« Stuff on foreign policy | Main | Stuff »

March 30, 2008



Any reasonable person would have to be very afraid of the DPRK regime obtaining nuclear weapons. This is a government which has on several occasions attempted to assassinate leading officials of the ROK, including in 1983 bombing an airliner containing South Korean cabinet ministers. I see no justification for a belief that the leadership of the slave state that is DPRK is anything but mentally unbalanced.

Joshua Collison

Oliver, do you recommend the Iraq treatment for all those countries who could one day soon pose a nuclear threat to us? Obviously those states that already have nuclear weapons, and are on our watch list of enemies, will be off the list as far as invasion goes. So no attack on Pakistan or North Korea. Venezuela would be great but it's too far away and Chavez isn't being painted as the devil too blatantly just yet. Zimbabwe and Sudan don't offer any great strategic potential. Too early for Syria. The clear answer to our game of "spot the soon to be bombed" is Iran. So it is up to us, the most terrified, most cowardly, most spineless, least willing to take on anyone we can't easily crush, bunch of heavily armed eco-warriors to, well, easily crush the despotic, sexist, homophobic, barbaric Iranian regime (and in the process kill tens or possibly hundreds of thousands of peace-loving, innocent, Iranian regime hating Iranians). Would it not be wiser, and more in keeping with left-wing values, to aid those inside (and Iranians outside) the Republic who wish for the kind of society that we would deem tolerable? Surely with ours and the US's history of toppling regimes (or democratically elected goverments) we would be perfectly suited to this role rather than a military assault? We don't have such a good record when it comes to achieving the publicly stated goals of our military intervention (Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq).

The comments to this entry are closed.