9/8 http://asia.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=3408521
Sigh... once again world leaders were unprepared for the obvious and
easily foreseen. Only a week ago Japan announced they're going to
_start_ spending $2b/year for the next 5+ years. SK has no plans for
defense at all. And in the next year we have a good chance of seeing
a few million people anywhere in the region go up in smoke. Literally.
\_ According to the 2003 CIA world factbook the military budgets
for these countries in 2002 were (roughly):
S. Korea: $13B
Japan: $40B
\_ Percentage for missile defense? near zero.
\_ Kim Jong-Il isn't going to do anything. Why not? Because he'll
lose if he tries. Kim Jong-Il's most important goal is survival.
He merely wants to give off the appearance of being crazy so he
can blackmail donor countries. If he did anything, we would
invade and he would lose. for sure.
\- it's probably actually the case that NKorea is
willing to "bid" to higher risk levels. going with
the poker analogy, bluffing might be just that when
it comes to a single round of poker, but the willingness
to run higher risks has implications across repeated
interactions. in a MAD world you dont directly threaten
the other side, but you threten the other side with
your willingness to risk things going out of control.
this model applies in a certain modified way in the
north korean case. lit. references skipped. BTW,
pico iyer has an interesting travel essay on NK
from a few yrs back in "tropical classical" i think.
there is also an interesting frontline on NK. --psb
\_ You know, that's very similar to what people said about Saddam
Hussein: he'd either use/have WMD's or allow the inspectors in.
1) we haven't found WMD's (which of course brings up nasty
questions of either intelligence failure or someone else getting
the weapons.
2) he didn't let inspectors in
\_ uhh, revisionist history here?
\_ Thanks for the correction--I must be hanging out with the
wrong crowd. His obstruction in 1994 led the inspectors
to believe that they couldn't accomplish anything (and
hence the left). The UN resolutions in 2002-2003 were
for Hussein to lead the inspectors to WMD's or produce
evidence that the weapons had been destroyed. No one
expected him to let his country be invaded rather than
comply.
\_ the inspectors left in 1998. Not 1994. Also
he did start producing serious evidence there were
no WMDs, but the adminstration went to the
the rest of the world and said he was lieing and
they had evidence to prove it. Funny how now they
are backing away from that and hoping most people
wont notice or care. Which is working in the US
but isn't working too well outside of the country.
And as has been proven recently the US CAN'T go
it alone unless they are willing to make sacrafices
and pay through the nose.
\_ His evidence was late and weak thus leading to
the reasonable assumption + intelligence that
there were easily found WMD. Hussein's actions
still make no sense. We had a large force at
his southern border and were making preparations
to invade that were so obvious CNN was showing
the work being done on international TV and he
still wouldn't blink.
\_ Perhaps he was not willing to fully
cooperate because US is bombing his
military capabilities even beyond the no
fly zone, and has pretty much stated that
we would try to assasinate Saddam if we
find the chance?
\_ No, your timeline is way off. We were
*way* beyond no fly zones and other
sanctions era garbage at this point. If
he didn't blink it was clear he'd get
invaded and crushed, party over. No blink.
You can't judge foreign leaders based on
your local concept of common sense.
\_ It was clear to him he would
get invaded no matter whether he
blinked or not. US special forces
is all over Iraq by that point, and
condition for no invasion is for
Saddam to step down and go into exile.
Exile means US can assasinate him
anytime it wants. The voluminous
evidence (several thousand pages) is
\_ So how much of your half-eaten Cheetos did you spew all over
your screen while typing that?
not weak but as much as he can provide
given that, as we now know, he really
doesn't have any WMD.
\_ Obviously I need to stop posting late at night.
There is no sane explanation for Hussein's actions. Why do you
expect Kim Jong-Il to be different?
\_ There's a really interesting long ass article about
Kim Jong-Il in last week's new yorker, I guess I could
post it somewhere if you're interested. now I feel
like psb, this sucks. - danh
\- evolutionary ameliorism
\_ So you work for the State Department and have access to the
psych profiles of foreign leaders? What security clearance
does that require? Is there any other secret shit you can
maneuvering to prevent a war at all costs. Keeping US
share with us? --super spy #1 fan
\_ One doesn't need all that "secret shit". It's common
\_ Umm, China constitutes > 70% of N Korean imports.
