The Importance Of Being Strong

These are dangerous times for America.
Nothing exemplifies that statement more than the recent decision by North Korea to fire half a dozen missiles (one of them of the long-range variety that could theoretically reach our western states) in our general direction. Granted, these missiles didn’t get very far – they all landed in the Sea of Japan – but that fact is irrelevant. These were test firings aimed at identifying problems with the missiles. Even in failure these launchings have brought the North Koreans closer to being able to deliver a nuclear payload within our borders.
What is America doing in reaction to this threat from North Korea? As I write this our response has not yet been made entirely clear by our leaders, but for the sake of our country’s safety (and international stability) I can only hope that whatever we do is both a strong and decisive rebuke of that country’s actions. And by “strong” I mean something more threatening than a strongly-worded statement issued from the UN Security Council or even directly from the White House.
Anything less makes America look weak in the eyes of it’s enemies, and appearing weak to our enemies makes Americans less safe.
You’d think that the wisdom of the above statement would be self-evident, but unfortunately not everyone in America gets it. Instead many advocate for a softer, gentler approach to foreign policy. They feel that all problems can be solved through diplomacy and that displays of American military strength and prowess only serve to unite our enemies against us.
This, to my mind, is a dangerous manner of thinking. I’ll not argue against diplomacy as I firmly believe that we should avoid war when we can, but I also believe that in recent years we have been far too soft in our foreign policy.
Historically, North Korea is a good example of this. In August of 1998 that country fired a Taepdong-1 missile (the predecessor to the longer-range missile I mentioned above) over Japan. What was America’s reaction under then-President Bill Clinton? Three months later America initiated diplomatic talks with Pyongyang, which ultimately resulted in the lifting of sanctions against North Korea and a contract for delivery of two power plant nuclear reactors from the United States.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • http://Array WOOF

    Bush formally wiithdrew from the 1994 Agreed Framework agreement with the N Koreans ( fuel oil and light water reactors), in Oct 2002.

    The North Koreans expelled the international inspectors, broke the locks on the fuel rods, loaded them onto a truck, and drove them to a nearby reprocessing facility, to be converted into bomb-grade plutonium. The White House stood by and did nothing.


    Korea? We’re Going To Iraq!

  • http://www.dartemis.net/users/r_g_graves/ sayanything-42

    WOOF,

    You really should expand your information sources:

    The Crawford Kid hasn’t begun to give up the fight
    MacRanger
    Sunday, July 09, 2006

    Fourty[sic] years ago, Time Magazine delcared “God is Dead”. Well they were wrong. Now Time magazine says the Crawford Kid has been de-spurred, the “Bush Doctrine is over!”….

    Well again they are wrong, for the Times UK, tells us that is far from the case:

    “PROGRAMME of covert action against nuclear and missile traffic to North Korea and Iran is to be intensified after last week’s missile tests by the North Korean regime. Intelligence agencies, navies and air forces from at least 13 nations are quietly co-operating in a “secret war” against Pyongyang and Tehran.

    It has so far involved interceptions of North Korean ships at sea, US agents prowling the waterfronts in Taiwan, multinational naval and air surveillance missions out of Singapore, investigators poring over the books of dubious banks in the former Portuguese colony of Macau and a fleet of planes and ships eavesdropping on the “hermit kingdom” in the waters north of Japan.

    Few details filter out from western officials about the programme, which has operated since 2003, or about the American financial sanctions that accompany it.

    Then you might want to look at Captain’s Quarters for the other outrages that have encouraged the Bush Administration to eschew direct two party negotiations with North Korea.

    Out Here
    Rodney Graves
    rodney.g.graves@gmail.com

  • diane

    Woof, yes, we went to Iraq.

    Dumb, huh? When Iraq was probably the least ‘dangerous’ in terms of immediate threat, than the other ‘Evil’ axisees.

    But then, we never did go to Iraq because they were a threat, certainly no immediate one.

    I’m sure you know why we went, WOOF.

  • robert108

    Woof: I realize some of us have trouble walking and chewing gum at the same time, but not our military. We really can handle this. I know you were really worried about that(not).

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development