Comments on: Norks with nukes http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/ The unbearable lightness of Lex. Enjoy! Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:43:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Raymond http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/comment-page-1/#comment-17925 Raymond Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:13:44 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/#comment-17925 No popular choices... Isn't that the US situation in every foreign policy issue of importance though? All these delay strategies of the US regarding Iran, North Korea, Chinese trade, even Iraq, and including strategic energy decisions since the cold war have all come about to a breaking point, leaving the US only unpopular choices in foreign policy. No popular choices…

Isn’t that the US situation in every foreign policy issue of importance though? All these delay strategies of the US regarding Iran, North Korea, Chinese trade, even Iraq, and including strategic energy decisions since the cold war have all come about to a breaking point, leaving the US only unpopular choices in foreign policy.

]]> By: Diplopius Disqualificata http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/comment-page-1/#comment-17919 Diplopius Disqualificata Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:31:16 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/#comment-17919 SJS, thank you for your thoughts. I by no means meant to imply that we could precision-strike our way out of this one (though we might have been able to do so back in 1994, before a certain ex-president got involved). Rather would prefer use ability to make NK into something less than a nation-state generally, and we need neither nuclear weapons nor boots on the ground to do that. They can bury and hide critical elements as deep as they want, deeper than the biggest B-whatever can reach, but they can't develop, perfect, build and ship their wares w/o ports, rail, food, housing, and electricity. Leave the nation-building (rebuilding), if any, to the Chinese or the ROKs, take your pick. I have every confidence in our ABM programs (truly do) but I think that threat's amply deterred by the Trident/Minuteman force. It's the non-state actor with a single weapon that keeps me up at night. I simply wish the will and leadership existed to draw a line in the sand and treat nuc weapons development as a causus belli. Iraq was definately the softest target back in 2003, but I don't think that should've made them first. SJS, thank you for your thoughts. I by no means meant to imply that we could precision-strike our way out of this one (though we might have been able to do so back in 1994, before a certain ex-president got involved). Rather would prefer use ability to make NK into something less than a nation-state generally, and we need neither nuclear weapons nor boots on the ground to do that. They can bury and hide critical elements as deep as they want, deeper than the biggest B-whatever can reach, but they can’t develop, perfect, build and ship their wares w/o ports, rail, food, housing, and electricity. Leave the nation-building (rebuilding), if any, to the Chinese or the ROKs, take your pick.

I have every confidence in our ABM programs (truly do) but I think that threat’s amply deterred by the Trident/Minuteman force. It’s the non-state actor with a single weapon that keeps me up at night. I simply wish the will and leadership existed to draw a line in the sand and treat nuc weapons development as a causus belli.

Iraq was definately the softest target back in 2003, but I don’t think that should’ve made them first.

]]> By: badbob http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/comment-page-1/#comment-17918 badbob Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:20:12 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/#comment-17918 DD, Taking Short Rounds's (I like it! Goes along with ol'beady eyes and the Cheetos Bandito) piece o'real estate would be a major effort. With or without allies. It would be a nose to nose, symmetric battlefield on tough terrain in a most inhospitable climate..Our forces will win of course, but these folks know how to fight. Bloody. Who out there has the stomach for it now? Personally, I don't think we're up to it right now (Iraq or no Iraq Skippy) and I don't see our own population wanting us to make it glass....yet. For sure he's a carbunkle in a bad place, that itches from time to time, but we don't need surgery yet. Speaking of Short Round I wonder what his legacy will be when he visits his ancestors. Does he have someone to turn Mordor over to when he's gone? Is that a time to look forward to? re "I can? DD,

Taking Short Rounds’s (I like it! Goes along with ol’beady eyes and the Cheetos Bandito) piece o’real estate would be a major effort. With or without allies. It would be a nose to nose, symmetric battlefield on tough terrain in a most inhospitable climate..Our forces will win of course, but these folks know how to fight. Bloody. Who out there has the stomach for it now?

Personally, I don’t think we’re up to it right now (Iraq or no Iraq Skippy) and I don’t see our own population wanting us to make it glass….yet.

For sure he’s a carbunkle in a bad place, that itches from time to time, but we don’t need surgery yet. Speaking of Short Round I wonder what his legacy will be when he visits his ancestors. Does he have someone to turn Mordor over to when he’s gone? Is that a time to look forward to?

re “I can?

]]> By: badbob http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/comment-page-1/#comment-409506 badbob Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:20:12 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/#comment-409506 DD, Taking Short Rounds's (I like it! Goes along with ol'beady eyes and the Cheetos Bandito) piece o'real estate would be a major effort. With or without allies. It would be a nose to nose, symmetric battlefield on tough terrain in a most inhospitable climate..Our forces will win of course, but these folks know how to fight. Bloody. Who out there has the stomach for it now? Personally, I don't think we're up to it right now (Iraq or no Iraq Skippy) and I don't see our own population wanting us to make it glass....yet. For sure he's a carbunkle in a bad place, that itches from time to time, but we don't need surgery yet. Speaking of Short Round I wonder what his legacy will be when he visits his ancestors. Does he have someone to turn Mordor over to when he's gone? Is that a time to look forward to? re "I can’t understand why we picked them first and not these guys.." Please don't forget those were mainly Sunni Arab Saudis on those airliners 9-11....not agents of Short Round...yet. B2 DD,

Taking Short Rounds’s (I like it! Goes along with ol’beady eyes and the Cheetos Bandito) piece o’real estate would be a major effort. With or without allies. It would be a nose to nose, symmetric battlefield on tough terrain in a most inhospitable climate..Our forces will win of course, but these folks know how to fight. Bloody. Who out there has the stomach for it now?

