Mondale: U.S. should destroy North Korea's missle.

[MnFats]

http://wcco.com/topstories/local_story_174111542.html


I just don't know what Fritz (Walter) is thinking.


Former Vice President Walter Mondale joined the list of people supporting a pre-emptive U.S. strike against a North Korean missile.

Mondale said on WCCO-AM on Friday that the United States should tell North Korea to dismantle the missile -- and if it doesn't "we are going to take it out."

He said the missile would be easy to hit and "I think it would end the nuclear long-range dreams of this dangerous country," said Mondale, who's also a former U.S. ambassador to Japan, in the interview.

Mondale, 78, said North Korea already has nuclear weapons and its ambition to develop a long-range missile is "one of the most dangerous developments in recent history."

It's so dangerous, he said, because of the nation's isolation from the international community and its unpredictable leader, Kim Jong Il.

"It is the danger of our time," he said. "Here's this bizarre, hermit kingdom over there with a paranoid leader getting ready to test a missile system that can hit us."

[originalpckelly]

1. He is 78 after all...

his mind might be going.

[ShaneGR]

2. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem if it was a joint strike...

Something like the US, South Korea, and Australia working in conjunction with each other. A lot of people overlook the serious threat that North Korea would be if they had long range nuclear capability.

[sutz12]

4. Include Japan in your list, too.

They're the closest target, after So Korea.

[atreides1]

6. Personally how many dead Koreans is acceptable?

South Korea won't do it, too many think that reconciliation of the north and south is a good thing.

So which contry would you call for a joint strike on next, Iran, Cuba? Hell let's go for broke a joint US European strike on Russia.

From your input I would guess that you're someone who thinks that we should "stay the course" in Iraq
also?

[FogerRox]

8. I'm curious, what would North Korea do after we blow up its missle?

the potential to re-start the Korean War is too great.

[Bake]

3. That's an option that should be considered

There are credible people on both sides of the aisle that firmly believe we should take out North Korea's missile before it ever gets off the ground. It's not a PNAC issue, not a partisan issue, as far as I am concerned. Frankly, I don't want N. Korea to have a missile capable of striking the US, Japan, OR China.

While I believe there is still SOME time for dipolacy to work, that time is shrinking fast.

Bake

[jayfish]

10. Before The Iraq Debacle I Would...

have agreed with you. Unfortunately, if NK decides to respond militarily we would have a hell of a time mounting a credible response. They might be able to push us right off the peninsula this time instead of to the ragged edge. if we were going to do anything about this it should have been taken care of sans the new Iraq war.

Jay

[Bake]

5. Or maybe we'll just get lucky and China will do it for us.

:sarcasm:

Bake

[lectrobyte]

7. Can someone answer this: Did they develop their missile after all of

our "axis of evil" saber rattling towards them? I kind of feel like when the world sees unarmed countries get invaded, they decide to arm themselves...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. I remember when Mondale claimed to be a liberal.

One of those that believed in diplomacy over force. Now, he's just a slobbering idiot with an itchy trigger finger.

[Bake]

11. But what do you do when diplomacy fails?

Diplomacy only works when one is dealing with rational people at the table. It is beginning to look like diplomacy is failing in this situation (if it hasn't already).

So then what? Liberals (and I count myself among them) do believe in diplomacy. But realistically there has to be another option when diplomacy fails, and I think we're almost there.

Bake

[NNN0LHI]

12. When diplomacy fails you give the diplomats some Viagra for their...

...unplanned retirement and get some competent diplomats.

Thats the way sane people handle it anyway.

Don

[Bake]

14. That's essentially saying diplomacy never fails

And the fact is, it sometimes does fail. In this case, suppose you get some new diplomats, and N.K. pushes the Launch button anyway. At that point, diplomacy has failed and it's now too late to do anything about it. That's not much of an option.

Bake

[NNN0LHI]

16. Diplomacy between two nuclear armed countries has never failed

There is a damn good reason for that too. The price for failure is too high.

As I said earlier most sane people know that.

Don

[Bake]

17. In the past, only sane people HAD nukes.

That's not necessarily the case anymore.

Bake

[NNN0LHI]

19. Not the case. Sane people would have never used them. Twice n/t

[Solo_in_MD]

13. He is not the only Dem calling for a premeptive strike

which is surprising.

I still harbor a strong suspicion that it will fail at launch or in early boost...and the somehow the current administration knows that.

[truebrit71]

15. Frankly I don't have a problem with it. It makes more sense than invading.

...Iraq for crying out loud...

[Jed Dilligan]

18. No, this is great tactical thinking

Since Shrub doesn't even have a tenth of the balls he would need to Kim Jong Il--I mean, we're talking raisins versus grapefruits--the Democrats should loudly call for a pre-emptive strike so it can be smeared on the R in the next campaign.