Trackback by Recognize Design :: Design, Marketing and Beyond

October 15, 2006 @ 10:52 pm

[…]the UN Security Council markets itself, as described on Trans-Pacific Radio[…]

Comment by Publicus

October 19, 2006 @ 1:36 pm

While perusing the media fallout from the DPRK nuke test I came across this in the Onion:

“To me the bomb isn’t as troubling as the giant catapult they’re constructing to fling it.”

This is clearly meant to be funny, but at the same time does bring up an interesting idea about the threat of Kim Jong Il with a warhead. Some may remember the ill fated Silkworm missile launch not too long ago that presumably would be used to launch said un-requested superfluous fission production and firework show. Clearly the threat of North Korea with the ability to produce kilotons of weapons grade plutonium is something that needs to be handled with kid gloves, but I wonder about their ability to deliver it in thirty minutes or less (Free Coke is not included). I am more concerned about a “dirty bomb” threat which of course does not even require weapons grade plutonium as much as just a lot of dynamite. More over the possibility of something going wrong with the containment and production facilities in North Korea is very much a cause for concern. We will also have to see what reaction our “decider” takes in response to this part of the “axis of evil”

Comment by DeOrio

October 19, 2006 @ 5:46 pm

Publicus, I agree. I think Kim Jong Il’s greatest victory will come when he can bait the US into overreacting and defeating themselves by getting bogged down in another morass of nation-building and ongoing skirmishes.

Comment by Steve Schapiro

October 21, 2006 @ 2:33 am

Deorio, Kim Jong Il wins as long as the UN and other do-nothings refuse to take action. He does what he wants and gets away with it. The best way to deal with Kim Jong Il is make sure he’s not there anymore. If he wants to learn about nukes, there’s a way we can teach him.

Comment by Ken Worsley

October 21, 2006 @ 2:53 am

Steve,

I’m not a big fan of the UN either. But what you’re saying sounds a lot like US govenrment circa early 2003. Given that the troops are still a tad busy with that conflict, what do you propose?

And, will you sign up for it?

Comment by Steve Schapiro

October 21, 2006 @ 3:13 am

Iraq is such a mess because the military wasn’t given the troop numbers it needed to get the job done right right away.
I assume you’ve heard of the Powell Doctrine - overwhelming force and a clear goal. We can do that in North Korea. Throw overwhelming force at them, we have an advantage in technology, then root out all the leadership. Make an agreement with China that South Korea would be the obvious influential partner here, and there you go.
I’d consider signing up if I thought I’d be allowed to do the job right.

Comment by Ken

October 21, 2006 @ 3:29 am

Steve,

Of course I’m familiar with the Powell doctrine. I was wondering if you could give me a good example of it being applied after June 6, 1945.

You’re forgetting something, something we’ve mentioned quite a bit in our discussions - despite any American attack, no matter how quickly it’s pulled off, the DPRK will pound Seoul with conventional weapnory. We’re talking hundreds of thousands of deaths within days; there’s no way US airstrikes could take out all DPRK positions along the DMZ in enough time to keep them from firing for at least a few days - and those troops won’t rout.

But don’t take my word for it. Seriously, look into it yourself. The situation is rich and complex, far beyond the sort of rugby attack that the Powell Doctrine (which I do respect - and think would have made sense in Iraq) could do in this theatre.