Nuke Pyongyang, Explained

But not by me. Check out Daniel Starr’s post on the topic here.

If all else fails:

1. Blockade North Korean waters
2. Mine one North Korean harbor
3. Cut North Korea’s oil pipeline
4. Drop one bomb on a North Korean railway junction;
4. Enforce a no-fly zone over a small rural sector of North Korea
5. Fly in an “inspection team” to examine or destroy a single site somewhere in North Korea.

Hmmmmmmm……………

Also, it appears that some South Koreans have been reading my musings on this issue and are pissed, as can clearly be seen by this picture of a recent protest:

(Y’know how I just promised not to post until I got to Japan? Well I lied! It’s called wireless at the airport. God I love the 21st century.)

About Curzon

Lord George Nathaniel Curzon (1859 - 1925) entered the British House of Commons as a Conservative MP in 1886, where he served as undersecretary of India and Foreign Affairs. He was appointed Viceroy of India at the turn of the 20th century where he delineated the North West Frontier Province, ordered a military expedition to Tibet, and unsuccessfully tried to partition the province of Bengal during his six-year tenure. Curzon served as Leader of the House of Lords in Prime Minister Lloyd George's War Cabinet and became Foreign Secretary in January 1919, where his most famous act was the drawing of the Curzon Line between a new Polish state and Russia. His publications include Russia in Central Asia (1889) and Persia and the Persian Question (1892). In real life, "Curzon" is a US citizen from the East Coast who has been a financial analyst, freelance translator, and university professor; he is currently on assignment in Tokyo.
This entry was posted in Nuclear, Orient and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Nuke Pyongyang, Explained

  1. Dan says:

    “Car accidents” (like the unfortunate one that injured Kim’s daughter) and “train accidents” (kaboom!) may be better than trying to take out the infrastructure. If the Norks will not fight without Kim, why bother fighting the Korks at all? Kill Kim:

    And yes, Good Sir, \/\/1+31355 +0×5!!!111 wot wot!

  2. IJ says:

    From the original posting, Nuke Pnongyang, Reloaded: “Considering the threat we face with an insane rogue nation with just enough nukes to destroy the world as we know it, preemptive strikes are not a consideration we should ignore.”

    It isn’t clear exactly who should adjudicate the ‘threat’.

    Whatever the final decision anyway, the penalty of economic sanctions is unlikely. It was reported this week that ‘Chinese rule out sanctions on North Korea’: >China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman. . . rejected suggestions that China should reduce oil or food shipments to North Korea, calling those part of its “normal trade” with its Communist neighbor that should be separated from the nuclear problem. . . “We oppose trying to address the problem through strong-arm tactics.”

  3. reelcobra says:

    I think the key is China and the upcoming Olympics. Not that we should pull a Jimmy Carter and boycott, but China has a lot riding on looking like it is a normal country, as opposed to the communist cesspool it really is.

    Without China propping it up, NK topples in a month max.

    We need to work China hard.

  4. Dan says:

    Without China propping it up, NK topples in a month max.

    The Norks (the Kim regime, at least) are quite willing to watch their people suffer and starve while the regime survives.

    Without the Chinese not assassination the Kim dynasty, NK topples in a month max.

  5. IJ says:

    Interesting comment, reelcobra. It will be difficult for the US administration to get many nations to consider boycotting the Beijing Olympics in 2008, because of the escalating trading and investment ties that China has around the world. It was difficult enough assembling a posse for Iraq – and many of these nations became disillusioned.

    Multilateral diplomacy with North Korea, led by the UN, is always another option.

  6. reelcobra says:

    I’m not calling for a boycott or even the threat of a boycott, because Bush has established that we don’t bluff. We play for keeps.

    I’m saying that we need to use true American leverage, in the form of economic and public relations.

    We should have Condi talking about this in press conferences: North Korea’s autonomy is a fiction.

    We need China to work on this. Since my earlier post today, China had the ba*ls to call on us to reopen talks.

    I don’t think so.

  7. Joe says:

    Lasers, man, this is why we need lasers.

  8. Pingback: Simon World

  9. Pingback: tdaxp