I'm sympathetic to the cause of stopping both dictators and starvation, but how would we do this?Moliere wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:58 amSo under no circumstances do we have a policy of humanitarian intervention. Millions can starve and suffer under this regime and we do nothing?
Would we have a plan ready and in place to feed those millions the hour we crossed the DMZ? Yes, life sucks for the North Koreans, but it will suck even more if we destroy what little economy and food networks are in place and then discover that we can't get a replacement system running for six months. A whole lotta millions will starve in that time. South Korea can't take them, and that's even if Seoul is still standing.
More than anything else, Iraq proved that we have no idea what we're doing when it comes to regime change. The provisional government's very first official action was to demobilize the Iraqi military; with the stroke of a pen we humiliated a hundred thousand trained soldiers and put them out on the street, and then we acted surprised when the insurrection swelled with experienced, resentful fighters.
But even then we didn't have starvation because Iraq had a functioning economy and plenty of oil to attract interested parties. What does NK have?
This was on Bush/Cheney's watch. I don't think anyone expects the current administration to act with greater forethought and competence.