How Stupid Does North Korea Think We Are?

[Bill Mattocks]

Wow. I mean, I know we have some stupid people running around loose, but this takes the cake.

How many times has North Korea pulled the football away?


Lucy pulls back the football by niallkennedy, on Flickr

We give them food, they agree to stop processing nuclear material.

Then they eat the food.

Then they accuse us of something nefarious and throw the nuclear inspectors out.

Then they begin reprocessing nuclear material again.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...uclear-tests/2012/02/29/gIQAsxwAiR_story.html

We're really....really...REALLY stupid. And anyone who believes that the North Koreans mean it THIS TIME is about as dumb as a box of rocks. Really.

N. Korea agrees to suspend uranium enrichment, nuclear tests
By William Wan, Updated: Wednesday, February 29, 2:45 PM

North Korea agreed to suspend its uranium-enrichment program, nuclear weapons tests and long-range missile launches in return for 240,000 metric tons of food aid from the United States, the State Department said Wednesday.

The agreement is the first sign of progress in years of stalled U.S. efforts to persuade one of the world’s most isolated and authoritarian countries to abandon its nuclear program. It also marks North Korea’s first major move on the world stage since the death of its leader, Kim Jong Il, and the elevation of his son, Kim Jong Eun.

...

North Korea has agreed to such steps before, only to renege on them later and demand more concessions.

“On one hand, you could say with the food aid that they’re buying the same horse for the third time,” said Victor Cha, a former White House adviser on Asia. “On the other hand, it means getting a handle on what has been a runaway nuclear program that’s continued unabated for more than three years. For that, a bit of food isn’t that high of a price.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...of-key-events/2012/02/29/gIQAYJoiiR_blog.html

Posted at 03:18 PM ET, 02/29/2012
North Korea agrees to halt uranium enrichment: A timeline of key events
By Anup Kaphle

North Korea has agreed to halt its uranium-enrichment program as well as its nuclear and long-range missile tests, in return for food aid from the United States.

...

— 1992: North Korea agrees to allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), but refuses access to locations that are suspected of nuclear weapons production.

— 1994: North Korea agrees to halt its nuclear program in return for $5 billion worth of free fuel and two nuclear reactors.

— 1995: The United States agrees to provide two modern nuclear reactors designed to produce less weapons-grade plutonium.

— 1998: North Korea fires a rocket over Japan and into the Pacific Ocean. Pyongyang claims it launched a satellite.

— 2002: The United States decides to halt oil shipments to Pyongyang, claiming it has admitted to having nuclear weapons. North Korea throws out international inspectors and reactivates its Yongbyon reactor.

— 2003: North Korea withdraws from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. For the first time, delegations from the United States, China and North Korea meet in Beijing to hold talks about the latter’s nuclear ambitions. Later that year, Pyongyang says it has obtained enough material to make up to six nuclear bombs.

— 2005: North Korea agrees to give up its weapons in return for more aid and security guarantees. But it later demands a civilian nuclear reactor.

— 2006: North Korea detonates a nuclear device in a test blast. The device was estimated to have a yield of less than a kiloton. It also test-fires a long-range missile named Taepodong-2, which crashes shortly after takeoff, U.S. officials say.

— 2007: North Korea agrees to close its main nuclear reactor in exchange for fuel aid.

— 2009: North Korea conducts a second test detonation of a nuclear device, this one with an estimated yield of between 1 and 10 kilotons. The regime also indicates that it may be willing to resume bilateral and multilateral talks on its nuclear programs at a meeting with visiting Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao.

— 2010: North Korea calls for end to hostile relations with the United States and vows to strive for a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. The same year, the country showed a visiting American nuclear scientist a new secret facility for enriching uranium at its Yongbyon complex, angering Washington and Seoul.

— 2012: North Korea says it will suspend its nuclear missile tests.

What kind of thumbsucker thinks THEY MEAN IT THIS TIME?

Seriously you have to be short a few brain cells to think this time will be any different.

But we fell for it, as usual. Now we taxpayers get to send a bunch of food to North Korea so they can pull the football away from us again.

