North Korea, wrong attitude

랴연

Right, heres a different opinion from the media opinion you've probably all been listening to.

Why have things gotten so bad ?

Two reasons, George Bush and Lee Myung-bak.

Before George came to power the North and the South were making great strides towards reconcilation. The President of the South had visited the North, they had formed cross-border initiatives, they had both declared a desire for peaceful reunification.

The North decided to experiment with capitalism in certain areas and tourism started to the North for the first time in 40 years even allowing Americans and South Koreans into the country.

Then George came into office, refused point blank to have any kind of discussions with them until they allowed nuclear inspectors etc into the country and then the North saw what the USA did in Afghanistan and Iraq and they genuinely got very worried about it happening to them. George put them on a list with Iraq for examplem "Axis of evil".

This prompted them to have a more agressive attitude towards the US and really started desperately developing nukes as they believe its the only thing that will stop them been invaded.

But things were still relatively "OK" between the North and the South, they still experimented with capitalism and tourism was opening up more and more. Relations were actually better then ever. The North and the South governments even had an agreement to open up a University togeather in the North that would have South students attend.

In 2006 even after the nuclear test, things were still "OK". The South Korean president, Mr Roh Moo-Hyun (RIP), travelled to Pyongyang and had a very formal reception from the North Korean leaders.

The general feelings were good.

Then the new president, Lee Myung-bak, came into office and immediately took a George Bush attitude to the North. He broke off talks and food aid and refused to meet with the Norths leaders until they stopped their nuclear program.

Lee Myung-bak has actually done everything in his power to provoke a response from the North since he took office.

He is the polar opposite of the former president, Mr Roh Moo-Hyun (RIP).

Basically Lee Myung-Bak is the physical representation of everything the North hate about the South. Hes extremely capitalist (wants to undue many leftist changes implemented by his predecessor including lowering the minimum wage (which is already pathetic)). He is very conservative and very much represents the wealthy big business owners, himself being a former CEO of Hyundai. The icing on the cake is that he is extremely pro-American, wanting to implement new changes to the system using no more reasoning then its "what the americans do so it must be good". Oh and hes very christian and has been giving christian churches favours over the Buddhists which hasn't gone down well north or south.

This whole situation is from the USA and SK's cold war style attitude to the North.

The North won't stop their nuclear program unless the USA and the South talk to them (and offer incentives) and the USA and the South won't talk to the North until they stop their nuclear program.

Its a catch 22, everyone knows it but noone wants to be the first to put out the hand.

I'm surprised with Obama's attitude here tbh, as a simple agreement to meet and talk would go a long way to defuse the situation.

Mal-Adjusted

랴연 wrote: »

The North won't stop their nuclear program unless the USA and the South talk to them (and offer incentives) and the USA and the South won't talk to the North until they stop their nuclear program.

Its a catch 22, everyone knows it but noone wants to be the first to put out the hand.

i'm sad to say this is probably the case. what's left to be seen is...is this the real deal and they're chancing their arn seeing how much they can get away with, or is North Korea just looking for incentives

b12mearse

If it were that simple then why would north korea be testing nuclear weapons? north korea is planning to invade south korea. its as simple as that. they want to provoke a war so there response will look as a defensive messure. north korea can't stand south koreas existance. they see it as an extension of u.s. imperialism.

랴연

Here is some of the opinions from people here. Please note that the two South Koreans are more concerned about their former president and don't really see war as likely. Many people here also blame the US and the current South Korean governments attitude towards the North as the cause of this situation.


HA SU-DONG, ENGINEER, 32, SUNGNAM CITY, SOUTH KOREA



I don't really care about North Korea's actions. They are just trying to get attention from the outside world.
But the South Korean government is in chaos now because our former president killed himself. I wonder if North Korea took advantage of this moment of chaos to play power games.
That's why I don't think they will launch a nuclear weapon right now. It is posturing.
But this could be very dangerous. Nobody really knows what is going on with Kim Jong-il. We hear that the government there is changing and this is their way of showing that they are still strong.
I'm not afraid but I'm concerned. This South Korean government doesn't know about North Korea. It's better to know North Korea than to ignore it.
But now people here are also very concerned about the death of our former president.