Since N. Korea has no natural resources or
domestic industry, this means in effect N.
Korea survives only through China. PRC
military wants military parity with the US
~ 2025, their generals and military reports
are very specific that they view the US as
adversary. Sorry you are wrong (unless of
course you know more thant the entire US
defense establishment).
sense. The problem with US intelligence services is
too much technology and too little common sense. Kim
wants to hold on to power for the long term, and to do
that his best model is the PRC. Unfortunately, US
sanctions is preventing him from following in the PRC's
footsteps. He also faces much more serious military
pressures and burden as compared to the PRC. South
Korea poses much more of a threat as the better
model than Taiwan vis-a-vis the PRC, since
Taiwan is so small compared to PRC. Yes, Kim might
strike if he is cornered. If you let him have a way
out, he would take the way out. I think US wants to
take him out whereas S. Korea prefers a more moderate,
slower, but less risky way. Maybe if PRC continues to
prosper economically, it can pull N. Korea out of
economic disaster even with US sanctions. Either take
Kim out ASAP or help him with economic liberalization
are both better than the current impasse.
\_ No, it isn't common sense to threaten your neighbors and
the US with nuclear weapons if you expect to survive long
term. If staying alive and in power was his goal, he's
chosen a suicidal and foolish path that only a mad man
would take. How do you see 10+ years of nuclear weapons
and missile development in a starving nation as a means
of survival as common sense?
\_ If S. Korea, Japan, US feels threatened by N. Korea,
how do you think N. Korea feels about the might of
the US? If N. Korea's military is weak, US and
S. Korea would likely have taken it out a long time
ago, given that USSR is no more and PRC is more and more
unwilling to support the liability that is N. Korea.
\_ Sigh... if the US wanted to take out NK we could do
so right now. NK can *never* be so strong that we
can't take them out. You have it all backwards. The
*only* reason to take them out is they're getting too
strong and building WMD and the means to use them
*and* are suicidally threatening to do so. Otherwise
no one would care what a backwater starving nation
run by yet another psycho is doing to it's people.
\_ not "no one." South Korea would care. Most
south Koreans still have family over there.
\_ Sure and USSR could have taken out Afghanistan.
Just throw a few nukular bombs and then send
in the whole damn Red Army. 3rd grade arguments
aside, the question is always, "At what cost?".
And no, the reason N. Korea is more and more a
concern is not that they are getting too strong
but that they are getting too weak and unstable,
and of course, the above stated desires of S.
Koreans to have a united nation. As for caring
about "backwater starving nations", it's all
about projecting power and securing interests,
like in Iraq, or Philippines in the last
century.
\_ don't forget that the current PRC model all started
with Mao being *dead*. all through the idiocy of the
great leap forward and the cultural revolution
there were moderate leaders ready to turn China into
a real country, and without the maniac dying all this
was totaly impossible. Kim is NK's maniac.
\_ Mao is a brutal dictator but not a maniac. Yes,
GLF is sheer stupidity but I think Mao really
believed it would work, at least initially. As for
the GPCR, it is Mao's calculated bid to return to power.
The PRC model (a more basic version) has been
experimented upon off and on since the commie
takeover, by the likes of Zhou, Liu and Deng.
Mao did not like it too much not because of its
merits/problems but because it gives too much
power to Liu and others, sidelining Mao.
\_ [troll purged]
\_ In Washington the 'common sense' prevailing intelligence is
that North Korea is China's client state. They are
maneuvering to force the US off of the Korean peninsula
so China can expand its sphere of influence. DUH.
\_ PRC's main concern is much more than whether US troops is
on the Korean peninsula. It's biggest fear is war on
the Korean peninsula. Politically, helping N. Korea would be
disastrous since PRC has good relations with S. Korea, and
need trade with Japan and US. Not helping would be
disastrous since its people and military leaders would be
questioning why it is giving up what the previous generation
gave life and blood for. Economically, it would be
disastrous for the whole region either way. Militarily, it
would have a hard time matching US / S. Korea. PRC is
maneuvering to prevent a war at all costs. Forcing US
off the Korean peninsula is way down on the bottom of the
list. This is all common sense, and very basic. |
http://csua.com/feed/