Should the US bribe/aid countries like N. Korea to get them to stop their WMD programs or should we invade....

Question

them instead, like Iraq? Which do you think is more of a bargin: a $1 billion bribe/aid package where no one dies or an $400 Billon invasion where many thousands die?

Answer 1

In terms of money the answer is clear: $1 billion for no lives lost seems like a better deal. Whether N. Korea will keep its word and not further their nuclear research is another story altogether.

Answer 2

Since 1995, the US has contributed over $ 1 billion dollars in aid to North Korea, of which $400 million has been in the form of energy aid. The energy aid was put in place, in part, as an incentive for North Korea to abandon their (then) existing plutonium enrichment program. NKorea, in fact, did just the opposite.
The US, along with other countries, has provided the balance of it's aid in humanitarian relief, at least in part in exchange for access to basic human rights for the North Korean people. That hasn't happened either. In 2006 NKorea ranked 159th out of 159 countries by the World Liberty index, an organization that draws on several other surveys to create their own composite index of liberty/economic freedom. They also rank at or near the bottom with other organizations like Amnesty International.

On both fronts the North Koreans have dealt in bad faith. They have in fact, proved themselves to be liars who can't be trusted.

Complicit in their duplicity is The Republic of China who, still fighting the Cold War apparently, continue to prop up and support this brutal regime. To what end, one can only speculate. I would think they would be embarassed.
To answer your question, I think the US and the 6 party group (excluding China) are just throwing good money after bad. Putting pressure on China is the key to solving the dilemma in North Korea. That, and getting rid of one of the worlds last great lunatic tin-pot dictators, Kim Jong-il, would make more sense than entering into another meaningless agreement that will just be ignored anyways.

Answer 3

I think that negotiation is ALWAYS better than war. And, no - we shouldn't "invade" Korea or any other sovereign nation. We shouldn't have "invaded" Iraq; we shouldn't "invade" Iran.

The problem is that Mr. Bush doesn't have the intelligence, the knowledge or the skill to handle negotiations with anyone. I'm truly surprised that there is an effort towards North Korea, feeble as it is.

Answer 4

"Eternal Storm -Their nuclear programs are not for making WMD, like what Bush said happened in Iraq. They are researching nuclear power as an energy source because their oil is either running out or they want something cleaner than oil."

I sure hope you're joking. If not, we're in more trouble than I ever imagined.

Answer 5

Their nuclear programs are not for making WMD, like what Bush said happened in Iraq. They are researching nuclear power as an energy source because their oil is either running out or they want something cleaner than oil.

Answer 6

thye should proly just leave them alone and let them blow themselves up