We're chumps. And the people who think this is a good idea? Morons. Low-grade, booger-eatin' morons.

 

[billc]

See, the problem is each new set of, as you say, thumbsuckers, think that finally, they are the ones who will now get North Korea to turn that corner and see the light. As the president said, "...we are the ones we have been waiting for..." They believe it each and every time. This time, "they" will be the ones that make the difference.

Here is the problem straight from the horses mouth...it comes in at 9 seconds on the video...

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I just get really sick of the "Well, we have to give them a chance," responses. Really? How many chances? How many? Give me a number! Never get an answer to that, because of course, there is no number. In the minds of people like that, what we're supposed to do is to kiss their asses and send them food, fuel, and money, build them nuclear reactors, and pray they never actually manage to build a good enough nuclear weapon to start a war somewhere with. These namby-pamby thumbsuckers quiver in the dark and pray nobody looks at them mean. It's all about appeasement.

 

[MA-Caver]

We should leave N. Korea alone as far as aid. They got big brother China whose economy is in the black and not in the red like ours, to help them out. The (North) Koreans know that if we get into any kind of spat with them China is going to step in and help out. So no, we're not that stupid but neither should they be THAT stupid to mess with a country that has more nuclear weapons than any other country at present... aside from Russia.
If the son of Jong Il has any sense, then he'll go the 180 of what his father had envisioned for his country and drop the pretense that they're a major power on the planet.

Can't we all just ... get along?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Can't we all just ... get along?

Sure. Lucy will hold the ball this time, and you come running up and kick it. Really. She really really really really means it.

 

[Big Don]

They are hoping Obama is as dumb and trusting as Clinton, Albright and Carter were.
They overestimate him
It isn't that they think we are stupid, it is that they think lack we the balls to follow through.

 

[Jason Striker II]

We should leave N. Korea alone as far as aid. They got big brother China whose economy is in the black and not in the red like ours, to help them out. The (North) Koreans know that if we get into any kind of spat with them China is going to step in and help out. So no, we're not that stupid but neither should they be THAT stupid to mess with a country that has more nuclear weapons than any other country at present... aside from Russia.
If the son of Jong Il has any sense, then he'll go the 180 of what his father had envisioned for his country and drop the pretense that they're a major power on the planet.

Can't we all just ... get along?

Just a note from an American who has been in China for the last 15 years: There is a very definite feeling among the Chinese people that the North Koreans are a pain in the ***. IMO, the government here is caught between a rock and a hard place: they want to look like they are supporting their last Communist neighbor and long-time ally, and yet KNOW that the NK regime is irrational.

 

[Ken Morgan]

You keep trying it because of that one day when she doesn't pull the football away.
Yeah, they will likey do something stupid and **** it all up, but you have to try because tomorrow may be that one day. There is after all a new person holding the ball.
Peace on the Korean Peninsula would save the US military tens of billions of dollars a year, one hellva lot cheaper then the food being provided.
Plus the food comes from US farmers, thereby driving down the food supply, and increasing prices, to the advantage of US farmers.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

You keep trying it because of that one day when she doesn't pull the football away.
Yeah, they will likey do something stupid and **** it all up, but you have to try because tomorrow may be that one day. There is after all a new person holding the ball.
Peace on the Korean Peninsula would save the US military tens of billions of dollars a year, one hellva lot cheaper then the food being provided.
Plus the food comes from US farmers, thereby driving down the food supply, and increasing prices, to the advantage of US farmers.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

 

[MA-Caver]

Just a note from an American who has been in China for the last 15 years: There is a very definite feeling among the Chinese people that the North Koreans are a pain in the ***. IMO, the government here is caught between a rock and a hard place: they want to look like they are supporting their last Communist neighbor and long-time ally, and yet KNOW that the NK regime is irrational.

Yeah well I see the two as big brother and little brother... you'd think that big brother would grab little brother by the collar and say "c'mere you idiot... the people you're messing with (U.S.)? They will kick your ***! So leave 'em alone or I just might let them."