SK CHUNG, MARKETING EXECUTIVE, 36, SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA


I'm not at all worried. But I'm angry at their childish behaviour.
My view is that North Korea is trying to get the attention of the US. This is their way of getting attention.
It is a dangerous thing but Korean people don't care about this. Nobody is really worried about a war between the North and South happening again.
Reunification is our ultimate aim. North Koreans also want this reunification but their way of going about things is different.
Kim Jong-il has run their government for such a long time and now he might hand some power onto his son. Even though we are not scared, we know this is an unpredictable place.



DU YUPING, DOCTOR, 52, BEIJING, CHINA



I know North Korea. I worked with North Korea in the field of health for 10 years.
To be very frank, I don't know why they launched missiles and conducted nuclear tests again. I think neighbouring countries have mishandled the situation with them. This is a mistake.
South Korea has taken a tough position with regard to the North. The Chinese give a little aid and the US gives very little too. The country is so poor.
It wants to make a big noise to draw attention from other countries. They are so poor and life is so hard in North Korea and that is why I think they try and sell the message to their people that their government is strong and can conduct nuclear tests.
I don't feel threatened. The Chinese are not so worried. The Chinese government should work with South Korea and the US to tell North Korea what we want and what we can do for them.
We don't want to remove the regime. We want stable government [and] economic development. That is how we must handle this.



HANNY GENG, DOCTOR, SHANGHAI, CHINA



I don't like the North Korean leader. Some Chinese view North Korea as a rogue state. I think the Chinese government has also said that it is resolutely against the test. As an ordinary Chinese man I don't think this is a good way to conduct things.
I don't trust Kim Jong-il. I never trusted him. North Koreans are living in a very poor situation.
With these actions, North Korea is holding China hostage. It wants to push China into a very difficult situation. I don't think North Korea's leader can be trusted and that worries me.
Historically, China as had a strong relationship with North Korea but in my view most Chinese don't like this.

랴연

b12mearse wrote: »

If it were that simple then why would north korea be testing nuclear weapons?

I just told you why.

1. Posturing
2. As a threat to use against possible invasion by the US.
3. To gain incentives through the use of threats.

North Korea is genuinely scared that they will end up like Iraq and honestly who can blame them ? They see their only option as having a strong military and WMD as measures against the US. The US would be very unlikely to invade a nuclear power.

north korea is planning to invade south korea.

Extremely unlikely. This is what most people not living here don't understand, even now in the middle of all this, the relationship between the North and South is like two brothers arguing. Last week the North broadcast their condolences for the death of the South's former President.

Manic Moran

And this week the North declared it would return to a state of active war with the South.

Brothers they may be, but it wouldn't be the first time one brother has killed another.

NTM

랴연

Manic Moran wrote: »

And this week the North declared it would return to a state of active war with the South.

Word play. They said they were no longer bound by the armistice, technically they have always been at war.

Have you studied the history much ? The US and Russia have a lot to answer for in splitting this country and causing so many problems here.

Brothers they may be, but it wouldn't be the first time one brother has killed another.

Its also not the first time the North has acted like this. My wife is so used to it that if the North weren't threatening something it would be unusual.

Manic Moran

The US and Russia have a lot to answer for in splitting this country and causing so many problems here.

And your solution to this is? It's water under the bridge, the current fact remains that the country is split, and the two sides are not on the best of terms.

My wife is so used to it that if the North weren't threatening something it would be unusual.

Fair point. Maybe it's time to call their bluff.

NTM

InFront

Very interesting to get your p.o.v 랴연

In terms of Lee Myung-bak's contribution to the escalade in tensions, do you think this is really as significant ,or moreso, than the ailing health of Kim Jong-il?
I kind of got the impression it was the latter which has brought about this shift?

