North Korea, China, and the Bomb

Word is coming in that there is activity at the nuclear test site in North Korea. There is the arrival of soldiers, trucks, and most incriminating is the construction of a building. Further there appears to be the construction of a second site that mirrors the first site. Are these the actions of a remorseful nation? But what might be very interesting is the involvement of China in the procedings.

Yes, it is true that China is trading in North Korea expecially for Iron Ore. China has now stood before the international community and stated that North Korea has explicitly promised no new detonations unless provoked. This is an unusual situation that calls for a bit of attention.

On October 9th, 2006 Kim ordered the detonation of a nuclear blast. He apparently only informed China 20 minutes before he decided to provoke the whole world. It is important to note the loss of face that Kim Jong Mad has dished China. China is no fool and does not really trust North Korea with a nuke. But China does not want to appear to be unsupportive of one of the few Communist countries in the world. Further China does not wish to lose its valuable trade with North Korea.

What to watch for? Watch for China playing it aloof until the second detonation. At that point China will come to the table and will begin to put serious pressure on North Korea. China does not want a war in that area of the world and certainly does not want to get pulled into a conflict with the USA without the benefit of preparation and surprise.

Further, watch for Kim to try to fix his nuke since the first one almost fizzled. It may take them awhile to try to figure out what went wrong. This may play into the political strategy since it allows them to cool down the international situation before blowing up another mountain. Unless we pull out of Korea expect them to detonate another nuke sooner or later.

Irrelevancy of Winning in Iraq

Yes, it is irrelevant if we are winning in Iraq. It only matters at the end of the day who wins. We were losing the whole duration of the American Revolution. We had our capitol burned to the ground in the War of 1812. The Union was losing for most of the Civil War. Certainly we were losing for most of WWII.


The question must not be whether or not we are winning in Iraq but what must be done to win in Iraq. Though it may seem like a word game remember that words are thoughts. A simple change in phrasing can change the whole world. Liberals run around crying that we cannot win in Iraq. How can we not win in Iraq if we choose to do so? We outnumber the Iraqis 11 to 1. Our GDP is 460 times greater than Iraq's GDP. If we were to dedicate 1% of the nation's income to winning in Iraq we would have the buying power of four and a half times the amount of goods and services that Iraq produces in a year.

Iraq Total Population: 26,783,383
USA Total Population: 300,000,000

Iraq GDP: $25.5 Billion 2004 (whitehouse.gov)
USA GDP: $11,733.5 Billion 2004 (econstats.com)

In short the real reason we have not won in Iraq is that we don't want to win (at least not yet). Now hold on before you get all sad and depressed. We are choosing to not "win" now so that there will be a lasting peace. Sure we would like to destroy the insurgency but we don't want to do many of the things necessary to destroy it. Sure we could shoot every military age male in Iraq and the insurgency would be effectively over. But we don't want to do that. It would have a detrimental effect on the formation of democracy.

In short we can win whenever we wish regardless of what panzie liberals will say. But as the Bush administration has clearly laid out. (not that the liberals have actually read the plan before disagreeing with it) The solution that we are involved in is going to take time. We are building a lasting democracy. The liberals say its impossible but we say that it is possible it simply is going to take time.

We can win whenever we want to and are winning as we please. That is the power of our 11.7 trillion dollar economy. (Note: we reportedly have a 13.1 trillion dollar economy now)(Further note: that increase is equivelant to the GDP of India, Indonesia, AND Iran)

What about Sudan?

When was the last time you heard about Sudan? Dafur and the UN Peacekeeping force are little talked about subjects when it comes to current events. This is a very important topic when it comes to terrorism though. The Sudan is a perfect breeding ground for the very brutal and inhuman terrorists that we face in Iraq and here at home.


Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said last month "What the al Qaeda in Iraq could do in May and what they can do today has been seriously degraded. They are not as effective or as organized today as they were back in May. But they're still an organization out there." The general said about 50 to 70 foreign fighters enter Iraq every month. "We know that most of them come from Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Egypt and Syria."


I can understand Saudia Arabia, I can even understand Egypt but Sudan is an awfully long way from home. The reason that we are fighting Sudanese fighters is that these hard core Islamafascists are highly experienced soldiers who are indoctrinated in radical teachings.

I would like to point out that the human rights abuses in that region merit much more media attention than Mr. Foley's disturbing actions.(as horrible as they are) Darfur is almost infinitly more bloody than even Iraq. These human rights attrocities demand action. There needs to be African Peacekeepers in there. There needs to be someone in there.

We have a special interest in stabilizing the Sudan but so does the world.

PS- I don't care if Sudan wants to reject peacekeepers. This mini-holocost needs to stop.