As long as we're ruminating about the NK military, I'd like to bring up what I think of as the lost opportunity in 1994. Remember when Clinton was supposedly very close to attacking North Korea over its nuclear program? I voted for the guy twice and was dismayed when the documents came out and the idea of really going to war with North Korea was never seriously considered at the top - it's pretty clear that Clinton would have accepted almost any deal to have avoided that step. Yet in terms of pre-emptive/preventative war, North Korea in 1994 was an almost perfect case and in hindsight that is quite clear.
The documents show that while Japan and South Korea were about as unenthusiastic as Clinton, they would have at least supported air strikes against nuclear targets. That might have led to war in and of itself, and if it hadn't, it would have called Pyongyang's bluff once and for all. In hindsight, it is clear that 1994 was the only opportunity that would ever exist to do something about North Korea AND exclude an obstructionist, uncooperative China at the same time. If war broke out now, to pacify China we would likely need to promise a complete withdrawal from the Korean peninsula afterwords, and even then China wouldn't probably raise a stink at the UN and posture on the world stage and before the domestic audience about American and Japanese warmongering. Finally, taking out North Korea in 1994 would have meant serious setbacks to the Pakistani and Iranian nuclear programs, to such an extent that Pakistan wouldn't have the bomb and Iran would be nowhere near it. Finally, if the occupation of North Korea became necessary, there would be plenty of South Korean help.
Compare and contrast that to Iraq and you see what I mean about a near-perfect scenario. It was doable back then, much more so than now. The benefits of having done it would have been enormous in terms of nuclear non-proliferation. *sigh*
The documents show that while Japan and South Korea were about as unenthusiastic as Clinton, they would have at least supported air strikes against nuclear targets. That might have led to war in and of itself, and if it hadn't, it would have called Pyongyang's bluff once and for all. In hindsight, it is clear that 1994 was the only opportunity that would ever exist to do something about North Korea AND exclude an obstructionist, uncooperative China at the same time. If war broke out now, to pacify China we would likely need to promise a complete withdrawal from the Korean peninsula afterwords, and even then China wouldn't probably raise a stink at the UN and posture on the world stage and before the domestic audience about American and Japanese warmongering. Finally, taking out North Korea in 1994 would have meant serious setbacks to the Pakistani and Iranian nuclear programs, to such an extent that Pakistan wouldn't have the bomb and Iran would be nowhere near it. Finally, if the occupation of North Korea became necessary, there would be plenty of South Korean help.
Compare and contrast that to Iraq and you see what I mean about a near-perfect scenario. It was doable back then, much more so than now. The benefits of having done it would have been enormous in terms of nuclear non-proliferation. *sigh*