North Korean Nukes

The North Korean Nuclear test, although bad for the environment, is a great thing for national security of both the US and the Korean peninsula.

The sad news is that North Korea gaining nuclear weapons merely means that we can’t invade, and are forced to use non-military actions such as diplomatic, economic and information to coerce the regime.

No other country has used weapons of mass destruction as effectively as the United States, our use of biological weapons literally wiped a race of peoples off the face of the planet (Native Americans and smallpox blankets).  We only used nuclear weapons as a means to more quickly end World War II.

North Korea acquiring nuclear weapons presents a few options which The Prince would be proud.  One, in order to aid in the defense of other surrounding nations, we can offer greater military assistance to South Korea, Japan, Russia, and the Phillipines.  Second, we give North Korea a simple message: “use nuclear weapons against anyone, and we’ll bomb you into the stone age.”  North Korea will be unable to use their weapons without ensuring their assured destruction.

The doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction ensures that all countries who use Weapons of Mass Destruction will be completely destroyed, committing effective suicide.

The true threat does not come with nuclear weapons that can be attributed to a particular country, where the doctrine of MAD can apply, but with non-national groups where we cannot determine who detonated a nuclear device.  Without determining who produced a nuclear weapon, we cannot use MAD to ensure proper deterrence and retaliation.

A conversation between two vets.

 This is an ongoing conversation between myself and another veteran.  He was first, and my comments are in between the dashes. -A As far as this “war”, I think it’s severely misguided.

The premise of it is good (however fighting a ‘war’ on terrorism is like fighting a war on racism or sexism) Somewhere along the way the cause was misdirected.

Sure Saddam was an evil person, but he wasn’t really doing anything to us. We had him pretty well contained. I feel like out of the “Axis of Terror” we decided to pick on the weaker one of the three. Now we’ve just stirred up the hornet’s nest. We’re fighting this ‘war’ halfassed. We can’t go after these people/groups only part of the time. We need to commit to it or just stop all together. Too many politians are playing the political game and are riding the fence. But I can’t blame them. This is a nasty fight that will last a long time.

—–

I think that we got rid of the enemy we knew and could anticipate, and traded it for the enemy we don’t know and can’t predict. Honestly, I think that our best course of action would (and I’m not just using hindsight, I’ve been saying this for years) be to have asked Saddam for the head of bin Laden on a plate in exchange for reduced or removed sanctions. Let the two of them fight it out, and then deal with the results. Better to have them fight each other anyway. Hes been our proxy before, why not again?

As to what to do now, GET OUT OF THE CITIES! We have no business being there other than to get shot at. They can’t beat us in the open desert, and the only thing we need to do to create a stable Iraq is train the Iraqi forces and then set up security to prevent forigners from entering and causing a mess. The Iraqi’s will create a democracy, we don’t need to do it at the point of a gun. Plus we can’t.