How to Stop the Next Korean War

For the first time in decades, a real war on the Korean Peninsula is possible.

BY ANDREI LANKOV | DECEMBER 16, 2010

South Koreans expect that this time their government will retaliate, and it seems that military leaders -- especially after Lee's recent shakeup of the top ranks -- share this mood. It's an understandable reaction, no doubt. But it is also dangerous and counterproductive.

To start with, even if a massive South Korean counterstrike were successful, it would exercise no impact on Pyongyang's political behavior. For instance, with its impressive technological superiority, the South Korean military could probably sink half the North Korean navy in about an hour. In most places, that sort of defeat would have serious political consequences -- but not in North Korea.

The lives of the common soldiers and sailors are of no political significance there. The tiny North Korean elite has demonstrated that it is ready to sacrifice as many of the common people as necessary to stay in control (during the famine of the late 1990s, as many as 1 million people perished, with no discernable political repercussions for the government). The death of a few hundred soldiers will be seen as a sorry but fully acceptable price -- and will not even deter Pyongyang from planning a new round of provocations.

Some argue that such a military disaster would damage the regime, which has staked its reputation on Kim Jong Il's "military first" doctrine. But Kim's regime controls the media so completely that even the most humiliating defeat would be presented as a great victory, a spectacular triumph of North Korean arms. Only a handful of generals will know the truth, and these generals understand that they would have no future without the current regime, so they are unlikely to protest.

So, nothing can be gained from a massive retaliatory strike. But much can be lost. It may be true that neither side wants war, but there is a danger that a South Korean counterstrike would be seen as excessive in Pyongyang. The North may choose to retaliate, perhaps even targeting Seoul this time -- and some 300 long-range guns, located near the capital, can kill thousands in a couple of hours. One cannot be sure whether such an exchange could be stopped in time, and chances for a showdown to escalate into a full-blown war are real, if relatively small. Needless to say, a 21st century war on the Korean peninsula would have disastrous consequences, not only for Korea, but for a world economy that is still emerging from recession.

Yes, it's far more likely the entire affair will be limited to a tit-for-tat exchange of strikes. Yet even that would help Pyongyang achieve its major goal. One can easily imagine how, even in the event of a limited engagement, major newspapers worldwide will run headlines screaming "War in Korea!" That will scare investors and deliver a heavy blow to the southern economy -- exactly what Pyongyang hopes to achieve.

Nor should we be misled by the current bellicosity of the Seoul street. If events take such a turn, the very same people who now loudly demand retaliation will start blaming the government for their economic woes and sense of physical insecurity. Whether Lee and his team will survive this challenge is an open but, frankly, not really important question. What is important is that even a carefully circumscribed crisis will show Pyongyang that its blackmail strategy works.

Does this mean that South Korea should just turn the other cheek? Of course, not, but the possible retaliation should be immediate and small in scale (frankly, of largely symbolic nature). For decades, South Koreans were capable of reacting to truly outrageous acts with remarkable restraint, and this is one of the reasons they now live in a society whose affluence, freedom, and sophistication is the envy of Asia. If they abandon this wise tradition in the coming months, they will pay a heavy price -- as will we all.

JUNG YEON-JE/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: NORTH KOREA, EAST ASIA
 

Andrei Lankov is professor at Kookmin University in Seoul and the author of several books on North Korean history and politics.

RKERG

9:36 PM ET

December 16, 2010

North Korea is a cancer on the Earth

And survives only because of the support of the thuggish authoritarian regime in China.
I don't know if South Korea can defeat North Korea or not but I do know that, like a cancer, it needs to be removed.

 

YOUFUTUBE

2:37 AM ET

December 20, 2010

Since you claimed that China

Since you claimed that China has a "thuggish authoritarian regime", then I guess the United States is even more "thuggish", it invaded Iraq without UN approval, it killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, and we all know that there is no weapon of mass destruction. I don't think you have the right to call any country in the world thuggish, what do you actually know about North Korea? let alone China.

 

MLANE

6:35 AM ET

December 17, 2010

Is there nothing FP can do

Is there nothing FP can do about these adverts?

 

KCASSIDY

9:14 PM ET

December 18, 2010

Adverts?

If you download AdBlock Plus you will take away 95% of all ads on the internet. Makes reading on the net a whole lot easier. It's free, and open source software. It turns all the ads into blank space and really saves your eyes. Check it out.

