Lot’s of people advocate the reunification of China. Which invariably means that Taiwan just give up and be absorbed into the PRC. I think things should remain as they are: two sovreign nations. Besides, I doubt a “Chinese Reunification” would be realistic anytime this side of 2050.

To be honest, I was just mad about the Yokota incident and hoped that would be the straw that broke the camel’s back. I’m still kind of ambivalent about the whole thing.

I liked the thing on the Marmot like a month ago where some guy was saying instead of placating SK we need to go to China and see what they require in concessions to stop supporting the North. Of course that would probably be something along the lines of “stop supporting Taiwan” but Taiwan holds no special place in my heart.

While I commend you for addressing the situation and at least suggesting a plan of action or solution to the problem with the DPRK, I have trouble in advocating preemptive use of nuclear weapons. I agree with you in the sense that war with NK is inevitable, but perhaps it can be done so quickly and effectively so as to reduce friendly and civilian casualties.

North Korea (unlike Iraq) is a type of enemy that our military was designed to face due to the Cold War. Likewise, war with NK would be a type of war in which our military would excel. In Iraq, we face an unconventional enemy and general insugency, something our military wasn’t really ‘destined’ to experience. There is something to be said about nuclear weapons, and I favor their existence primarily as a deterrent, and secondly as a devastatingly powerful retaliatory weapon. I agree with Adamu that the use of a nuclear weapon (even a “small” one) carries such a psychological impact that the US would lose moral authority. The other problem is that there are far too many targets that would need to be taken out simultaneously in the first strike to ensure that an extremely pissed off KJI (or loyalist General) wouldn’t have a nuclear strike capability himself.

To avail these dilemmas, I propose that any first-strike taken against NK be made with a combination of Air-Force delivered smart (yet conventional) munitions and special ops units on the ground. The former would likely be F-117s, B-2s, or B-1s (all of which are stealth aircraft of some degree) flying from Guam or Okinawa and deliever their smart ordinances to the (relatively) weaker nuclear sites and command centers. Special Operations (SOCOM, Delta Force, etc.) could be inserted via a HALO jump or the like to perform demolition to the more heavily armored missle sites in which even a “bunker buster” bomb would be useless. They could also be covered and deployed by Marine helicopters based from the Navy’s LHD warships (built by the naval shipyard my father works at!). Meanwhile, the entire elite ground force would be covered by F-14s and F-18s delievering HARM anti-radar missles to the SAM sites and then destroying the artillery threatening Seoul. The entire operation could realistically happen in a matter of a few hours, rendering the DPRK unable to threaten anybody outside of theater. A conventional war could then ensue “safely”. I’ll let you, Curzon – more of a political expert than I – to worry about fueling a revolution or organized dissent inside NK, as well as the geopolitical ramifications of the US starting another war.

Again, actual nuclear war is too terrible to imagine. The best policy would be to first disable the enemy’s nuclear capability, especially considering that Kim Jong Il doesn’t exactly strike me as a rational (or mentally stable) fellow. And that should be done without resorting to nuclear weapons, conventionals can do the job with much less civilian loss of life.

Maybe then Korea can replace their anti-Japanese national holidays with a huge Korean Unification festival which would, of course, include the North Korean Arirang festival, complete with all 100,000 dancers.