North Korea wants to be an attention whore again...

What you've got to understand about North Korea is that its particular brand of communism is almost completely unique. Making compatibility with the world "free-market" almost impossible, Kim knows this, even China has a rather competitive capitalist infrastructure which is why it has become such a huge economic player. Uniting the Korean Peninsula is also sort of a big thing, too. It's a huge portion of Korean history (Romance of the Three Kingdoms, anyone?), and Kim believes his family has a right to rule a united Korea unmitigated.

Although, it should be noted that North Korea's build-up of weapons is due to a political maneuvering strategy. Related to Agreed Framework, which Clinton-Era congress and Bush dropped the ball on. That's when North Korea decided to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The deal was South Korea would build two light water reactors for the DPRK in support of the goals for reliable energy infrastructure and we were to ship oil to North Korea. It was a deal cut in response to a suspicion that North Korea might be enriching plutonium, because at the time they were using plutonium/graphite reactors-- which you'll notice a lot of countries with fledgling nuclear programs use, because it does not require the enrichment or advanced techniques employed with newer reactor technologies.

I think North Korea at one point was much more willing to work with the U.S. and the other Western powers, but due to mismanagement and an unwilligness to resume one-on-one talks things have taken a darker turn.

Would North Korea win an extended engagement against Coalition forces? No. Would they inflict heavy casualties upon us and our allies? Yes. Are we willing to accept those casualties? That's the question that remains unanswered. Personally, I wouldn't, especially since this really is a situation that can be solved through diplomatic means.

Why do I say it can be "solved" through diplomatic means? Because, ultimately it boils down to money and resources. Kim wants a prosperous North Korea, that won't happen if he continues his father's doctrine of self-reliance. He has even been quoted, on one of his diplomatic visits to China, praising the Chinese economic advancements-- due to their adaptation of a market-economy in the 80's. Sure, it's not going to happen overnight, but I'd say a revisitation of something similar to Agreed Framework would most likely accomplish our immediate goal of disarmament along the DPRK/ROK border and provide the DPRK with a valuable resource.

Quite honestly, something similar would probably work with Iran. However, that situation is a lot more complicated than dealing with North Korea. It's pretty easy to discern what the DPRK's objectives are.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Quote:

Where the hell'd Korea come into question in RoTK?

My understanding is that Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a chinese retelling of the relationship between the three Kingdoms on the Korean Peninsula: Silla, Goguryeo and Baekje.

At that time, Koreans primarily used Hanja (chinese characters) for written record. So, considering that all of this took place several hundred years before (concluding c. 935) RoTK was written (in the 1300s), is it not probable? And, I'm unsure, but I thought I read somewhere that some of the names might be transliterations of Hanja into Chinese.

I could be entirely mistaken, as I might've taken the story completely out of context. China had also experienced a period of seperation after the fall of the Han Dynasty (c. 200?). Albeit lasting less than 80 years.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Kim wouldn't have to relinquish his seat of power, though. When did I suggest in my scenario that Kim would be stepping down?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Kim has a ridiculously huge melon. I mean, seriously.

And that woman has no chin. Why did we send madeline? Can't we send not-fat Americans to represent America?

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?