 

RAZAUSMAN

9:06 AM ET

December 17, 2010

Incorrect assessment

A massive assault with an American air arm desined to neitralize the leadership, will see the capitulation of the norths armed forces faster than Saddams army. The norths population will see themselves as being liberated. It is better for the south to take the bitter pill now then to drag this out any longer and risk nuclear strikes in the future.

 

BRLEE2

11:23 AM ET

December 17, 2010

Your assessment seems

Your assessment seems remarkably similar to pre-war assessments of Iraq. The early attempts to bomb Saddam and "mission accomplished" both failed. Regardless, the North already has nuclear weapons. So that "bitter pill" includes nearly certain nuclear strikes.

 

JMSCONNORS@GMAIL.COM

12:24 PM ET

December 17, 2010

is that certain that they

is that certain that they have nuclear missle? or are you thinking dirty bomb missle?

 

MIASKU

11:43 AM ET

December 18, 2010

god-dictator

This is not correct. The people of North Korea worship their Dear Leader like a god, and will fight to the death like the Kamikazes of WWII.

 

DDSNAIK

5:21 PM ET

December 29, 2010

North Korean soliders, maybe

If all the stories about famines and food shortages and nutritional deficiencies are accurate, it's hard to imagine any significant resistance outside of the NK military forces

 

HADRIANEYES

11:11 AM ET

December 17, 2010

This Smells Like an Armchair Observer

Make it a quick war. That's right it can be quick. Does anybody remember just how quickly Iraq actually fell to the US? March 20th to April 9th. Since then we have developed and fielded the F-22 Raptor. Clearly the North would capitulate under a coordinated strike on ALL of its military hardware. Faced with the inability to do much more than send waves of North Koreans at some firing line (most of whom would likely desert the moment they crossed the 38th), the North would have to concede a quick military defeat. I am quite certain that an insane number of North Koreas might die as a result of this war but with all of the artillery drills and patriot missile batteries and military satellites aimed at the Korean peninsula, the South will take few casualties and its infrastructure would remain intact. Not only that but economic progress would continue to boom. We did pretty well even while bogged down in Iraq up until 2008, but that was not due to a war.

 

JMSCONNORS@GMAIL.COM

12:28 PM ET

December 17, 2010

that's what i was thinking,

that's what i was thinking, with all of our high tech satellite imagery could those 300 long guns be pin pointed and taken out with a pre-emptive lazer guided bombardment essentially ending the hostage situation?

 

DUNCAN-O

10:15 PM ET

December 17, 2010

300 Guns

Add insane numbers of South Koreans and very likely Americans, too, to those who would die. The actual number of North Korean artillery pieces is more like 12,000. That's a lot of work for the 500 or so combat aircraft the ROK-US Combined Forces Command could muster to the job, even if that's all they did, ignoring other important things like ground-support sorties, massive land invasions, or air-to-air combat with the North's own massive airforce.

The commander of forces in the South said that "Pyongyang could sustain up to 500,000 rounds per hour against Combined Forces Command defenses and Seoul for several hours." The damage that just one relatively small 130mm gun could do to a residential area in just 5 minutes is horrific. Go ahead and risk 24 million civilians for your quick little war. Have you even thought about the North's massive chemical stockpiles? The US Army plans for 90% combat ineffectiveness for units under chemical weapons attack, and that's with proper equipment and training. What do you think civilian areas would suffer with even 10% of the North's guns raining chemical death down on them? I think the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan would look pale and pretty in comparison to what might come if the situation in Korea trends toward entropy.

So please don't call so readily for a quick war. You may get what you wish for.

 

MIASKU

11:52 AM ET

December 18, 2010

out of hand

We would have to be ready to use tactical nuclear weapons if the situation got out of hand, rather than letting the North Koreans flood the streets of Seoul with poison gas.

 

TUZZER

10:38 AM ET

December 22, 2010

Capital

Would it be possible to bomb the capital where all the leaderships are before they know it? Pyongyang seems to be the root of all the problems in North Korea.

 

HELIOUS6423

3:03 PM ET

December 17, 2010

Unfortunately, that is possible. Nevertheless...

The possibility of a war is quite unnerving. Nobody knows how large the damage can be. Nevertheless, we have to remember that, even if we build multiple scenarios, we cannot know what exactly will happen.

The studies of NK army remind me of a history class in studying of WW2. We were taught how the government of England overestimated the size of the German air force in the 30s, as a factor in driving them to Appeasement. Publication of information in SK to possible confrontation can be done to coordinate civil life and mitigate civil casualties.

