Well, I didn't see it as a trap when I responded. Does that still count?
Apple employees didn't vote for Steve Jobs or to sue Samsung. Many anti-US terrorist groups have justified their targeting of US civilians because they view their democracy as the people mandating policy. True or not, that is how they have described it. Anyway, I understand you distinguish between government policy and civilian intent, and when I said "they" I meant the US government.
Well, you lost me there Fluffy. Maybe you should define what an enemy of the state is because it must be different from how I think of it. Supporting decriminalization isn't even illegal all on it's own, not sure how one becomes an enemy of the state from just supporting that concept. Maybe you should also define "support".
Israel has a similar strategy (but a different relationship to the Super Power) that is, they have nukes and act like a mad dog if anyone so much as looks at them funny. In fact, Israel has even said as much as that it has missiles that could hit any capital in Europe and it's a poorly guarded secret
You make the assumption that the US would resort to nukes even if the North used nothing but conventional weapons. I'm not convinced to be honest. I think the US would be rather nervous about using nukes that close to China. It's just too much shit hitting the fan here. A conventional response would likely be enough to stop the North as they did in the 1950s.
I don't necessarily think that they would but - all options would be on the table. They'll never say they won't. However, if NK did try to preemptively nuke the US then the US could immediately respond without having to go to the UN or anything. It would be messy and quick and we'd all have to deal with the fallout afterwards.
Sorry, I'm just not convinced. To me the North Korea + China combo completely mirrors South Korea + US. Neither side is likely to start anything because both are backed by heavy hitters. If anything, North Korea has the advantage as China is right next door. A nuclear North Korea is an attempt to alter this balance and give themselves an advantage. What will likely happen is that eventually South Korea will end up building their own nuclear arsenal as well.
They .... can't .... use .... it. Not as a first strike weapon. It is the Samson option, it is a poison pill - it is the finger you give while you die. It can only raise the cost to your enemy, not change the fact of your ultimate defeat. It is something you use if you are already beaten, just to spoil the party for the other chap. It constrains the US ability to act. That is in fact what makes it so dangerous to the US, not Kim using it unprovoked.
No, not if they are acting rationally. But it's still a political advantage in the sense that they have one more thing to brandish, and they will brandish it. And this type of behavior isn't good or healthy. China has issues with many surrounding nations, but it doesn't threaten pre-emptive nuclear war nor does it release YouTube videos depicting their "enemies" being incinerated in a huge ball of fire either. North Korea may not intend to follow through on those threats, but people generally don't appreciate being threatened. If I put a gun to your head you'd probably want to pound the crap out of me even if I later point out the gun was never loaded. You know, the situation would have been a lot different if North Korea quietly developed it's nuclear arsenal and never threatened all it's neighbors with flaming death.
Right but your position remains that they're crazy and therefore have to be dealt with. After all, Saddam was crazy too and threatened the west with annihilation with WMD in 45 minutes. Amedinejhad is crazy and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Etc. Etc.
Luckily we have Obama as the President. He'll actually bomb NK back. If GWBush was still in charge we'd be invading Vietnam.
Do note I only blamed Bush for setting the precedence of attacking a nation that didn't attack us first. It's like the bully who beats up the little kid because that little kid looked at the bully funny. Obama has yet to actually take that action. I suspect Obama will attack the actual nation that attacked. Hitting back after being hit.
thanks! I think you finally figured out his problem
That's balls. Dubya would have bombed NK back immediately because that's what he would have to do. He worked int he same system Obama works in. That would be the required response. Dubya DID go after Afghanistan right away even though Afghanistan, as a state, did not attack the US and were open to negotiating the capture and deportation of Osama bin Laden. What the Bush administration then did (because Bush was second fiddle to Cheney really) was to invade Iraq, something that had long been on the agenda in various factions of the US which happened to be the faction that held sway in the White House - the neo-cons. The Baker faction was able to curb them after the fact but they managed at least one of the wars they had always wanted.
