North Korea ad nauseum

Ohay, I still haven't offered a 'solution' to the North Korea thing, but Nathanael has responded to my own commentary, saying "It seems that Nato was thinking of “hitting” North Korea, or at any rate, of being able to."

About which he is fully correct. Being able to cast doubt on North Korea's ability to deliver its nukes gives a great deal more leverage in negotiations, and of course, gives us some in hope of preventing unthinkable in case negotiations fail catastrophically. It still leaves them with a lot of leverage, but you do the best you can with what you have.

Something else he said is also important to note:

Nato suggests that Kim Jong Il would “respond” with his “gigantic army.” Why? If we did take out his nukes, North Korea would be in no better position to invade South Korea than at any time in the past fifty years. And why punish South Korea, or even Japan, for what the US did?

North Korea is a good bit more desperate than they've ever been before. Millions of people are starving, their electrical infrastructure is breaking down, and so on. South Korea has food, resources, and offers a distraction from internal dissent. Meanwhile, by striking North Korea we are, technically, committing an act of war. South Korea is our close ally. While I doubt much of the world would be on North Korea's side, I don't think the rest of the world would admit that our moral position is exactly flawless. And in Kim Jong Il's mind, that might well be enough.