STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Hermes

North Korea missiles

halleybird · Hermes

I don't think a preemptive attack is necessary. Besides, our military resources are depleted as is. But it's still scary stuff, and Kim Jong Il is a scary mofo. Am I the only one who thinks of him as he was in Team America: World Police? I know that's terrible.

kisa · Dooney & Bourke

I don't think a preemptive attack is necsessary, and I think a preemptive attack would be pretty ridiculous. The policies of North Korea may be contrary to those of the United States, but they have as much right to test the missiles they develop as the United States does or any other nation for that matter. I think Kim Jong Il is probably stretching his military muscle out of suspicion that the US will go after North Korea next.

About the California thing, the taepodong missile test failed, so I don't know what the chances are of that actually being a feasible scenario. And beyond that I don't really see why North Korea would want to provoke a superpower that absolutely dwarves them.

Hermes

kisa wrote:

About the California thing, the taepodong missile test failed, so I don't know what the chances are of that actually being a feasible scenario. And beyond that I don't really see why North Korea would want to provoke a superpower that absolutely dwarves them.

I understand that the now seven tests have failed, but what if they figure out what they're doing wrong and succeed? Kim Jong Il is not playing with a full deck, and his actions are a strong indicator that to "provoke a superpower that absolutely dwarves them" is not a deterrent.

it's purely a hypothetical question - what if they are successful - and all this while we're saying "oh, NK is nothing to worry about" then lo and behold they succeed and everyone is breathing down the government's back about what they didn't do to prevent it. That's what I was curious about, is what others think should be done to solve this issue.

part of the reason I'm asking this question is due to 911 - Osama Bin Laden was threatening the US for a long time, and Afghanistan did not have a fraction of the military power that NK has. I always thought something needed to be done about Bin Laden before 911 ever happened - as a matter of fact, as soon as 911 happened I was asking if anyone heard if it was bin laden. I've always felt that Saddam should have been taken out of power years before he was - these Hitler-esque figures are a disaster waiting to happen.

Hermes

a NYT article on Kim Jong il for those that may not be familiar with what a nut this guy is:

'Rogue Regime': A Marxist Sun King

By JOSHUA KURLANTZICK Published: August 7, 2005

IS there a modern world leader as poorly understood as Kim Jong Il? Selig Harrison, a North Korea expert who has traveled to Pyongyang numerous times, regards Kim as a kind of Asian Gorbachev, a man pushing ''reform by stealth.'' For President Bush, by contrast, the North Korean leader is a ''pygmy,'' a mindless, brutal leader: since 2001 the White House has until recently essentially refused to engage in bilateral talks with North Korea.

Skip to next paragraph Enlarge This Image

Ed Lam

ROGUE REGIME
Kim Jong Il and the Looming Threat of North Korea.
By Jasper Becker.
Illustrated. 300 pp. Oxford University Press. $28. Forum: Book News and Reviews

In ''Rogue Regime: Kim Jong Il and the Looming Threat of North Korea,'' the veteran Asia correspondent Jasper Becker makes a powerful case for defining Kim once and for all -- not as an ordinary, if nuclear-tipped, dictator, but as an extraordinarily skillful tyrant presiding over the worst man-made catastrophe in modern history, worse than Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge or the Soviet Union in the 1930's.

Becker cannot report from inside North Korea, and he is not a nuclear expert. Instead, relying on extensive interviews with North Korean exiles, he offers a highly readable narrative that unearths Kim's history, probes his decision-making style and details the grotesque consequences of those decisions. His book is a subtle plea to the world to expand its focus beyond the -- admittedly important -- nuclear issue to the vast humanitarian catastrophe unfolding under Kim Jong Il's gaze.

Becker traces Kim's destructive behavior to the early days of the world's only Communist dynasty. The regime was founded on lies, with Kim Il Sung, the father of the present ruler, destroying all evidence of Soviet participation in his rise to power and brainwashing Koreans far more extensively than other Communist nations brainwashed their citizens. In 1963, a Soviet diplomat in the North called Kim Il Sung's rule a ''political gestapo.''