Personally, I don’t think we’re up to it right now (Iraq or no Iraq Skippy) and I don’t see our own population wanting us to make it glass….yet.

For sure he’s a carbunkle in a bad place, that itches from time to time, but we don’t need surgery yet. Speaking of Short Round I wonder what his legacy will be when he visits his ancestors. Does he have someone to turn Mordor over to when he’s gone? Is that a time to look forward to?

re “I can’t understand why we picked them first and not these guys..”

Please don’t forget those were mainly Sunni Arab Saudis on those airliners 9-11….not agents of Short Round…yet.

B2

]]> By: Steeljaw Scribe http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/comment-page-1/#comment-17899 Steeljaw Scribe Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:49:24 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/#comment-17899 DD: Frankly, on a relative scale the WMD in Iraq, in theory, was to have been easier to find/deal with than in nK(where they have taken the art of burying/hiding things to a new level). I pass that along as one who was very much involved with the USNCR verification process post Desert Storm through the mid-90's. Even given the above, it was a b*tch trying to track down all the elements of Sadam's nuclear ambitions. I think containment may not be such a bad idea providing we get the Chinese to honestly play along and exert pressure from their end. Don't forget, we have a capability that will be very capable in defending the US against at least one major form of delivery,IR/ICBM, and are building up capability in theater vs MRBM. By no means a comprehensive review -- just some add'l food for thought... -SJS DD: Frankly, on a relative scale the WMD in Iraq, in theory, was to have been easier to find/deal with than in nK(where they have taken the art of burying/hiding things to a new level). I pass that along as one who was very much involved with the USNCR verification process post Desert Storm through the mid-90′s. Even given the above, it was a b*tch trying to track down all the elements of Sadam’s nuclear ambitions.

I think containment may not be such a bad idea providing we get the Chinese to honestly play along and exert pressure from their end. Don’t forget, we have a capability that will be very capable in defending the US against at least one major form of delivery,IR/ICBM, and are building up capability in theater vs MRBM.

By no means a comprehensive review — just some add’l food for thought…
-SJS

]]> By: Diplopius Disqualificata http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/comment-page-1/#comment-17893 Diplopius Disqualificata Fri, 06 Oct 2006 13:54:24 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/2006/10/05/norks-with-nukes/#comment-17893 Lex- Your "bad choice" isn't really a choice at all...the Pakistani experience shows that it's impossible to prevent a 3rd world country from proliferating. I think your defense of OIF on the grounds of WMD knowledge then available shows that you're sympathetic to the "One Percent Doctrine" that the magnitudes of WMD threats requires decisionmakers to treat low probabilities as certainties. So, I'm surprised to see you advocating for containment in the NORK case. I actually think its a good idea, too, and why I think we should have acted on NORK, then Iran, then Iraq -- and not the reverse order that we seem to have pursued. What the NORKs have, they sell. Even a rationally actor in Pyongyang might not be deterred from letting go of a few devices for a few billion dollars and, when oil reaches $100 a bbl I'm not sure we can rule out non-state actors from coming up with that kind of coin. Not sure we can make the requisite credible threat of certain nuclear retailiation under such circumstances (Short Round might truly believe that the package wouldn't have a return address). You can't deter proliferation, you can't prevent proliferation--you can only attrit it. And, that's not good enough. I work 300 meters from the White House. I don't give a rats ass about how many "peninsular lives" it costs to disarm the NORKs, what the Chinese think about it, or what types of hardware or tactics we have to use to achieve it--up to and including doing the entire job from 30,000 feet and with every weapon in the arsenal. I think that might have a salutary effect on the proliferative choices of the final member of the Axis of Evil. If WMD was the justification for OIF, I can't understand why we picked them first and not these guys. Lex- Your “bad choice” isn’t really a choice at all…the Pakistani experience shows that it’s impossible to prevent a 3rd world country from proliferating. I think your defense of OIF on the grounds of WMD knowledge then available shows that you’re sympathetic to the “One Percent Doctrine” that the magnitudes of WMD threats requires decisionmakers to treat low probabilities as certainties. So, I’m surprised to see you advocating for containment in the NORK case.

I actually think its a good idea, too, and why I think we should have acted on NORK, then Iran, then Iraq — and not the reverse order that we seem to have pursued. What the NORKs have, they sell. Even a rationally actor in Pyongyang might not be deterred from letting go of a few devices for a few billion dollars and, when oil reaches $100 a bbl I’m not sure we can rule out non-state actors from coming up with that kind of coin. Not sure we can make the requisite credible threat of certain nuclear retailiation under such circumstances (Short Round might truly believe that the package wouldn’t have a return address). You can’t deter proliferation, you can’t prevent proliferation–you can only attrit it.

And, that’s not good enough. I work 300 meters from the White House. I don’t give a rats ass about how many “peninsular lives” it costs to disarm the NORKs, what the Chinese think about it, or what types of hardware or tactics we have to use to achieve it–up to and including doing the entire job from 30,000 feet and with every weapon in the arsenal. I think that might have a salutary effect on the proliferative choices of the final member of the Axis of Evil.

If WMD was the justification for OIF, I can’t understand why we picked them first and not these guys.

]]>