I am going to make a concerted effort to read up some more material on this conflict. The divided country is like the vestigial appendix of the cold war imo, so would be quite fascinating to get a better insight into it in light of its current prominence.
Anybody know any worthwhile reading?

랴연

Manic Moran wrote: »

And your solution to this is?

What do you mean ? I was just pointing out a historical fact, theres no problem or solution. Its finished.

But while you mention it, the US could apologise for their role in splitting the country and forcing a capitalist dictatorship on the South Korean people, run by an American puppet president who was so pro-western society he was anti-Korean.

They could also change their policy to actually take into account that Seoul is in the dangerzone. Their policy at the moment is extremely confrontationalist and they try to make the SK government act the same. Its very easy to act like that when your country isn't in the firing line.

It's water under the bridge, the current fact remains that the country is split, and the two sides are not on the best of terms.

They should still apologise for a lot of their actions in the past.

Fair point. Maybe it's time to call their bluff.

I said it was unlikely not impossible. The North will bite if they are pushed too far, out of necessity if nothing else.

랴연

InFront wrote: »

Very interesting to get your p.o.v 랴연

In terms of Lee Myung-bak's contribution to the escalade in tensions, do you think this is really as significant ,or moreso, than the ailing health of Kim Jong-il?
I kind of got the impression it was the latter which has brought about this shift?

The escalade in tension is most definately Lee Myung-bak's fault and the change in policy from the South towards the North.

While Kim Jung-Il's health is an issue, I don't believe it would have esculated issues externally. Many people are of the opinion that the ruling elite in the North are sick of the Kim family regime but they also see it as quite impossible to change it because of the cult built up around Kim Il-Sung.

Worship of Kim Il-Sung is like a religion and worship of him is so interconnected to nationalism in the state that they may be inseperable. So whoever takes charge will have to keep this cult going, it would be easier to continue through the family.

Absolutely 100% Lee Myung-bak for the escaluation in tensions. Many people don't realise that even after the 2006 nuclear test relations between the North and South were good.

The President here drove across the border to a reception for him in Pyongyang. The 'sunshine' policy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Policy) was still in full swing and NK was opening up more and more. Until Lee took office that is.

wikipedia wrote:

A longtime opponent of the Sunshine Policy carried out by his predecessors Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun, Lee shifted towards a more aggressive policy on North Korea, promising to provide massive economic assistance but only after North Korea abandoned its suspected nuclear weapons programs. The ultimate goal of the administration regarding inter-Korean relation is based on the "non-nuclear, openness, 3000" plan that entails reciprocity and mutual benefit between the two Koreas in order to achieve economic advancement and bring about happiness among the people living in the Korean peninsula. The current inter-Korean situation is undergoing a massive transitional period. The administration, however, made it clear that it will pursure a more productive policy that eventually would contribute to the peaceful reunification, but only after North Korea gives up its nuclear ambitions and adopt a more open-minded approach. The North Korean government viewed this as confrontational and responded by calling Lee a “traitor” and an “anti-North confrontation advocator”. The North Korean response included the expulsion of South Korean officials from an inter-Korean industrial complex, the launching of naval missiles into the sea, and the deployment of MIGs and army units provocatively close to the DMZ. Domestically, Lee's critics claim his strategy will only serve to antagonize the Kim Jong-il regime and undermine progress towards friendly North Korea-South Korea relations[70]
There are some critics in Korea who argue that inter-Korean relations have been rapidly deteriorating, mainly because the Lee Myung-bak government persisted on differentiating its North Korean policies from those of the former Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun governments, ignoring the agreements previously made at the North-South summit and pursued a hardline policy. [71]
However, Lee claims that there are many other inter-Korean agreements as well which have not been honored and that both Koreas should have frank dialogue with each other to break the stalemate. Lee supports the reunification of Korea, although he believes that political differences between the two Koreas create an enormous obstacle to reunification.