At least Kim Il Sung enjoyed some respect within his country for his role as the founder of the North. He also faced some checks, admittedly limited, on his power: unlike Kim Jong Il, he held regular meetings of cadres. But after his father's death in 1994, Kim Jong Il transformed North Korea from an odious totalitarian regime into something actually worse, ''a Marxist Sun King'' state that was ready to oversee an unparalleled orgy of extravagance and absolutism.

Details of that extravagance are drawn from Kim's former lackeys. ''For all the immense privileges enjoyed by . . . those who ruled the Soviet Union and China, they did not aspire to a live a life completely alien to their countrymen,'' Becker writes. ''They did not show signs of a consuming desire to emulate the tastes of a jet-set billionaire.'' Kim does -- and he has built a stable of 100 imported limousines, as well as an entourage of women who are trained in ''pleasure groups'' to service the leader sexually. Kim imports professional wrestlers from the United States, at a cost of $15 million, to entertain him. And when he decided to build a film industry, he did what Hollywood studio heads could only dream about -- kidnapped foreign directors and actors and forced them to work for him. His wine cellars contain more than 10,000 French bottles. He flies in chefs from Italy to prepare pizza. Meanwhile, his people scrounge for edible roots.

Hunger had been a problem under Kim Il Sung. But under Kim Jong Il, Becker writes, it became possibly ''the most devastating famine in history,'' with death rates approaching 15 percent of the population, surpassing ''any comparable disaster in the 20th century,'' even China's under Mao. (One of Becker's previous books was about the famine in China in the late 1950's and early 60's.) By some estimates, over three million North Koreans have died, more victims than in Pol Pot's Cambodia, and international agencies are warning that this year may bring particularly serious hunger.

To survive has required tenacity. Koreans are reported even to have murdered children and mixed their flesh with pork to eat. When I have encountered North Korean refugees in Asia, they look barely human -- stunted figures with sallow, terrified faces. Some North Koreans have tried to grow their own food, potentially a sign of independent thinking. But for years Kim had them stopped, though he has begun to open the economy slightly in the past three years. Those who protested were sent to an extensive gulag system, which may have resulted in the deaths of one million people. In this internal slave state, Becker suggests, tests of chemical weapons are carried out on prisoners, and pregnant women whose children were tainted with foreign blood have been forced to have abortions. Kim Jong Il has ''resisted adopting every policy that could have brought the misery to a quick end,'' Becker says, making ''the suffering he inflicted on an entire people an unparalleled and monstrous crime.''

Despite the famine, and despite some intelligence assessments that his regime was about to collapse, Kim Jong Il has survived in power for over a decade. Becker is strongest in laying blame, accusing the international community of tacitly acquiescing in Kim's charnel house. United Nations agencies that are supposed to monitor the humanitarian crisis in North Korea have averted their gaze, refusing to confront a host government. They have declined to call the North's hunger a famine, and allowed Pyongyang to control food aid, all but assuring that it would be channeled to Kim's associates.

In South Korea, where much of the population does not remember the Korean War, successive governments have shamefully hindered North Korean refugees from fleeing, meanwhile funneling hundreds of millions of dollars to the North. The Clinton administration also provided assistance to Kim, while making human rights a low priority. Kim Jong Il ''obtained enough foreign aid'' from the United States and South Korea ''to continue food and goods distribution and maintain the loyalty of core followers,'' Becker writes. On the other hand, by often refusing even to deal directly with the North Korea issue and simply hoping for Pyongyang's collapse, the Bush administration has failed to make any headway at all.

Yet after convincingly demonstrating why North Korean human rights should be as much an issue as North Korean nukes, Becker has only limited policy suggestions to offer readers. He recognizes that removing the Dear Leader by force would be almost impossible -- his first chapter contains a detailed war game illustrating the capabilities of Kim's weaponry. But he also understands that ''when the North Korean crisis is defined as being just about proliferation or restoring the economy, Kim Jong Il has already won,'' that any strategy for dealing with Kim Jong Il must try to improve the lives of average North Koreans.