 

[cdunn]

I wonder what's going on in the back channels, the diplomacy we don't hear about. Because the situation is not-simple. Pyongyang has enough traditional artillery in place to level Seoul, the ROK would turn around, spit the blood out of its mouth, and grind North Korea into dust, especially of they slipped a nuke or two into the barrage. North Korea knows that, South Korea knows that, China knows that, and we know that. But even the military damage they can do to the capital of South Korea pales in the face of the real problem - At the first whiff of hope crossed with even worse shortages at home, millions of refugees are going to surge over the borders of North Korea, mostly into China, at which point, China is between a rock and a hard place; they can't really integrate the outflux from North Korea readily, and genocide will cost them too much international cooperation for them to sustain the internal growth that keeps the country from exploding. Ergo, I expect that China and South Korea are providing (the threat of economic) pressure on the the US to just shutup and feed the damn North Koreans.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I wonder what's going on in the back channels, the diplomacy we don't hear about. Because the situation is not-simple. Pyongyang has enough traditional artillery in place to level Seoul, the ROK would turn around, spit the blood out of its mouth, and grind North Korea into dust, especially of they slipped a nuke or two into the barrage. North Korea knows that, South Korea knows that, China knows that, and we know that. But even the military damage they can do to the capital of South Korea pales in the face of the real problem - At the first whiff of hope crossed with even worse shortages at home, millions of refugees are going to surge over the borders of North Korea, mostly into China, at which point, China is between a rock and a hard place; they can't really integrate the outflux from North Korea readily, and genocide will cost them too much international cooperation for them to sustain the internal growth that keeps the country from exploding. Ergo, I expect that China and South Korea are providing (the threat of economic) pressure on the the US to just shutup and feed the damn North Koreans.

I think that's a reasonable analysis of the current situation, but I'm no expert. I wish China would feed them; they're pals and all.

 

[cdunn]

They already are.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

They already are.

Then what the hell are we doing giving them food aid? We have enough financial problems already. Screw them.

 

[cdunn]

Then what the hell are we doing giving them food aid? We have enough financial problems already. Screw them.

Providing China a diplomatic way out if it does come to war. North Korea's military ability is insubstantial, however, we do not want China to feel like it has to defend its interests there against us.

 

[oftheherd1]

...

Can't we all just ... get along?

Who is we? Multilateral agreements means more than one country agrees and then sticks to the bargain. The North Koreans don't have a track record of doing that.

Yeah well I see the two as big brother and little brother... you'd think that big brother would grab little brother by the collar and say "c'mere you idiot... the people you're messing with (U.S.)? They will kick your ***! So leave 'em alone or I just might let them."

What possible incentive would they have to do that. North Korea is a bigger thorn in our side than the Chinese. And they can do a lot of saber rattling and destabilizing actions the Chinese don't want to do openly.

...

I expect that China and South Korea are providing (the threat of economic) pressure on the the US to just shutup and feed the damn North Koreans.

Certainly possible, but I think very improbable. Short of causing a world war, China really has no reason to want to stop the North Koreans ... or they would. South Korea wants the two Koreas joined. So does the North. The difference is that the South is willing to make concessions. The North is only willing to look like they are making concessions. When that no longer suits them, they renegade.

Providing China a diplomatic way out if it does come to war. North Korea's military ability is insubstantial, however, we do not want China to feel like it has to defend its interests there against us.

Yep! We learned the hard way that we don't want to fight the Chinese nearly 60 years ago. And they will assist North Korea. Just as we used to guard those we were treaty-obliged to assist. It is always in their interest to do so. They want as many communist states surrounding them as possible. If they ever decide war is the only option left, they want those buffer states. And we are in for a very hard time.

 

[cdunn]

Double post to add:

We need China to believe we are working with them on the mutual problem of North Korea.The primary US objective in North Korea is to end the posession of nuclear weapons by a hostile, rogue state. There are three/four primary ways that I can see this happening, in order of idealness, and their associated costs:

1: Korean reunification. Lowest probabilty, long shot, all we can do to influence this is to maintain status quo until such a time as the slow evolution of the regime in North Korea continues; this requires whoever Kim Jong-Un installs / has installed for him being more pro-western than the paranoids appointed under Kim Jong-Il and Kim Il-Sung. But it is ideal; it lets South Korea bear the price of rebuilding North Korea, much as West Germany is rebuilding East Germany.

