Thursday, May 20, 2010

This Boggles FLG's Mind

MSNBC:
South Korea accused North Korea Thursday of firing a torpedo that sank a naval warship in March, killing 46 sailors in the country's worst military disaster since the Korean War.

South Korea said it would take "firm" measures against its impoverished and reclusive neighbor, which furiously responded that it was ready for war if Seoul or its allies imposed sanctions.

[...]

Japan ruled out the resumption of nuclear disarmament talks by five regional powers and the North, and said Washington shared its view that such negotiations — aimed at aiding Pyongyang in return for a promise to drop its nuclear arms — were unthinkable.

It's that last paragraph that most boggles FLG's mind. The five regional powers are the ones who want disarmament, so is ruling them out really punishing North Korea? Now, FLG isn't saying that we should give them goodies after acting like assholes, but who really loses when we stop negotiating NK's disarmament? They're still a two-bit nuclear power.

FLG has, and has had for a while, half a mind just to advocate the preemptive nuclear annihilation of North Korea. It would solve all this bullshit with the regime and resolve in advance and permanently the horribly painful reintegration of North Korean people after the regime collapses. Plus, and probably most importantly, it would scare the shit out of other countries thinking about getting the bomb. FLG realizes that sacrificing the lives of millions of innocent North Koreans and the radiological damage are massive negatives, not to mention the huge blow to America's reputation in the world, but Iran and everybody else would certainly think twice.

6 comments:

Withywindle said...

The trouble is the enormous Nork artillery park aimed at Seoul, which goes off 30 seconds after we nuke the Norks. And you can't nuke the artillery park cause it's too close to Seoul.

FLG said...

I'm aware of this artillery. However, I think we could take it out with some sort of smart cluster munition. Furthermore, are we entirely sure that in a very hierarchical society like NK troops will fire if the head has been cut off? Perhaps not, but I admit that's a big risk to take.

Withywindle said...

Most to the point, losing Seoul is not a risk the South Koreans are willing to take; and we defer to them. Understandably, I think.

The Ancient said...

Call me a girly-man, but casual discussion of exterminating an entire country makes me a little queasy.

That said, I wouldn't mind seeing a pre-emptive destruction of North Korea's leadership class and the immediate military threat to Seoul.

I'm sure this could be done in a non-nuclear way. But the blowback -- not least from the South Korean public -- would be very, very bad.

Withywindle said...

Girly-man.

Actually, I said precisely what you're saying, to my friend Gowanus, back about 2002. Except I said that any pre-emptive strike was too great a risk to take, with Seoul on the line.

The Ancient said...

Seoul-man --

Some problems have no good solutions.

(Do you think the Norks have hardened chips in their command and control systems? I guessing not.)

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.