I cannot foresee the reaction in the other neighboring countries. I think they do expect the military confrontation to continue. They might just have to prepare as well.

I do not know what goes on in the head of North Korean Government. They are probably so information-limited they do not know either. I put my bet that their government officials are scared and they do realize how badly run their economy is. They just cannot imagine any other action to surviving currently. If there were a way to let them know that their action lead to disaster, and that there is another way out... Wikileaks-type or radio? It leads me to think the most striking action that SK can take to respond is to block North's radio propaganda. Can SK block and emit a radio signal on North-based waves?

 

RAY GIBBS

10:49 PM ET

December 17, 2010

Our man in North Korea...

Gov. Richardson, good move, my President.

 

PUBLICUS

4:54 AM ET

December 18, 2010

A Faustian Bargain?

Peacefully settling this perniciously escalating North Korea problem likely would require a Faustian Bargain on a grand scale. Several governments would need to cooperate in unprecedented ways. Decapitating the DPRK leaders could occur peacefully if they and everyone else were to agree to accept political asylum in the PRC. Under such an (ghastly but realistic) arrangement, anywhere from 1000 to 10,000 DPRK elites of all kinds could take their criminally obtained wealth to the PRC. Seoul could assume the burden, aided by other six-party governments, of a unified Korean peninsula. Several thousand DPRK cadre distributed in the PRC would hardly be noticed in a country the size of the USA and with ten times the USA population. International tribunals such as the ICC could issue indictments against the (former) DPRK elites, to include arrest warrants, but would recognize in their heart of hearts that Beijing would ignore them while suffering only nominal pressures from other governments such as the United States to comply.

It would be Herculean to attempt this and would have 1001 'impossible' tasks to iron out and tie together, but if this could be accomplished it would set a new global standard of cooperation and a new realism to the notion of a world of interdependent peoples and nations.

If decapitation were attempted by military means, however, I haven't any real doubt such a blitzkrieg could succeed with minimal damage. The air war after all would include a swarm of Trident and other missiles bearing conventional arms and would have to be coordinated in its execution with the governments of the ROK and Japan. The combined military forces of the three countries would make short work of the DPRK's offensive capabilities overnight. (The S Korean top general spoke only of the US-ROK Combined Command, deliberately omitting a public mention of Japan for obvious political and strategic reasons.) I do believe the Japanese people would fully accept their (strong) military forces acting together with those of the USA and the ROK to rid Japan of this problem that is of great constant concern in Japan. Because it would be a war, a certain amount of death and destruction would occur in the South, perhaps even in Japan, but it would be minimal. The Iraq war established a remarkable timeline (to understate it), as has been pointed out above, but the time line would have to be adjusted to a hyphen rather than a line, i.e., a day rather than a score days (or a few more than) which with the three allies acting together can be done.

Clearly the Faustian Bargain I suggest would be preferable to a military 'solution'. For one thing, in the Faustian Bargain the PRC would be involved as a partner (of sorts) whereas the PRC and Russia would react to learning of a sudden allied military solution in the works with much more shock than awe.

 

JSLAVIN81

10:33 AM ET

December 18, 2010

When does it stop, and how?

Is Lankov on the take from Pyongyang? 'Cause it sure seems as if what he's in favor of is exactly the sort of thing Kim & Co. desire: A cowed, scared South Korea whose responses to North Korean military provocations are largely symbolic, and therefore, meaningless. I live in South Korea, and once upon a time (not so long ago), I lived in Israel...both are countries constantly in another's sights, but at least Israelis don't try to avoid the reality staring 'em in the face.

The same CANNOT be said for South Koreans, who claim ethnic brotherhood with their cousins in the North and yet, when defectors arrive, turn up their noses at their "family" (driving some to fly to Europe, burn their S. Korean ID papers, and claim asylum *once again* as N. Korean refugees...in places that'll actually accept them). Economically, South Korea is an "Asian Tiger"; otherwise, it's a paper tiger that I really think wouldn't survive without our (US) presence.

Why is Seoul the only scared party? And why must the Republic of Korea remain the only openly frightened party? A balance of terror is what's most needed, and while South Korea fears the economic effects of war, North Korea's leadership fears losing power. Sure, the North Korean army could devastate Seoul. But the US-ROK alliance could turn the "showcase" city of Pyongyang into a parking lot. They could shake the DPRK system to its core.