Becker does suggest pushing the United Nations to rethink how it handles states that terrorize their people. But there are other options as well. The United States could step up containment to try to ensure that North Korea can't sell its weapons to terrorists; and it could make better use of its bully pulpit, highlighting the North's concentration camps and pressing the South Koreans to open their borders more to North Korean refugees. The Bush administration's upcoming appointment of a special envoy for North Korean human rights is a good start. The United Nations could make greater efforts to gain access to Korean concentration camps, employing Korean speakers to ferret out information. At the same time American diplomats could work harder to persuade South Korea and China that a breakdown of Kim's regime would not necessarily cause chaos, indeed, might actually result in greater stability on their borders. For the present, however, Kim Jong Il will remain happily misunderstood.

-- Edited by detroit at 20:58, 2006-07-05

ayo · Coach

Kim Jong is an absolute nutcase. He fits the profile of a typical dictator, brash, arrogant and implusive.

With that being said, this guy has been doing crazy stuff for YEARS and no one has done anything about it. I think this time he has crossed the line.

I'm usually not on the side of the states when it comes to their so called "preventative measures" but this time around I would be in total agreement.

Hedvig · Coach

ayo wrote:

Kim Jong is an absolute nutcase. He fits the profile of a typical dictator, brash, arrogant and implusive.
With that being said, this guy has been doing crazy stuff for YEARS and no one has done anything about it. I think this time he has crossed the line.

I agree - and I think history has shown time and again that you should not ignore or underestimate these crazy dictators.

asf · Kate Spade

i agree with ayo and hedvig - i don't think we can take chances with this guy. he spends all this money on military while most of the country doesn't have enough to eat. i saw on the news wthis morning that a lot of n. korea has up to 20 blackouts a day! it's obvious what his priorities are (himself, his allies/co-conspirators/what have you, and weapons - not necessarily in that order), and his disregard for the other 99% of his people should show that he certainly isn't going to give a shit what the us does/thinks/threatens.

he needs to go. now.

relrel · Marc Jacobs

There is a pretty interesting article in the latest Mental Floss magazine about North Korea and it's leaders, both Kim Jong Il and the deceased Kim Il Sung (who technically is still the official head of state!). It talks about who might possibly lead after Kim Jong Il dies and the idea of hereditary succession in a communist state.

blubirde · Chanel

I don't support preemptive strikes - ever. I also don't believe NK has the capacity to do what it wants to do. Further, it's entirely hypocritical to tell them they can't test their own missiles. We're playing war games in the South Pacific, for god's sake.

All that said, he is crazy and that can't be a good thing. I think this should lie in the hands of the UN and I hope diplomatic actions can make a difference.

ayo · Coach

blubirde wrote:

I don't support preemptive strikes - ever. I also don't believe NK has the capacity to do what it wants to do. Further, it's entirely hypocritical to tell them they can't test their own missiles. We're playing war games in the South Pacific, for god's sake. All that said, he is crazy and that can't be a good thing. I think this should lie in the hands of the UN and I hope diplomatic actions can make a difference.

Agreed to an extent..

but do you really think that 1) diplomatic actions will truly be effective on someone that is basically not in he's right mind (you can't reason with a fool) and 2) the US, China and Japan should just sit back and wait while this lunatic plays target practice and hope he doesn't get lucky?

I honestly think he is just looking for attention and hopefully the attention he's received now will be enough to quiet him for sometime..but if not..he may try to take it a step further and that may impact the lives many.

Hermes

I'm with you, Ayo. Here's the latest -- I hope China will be able to diffuse the situation...

North Korea May Have Another Missile Ready
By Associated Press

document.write(getElapsed("20060707T130149Z"));
1 hour agoUPDATED 1 HOUR 1 MINUTE AGO

A South Korean protester holds a picture of North ...