2: War, China as ally. If we can pin North Korea between us, that's the ideal military solution. This requires the Chinese government to feel that it is also in the best interests in China; while it cannot be disputed that the China/NK relationship is deteriorating, we would look insincere making that proposal at this time. Building a diplomatic history of working with China on the issue would go a long way.

3: War, China as neutral party. If we can get China to 'look the other way', North Korea basically becomes Iraq mark 2. We can't afford this option right now. Maybe once we're wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the expense and difficulty of nation building has already left a very, very bitter taste in the electorates' mouths. We have to, again, build the case that it's in China's interest to look the other way. Working with China over the containment issues, again, goes a long way.

4: War, China hostile. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. If China decides that it's in their interest to fight on behalf of North Korea, it's either a long war of hideous attrition, and massive economic devestation on both sides, or a very short one with the exchange of radioactive craters. I fully expect that once we're in an all-in war in Asia, Iran is going to cackle with glee and try something stupid, and we'll have to multi-front it with NATO. Giving them the finger over the back channels and provoking North Korea is how we can make it happen, though. It's not a certainty, because of the extreme expense to China, but it's a possibility, and it's ultimate disaster scenario 1. But there won't be a North Korea to speak of afterwards.

5: Of course, ultimate disaster scenario 2 is the complete collapse of the North Korean regime and the sale of nuclear devices to Iran or independent agents by ex-DPRK officers looking for a quick buck.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Double post to add:

We need China to believe we are working with them on the mutual problem of North Korea.The primary US objective in North Korea is to end the posession of nuclear weapons by a hostile, rogue state. There are three/four primary ways that I can see this happening, in order of idealness, and their associated costs:

1: Korean reunification. Lowest probabilty, long shot, all we can do to influence this is to maintain status quo until such a time as the slow evolution of the regime in North Korea continues; this requires whoever Kim Jong-Un installs / has installed for him being more pro-western than the paranoids appointed under Kim Jong-Il and Kim Il-Sung. But it is ideal; it lets South Korea bear the price of rebuilding North Korea, much as West Germany is rebuilding East Germany.

2: War, China as ally. If we can pin North Korea between us, that's the ideal military solution. This requires the Chinese government to feel that it is also in the best interests in China; while it cannot be disputed that the China/NK relationship is deteriorating, we would look insincere making that proposal at this time. Building a diplomatic history of working with China on the issue would go a long way.

3: War, China as neutral party. If we can get China to 'look the other way', North Korea basically becomes Iraq mark 2. We can't afford this option right now. Maybe once we're wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the expense and difficulty of nation building has already left a very, very bitter taste in the electorates' mouths. We have to, again, build the case that it's in China's interest to look the other way. Working with China over the containment issues, again, goes a long way.

4: War, China hostile. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. If China decides that it's in their interest to fight on behalf of North Korea, it's either a long war of hideous attrition, and massive economic devestation on both sides, or a very short one with the exchange of radioactive craters. I fully expect that once we're in an all-in war in Asia, Iran is going to cackle with glee and try something stupid, and we'll have to multi-front it with NATO. Giving them the finger over the back channels and provoking North Korea is how we can make it happen, though. It's not a certainty, because of the extreme expense to China, but it's a possibility, and it's ultimate disaster scenario 1. But there won't be a North Korea to speak of afterwards.

5: Of course, ultimate disaster scenario 2 is the complete collapse of the North Korean regime and the sale of nuclear devices to Iran or independent agents by ex-DPRK officers looking for a quick buck.

I would also consider the option of pre-planned military strikes to deprive them of all nuclear assets, no war, no invasion, and simultaneous decapitation of their military leadership. Followed by huge multi-national humanitarian efforts for the common citizens of North Korea, who are the pawns and the ones suffering in all this.

