nihilism, nukes and North Korea

So, North Korea purportedly did an underground test of a nuclear bomb yesterday. If the 4.3 Richter reading reported was a nuke test, it could not have been a plutonium bomb, and is thought to have been a dud.

We all knew that N. Korea was working towards possessing a nuke capability, and there has been much sabre-rattling, and posturing on the part of the United States administration, but over-whelmingly, I have sensed almost an ambivalence to the issue. China seems to have distanced itself somewhat, and has hinted at restricting energy aid to N.K., but ruled out food aid restrictions. Iran seems to be ambivalent as well, and is likely watching to see what happens as they pursue their own nuclear ambitions. North Korea has been thought to have the bomb for the last ten years, or so, but not the delivery system (missiles capable of carrying it). If they do have it, they are the 9th country (although Isreal has not admitted it yet).

So what to do about it? Cut off aid? Impose sanctions? That will accomplish little - as the North Korean people have been dealing with famine and such for years. It seems that the military (and bomb and missile making) have been higher priorities than the people for a long, long time. A naval blockade? That could trigger problems with China - who for sure has nukes, and delivery systems capable of reaching into North America. Send in ground forces? Umm, North Korea has a highly trained standing army of about a million soldiers. The U.S. is bogged down in Iraq, so unless they draft a huge segment of the population, where will the troops come from? Other options? Well, the U.S, or the U.K., or France could nuke 'em, but a) isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? and b) it could set off a nuclear conflict to destroy all life on this planet. Ignore it and hope for the best (as in India and Pakistan)? Diplomacy?

And why shouldn't N. Korea, or Iran, or Luxembourg, or Honduras, or Calgary have nukes? Because the U.S. and her allies don't want them to? If the bully in the school yard (and his coterie of wannabe thugs) have big sticks, and are constantly threatening to take (and are taking) your lunch money, and beating the crap out of the other weaklings, why wouldn't you arm yourself with your very own big stick? This is the so-called nuclear deterrent. Mutually assured destruction is a good reason not to pick on the weaker states of this world. N. Korea has never seemed to have any itchiness for empire, so what might they do if they do have a few bombs? Protect themselves from bullying is the first thing that comes to my mind. When you give the school yard bully an unexpected shot in the nose, he tends to gain respect for you, to lose interest in you, and sometimes even changes his ways.

Further, the U.S. has basically thrown out the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty by developing small-yield nukes, bunker-busters, working towards "Star Wars", and what about all that depleted uranium dumped in the Balkans, Afghanistan, and Iraq? That is poisoning all of us thanks to global air currents.

Nukes for everyone.

Don't hesitate to bend over, and kiss your ass goodbye.

Edit: I failed to point out that Canada - who has been known as a fair-minded, peace-keeping country for a long, long time, has joined that coterie of wannabe thugs lock, stock and barrel (literally). Rather, our government (a minority with only about 32% of the vote) has made that move. Most Canadians do not want to be involved in aggression, just as, I'm sure, most Americans, or British do not want to be at war.

So why do governments act as they do? Do governments really represent the citizens of their respective countries? England's Blair has been lying to his countrymen. Bush and Co. have been lying to Americans. The Canadian government is doing the same. Voting is a sham - we still end up with governments that do all kinds of shiite that is diametrically opposed to the intent of the citizenry. What can be done about that? Over time, I will attempt to open up that discussion here.

Stay tuned.