This was originally published on Oct. 11, 2006.
I find it ridiculously amusing that nations feeling threatened by a nuclear attack will simply strike back. It must not occur to them that a nuclear explosion is caused by an all expansive destructive device that will raze buildings and desolate areas for many years to come. South Korea has stated in recent reports that they are preparing for nuclear war. What does that mean exactly? Perhaps it means that their citizens will be employing the very useful "duck & cover" strategy that 1950's United States citizens practiced under the Soviet Nuclear Threat. Perhaps it means that the South Korean military will throw down a preemptive strike and decimate that crappy little country to the north.
My point is that nuclear war will definitely change everything. Little fish with three eyes, little three armed children, and women presidents. I shudder to think of the possibilities, a female president, please. And how does the United States respond? Well I'll tell you what it won't do; the United States will not invade North Korea because going after somebody who has been proven to have weapons of mass destruction is a mistake. Does this sound vaguely familiar? Yes, it does. Despite international criticism the US invaded Iraq, decimated its infrastructure and now pillages and plunders its weaselly black guts out. So why won't the US attack North Korea? Well, for one, it wouldn't look good on anyone's resume. I would hate to have yet another failed military operation on my hands and I'm sure the current administration feels the same.
North Korea is a country of extreme poverty and economic sanctions will definitely increase that country's mortality rate. For once I cannot offer a solution here. Maybe the world's largest arms dealer should just give them some guns. That usually makes men with small penises happy. No, I do not have a solution but I know who does: http://www.workers.org/2006/world/korea-1029/