I am going to make a concerted effort to read up some more material on this conflict. The divided country is like the vestigial appendix of the cold war imo, so would be quite fascinating to get a better insight into it in light of its current prominence.
Anybody know any worthwhile reading?

I highly recommend http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Line_(film)

Welcome to North Korea -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ6E3cShcVU

An American soldier defected to North Korea -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZtkHUkZ8Rg

President Roh Moo-Hyun visiting North Korea -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyaquD_fMqM

A state of mind (Excellent documentary on the North and 2 North Korean girls. Really fascinating.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fjj-swHSR8

Friends of Kim documentary (Some mad Spainish guy who is president of an organisation to support the DPRK) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C76HqPaA6kw

bonkey

랴연 wrote: »

Why have things gotten so bad ?
...
I'm surprised with Obama's attitude here tbh, as a simple agreement to meet and talk would go a long way to defuse the situation.

I was just pointing out a historical fact, theres no problem or solution.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you seem to be backing away from your original stance.

You started by saying things are bad, and that there is a situation which can be diffused. You go on to say that there isn't a problem, and therefore there is no solution.

If there is no problem, then why do the US or South Korea need to do anything differently? To do so would only risk creating problems, surely?

It's a weird situation. I don't think there's any way, incentives or otherwise, of stopping NK from having a fair few nukes in the future.

The only people who would ever be able to stop them are the Chinese.

랴연

bonkey wrote: »

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you seem to be backing away from your original stance.

You started by saying things are bad, and that there is a situation which can be diffused. You go on to say that there isn't a problem, and therefore there is no solution.

Sorry for the confusion. In that instance I was talking about the circumstances involving the partition of the country between the US and Soviets and how the US have a lot to answer for for their part in it and their actions before, during and after the Japanese surrender in Korea.

petethebrick

North Korea has no intention of invading South Korea. It's provocative actions over the past two decades especially, are simply part of it's strategy of brinkmanship. Time and time again Pyongyang has won major concessions as a result of this strategy and my opinion is that it is hoping to milk the new US administration both financially and in terms of better guaranteeing the security of the North Korean state.

That said - the game of brinkmanship between NK-US has come dangerously close to exploding before and there is a chance this might actually happen in the future. My main point is that NK does not intend to stage any sort of invasion or attack on it's southern brother. I recently wrote a paper on North Korean strategy if anyone's interested. just PM me.

ilkhanid

랴연 wrote: »

Then George came into office, refused point blank to have any kind of discussions with them until they allowed nuclear inspectors etc into the country and then the North saw what the USA did in Afghanistan and Iraq and they genuinely got very worried about it happening to them. George put them on a list with Iraq for examplem "Axis of evil".

This prompted them to have a more agressive attitude towards the US and really started desperately developing nukes as they believe its the only thing that will stop them been invaded.

.

Excuse me, is it not true that we have a new president in the USA, one who is unlikely to be invading anywhere? Noth Korea is acting as if George Bush is still in the White House. This is obtuse at best.
So..they are frightened of being attacked. Forgive me for being naive and stating the obvious, but if they stopped behaving like insane barbarians, maybe nobody would want to invade them at all, or care a damn about them. So, they want incentives and talks. Why in the world should they be entitled to anything as of right? Even other lunatic regimes manage to mantain a certain standard of behaviour, not hectoring and threatening their neighbours like North Korea does. In the real world, if you keep shouting and yelling "I want, I want, I want...." people ignore you.

petethebrick

ilkhanid wrote: »

In the real world, if you keep shouting and yelling "I want, I want, I want...." people ignore you.

This is not true in the case of North Korea. Time and time again they have made considerable gains from this strategy - from energy supplies to food aid, to diplomatic concessions. The reason they have upped the ante now is that they perceive the Obama administration as weaker (in neo-realist terms) than the previous one and therefore more likely to grant such concessions.

partyguinness

I always ask myself this almost child like question:

Why is ok for the US, UK, Isreal, Pakistan, India, Russia, France to have nuclear weapons but not North Korea?