What Lankov conveniently omits from this assessment is that South Korea's investor ratings already usually take the geopolitical situation on the Korean Peninsula into account; it's risky, but it's deemed an acceptable risk...the shelling of Yeonpyeong-do was an act of war and thus a destabilizing event, but didn't change much in that respect. The won-dollar rate today is still better than it was a couple years ago at this time.

Of the two countries, North Korea actually has more to lose than South Korea: You can rebuild a shaken or even shattered economy, but you can't rebuild a country that no longer exists, and the N. Korean elite would no longer have the benefits and privileges they enjoy today (compared to their countrymen) in a reunified (even with the North under UN, rather than direct ROK, control) land.

In a "total" war, the North Korean army has the numbers but it doesn't have the strength...or, I suspect, the will...to prevent the forcible reunification of the Peninsula under the ROK.

Sure, even in a "limited" engagement, South Korea would get a black eye - and there would likely be considerable civilian casualties...but far fewer than if the North Koreans continue nuclear arms development and achieve miniaturization, etc., and then intimidate South Korea to a degree we can only imagine at the moment. Somehow, sometime, the blackmail has to stop.

 

PUBLICUS

12:56 PM ET

December 18, 2010

Step out of the circle

We do need to step out of the box that the only choices on the Korean peninsula are either war or a cowering passivity to a boisterous and loud nothing power backed by the CCP/PRC. The CCP/PRC has to be maneuvered, manipulated, into accepting the N Korean elites in political asylum as "refugees" or the status quo in NE Asia will continue to deteriorate to no one's gain and for many a great suffering and pain. We also need to consider most seriously what a US-ROK Combined Command attack against N Korea would do to the neighborhood, to the CCP, Russia and Japan in particular.

Japan and everyone else know that an attack by the US-ROK Combined UN Command would result in the DPRK launching missiles into Japan, which is the principal reason why if the decision were made in Washington and Seoul to initiate an order of battle against the DPROK, Japan (and its strong military) would have to be included in the order, i.e., become a part of a lightning attack to decapitate and also suddenly and completely to disable the DPRK military capability. Adm Mullen going to S Korea and the JCS of S Korea jointly are sending these direct messages to Pyongyang, but to the control freaks of Beijing especially and in particular.

Having lived recently in S Korea myself, I am aware of the (despicable) attitude of the South Koreans towards their 'sibling brethren' DPROK defectors, which is unsympathetic and, to be kind, indifferent. The S Korean government in their close and ongoing study of the unification of Germany have learned the enormous costs financially of such a unification to the then 3rd richest country of the world, W Germany. It is enormous; it also places social and cultural demands on both groups of 'brethren' that in S Korea, the obviously richer of the two are unwilling to bear - this is the real and selfish discussion in S Korea which occurs below the level of public discourse. The ROK Ministry of Unification is a Christmas tree of eternal lights and flashing glitter, nothing more. For the past 20 years, for instance, every time I ask a S Korean about unification, they respond that it isn't expected to occur for another ten years. The S Koreans have been saying this for the past 30 years and continue to say it today.

The DPROK has to win any war or conflict in the first 24 hours as it hasn't the economy to sustain warfare by its million member armed forces for any significant period of time. Consequently, in an attack on N Korea by the US-ROK and Japan, which is the way it would have to be, the CCP/PRC and Russia would need to decide to intervene or to allow the certain and swift destruction of the DPROK. My guess is that the CCP in Beijing would angrily accept the destruction of the DPRK because it isn't yet militarily strong enough or ready in economic strength to engage in war against the United States, much less the US-ROK and Japan united as the allies that we are. Russia would back off from such a conflagration for its own (wise) reasons and parochial self interest.

We need to step out of the present box to consider radical solutions that don't present an O.K. Corral scenario where after all the shooting is over and the body count is taken the town continues to remain intact and standing. We need instead to pressure the CCP/PRC to accept the DPROK leadership elites in political asylum to peacefully clear the way to the unification of the two Koreas under the leadership of Seoul. Chances are pretty certain that the S Koreans won't like this burden and neither will the CCP/PRC like this outcome. But both need to be manipulated into this as the only guaranteed peaceful solution to a situation on the peninsula that is only increasing in its danger and menace to everyone.

