The U.S. rushed into Iraq over the same issues that we are having with N Korea. Why aren't we attacking Korea

Question

The reasons we were given for rushing into Iraq were terrorist connections, treatment of the citizens and the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction... and a lot of this was just unproven intelligence. With North Korea.. we KNOW of terrorist ties.. and we have undeniable proof that Kim Il has, and is testing Nukes... yet we're trying to be diplomatic? If we were ever justified in going into Iraq... then how can a MUCH BIGGER threat be treated so lightly?

Answer 1

Perhaps it has something to do with the terms of the cease fire after Gulf War 1. North Korea hasn't violated that cease fire agreement.

Therefore, as of this moment, President Bush doesn't have the same grounds to attach NK.

Answer 2

No, they weren't the same issues, not in the least. This claim is not true. So, are you lying or just plain ignorant? Because it is one or the other. This is not subject to opinion, because the reasons for going into Iraq are on record. The situation with North Korea is not comparable in the least.

I'm still trying to figure out the 'rushing' part of this. There was a long, slow build up, starting with debates in Congress and statements in speeches and introduction of resolutions and debate in the UN. After that, then the coalition was formed, and then it was deployed to the Iraqi border, and Saddam was still being given a chance to let the UN inspectors resume their work. At that point, after months and months, the invasion occurred. That, my friends, is the slowest 'rush' to war in the history of the world.

Answer 3

Your question shows a fundamental lack of historical knowledge and is what is known as a "straw man" argument. What you leave out is that the US and the world (through the UN) spent over 20 years trying to deal diplomatically with Iraq. Therefore, we did not "rush in." It was only after an extended and extensive diplomatic effort that Iraq was invaded. Given time, the same may happen in North Korea.

Answer 4

The problem is the People's Republic of China. I'm sure they would take a very dim view of U.S. hostilities against a country with which it shares a border.
Even if China refrained from attacking US military forces in N. Korea, it could very well take some powerful economic steps to cripple us. If China stopped exporting things to us and dumped its reserve of dollars onto the world market, the US economy would most likely go haywire. We could face either hyperinflation or a deflation in the currency, which could throw the entire country into a serious depression.
N Korea is like a criminal resting on top of a lion. We want to apprehend the criminal without waking up the lion. This is going to require some finesse.

Answer 5

You can't have it both ways. You whine because you think we rushed into Iraq but now you want us to rush into North Korea. Make up your minds. Thank you for the question. This is the perfect example of liberal hypocrisy. No matter what we do it will never be the correct action to you people. You crave power more then American (and worldwide) safety. I thought diplomacy was always the answer?

Answer 6

That would be for two simple reasons:

1. North Korea really does haves of weapons of mass destruction

2. North Korea does not have any significant oil reserves

Answer 7

we are already at warfare with North Korea, we concluded the Korean warfare with an armistice not a peace treaty. they have executed this style of project beforehand and they're going to do it lower back, i do not imagine getting into an uproar about that is going to do us any sturdy. as well South Korea is replaced into hit a lot harder then we were and they are in a miles more suitable useful position to reply.

Answer 8

We should have,but instead Clinton gave them the means to make nuclear weapons.We allowed N.K. to get to a point where it may cost a great deal to stop them.
What we are doing in the Mid-East is trying to prevent more N.K.s.Are you so brain dead that you really do not understand this.
We invested over twelve years of diplomacy in Iraq and three presidents.Don't you think that was long enough to figure out the man was not going to be peaceful?

Answer 9

us is just pretending to be diplomatic. clinton gave north korea the reactors to produce uranium and pakistan, which is a US ally and controlled by the CIA, gave north korea the enrichment technology. so their whole bomb came courtesy of the united states, which is now trying to use the bomb scenario as a pretext for defending japan from a korean invasion

and the big picture here is that the uS empire is moving down, and china is coming up. so if the US is going to fight china for control, better sooner than later.

US wants war for world domination. that is what's happening. america is the dictatorship of dictatorships.

Answer 10

there is a financial down side to war with korea .MADE in korea is not the south always it is north korea too.
WE have huge investments and destroying the infrastructure and destabelizing the region would serve no purpose except to harm profits of american owned company's that do business with korea.
PLUS china has lill kim's back and we do not want to have wal mart or the steal industry or plastics harmed with bad relations with china.ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.