Getting a nuclear weapon is a sure way of ensuing that you will not be attacked or invaded.

But then again N.Korea is not sitting on any precious resources like, oh I dont know, oil perhaps?

Manic Moran

Basically Lee Myung-Bak is the physical representation of everything the North hate about the South.

This strikes me as the North's problem, not the South's.

Hes extremely capitalist (wants to undue many leftist changes implemented by his predecessor including lowering the minimum wage (which is already pathetic)). He is very conservative and very much represents the wealthy big business owners, himself being a former CEO of Hyundai. The icing on the cake is that he is extremely pro-American, wanting to implement new changes to the system using no more reasoning then its "what the americans do so it must be good". Oh and hes very christian and has been giving christian churches favours over the Buddhists which hasn't gone down well north or south.

Unless I miss my guess, little of this should have been a surprise to the ROK Voter during the elections. Are you sure you want to blame the man, and not the population of the South as a whole?

But then again N.Korea is not sitting on any precious resources like, oh I dont know, oil perhaps?

It's actually quite rich in minerals. As a point of interest, Afghanistan, it's not well known, is potentially one of the richer countries in the world, with, for example, the purest, and some of the largest, copper resources you can find.

NTM

SeanW

@PartyGuinness

US, UK, France, Russia, China
The Big Five are signatories to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, which among other things binds them by International Law, not to use nuclear weapons in a "First nuclear strike" and provides explicit protection for Non Nuclear Weapons States. I'm no fan of most of the Big 5, and the policies of large and/or semi-imperialist government, but I would feel a lot safer even with Mr. Putin with his finger on the red button than that nutcase Kim Jong Il and his brother Mental Lee Il.

That's right: even if a country attacks a NPT compliant nuclear weapons state, the NWS can only reply in kind, so if they are invaded with conventional weaponary they cannot respond with nuclear weapons.

Israel: views about Israel (and by extension its nuclear arsenal) vary wildly from group to group and person to person so this isn't the place to discuss it.

India: Is involved in a Cold War with Pakistan
Pakistan: Is involved in a Cold War with India - but what worries me is that Pakistan is fighting for its survival against Islamofascists :eek: I really would not like to think what's going to happen if the Taliban takes Islamabad.

Getting a nuclear weapon is a sure way of ensuing that you will not be attacked or invaded.

Under the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, a Nuclear Weapons State cannot use atomic weapons to deter conventional attack.

North Korea on the other hand, could use atomic weapons if Mr Il's Ouija board tells him to.

But then again N.Korea is not sitting on any precious resources like, oh I dont know, oil perhaps?

No, but if North Korea makes any of the hostile action it's threatening, I wouldn't have any problem with South Korea, Japan or the U.S. bombing the living crap out of them. Would make the world - maybe even including N. Korea a safer place.

nacho libre

partyguinness wrote: »

I always ask myself this almost child like question:

Why is ok for the US, UK, Isreal, Pakistan, India, Russia, France to have nuclear weapons but not North Korea?

Getting a nuclear weapon is a sure way of ensuing that you will not be attacked or invaded.

But then again N.Korea is not sitting on any precious resources like, oh I dont know, oil perhaps?

it might to do with the mindest of the current leader's late father(Kim Il-sung) and his son, as revealed by a defector during a discussion in 1994
:
In the meeting between Father and son and senior generals there was a discussion about what would happen if there was between North Korea and America

the sycophantic generals: if there was a war with america we would defeat them
Kim Il-sung: What if America were to defeat us

the generals: bemused silence

Kim Jong-il: we would take them with us, afterall what is the world without North Korea.