It's accurately said that the CCP/RPC view the DPRK as their East Germany, i.e., if the DPRK falls so too will the CCP in Beijing. I look forward to it, but in the short term we need to provide Beijing with assurances that in the words of Santayana, those who fail to learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat it. The obvious lesson of history here to the CP/PRC is to let go of its client satellite state in Pyongyang lest a conflagration occur for which the CCP in Beijing is not yet ready. The difficulty to the CCP is that if it must let go of the DPRK, then by its own predicate the CCP must also abandon all hope of regaining Taiwan. A tough order indeed, but an order worth pursuing, i.e., if the CCP in Beijing is in fact truly rational, reasonable and wholly committed to peace and a balance of powers.

 

BLUERISING

4:54 PM ET

December 18, 2010

Of the four independents

As for foreign policy, if you remove immigration,ygs lys it was virtually a non-issue in this last election. I reckon if you asked either candidate to name and spell the names of four Southeast Asian leaders, they couldn't do it.
ssk prim sorgulama
18 aral?k ehliyet s?nav sorular?

 

ADAM NEIRA

12:31 AM ET

December 20, 2010

Right at this second, thank

Right at this second, thank G-d, there are whole teams of people watching North Korea's every move. Blessings to them. The DPRK military personnel are trying to manipulate international conditions in their favour. Do not underestimate the power of nationalism even in a starving population. Stalin was able to rouse and prepare the peasants quite easily with a bit of Eisensteinian "Alexander Nevsky" propaganda years before Barbarossa. The NK watchers should be trying to gauge the public mood of the North. They DPRK leadership clique have misinterpreted the will and intelligence of their southern neighbours on many occasions however. Sometimes restraint is the hallmark of true strength. The South Koreans are incredibly resourceful, pragmatic and hard working. They have been dealing with brother next door for sixty years. The recent attack on the island was highly significant however.

There is a way to effect change in the North. China has a big part to play. If the North Korean leaders feel they have no way out things may escalate. The “Us versus Them” dynamic is ingratiated into the populace. Many North Koreans did fight valiantly against the Japanese in the 1930’s and 40’s and such pride must be factored in to all deliberations. They do watch the geo-political landscape and try and calibrate their decisions hence. Unfortunately their instruments and methodology are in need of repair. (I wonder what their Axis-of-Evil Twin Iran thinks about this attack on an ally of the USA ?)A desperate man should not be painted into a corner. The psychology of the North is complex. Groupthink can be changed if an understanding of the power and focus dynamics is attained. In this interconnected world things can change pretty quickly. More attention must be paid to the Peninsula and a long-term game plan worked out for all the players. The current situation is unsustainable. Great crisis can lead to great opportunity.

North Korea has some very smart engineers. Abdul Qadir Khan and his underlings met with many of them. Do not underestimate the North Koreans. In WWII many British and Australians thought the Japanese were inferior, slanty eyed Asian peasants with no fighting skill or strategic nous whatsoever. Blind love of a leader and empire can induce super-dangerous fanaticism. An autonomous population is far less likely to be swayed by a malevolent dictator. On a "Degree of Autonomy" rating the North Korean population would be at the bottom of the global ladder. The place makes Cuba look like a free-speech paradise. If a war breaks out on the Peninsula the carnage on both "sides" will be horrific. Sth.Korea and its allies will win, but it will be a Pyrrhic victory. Everything must be done to avoid a conflict, but if push comes to shove and the North launches artillery attacks a military response will be absolutely justified. One must stand up to people that want to hurt you.

Naiive isolationism will not work in 2010. I resolved this question ten years ago. The level of interconnectedness of the world today is self-evident. How would you solve the pirate problem off Somalia ? How about air-traffic control ? Natural disasters like the tsunami and early warning systems ? Trade ? Terrorism which is not national ? Refugees ? etc, etc. This topic is fit for another place. We should stay on topic, or else these threads end up looking like a dog's breakfast. If the Peninsula blows up the whole world will be affected, mark my words...
That border is incredibly tense. I remember reading about the 1976 Axe Murder Incident. The soldiers there are under enormous stress. One of my favourite Korean movies, out of eight I have seen, is "The Guard Post". The border problem is etched very deeply on the psyche of population. (My favourite movie from that land is 2003's "Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter and Spring". Absolutely beautiful ! Even the memory of the film gives me hope for the Peninsula.)

