Gary

I think you may be underestimating the difficulty of bombing North Korea to eliminate all possible nuclear weapons.

As of February 2005 the US Defense Intelligence Agency analysts were reported to believe that North Korea may already have produced as many as 12 to 15 nuclear weapons. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke.htm

The alleged nuclear test hence may under-represent what may be a more advanced state of North Korean nuclear weapons development.

As the weapons (even large ones) are portable they may have been hidden anywhere on North Korea's surface or buried in bunkers for later use.

An airstike is therefore dangerous (not because of North Korea's army, or weak air defences) but because there are too many possible targets (hiding places) for the US to be sure it has destroyed all the nukes. see this Targetting List http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/target.htm

Furthermore China and Russia would have strong reservations about the US destroying a close neighbour and so are unlikely to agree to an air attack.

While an airstike is a possibility I think it has only a 30% chance of occurring.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

About blardy time Brushy :) your finally asking the right questions of China (and I hope of N.Korea and the Islamo radicals closer to home)

From this point on, my post is simply the cold hard brutal and honest voice of human common sense.

BUT
I saw no mention in the posts of this clear threat..

"Talk to us face to face....or we will put Nukes on Missiles"

Missiles ? aimed where ? clearly... AT THE PEOPLE YOU ARE THREATENING.

'WHY' ?... clearly.. to DESTROY THEM.

I take that to be "pay us money or we will begin the process of thermo nuclear war against you"

Which I interpret as an act of war, for which there can only be ONE answer.

*Take them out NOW, or.. face the 'long term' annihilation they are now promising*

It's not an issue of whether the USA can take them on..its a matter of a chain of command and some buttons being pressed. Pyong Yang would probably be sufficient, as it would take out not only Kim Jong IL, but also most of the N.Koreans who worship him.

Yes.. MASSIVE loss of life.. but not ours.

Wait..and the massive loss WILL be 'ours'.

Armageddon draweth nigh ? (not on the Korean peninsula, but in due course this could lead to a believable scenario)

6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains. (Math 24)

Sobering words of our Lord:

"27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man."

As Ripley says.."Believe it....or not"

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=24&version=31

(a read of the whole chapter might focus our minds somewhat.)

DB,

“From this point on, my post is simply the cold hard brutal and honest voice of human common sense.”

LOL – Hardly!

I wonder how many people are aware that Clinton made a promise to North Korea back in 1994 that if they halted their nuclear weapons programme, the USA would provide them with food,fuel and two lightwater reactors. This was known as "the Framework Agreement".

North Korea agreed but the US never delivered on their promise.

They had a good deal but they blew it.

Bush is now refusing to talk to Pyonyang and the only solution appears to be military or the imposition of economic sanctions, both of which would potentially aggravate China and cost a lot of human lives.

Perhaps some sort of trade agreement would be more suitable for all parties, before it's too late.

Thanks Gary for the interesting (and timely) analysis. The one problem with the thesis from my perspective was that the DPKR already possesses a fairly serious deterrent with its conventional weapons aimed at Soul. Surely these would be put into use if the US started bombing the country.

A very difficult issue, but Boazy’s take them out now option is virtually impossible.

Nth Korea is not Iraq. It has the 4th largest army in the world and has been at war for 50 years. There has never been a ceasefire.
Any attempt to attack would result in Seoul being demolished within hours by conventional weapons.

What has happened over the past few years is a result of a change in US policy? The ‘axis of evil” speech is in many ways to blame.

The year after Bush's speech, North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Later in 2003, several right-wing political strategists (the neoconservatives, led by Richard Perle) favored by the Bush Administration called for military strikes in North Korea against its nuclear sites.

Given the threat by the US to bomb North Korea surely it is a natural response to find any means to prevent this.