Kim Il-sung: Nodded his approval

that would indicate both father and son are dangerous megalomaniacs.
with that in mind given Kim Jong-il is on the way out who knows what he might do if provoked.
however, that said i suspect there are Chinese intelligent agents opearting at high levels in the North Korean regime. if so the chances are, those around Kim Jong-il, who like living, will be encouraged to overthrow him if there was real threat of Kim pursuing a course that would ensure their demise. his cronies don't give damn about the citizens but if there own existence is under threat the chances are they'll turn against Kim Jong-il. .

this current situation is great for Obama's critics because Kim Jong-il obviously perceives the current U.S administration as a poodle when it comes to foreign policy compared to that last American Government.

i think both sides will try to save face publicially and the Korean's behind the scenes will end up extracting more concessions from America.

랴연

?

I'm simply stating the fact that the new SK administration is taking an extremely hard-line with the North, ignoring previous agreements by the former administration and thus increasing the tension.

The current situation is as much Bush's and Lee's doing as it is Kims. George started them on the path to nuclear armament and now Lee is continuing it by refusing to talk.

The previous Sunshine policy was working wonders until this administration abandoned it.

랴연

SeanW wrote: »

@PartyGuinness
That's right: even if a country attacks a NPT compliant nuclear weapons state, the NWS can only reply in kind, so if they are invaded with conventional weaponary they cannot respond with nuclear weapons.

Thats grand but not relevant. I stated one of the reasons NK wanted Nukes was as a deterrent to invasion, not as a deterrent to getting nuked.

North Korea on the other hand, could use atomic weapons if Mr Il's Ouija board tells him to.

Its a very wildly held myth that Kim is stupid, insane when in fact everyone who has met him including former Presidents and US administration officials have said the exact opposite.

The man is regarded as actually very intelligent, even by the current South Korean administration.

랴연

nacho libre wrote: »

it might to do with the mindest of the current leader's late father(Kim Il-sung) and his son, as revealed by a defector during a discussion in 1994

................

Kim Jong-il: we would take them with us, afterall what is the world without North Korea.

Kim Il-sung: Nodded his approval

I highly doubt that. It sounds like the usual rubbish you hear from tabloids in the US and Europe. Source please ?

partyguinness

partyguinness wrote: »

I always ask myself this almost child like question:

Why is ok for the US, UK, Isreal, Pakistan, India, Russia, France to have nuclear weapons but not North Korea?

Getting a nuclear weapon is a sure way of ensuing that you will not be attacked or invaded.

But then again N.Korea is not sitting on any precious resources like, oh I dont know, oil perhaps?

My tongue was firmly in my cheek there...

Despite all the international agreements and norms, its fairly safe to say that having nuclear weapons is sure way of preventing any form of attack or invasion or it makes another country think 2 about it..nuclear or convention. Shall we call it an implicit understanding/reality.

nacho libre

랴연 wrote: »

I highly doubt that. It sounds like the usual rubbish you hear from tabloids in the US and Europe. Source please ?

I read it in the Daily Telegraph.

the_syco

nacho libre wrote: »

if so the chances are, those around Kim Jong-il, who like living, will be encouraged to overthrow him if there was real threat of Kim pursuing a course that would ensure their demise. his cronies don't give damn about the citizens but if there own existence is under threat the chances are they'll turn against Kim Jong-il. .

If he has half a brain, the president will have a look-a-like or nine. Kill the wrong one, your family dies, then you die. He should have an extremely loyal personal army, many who probably see him as a god-type figure.

Because of this, I doubt he'll be killed off anytime quickly. Also, I doubt the Chinese would be stupid enough to piss off a neighbour who can make nukes, can fire long range rockets, by trying to kill him.

nacho libre wrote: »

that would indicate both father and son are dangerous megalomaniacs.

If the son said anything other than what was expected of him, he'd suffer an accident, or someone else would have been picked to replace the father. He may have meant every word, or he could be biding his time.

