Actually the Bush administration is handling North Korea simultaneously even as we prepare for what looks like another military confrontation with Iraq. One has to remember that in diplomacy, one size does not fit all. How we handle Iraq is necessarily different then how we handle North Korea, it has to be, the situations are quite different and the threat levels are also quite different.
At first glance it may seem like a contradiction, however it is the assessment of this government that North Korea with its declared nuclear weapons program is currently less of an immediate threat then Iraq with its undeclared and clandestine chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs. To get the big picture, you have to understand the dynamics involved.
Hear are the three primary reasons for having nukes or other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as they are called.
- Deterrence Dont try and mess with us; we have nukes!
- Diplomatic leverage Pay attention to us, keep us happy, send us money appease us; we have nukes!
- We plan on using nukes or other WMD against others but we wont tell you until you see the mushroom cloud.
The United States, The former USSR, UK, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, etc. all fall into category 1 and have no intention of using their weapons unless they feel their survival is at stake. The world has been put on notice that they all have these terrible weapons.
North Korea while quite dangerous and ruled by a brutal regime has no intention of using their nukes unless provoked. North Korea falls into category 2 and they are trying to say to the world, and in particular to the United States, pay attention to us, we want to be players in the big game too, we want assurances that we are safe, and oh and by the way, it is true that we spend the majority of our treasure on military ambitions, but we want you to make up the shortfall; so send us money because we are crazy and you just never know what we might do.
Iraq unfortunately falls into category 3. They have WMDs and an on-going nuke weapons program, and they are trying to hide it. They are likely willing to share such technologies and weapons with others (read terrorist groups) and they plan on using it the first chance they get.
The most dangerous regimes from the United States standpoint are those that have or are trying to acquire WMD and dont declare such. There is no doubt in my mind and our best and most informed military intelligence players that Saddam would nuke the United States, Israel and other nations, just as soon as he has these weapons in his hands. Im not a gambler, but I would bet the rent money on that in a heartbeat.
I give my opinion on such matters quite rarely, but this is one time I will and you can take it for what its worth. I feel it would go down as the biggest blunder in world history to allow the situation in Iraq to continue in its present form for much longer. If this president, if this congress, if this nation, and if all peace loving people the world over do not come together and act decisively to disarm Saddam, we here today and the generations that come after us will pay an incalculable price for our foolishness.
Holy crap, did I just do a state of the union?
Seriously, I dont thirst for war, I would like to avoid it but sometimes it is necessary. And if you dont think that war is ever necessary then you just dont understand the price of freedom.
Freeman
Edited by - freeman on 29 January 2003 10:27:10
