[commanderkai]

sandorski sandorski:

Depends. Clearly such intervention has been going on though. Not all Action requires Military Action.

Pray tell, what sort of action would you think would be more effective? Political action to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons has generally proven ineffective.

[sandorski]

commanderkai commanderkai:

sandorski sandorski:

Depends. Clearly such intervention has been going on though. Not all Action requires Military Action.

Pray tell, what sort of action would you think would be more effective? Political action to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons has generally proven ineffective.

You think Military action against North Korea is a good idea?

[commanderkai]

sandorski sandorski:

You think Military action against North Korea is a good idea?

How many negotiations and conferences have occurred over North Korea's nuclear weapons? Were they successful? We all know the answers to that.

Of course, there is some middle ground between open warfare, and diplomacy, which Israel is currently conducting with Iran. Maybe all we have left is the hope that the good judgment of our fellow humans prevents their use.

[sandorski]

commanderkai commanderkai:

sandorski sandorski:

You think Military action against North Korea is a good idea?

How many negotiations and conferences have occurred over North Korea's nuclear weapons? Were they successful? We all know the answers to that.

Of course, there is some middle ground between open warfare, and diplomacy, which Israel is currently conducting with Iran. Maybe all we have left is the hope that the good judgment of our fellow humans prevents their use.

Military action against North Korea is not practical, without the wholesale destruction of South Korea anyway. Diplomacy hasn't really worked either, but embargoes have had some success. Containment and simply waiting them out is the most practical solution. That's pretty much how the Soviet Union was defeated, although North Korea is unique in the sense that there's fewer options as the Soviet Union could be engaged in more indirect ways, such as through numerous Proxy Wars.

[commanderkai]

sandorski sandorski:

Military action against North Korea is not practical, without the wholesale destruction of South Korea anyway. Diplomacy hasn't really worked either, but embargoes have had some success. Containment and simply waiting them out is the most practical solution. That's pretty much how the Soviet Union was defeated, although North Korea is unique in the sense that there's fewer options as the Soviet Union could be engaged in more indirect ways, such as through numerous Proxy Wars.

I wouldn't even call embargoes and containment successful, since we can't get China to agree to it. More importantly, North Korea was successful in their nuclear ambitions even with Western isolation. China is probably the key to preventing North Korea from getting too out of control, but how much leverage do we truly have over them, beyond their own self interests of keeping themselves out of a nuclear war?

The Soviet Union, much like China, are more rational actors compared to North Korea and quite possibly, Iran, specifically because they have little at stake other than their position of power.

[sandorski]

commanderkai commanderkai:

sandorski sandorski:

Military action against North Korea is not practical, without the wholesale destruction of South Korea anyway. Diplomacy hasn't really worked either, but embargoes have had some success. Containment and simply waiting them out is the most practical solution. That's pretty much how the Soviet Union was defeated, although North Korea is unique in the sense that there's fewer options as the Soviet Union could be engaged in more indirect ways, such as through numerous Proxy Wars.

I wouldn't even call embargoes and containment successful, since we can't get China to agree to it. More importantly, North Korea was successful in their nuclear ambitions even with Western isolation. China is probably the key to preventing North Korea from getting too out of control, but how much leverage do we truly have over them, beyond their own self interests of keeping themselves out of a nuclear war?

The Soviet Union, much like China, are more rational actors compared to North Korea and quite possibly, Iran, specifically because they have little at stake other than their position of power.

I agree, regardless of the complexity of the situation, Military action against North Korea is not practical. Wait them out, they'll eventually grow tired. Embargoes are not 100% effective, but they slow them down.

[uwish]

screw North Korea, look at the Iranian situation.

[commanderkai]

sandorski sandorski:

I agree, regardless of the complexity of the situation, Military action against North Korea is not practical. Wait them out, they'll eventually grow tired. Embargoes are not 100% effective, but they slow them down.

Iran is the key right now. Military action against North Korea was impractical even before they became a nuclear power, because of their proximity to South Korea and Japan, along with it's closeness to China.

Uwish stated correctly, Iran is the current....case study, for the lack of a better word. Military threat and intervention did succeed with Iraq and Libya, and yet such an intervention is extremely dangerous with cases like North Korea. Right now, negotiations, covert actions, and embargoes/economic sanctions are all being attempted to prevent nuclear proliferation.