The Peninsula will be reunited in the coming years and decades. The Korean War was a complete waste of time and energy. A proud and ancient culture was besieged by competing geo-political game players and the result was a disastrous split. The mindset of the North Koreans is interesting. Many Koreans from the North fought valiantly against the invading Japanese circa WWII. In an interesting footnote, last year the North played the South is a world cup qualifier. At the end of the game all the players shook hands. The look on their faces was one of quiet hope and friendliness layered with years of distrust. Like two brothers who have been estranged from each other due to outside forces and repeated trauma.The land is destined to be united eventually.

 

PUBLICUS

2:32 AM ET

December 20, 2010

Happily forever after

It's what comes before the happily ever after that we must deal with now, in the present. I share your view that the S Koreans must stand up to the NKoreans in their powerplay by brinkmanship to turn regional and international conditions more to their favor, i.e., to suit Pyongyang-Beijing-Moscow.

As has been noted above, the NKoreans aren't particularly stupid, but they are ignorant - dangerously so.

You keep saying the N Koreans fought against the Japanese during WWII and during the 1930s and 40s but make no mention of S Koreans during this timeframe. Also oddly, you do not note that Japan beginning in 1910 occupied and proceded to colonize (all of) the Korean Peninsula until Japan's defeat in WWII in 1945. At the end of the war Soviet Union troops swarmed down the Korean peninsula until quickly dispatched US armed forces landed and set up a line. The consequence since then is the two Koreas divided at the 38th parallel. The only people the Koreans in the North have fought are the Koreans in the South (and unexpectedly, UN-USA forces 1950-53). Given this history I guess I can understand how Koreans in the South feel towards the Beijing-Moscow supported Koreans of the Pyongyang North. This is an international entanglement which needs a sophisticated approach to sort out. Nothing can happen however until Beijing stops weaving and tightening the knot.

 

THE_ASPYRANT

2:01 PM ET

December 20, 2010

What's in it for us?

The desired outcome of all of this is the same for both the U.S. and S. Korea (Japan, as well). A nonexistent N. Korea, a unified Korean peninsula, and the DPRK elite punished for their crimes against the people of DPRK. What about the costs to achieve such goals? S. Korean civilians would be in danger, Japan would be vulnerable to attacks, and U.S. troops would be putting their lives at risk (once again). Although, S. Korea would pay the most, their rewards for their persistence would be the greatest.

As wonderful as a Faustian bargain (such as the one Publicus recommended) sounds, human history has shown that deals such as this just don't happen. Massive change is almost always precluded by war. The key would be to minimize the damage and to put the pre-planning in place for a quick recovery after it was over. I don't think there's any question that the N. Korea situation is due to be fixed; the only real issue is how soon and in what way.

I'm looking forward to see what happens, although with a measure of concern.

 

PUBLICUS

3:16 AM ET

December 21, 2010

3 million pounds of crow

Three million pounds of crow are now being consumed in three foreign capitals: one million in Pyongyang, one million in Beijing and one million in Moscow. The three this time and forever have failed completely to blackmail the US, ROK and Japan back to the surrender table to extract yet more concessions. In the past Pyongyang-Beijing-Moscow could stage an incident, or present a nuclear threat, throw a tantrum, break yet another agreement to reliably get the other half of the now deceased 6-party talks to the surrender table to win their demands. This time, however, even after unprecedented military provocations, Washington, Seoul and Tokyo with an assist from the UNSC backed Pyongyang down along with its advocates Beijing and Moscow.

Congratulations to Pres Obama for his policy of "strategic patience" and for holding firmly to it during this particularly bellicose period which included the most severe military hostilities against S Korea by Pyongyang since the end of the Korean Conflict in 1953. Now that Pyongyang-Beijing-Moscow see the surrender table had already been folded up and thrown out, the trio needs to go back to the drawing board. Do not pass goal, do not collect $200. The time of the tail wagging the dog are past. Not only have the rules of the game been changed, the game itself has been trashed. It's time to think new.

 

MELISSA.S

7:26 AM ET

December 22, 2010

Very interesting article! It

Very interesting article! It useful for college paper. I think that it is needed to prevent a conflict all forces! very terrible that in our time such developed countries as Korea can be in a military danger! In fact further development will be able to cause more global conflict. If people really wanted military development it is necessary quickly to take measures!

 

MELISSA.S

7:28 AM ET

December 22, 2010

Very interesting article! It

Very interesting article! It useful for college paper. I think that it is needed to prevent a conflict all forces! very terrible that in our time such developed countries as Korea can be in a military danger! In fact further development will be able to cause more global conflict. If people really wanted military development it is necessary quickly to take measures!