Centerfield

You old enough to have a beer? If so, this former Ole [ed. note, from the good college in Northfield] would like to buy you one. With Dayton leaving, we have work to do.

Though as any Northfieldian knows, Carls aren't exactly...stringent?...when it comes to drinking age, I personally don't drink, and I'm only 18 anyway. But thanks for the offer, anyway!

[ed. note: Only an Olie would make the mistake of calling St. Olaf the "good college" in Northfield. Go Knights!]

To others who don't know, Wellstone was a Carleton professor before he got on a green bus and drove around the state in an unlikely bid for the Senate. Carleton is like the Berkeley of MN.

No true Minnesotan can pass up talking about their state, so I'll take my turn, commenting (sort of) on Wellstone:

A friend of mine and I were driving to Iowa City to visit my uncle, and driving down 35 we drove right next to Wellstone's party bus for quite some time. We weren't able to see him, but there was no mistaking the bus.

Welcome, David. When I noted your college email address, I thought "college student", but then I read your blog and thought "well no, maybe college professor".

You're way to mature as a writer and political commentator to be 18.

In any event, we're very glad to have you here.

William,

Whatever gave you the idea that professors are more mature than their students? I can assure you that's all too often a mistaken assumption. :-)

David;
Welcome. My response to this issue is the same a previous post regarding Iran and what to do. Damned if you do; damned if you don't. In addition, its clear by N. Korea's insistence in only dealing with us that Kim is trying to blackmail the US.

In addition, its clear by N. Korea's insistence in only dealing with us that Kim is trying to blackmail the US.

Hey, it worked before. Clinton gave him everything he wanted.

Ah...you're right William. As of today, I'm 19. And I plan on becoming a Professor one day. So good guesses all around.

David, have I misread your post or am I correct in saying that you believe it is our (U.S) fault (e.g. we are responsible) that the North Korean Govt. possesses nuclear weapons? They wouldn't have produced them had we not strengthed our missle defenses?

You also state that the human rights abuses demand "decisiveness and action." Said decisiveness and action is to be in the form of: "There must be a strong statement..."

Congratulations on your 19th birthday. I'd say it's fairly obvious.

You want the US of A to something about NK? I thought all of you chickendoves wanted peace and love all around. How about you drop out of that loser college and join the military.

David,

Corellation(sp) is not causality. You can argue that if we abandoned our defence shield that there would be an acceleration to take advantage of a window of opportunity. For that matter there is actually no proof that they actually accelerated (oh that we actually could monitor their respective programs and know how far along they are).

I would argue that each of the regimes would have continued irrespective of our policy. Iran, because it is interested in enhancing local influence, and NK because they believe that since they extorted the Clinton Administration that they can do it again (if not this administration then the next).

In the case of NK I believe that the strategy of ignoring them might be correct since a first nuke strike on their part simply ends their existance. Iran on the other hand may try using conventional forces backed by the threat of nuclear retaliation to further regional aims.

I'm confused. Saddam Hussein was a brutal oppressor of human rights but it was a bad thing to go after him? But KJI we should go after because he's an oppressor of human rights? Or is it because he has the bomb?

We should go after him how? Building a missile defense shield is, to you, obviously the wrong thing to do, it'll only make him mad *he's already mad*. I live in Arizona. By some estimates his (untested) ICBMs can reach as far as Phoenix - not to mention the entire west coast. Do I want a missile defense shield? What would you think if you lived a button-push from a madman away from oblivion?

Will it work? Who knows? But amongst that "who" is Mr. Il. That's the point.

"There must be a strong statement that government sponsored brutality is not and will not be tolerated by any nation, anywhere, at any time. Morality demands it."

Do you mean a strong verbal statement, or making a strong statement through actions. If so, what kind of action do you mean.

I support humanitarian intervention, but most UN members don't. So the politics are very difficult.

Here's an excellent book that you should check out: A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, Samantha Power

AMAZON link

So can't we just ignore them? NK seems to be in a downward financial spiral. I don't think we need to defeat them, just to wait until they go broke. Without international support, NK will implode given time.

Strong-arming China to assist us by cutting the umbilical would be the most expedient solution given the current situation; but probably wholly unrealistic (especially now that the EU seems intent on lifting the arms embargo: China would probably dump us and snuggle up to Europe).

The only catch (and it is a big catch) is that Il may actually be crazy enough to coerce support out of NK's neighbors like Japan and SK with the nukes.

Also, I don't think we have to worry about the long range missile threat. He knows that Japan may as well be US soil, and it's a lot easier to hit.

Geez...I've been taking a lot of flak for the "strong statement" rhetoric. I thought saying that I DIDN'T mean it in the UN resolution sense would get the meaning across, but clearly no. To be clear: I mean it in the M-16 and cruise missiles sense, not "The US is very disturbed by North Korean activities..blah blah" sense.

There's also a lot of presumption about my prior policy beliefs. One commenter assumed I opposed the Iraq war (I didn't--and don't). Another (politely, to be fair) inquired about whether I am saying that it is our "fault" that NK has nukes. I think "fault" is putting it too simplistically--North Korea is the blameworthy party here. However, I do stand by my statement that US policies have made the problem worse than it could have been. Pseudo-aggressive postures are the worst possible in this case. Either negotiate with the regime or bomb it out of existance (personally, I favor the latter). Maybe if there was proof that the ABM system would work, it would be a fair trade, but it doesn't and isn't. Not only does the system constantly fail, but it is designed to stop land-based attacks from Russia. The NKers, by contrast, are pursuing sub-based technology which would sidestep even a working ABM system. Oopsie.

And finally, Samantha Power is an awesome author. I recommend her book heartily as well (though I've only managed to read half of it before it was due at the Library again...classes)