 

[cdunn]

I would also consider the option of pre-planned military strikes to deprive them of all nuclear assets, no war, no invasion, and simultaneous decapitation of their military leadership. Followed by huge multi-national humanitarian efforts for the common citizens of North Korea, who are the pawns and the ones suffering in all this.

In other words, basically option 3, and what they told us was going to happen in Afghanistan and Iraq, before the natives started shooting back. Still need Chinese buy-in, or else they can roll up the peninsula right up to the dmz and try to set up a responsive puppet, as opposed to the rabid guard dog that's there now.

 

[oftheherd1]

Double post to add:

We need China to believe we are working with them on the mutual problem of North Korea.The primary US objective in North Korea is to end the posession of nuclear weapons by a hostile, rogue state. There are three/four primary ways that I can see this happening, in order of idealness, and their associated costs:

I just don't think they really have a problem with North Korea. If any, it is very small.

1: Korean reunification. Lowest probabilty, long shot, all we can do to influence this is to maintain status quo until such a time as the slow evolution of the regime in North Korea continues; this requires whoever Kim Jong-Un installs / has installed for him being more pro-western than the paranoids appointed under Kim Jong-Il and Kim Il-Sung. But it is ideal; it lets South Korea bear the price of rebuilding North Korea, much as West Germany is rebuilding East Germany.

The problem is that both want it, but on their own terms. The North won't compromise, and the South will only compromise a little. Luckily the North won't compromise. There are enough young people in South Korea who want reunification, and aren't old enough to remember the Korean War (or blame it on us?).

2: War, China as ally. If we can pin North Korea between us, that's the ideal military solution. This requires the Chinese government to feel that it is also in the best interests in China; while it cannot be disputed that the China/NK relationship is deteriorating, we would look insincere making that proposal at this time. Building a diplomatic history of working with China on the issue would go a long way.

That's just not going to happen. When it gets to be in China's best interest to war against and occupy North Korea, they will neither need nor want our help. Right now, it isn't in China's best interest to stop North Korea's actions.

3: War, China as neutral party. If we can get China to 'look the other way', North Korea basically becomes Iraq mark 2. We can't afford this option right now. Maybe once we're wrapped up in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the expense and difficulty of nation building has already left a very, very bitter taste in the electorates' mouths. We have to, again, build the case that it's in China's interest to look the other way. Working with China over the containment issues, again, goes a long way.

Again, not going to happen. North Korea is a buffer and protected state. They will not allow anyone else to remove the current regime and remove North Korea's usefulness to China. It is not going to be in China's best interests, ever given to two regimes in question.

4: War, China hostile. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. If China decides that it's in their interest to fight on behalf of North Korea, it's either a long war of hideous attrition, and massive economic devestation on both sides, or a very short one with the exchange of radioactive craters. I fully expect that once we're in an all-in war in Asia, Iran is going to cackle with glee and try something stupid, and we'll have to multi-front it with NATO. Giving them the finger over the back channels and provoking North Korea is how we can make it happen, though. It's not a certainty, because of the extreme expense to China, but it's a possibility, and it's ultimate disaster scenario 1. But there won't be a North Korea to speak of afterwards.

If we can limit it to the Korean peninsula, we might limit it to conventional weaponry between us. The North Koreans won't see it that way. We would still find a real problem in defending against a massive Chinese army. And I doubt China would accept defeat above the 38th parallel, maybe not even below it, so they will always reserve the right to go beyond conventional weaponry. A scenario to be avoided if at all possible.

5: Of course, ultimate disaster scenario 2 is the complete collapse of the North Korean regime and the sale of nuclear devices to Iran or independent agents by ex-DPRK officers looking for a quick buck.

China isn't likely to allow that to happen. They are friends with North Korea and want that buffer and deniability for whatever they may encourage the North to do. They are friends with Iran, but will have to make some economic concessions to other western countries, or plan on world war. They might chance it if they think they can let the rest of the world wear itself down, then pick the most advantageous side to support, at a great cost to that side. They have to be sure they can survive economically until they think it advantageous to intervene somewhere. They can use a military buildup to help their own economy. Not a good scenario for anybody else.

Sorry sir, I can't support any of your ideas for the reasons given. I understand you may disagree.