Why Bush doesn't want to attack North Korea?

Question

Of the three axes of evil that Bush mentioned, why Bush only attacked Iraq and doesn't seem to want to attack North Korea which really has weapon of mass destruction?

Answer 1

N.Korea has no allies. The fact that USA and South Korea make up over 25% of chinas income is the reason why china will most likely HELP when we take out Lil Kim.

And Russia is disorganized to the point of it being a non issue.

We are technically still at war with north korea since the korean war. So taking out lil kim with a single missle will not ne assasination. It will be a continuation and finishing of the war which took over 55,000 american soldiers lives.


WE ARE NOT GOING TO WAR WIT NORTH KOREA NOW the same reason of Sudan. Too much HUMANITARIAN aid will be needed to help the terroble condition civilians there. That is what we are planning for. The international comunity cannot be relied on to just come up with the help needed to get those people food and water.

Funny thing is , the planning we are doign to get food and aid to the starving civilians of north korea is more, adn will be more than Lil Kim has done for his people in the past 30(or however many) years.

Answer 2

i could desire and pray that President Bush could use each ability available to circumvent a militia war of words with any u . s . a .. the certainty that we've not been bodily attacked by using N Korea is a plus and if we can defuse the region and attain a verifiable contract i'm serious approximately it. conflict could desire to be the final motel of any war of words. North Korea's threats and movements have pushed the international to the fringe of nuclear conflict and in the event that they attack seek for the draft to be imposed. i do no longer comprehend if China desires a great glass automobile parking zone to its east or no longer yet South Korea could desire to apply the gap. N. Korea has neither the resourses or inhabitants to sustain a conflict with out chinese language or Russian help and what we've is a regime that has been coddled and assisted by using 2 international places that don't love us.

Answer 3

Does it strike you as odd that the first target of the "axis of evil" was Iraq? Well, what does Iraq have that North Korea doesn't? Oil is the answer.
In Iraq the oil buddies of the Bush junta got their payback to get their boy into the White House. Since we are already close to Iran, the second on the axis-of-evil-list, we might as well invade them too. That would not only secure a larger pie of the oil cake, but would also protect Israel from Iran's support of Hezbollah.

Why not go to North Korea you may ask? Well, do they have oil? Nope. All they have is a starving populace. What would the oil buddies of the Bush junta get out of that? Nothing, nada, zilch. All the Bush junta would have to show for is a humanitarian catastrophe on their hands. Millions of mouths to feed and voters screaming about the loss of money into North Korea.

Bush will never attack North Korea, no matter how much nuclear weapons they will amass.

Answer 4

They are going to, it's just that now they are making preparations such as estimating the number of weapons NK possess, whether other countries are supporting them, etc. They definitely do not want to make the same mistake as the Vietnam war again.

Answer 5

They say you can tell who walks the walk and who talks the talk when the sh*t hit's the fan. Before they tested nukes, Bush could've stopped them. Now that they have them, all Bush is doing is talking. Iraq never had 'em, and Bush didn't think twice before going in there.

October 9, 2006; the day the sh*t officially hit the fan.

Answer 6

What did the Koreans do to the USA to warrant a military strike? It tested its nuclear device underground in their own country; did not directly threaten any other neighbouring country nor the US; and just sabre-rattled. DPRK did what it did because the US refused to talk directly to them but impose pre-conditions / proposed sanctions.

Answer 7

First, the military is overextended. Second, that war was fought and lost already. Third, NK's president is a total nutter, as opposed to Saddam who was only half ripped. Fourth, there's no huge oil repository in NK.

Could go on and on, but that would take all day.

Answer 8

Every situation is different. We tried with Iraq for 12 years to get them to abide by the cease-fire.

We may get to that point with North Korea, where a military solution is necessary.

I assume you would support such action, judging by your question.

Answer 9

Altruism has paralyzed him, and most of our country. We feed these clowns (and the Palestinians -- despite their election of Hamas). If we merely stopped feeding our enemies, we'd probably be in a lot less trouble.

Answer 10

I'm no fan of George Bush but maybe, just maybe, he doesn't want to thousands dead on both sides unless it is absolutely necessary. I know that didn't stop him in Iraq but we can hope he can learn from his mistakes.