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea could have another long-range missile at a launch site but does not appear close to firing it, South Korea's defense minister told reporters Friday. Also, South Korea said it will delay food and fertilizer shipments to the North, and had turned down a proposal by the North to hold military talks this week.

Intelligence shows the North may have moved two long-range Taepodong-2 missiles to the launch site before it test-fired what was believed to be a Taepodong and six other, shorter-range missiles on Wednesday, Defense Minister Yoon Kwang-ung told a small group of reporters, the Yonhap news agency said.

The second Taepodong may still be at the site, but Yoon said that current intelligence showed no sign it was near the launch pad itself, Yonhap said.

Meanwhile, a U.S. envoy said after meeting with Chinese officials in Beijing that the United States and China had agreed to work together to restore calm in the region.

Japan helped increase the pressure on the impoverished communist state by announcing it would not provide food aid and was considering restricting agricultural and fisheries trade to the North, which is dependent on international food shipments.

Yoon was quoted by Yonhap as saying there apparently was a technical problem with the North's Taepodongs and that further launches would likely be delayed until the glitch is resolved.

He also said that a North Korean boat that observed the missile launches had left the area _ further suggestion that more immminent launches are unlikely.

The Taepodong is designed to be capable of reaching as far the United States, according to U.S. officials. But on Wednesday, what appeared to be a Taepodong broke up less than a minute after takeoff and fell into the sea.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, dispatched to the region in the wake of Wednesday's missile barrage, said China obviously opposed the launches. He said senior Chinese diplomats had told him that Beijing had contacted Pyongyang after the launches, though they did not provide details on what was said.

"They were very clear in their views of the North Korean missile launches, very clear that they have no interest in seeing this happen and do not regard this in anyway positively," Hill said before leaving Beijing for South Korea.

Hill said that he and the Chinese agreed that the two governments must work "to deal with the situation," curb further North Korean provocations and persuade Pyongyang to return to regional negotiations on its nuclear program.

China, which is North Korea's staunchest ally and a source of oil and other economic assistance, is seen as key to getting Pyongyang to halt missile tests and resume stalled negotiations over its nuclear weapons programs.

The U.S. has urged Beijing to use the most leverage possible with North Korea. So far, China's efforts have been mostly limited to diplomatic appeals.

North Korea had proposed Monday that it meet with South Korean officials Friday at the border village of Panmunjom to work on setting up talks between generals aimed at reducing tension along the world's most heavily fortified border.

"Our side judged that it is not an appropriate time," the South Korean Defense Ministry said in a statement Friday. "We notified the North that we would propose a date at an appropriate time later."

The two sides held their last high-level military talks in May, but failed to produce any agreement because of a dispute over their marine border.

South Korea had been taking a relatively soft approach with Pyongyang, shelving earlier criticism of the missiles and insisting on maintaining ties with the North developed in recent years.

Yonhap quoted Choe Myong Nam, councilor at the North's mission to the U.N. in Geneva, as saying that Wednesday's launches were successful and could be continued, echoing an earlier statement by North Korea's Foreign Ministry.

"It's an unfair logic to say that somebody can do something and others cannot. The same logic applies to nuclear possession," Choe said. The missile launches are "not intended to strike anyone and it's the North position that missile launches could be continued," he said.

South Korea ordered two of its airlines to avoid a flight route near the path of the missiles until July 11.

In Washington, President Bush expressed support for a draft U.N. Security Council resolution, offered by Japan, to sanction North Korea for the launches. China and Russia have shown little interest in sanctions, saying diplomacy remains the only way to resolve the dispute.

Hermes

Sounds like Japan is gearing up to do something. I would not be one bit surprised if the U.S. supported Japan not only in condoning of actions, but supply of weaponry.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, right, is greeted by Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Shotaro Yochi, ...

