North Korea is one of the most brutal regimes in world history. Today there are hundreds of thousands of North Koreans in prison camps. The entire nation lives in grim fear of its government. North Korea is poor, as all communist nations are. Millions of North Koreans have starved to death in the last 30 years. North Korea has virtually no electricity outside of the capital of Pyongyang.
On the other hand, free and capitalist South Korea, separated only by a border, has a per capita economic production of 18 times that of the North and a living standard like many other advanced nations.
Communist North Korea today has an economy that is about 1/800 the size of the American economy. Yet North Korea is now threatening the US and other nations with nuclear attack, and has a massive army as the people live in poverty.
This is how communist nations always act. They starve the people and feed their militaries. This is why the Russian people waited in line for bread while the Soviet communist military was given full funding (today the Russian economy is about 6% the size of the US economy).
After taking control of North Korea in 1949 the communists have never given an inch. They have only moved toward more oppression and brutality. This is classic totalitarian communism.
On the other hand South Korea had a conservative, pro-American military government after the Korean War ended in 1953, a war that saved the South from the North and cost 33,000 American military lives. That military government guided South Korea to peace and prosperity, kept the North at bay and then ceded control to free elections in 1988.
Thus we have two forces on the Korean peninsula coming from opposite sides, and we can easily see which is truly malignant and which is good.
Now North Korea is threatening nuclear attacks on South Korea, Japan and the US. This comes out of years of policy in which the US ignored North Korea’s increasingly sophisticated nuclear arsenal, hoping that the problem would go away. It didn’t.
Here is Ryan Pickrell at The Daily Caller reporting on US president Bill Clinton and how he contributed to the current situation:
President Bill Clinton thought he saved the world from a nuclear North Korea more than two decades ago, but he was wrong.
North Korea now has an intercontinental ballistic missile that can range most of the continental U.S., and a new Defense Intelligence Agency assessment suggests that North Korea has successfully miniaturized nuclear warheads for its missiles. The North is, according to a recent defense intelligence report, expected to be able to field a reliable, nuclear-armed Intercontinental Ballistic Missile as early as next year.
In the early 1990s, Clinton faced a growing nuclear threat from North Korea, but he ultimately chose diplomacy and deals over the application of military force.
“I was determined to prevent North Korea from developing a nuclear arsenal, even at the risk of war,” Clinton wrote in his memoirs. He decided to change course after receiving “a sobering estimate of the staggering losses both sides would suffer if war broke out.”
Before North Korea had nuclear weapons, the anticipated casualty count in the event of a renewed conflict on the (Korean) peninsula was in the hundreds of thousands. Instead of war, Clinton chose the Agreed Framework, promising billions of dollars in aid for a North Korean nuclear freeze.
“This is a good deal for the United States,” he said at the time. “North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program. South Korea and our other allies will be better protected. The entire world will be safer as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons.”
The North Koreans negotiated in bad faith, however, offering false promises to convince the U.S. to unwittingly subsidize their nuclear program. The country began enriching nuclear material, and North Korea conducted its first nuclear test a little over a decade later. North Korea has since continued its steady march to becoming a fully-armed nuclear power.
Evidence suggests that North Korea will achieve its nuclear weapons goals much sooner than analysts and experts previously expected.
North Korea advanced its program throughout the Bush and Obama administrations, bringing the U.S. to the risky situation it now faces.
… While the casualty count in a North Korean crisis might have been high in the 1990s, the cost of a conflict now that North Korea has nuclear weapons would be in the millions.
In Autumn 2000 Clinton secretary of state Madeleine Albright visited North Korea and was seen shamefully pandering. Albright acted very impressed, like a giddy schoolgirl. Conservatives shuddered.
Thus Clinton and Bush and Obama kicked the can down the road. Look again at this pacifist sophistry from Clinton:
“This is a good deal for the United States. North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program. South Korea and our other allies will be better protected. The entire world will be safer as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons.”
And what happened?
Just the opposite. And now president Trump is threatening to act, maybe even to attack North Korea and destroy its nuclear capabilities. Good. We need to resolve this situation before it gets worse. It would be like stopping Hitler in 1937 instead of waiting until 1944 when the stakes were vastly higher. President Trump said:
“North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with the fire and fury like the world has never seen. (North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un) has been very threatening beyond a normal state, and as I said, they will be met with the fire and fury and, frankly, power the likes of which this world has never seen before.”
Great. Congratulations president Trump. Another home run. Naturally the lefties all over the world are quaking, saying that Trump is going to take us into nuclear war. But it is the appeasement policy leading up to Trump that has led us to this point, just as appeasement of Hitler led to World War II.
The Daily Beast reported back in January 2016 about another appeaser named Obama:
News of a North Korean nuclear test earlier this week set off an explosion of finger-pointing by Republican presidential candidates—Barack Obama, they say, is to blame for the American failure to halt the hermit state’s progress on developing weapons.
Normally such a rabid rush to pin a crisis on Obama could be shrugged off as partisanship, but in this case. Nuclear nonproliferation experts agree: Obama, they claim, is responsible for the failure of America to prevent North Korea from expanding its nuclear program. America’s strategy on North Korea in the first years of the Obama administration, was led by the White House and National Security Council.
The Obama administration concept of ‘strategic patience’ emerged early on in the administration after the scathing experience of North Korea’s 2009 nuclear test. The strategy essentially demanded that North Koreans recommit to concrete steps towards denuclearization—such as allowing inspectors and freezing fissile material production—as a precondition of any future talks.
“It meant that the administration didn’t want to be driven by a (North Korea)-orchestrated sense of crisis, and would respond in its own time to North Korean initiatives,” said Scott Synder, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
“The Obama administration came into office with a healthy skepticism of North Korea’s ability to follow through on its commitments.,” explains Daryl Kimball, publisher of Arms Control Today. Given the breakdown of the denuclearization agreement reached under Bush, the Obama administration “came in with the view that before talks began again North Korea should recommit to taking steps to show that they were committed to meeting that pledge.”
It is a strategy that has proven to be a failure, given the most recent nuclear test. North Korea has simply accepted sanctions and international isolation as the cost of a slow and steady expansion of its nuclear weapons program.
“The problem with this approach, while it is well intentioned and principled, it has not worked. The talks have not begun, the Obama administration did want those talks to happen, but they have not begun,” said Kimball. Today North Korea has enough fissile material for roughly 10 to 16 nuclear bombs, Kimball added. “That’s certainly up from where it was a decade ago.. it was perhaps roughly half of that in 2006, 2007, 2008.”
We should be somewhat optimistic about the situation with North Korea. We faced a vastly more dire situation with the Soviet Union and it ended peacefully, but only when president Ronald Reagan got tough. After all, evil people only understand force. They are not interested in diplomacy.
(Please bookmark this website and send this article by e-mail to your friends. And please recommend this site to all of your friends via Facebook and any other means. Let’s make Nikitas3.com the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. And if you would like to contribute to Nikitas3.com, please click the link at the upper right where it says “support this site”. Thank you, Nikitas)