Perry: US should be ready to destroy North Korean missile

[Virginia Dare]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States should be ready to destroy North Korea's missile if it is not taken off the launch pad, former defense secretary William Perry and his deputy Ashton Carter said.

Preemption, while "unwisely ballyhooed" by the White House and wrongly applied in Iraq because it lacked weapons of mass destruction, "is surely a prudent policy," the two officials who served under former President Bill Clinton (1992-2000) said in a letter to The Washington Post.


http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/7000/20060622/1045000006.htm&floc=NW_1-T

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. The whitehouse knows that we would have a hell of a time

taking preemptive actions against a country that actually has a defense system.

[Virginia Dare]

3. I think we're probably screwed...

we're dependant on an ignorant chimp to get us out of an extremely delicate, complicated, and dangerous diplomatic situation. Remember the missiles of October? Well, the Chimp isn't any more of a JFK than Mr. Potato-head was.

[fshrink]

2. There you go! That's a winning idea.

How about assassinating Chavez. That would be prudent policy too. Or blasting the moon so it wouldn't threaten to collide with Earth at some point. How about changing party?

[Virginia Dare]

4. I don't know if the North Koreans are going to just...

go away quietly this time, and we've got an incompetent fool in the White House. We've got one insane ruler against another.

This is a very bad mess we're in.

[fshrink]

7. The Korean guy is a puppet. You can buy

him out with a Ferrari. This is fodder for our local neo-fascist machine and only that.

[Virginia Dare]

9. That's just it...

Bush is just crazy enough not to give him the candy he's crying for, and he's just crazy enough to retaliate. I hope I'm wrong.

[endarkenment]

13. Bush is the only nut running around attacking other nations.

Kim might or might not be a nut, but he has no track record of belligerant actions.

[Virginia Dare]

16. Good point...

let's just hope he doesn't start.

[GodlessBiker]

5. Dr. Strangelove, meet Professor OyVeyThatMakesMyHeadHurtLady.

[neverforget]

6. North Korea could shell Seoul and cause many casualties in

retaliation. This is the type of the thing that could get out of hand very easily. If they were to do it, I would expect the North to launch their missile on June 25 which is the 56th anniversary of the start of the Korean War. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War

[Captain Hilts]

8. This is the war we should have had instead of the one we have. nt

[Recursion]

10. *shrug* Perry has a point

If * had been dealing with NK 4 years ago rather than rattling his saber against Iraq, we wouldn't have to be making decisions like this right now.

[endarkenment]

11. We should initiate hostilities against another nation?

because they might do something bad in the future? Really? up.

[Recursion]

14. Sometimes, when the threat actually exists

and isn't just a baldfaced lie.

[Nihil]

15. "The threat"?

Nope, I think it is just a bald-faced lie.

[jerry611]

17. It can be argued that it would save millions

If I were president of the USA. And I get intelligence that North Korea is going to launch a missile with a nuclear warhead at the United States. I would order a missile strike to pre-emptively destroy that site. That to me is a no-brainer.

Saying you are completely against pre-emptive action makes you a fool. Are you saying that if you were president, and you recieve intel that North Korea WILL launch. You would sit here, wait, and do nothing? You are going to be thrown out of office with that kind of radical pacifist bullshit.

I am against action like the Iraq war. Where the threat wasn't verified, nor real. But North Korea right now has a ICBM capable of hitting the United States. And they have fueled that missile. It is ready for launch. That is a real and very serious threat. If we recieve credible intel that the Koreans have placed a live nuclear warhead on an ICMB that can reach the USA and they have fueled it...I would order its destruction if I were president.

[daleo]

19. Your scenario is not considered preemptive war

Self defense is permitted in the case of a clearly impending attack, for example a mobilization of troops on one's border.

The idea that you should take out another country's forces "just in case" is pre-emptive, and it is a recipe for disaster. If JFK had followed that policy in Cuba, it would have meant nuclear war.

[shadowknows69]

21. There is no Nuclear warhead

even our own intelligence says that he couldn't possibly fit one to this missle.

[daleo]

12. Just bring back reruns of M*A*S*H

Not reruns of the Korean War.

[occuserpens]

18. The N.Korean missile affair

2006-06-22 The N.Korean missile affair

[nealmhughes]

20. Say if the US were to launch a preemptive strike,

would Kim take it? What would China and Russia say? They are only 40 miles or so from Seoul, you know, one of the largest cities in Asia...and God only knows what kind of nasties the NKoreans have to lob there...

I wonder if he doesn't want some more food concessions and computer parts? He ususally backs down when he gets paid off -- or has in the past.

Why don't they say they are launching a satellite for communications? Noone has a problem with anyone doing that. Just a really bad satellite that didn't obtain orbit... Now that is how to save face.

Actually I would no be surprised to learn that many in the Pentagon want them to launch a missile to study its capabilities.

If Kim were confronted and want war with the US and Korea, could he not have an old fashioned Russian-style "sudden heart attack" by his generals?

And since the Korean War is technically still ongoing (only an armistice in place, not a peace treaty), the UN is technically the one who is trying to get Korea united, that is why the Korean War was multinational, they invaded the south (after the US set up the ROK)...