Japan Considers Strike Against N. Korea
By MARI YAMAGUCHI, Associated Press Writer

document.write(getElapsed("20060710T113917Z"));
3 hours agoUPDATED 1 HOUR 21 MINUTES AGO

TOKYO - Japan said Monday it was considering whether a pre-emptive strike on the North's missile bases would violate its constitution, signaling a hardening stance ahead of a possible U.N. Security Council vote on Tokyo's proposal for sanctions against the regime.

Japan was badly rattled by North Korea's missile tests last week and several government officials openly discussed whether the country ought to take steps to better defend itself, including setting up the legal framework to allow Tokyo to launch a pre-emptive strike against Northern missile sites.

"If we accept that there is no other option to prevent an attack ... there is the view that attacking the launch base of the guided missiles is within the constitutional right of self-defense. We need to deepen discussion," Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe said.

Japan's constitution currently bars the use of military force in settling international disputes and prohibits Japan from maintaining a military for warfare. Tokyo has interpreted that to mean it can have armed troops to protect itself, allowing the existence of its 240,000-strong Self-Defense Forces.

A Defense Agency spokeswoman, however, said Japan has no attacking weapons such as ballistic missiles that could reach North Korea. Its forces only have ground-to-air missiles and ground-to-vessel missiles, she said on condition of anonymity due to official policy.

Despite resistance from China and Russia, Japan has pushed for a U.N. Security Council resolution that would prohibit nations from procuring missiles or missile-related "items, materials goods and technology" from North Korea. A vote was possible in New York later Monday, but Japan said it would not insist on one.

"It's important for the international community to express a strong will in response to the North Korean missile launches," Abe said. "This resolution is an effective way of expressing that."

China and Russia, both nations with veto power on the council, have voiced opposition to the measure. Kyodo News agency reported Monday, citing unnamed Chinese diplomatic sources, that China may use its veto on the Security Council to block the resolution.

The United States, Britain and France have expressed support for the proposal, while Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso has said there is a possibility that Russia will abstain.

South Korea, not a council member, has not publicly taken a position on the resolution, but on Sunday Seoul rebuked Japan for its outspoken criticism of the tests.

"There is no reason to fuss over this from the break of dawn like Japan, but every reason to do the opposite," a statement from President Roh Moo-hyun's office said, suggesting that Tokyo was contributing to tensions on the Korean Peninsula.

Abe said Monday it was "regrettable" that South Korea had accused Japan of overreacting.

"There is no mistake that the missile launch ... is a threat to Japan and the region. It is only natural for Japan to take measures of risk management against such a threat," Abe said.

Meanwhile, a Chinese delegation including the country's top nuclear envoy _ Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei _ arrived in North Korea on Monday, officially to attend celebrations marking the 45th anniversary of a friendship treaty between the North and China.

The U.S. is urging Beijing to push its communist ally back into six-party nuclear disarmament talks, but the Chinese government has not said whether Wu would bring up the negotiations. A ministry spokeswoman said last week that China was "making assiduous efforts" in pushing for the talks to resume.

Talks have been deadlocked since November because of a boycott by Pyongyang in protest of a crackdown by Washington on the regime's alleged money-laundering and other financial crimes.

Beijing has suggested an informal gathering of the six nations, which could allow the North to technically stand by its boycott, but at the same time meet with the other five parties _ South Korea, China, the U.S., Japan and Russia. The U.S. has backed the idea and said Washington could meet with the North on the sidelines of such a meeting.

Still, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill questioned just how influential Beijing was with the enigmatic regime.

"I must say the issue of China's influence on DPRK is one that concerns us," Hill told reporters in Tokyo. "China said to the DPRK, 'Don't fire those missiles,' but the DPRK fired them. So I think everybody, especially the Chinese, are a little bit worried about it."

The DPRK refers to the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Hill is touring the region to coordinate strategy on North Korea. He has emphasized the need for countries involved to present a united front.

"We want to make it very clear that we all speak in one voice on this provocative action by the North Koreans to launch missiles in all shapes and sizes," Hill said. "We want to make it clear to North Korea that what it did was really unacceptable."