceptable to have external military intervention to end gross human rights abuses, which is exactly what the western soldiers meant when they said “never again” after uncovering human ovens.

2. Implement policy 1 at a time of “our” (free world) choosing, in a manner we consider strategic, using resources (including coalition allies) in the most appropriate manner. E.g. it may be more appropriate to have France doing peacekeeping duties in Kabul (which the US hates) rather than interfering with targetting in the combat phase of OIF like they did in Kosovo.

At the moment we have a hard enough time just getting people to acknowledge that the US et al had more right to end systematic rape in Iraq than Saddam did to execute said rape. With western morality devolved to this sorry state, half the campaign is just de-Communizing our own societies like Germany was de-Nazified. See this:

http://www.nationalreview.com/.....260828.asp

We are in a funny situation where after winning the cold war physically, the USSR may still end up winning the cold war mentally. How ignomious is it to be defeated by a dead enemy?

On the whole, though, it’s better than people have an honest idea of what goes in in the DPRK than if they don’t. It at least increases the chance that we’ll be choosing between rational, informed alternative policies, IMO.