War is not to see who is right, but to see who is left. Take
note of that before thinking of war.
Let me deal with a few things I read:
1) Nuking N. Korea into a
glass carpark.
A VERY NOT GOOD IDEA. Not only it is cruelty and
will be condemned by the entire world, but nukes will have severe
enviromental, geo-political and humanitarian complications,
especially for US close ally, South Korea,
Heck, becuase of the A-bombs dropped in 1945, everyone agreed to a
certain extent that nuclear weapons cannot be used in conventional
war. Otherwise, Vietnam would have been a smothering crater during
the Vietnam war.
Anyone who thinks it is easy to drop a nuclear warhead without
reprecussions needs to read more about what happened to the people
that survived the blast in Hiroshima and Nagasaki; What happens
after nuclear bombs detonate; What happens to the country that can
have the heart to commit such an act of terror.
And also if 1 or 5 nukes don't ensure the removal of all of N.Korea
nuclear capabilities, it most likely safe to say bye-bye to US West
Coast.
2) The very idea of
attacking N. Korea
Its a safe bet that US military is stretched to its limit with the
Iraq war. Sure, they got a few million reserved, but financially,
it is not profitable. Instead US would more likely sell weapons to
Japan and allow Japan to build up a military to combat
N.Korea.
BUT China and Russia both will not be happy. (Chinese-Jap relations
are pretty sour, and Russia won't like bombs going off) S.Korea may
not be happy either, REMEMBER that families in S. Korea and N.Korea
are still separated, and it will take a few more generations to
purify the population.
Plus, N. Korea have no oil, Russia is the ppl with oil, deep in the
Siberian desert, and tons of nukes that were developed during the
cold war.
And you got the Pacific Ocean, and the closest military base is
Hawaii (or Alaska). The most US can do is shell and bomb the sh*t
out of N. Korea, and say bye-bye to the West coast.
3) Prospekt
USA
I personally am totally against war of any kind. USA flaunts its
power by taking Afganistan and Iraq in a matter of weeks. But USA
is having a hard time keeping the resistance down. Terror attacks
risen since then.
The first reason Mr. Bush gave is that Saddam is hiding WMDs, and
is asking him to disarm something Saddam doesn't have in the first
place, if you are talking about nukes btw, since the most he got is
biological weapons. US would attacked Iraq anyway even if Saddam
did disarm non-existant WMDs, because of the oil, glorious
oil.
After sometime, no WMDs, so Mr. Bush declared Saddam as an insane,
cruel dictator. We all can say he is, but now Iraqis have to fear
for their lives still.
And an insult to injury, Bush applies 'damage control' by saying
America is promoting Democracy in the Middle East, with Tanks! War
justified!
Multiply by annual tropical storms damaging infrastructure and the
recontruction after Katrina, one would wonder where did Bush pull
out so much money from, and still is able to mantain the military
budget. My theory is that he is pulling money from scientific
progress, education and health to fund the war.
In summary, it is too costly to wage another war. USA have too much
to lose when it already is 'bleeding like mad'. N. Korea has little
to lose however, and would gladly test the effects of a nuclear
bomb detonating in downtown San Francisco if it has a reason to
retaliate.
So to answer topic: Why USA doesn't attack N. Korea:
Because Bush haven't got enough money and a not good enough reason
to attack N. Korea.
Apologies for all spelling error, I drank too much coffee.[/b]
