----- Original Message ----- From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 10:03 AM Subject: Re: N Korea threatens to 'destroy world'
>_Of course_ we treat Iraq and North > Korea differently. That isn't a sign of hypocrisy, > it's a sign of rationality. I can appreciate that, since I wrote something similar. But, when you read the administrations take on both Iraq and North Korea, it appears that they consider Iraq a much more serious threat than North Korea, and therefore the first we should attack. It appears that your arguement, and mine are both that we are not talking about attacking N. Korea because N. Korea is more dangerous than Iraq now, not less. So, it appears the administration is speaking falsely about its reasoning. I can guess at some of the reasons the administration wants to downplay the crisis in North Korea, but it still doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't just give the appearance of a polite diplomatic fiction, it gives the appearnce that the administration isn't thinking clearly, that it is so obsessed with Hussein, it is not considering the real needs of US security. >From what I read, given the present state of the sanctions, if we try to apply containment to Iraq, they may have a A-bomb or two with a medium range delivery capacity in 5 years. If we apply the same principals to N. Korea, they may have 50 with some delverable by true ICBMs to the US West. Is that a reasonable assessment? If so, isn't N. Korea more dangerous? Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