Riddle101

To be honest it's everyone involved in this debacle's fault. America, South Korea and North Korea have basically caused havoc with their stupid arguments. The problem concerning the Americans is that, they simply don't understand Korea. They think that sending a couple thousand soldiers to South Korea and threatening sanctions to N.K is really going to defuse the situation, in actual fact it's just making it worse because N.K are becoming more hostile towards America. As for South Korea and North Korea, well it's just like the Sinn Fein and DUP back during the troubles. Neither side agrees with the other side and in doing so they constanly agrue. But of course then you also have their history which i'm sure causes a lot of resentment between the two countries, kind've like the resentment Irish and British people feel. All in all, what the two sides are doing is completely wrong and if history has thought us anything, it's that you can't just expect everything to be nice and happy when you've thousands of weapons backng you up. N.K, S.K and America need to keep negotiations going. They need to put away the guns and talk things through. I propose that there should be a sitting between N.K, S.K, America, and a neutral country should play the mediator in the meeting. Although i'm not sure who would be the right candidate.

랴연

nacho libre wrote: »

I read it in the Daily Telegraph.

Defectors have proven to have false claims before, e.g > claiming to know more then they do. It makes money for them. Many of them have a very hard time when they defect, they are completely incapable of taking care of themselves, coming from a communist country to a capitalist one,especially one as capitalist as South Korea can be a huge shock.

I'm not saying its definitely false because I don't know, but I live in Korea and I've done enough research on the subject to know that what you quoted doesn't sound even similar to anything I've heard before.

ilkhanid

"To be honest it's everyone involved in this debacle's fault. "

Sorry, but I don't buy that "everybody's fault" view. North Korea constantly behaves in an outrageous manner, but we keep hearing that allowances should be made for it. Why exactly? We hear above about South Korea "provoking" the North, by going back on trade agreements, calling for sanctions, abandoning the "sunshine" policy. In the normal course of things civilized nations engage in relations, even of hostility within a certain framework of-at times forced-politeness. But to start threatening war at every slight, to threaten its neighbour with war and destruction, as NK does constantly is beyond the limits. What about North Koreas provocations? Over the years it has engaged in the most appalling conduct against its neighbours;placing bombs on airliners,infiltrating commandos into South Korea and kidnapping citizens of Japan, to name only three. Did the South or Japan threaten North Korea with imminent destruction. No, they did not, but the reaction of the North is insanely disproportionate to any act directed against it.
So, are we supposed to allow them a degree of leeway because of fear of an invasion by the USA? Sorry to repeat myself, but as I said before there is a new regime in the USA and only a paranoid would believe that Barack Obama is preparing a war against the North. If Kim Jong il is an intelligent as some here claim shouldn't he know that? I think Obama has many other priorities. North Korea will not be unilaterally attacked during this American administration. Anyway, isn't Obama supposed to be busy with Iraq, Afghanistan and the coming war with Iran:rolleyes:
Anyway, North Korea is allied with China, and since China is wary about an ally of the US on its borders, there is no way it would countenance any USA armed action against North Korea, without getting involved. China and the United States know that, and China would have no reason to persuade the North Koreans to the contrary. It already has fought one war to keep American troops away from the Yalu river. So under china's nuclear umbrella North Korea has less reason to need nuclear weapons than West Germany had during the cold war.
In fact, if reports are accurate, even China is beginning to lose patience with it's troublesome neighbour. I agree with the Petethebrick above who believes that North Korea thinks the USA is weak. The North Koreans are not frightened, they are aggressive and cynical. They think the rest of the world owes them a living and that when their lunatic totalitarian regime can't fend for itself that others should provide the means for it to do so.

Manic Moran

a Nuclear Weapons State cannot use atomic weapons to deter conventional attack.

In fairness, treaties be damned: There's a different between "cannot" and "should not." All it takes is an authorised launch order.

President Merkin Muffley: General Turgidson, I find this very difficult to understand. I was under the impression that I was the only one in authority to order the use of nuclear weapons.

General "Buck" Turgidson: That's right, sir, you are the only person authorized to do so. And although I, uh, hate to judge before all the facts are in, it's beginning to look like, uh, General Ripper exceeded his authority.

NTM