Why don't we "liberate north korea?

Question

The u.s. seems to be in a liberating mood, so why not north korea or Cuba? If liberating is the reason we are there, why not go to other countries? oh thats right, north korea has no oil, its no good.

Answer 1

I am currently living here in South Korea; your question is not a simple question to answer.

If you could imagine a million+ army that are fanatically devoted to the "Great Leader" Kim, Jong-Il that would immediately die if he commanded it, you would possibly get the sense of why the question is not simple to answer.

That size army doesn't include the civilian (reserve) people who would also die on command for the fanatical Leader.

Then to, children are taught from an early age how to handle and use the AK-47.

People are taught from birth that the "Great Leader" is responsible for their very being in existance.

Believe it or not, some of the very first words children are taught are "Great Leader" along with "Kim, Jong-Il."

The children are taught their very first love is for the "Great Leader," this even comes before their parents !!

When you have the time, I recommend you do a search on the Internet and find articles written by the author named

Andrei Lankov

This man lived in North Korea as an exchange student back in the '80's. His research is impeccable.

After reading some of his articles, you would have insight into just how conditions are over there.

Answer 2

Have to agree with you - no oil, no liberation.

But why is Bush so upset with North Korea? Maybe because North Korea has this unreasonable nuclear ambition and this America cannot tolerate.

America will only condone or allow "friendly" countries to have nuclear capabilities eg Israel, India, Pakistan. North Korea and Iran are considered unfriendly or 'evil' and therefore should be put on notice of possible military strikes if they continue with their nuclear programmes.

However, posturing is one thing and actual military action is quite another matter. Between North Korea and Iran, the latter is the choice for more sabre rattling. Why? For its oil, of course.

Unfortunately for America, no amount of threat or persuasion has thus far any effect on North Korea to deprogramme. Worse, North Korea is not even worried, at least outwardly, about possible military confrontations. So the futile six-nation jawings go on and then off and then back on again. On the positive side though, such direct and social engagements should continue.

With Iran, the stage seems set for for more tough talk and maybe even limited actions. There is however, little hope of scaring the Iranians from scuttling their nuclear ambitions and strong words so far have little effect.

One must give the Americans credit for lateral thinking for they have now blamed a large part of the insurgency activities in Iraq on the Iranians. This twist will give the USA licience to kill or for military skirmishes into Iraq. Large scale war similar to the Iraqi invasion is however, unlikely. Bush has taken on about as much as mighty America can handle.

North Korea is a sovereign state and is no body's fool to tolerate any direct interference in its own affairs. One does not hear of any cry to plea for "liberation", not that there is much that comes out of that country anyway. It has survived since the Korean War, no thanks to the Americans and will continue to with or without the outside world.

It is perhaps best that the world, particularly the Americans, leave well enough alone and this means North Korea. Military confrontation may develop into something even the America may not contain nor have the stomach for.

Right now, America's self-assumed moral high ground does not hold well. It has the biggest nuclear arsenal that can annihilate the world many times over and is still continuing to develop better and more powerful nuclear arms with even more efficiient delivery systems. It is condoning and helping nuclear developments in India and Pakistan and have yet to say anything negative about Israel's nuclear capability and yet it is desperate to stop Iran and North Korea. This stand is worse than double standard.

To have any credibility at all in trying to limit nuclear proliferation, America should first sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and then quickly disarm and destroy its own vast nuclear arsenal and then at the same time get the British, the French and the Chinese to do likewise, besides forcing Israel, India and Pakistan to forthwith cease and desist. We do know, however, such a utopian state will never be achieved. Our best hope is that more nations (Japan?) will not join the nuclear club.

Answer 3

Bush did liberate Iraq... Syria and Libya were next in his plans.
I don't understand why some Americans support freeing others from oppression and others do not but consider this. HwBush sent troops into Somalia as peacekeepers, to end genocide. Clinton pulled them out. Then Clinton blocked UN efforts in Rwanda as over 500 thousand were butchered with machettes. And you can argue that Bush liberated Iraq for oil...very weakly...but there is a very strong argument that it was to spread democracy, reduce the tyranny that causes radical fundamentalism. Even Obama has said many times that the ONLY way terrorism will end is where people can express themselves through democracy. From his actions it seems he doesn't believe his own words.
We are at the End of History...all the world's governments will be democratic...even N Korea. Hegel was right.

Answer 4

North Korea isn't a real risk to united states. The North Korean have sufficient problems with their own leaders that they do no longer choose for us invading and inflicting extra issues. If we had stable intelligence that the North Koreans have been able to, and silly sufficient, launching a WMD against Japan (or yet another Allie) we would be justified in eliminating that risk.

Answer 5

Yeah, and let's not forget that 'liberating' North Korea would require about 7 times as big a military commitment than we've made in the middle east

Answer 6

We don't have any business in North Korea. As for Cuba, I hope the USA won't give up Guantanamo, until Cuba becomes free of Communism. Irak? well homes, what do you expect, we're going to be there for nothing? Think again.

Answer 7

america is usually in the liberating mood cause when conservatives are in power they have more to do with the world internationally than compared to liberal thinkers who only care about welfare at home. Cuba isn't worth anything and North Korea has mother China watching her Ps&Qs, so we have no real desire to mess in some areas. Now Iraq was different cause most of Iraqis wanted us to liberate shiites from the Sunnis and most neighbors near iraq wanted saddam out of power..... so here we are standing in kaka cause we tried to help and yet other world countries aren't much help and neither is a lot of our own citizens cause most people have short attention spans and really only care about their own-selves in the long haul.

Answer 8

We probably wouldn't invade North Korea because Seoul (capital of the 11th biggest economy in the world) would be in ruins. I agree that lack of oil, but I think some of it has to do more with the fact it would also start a war with China.

Answer 9

North Korea will kick our ***!!!

That's why I'm working out and getting ready for the draft!

Get Ready!

Answer 10

The million man army won't back down so easily. If we get upset because 3,000 of our soldiers died in a country that one day may benefit us, oil. Imagine if 10,000 of our soldiers died in a country with no strategic value. Plus if we upset china we upset
Wal-mart.