Alan Stewart Carl, a moderate blogger, writes: “North Korea seems very insistent on testing President Obama. Apparently, the U.S. government is tracking a North Korean freighter suspected of carrying illicit arms. Government officials say they will a….

I think part of the problem might be that we are a long way from having a reliable capability to shoot down a ballistic missile. We could try. But if we failed – pretty likely — we’d look like idiots.

However, your point of view is distinctly North Korean and for several presidencies now we’ve bought into it–give us stuff first and then we’ll change for the better. But, sadly, North Korea has never demonstrated that concessions bring about positive change. From a Western perspective (and I understand I don’t speak for everyone), that is backwards thinking. However, given Obama’s view on entitlements at home, he may actually be receptive to this sort of strategy.

Would that be like the end of the effing world? One salutary effect it would have would be to send a message to all the not ready for prime time players.

This is getting ridiculous. Why US can’t take the peace route for change. No matter who’s in the power, we can’t

seem to find peace. Before Bush call them “Axis of Evil” for Iran and North Korea, I believe KimJungIL was looking

for economic means for his people following China’s economic model; thismade the free trade zone in North Korea come

true.

Why not try peace? Let’s remove all the restrictions to North Korea and see if North Korea still willing to risk

everything by going Nuclear. Unless Obama is trying to save US Auto industry by creating war to destroy Korea and

Japan, we should leave them alone; talk about Killing the Competition. I din’t vote for Obama to continue this un-

peaceful resolution; I thought we’ll be in different situation then that ignorant B*sh&D*ck fu*king up US.

If we continue to push the poor and dying of hunger by millions due to all the blockade that’s been put on the North

Korea, they will make a choice. Either dying by hunger and cold or throw everything they got before getting

destroyed; no one knows what this would limit to. In Korea, there’s proverb, “If you step on a worm then it will

twitch”.

What bothers me is the emotional state of Kim Jong Il. He’s in effect the king of NK. He has three possible male heirs. One he thinks is a flake. One he thinks is a wuss. So he’s settled on his youngest as his heir.

This is an inherently unstable situation. Take it out of NK and put it in Elizabethan England. The king is passing over two heirs in favor of the youngest? I’m seeing daggers unsheathed in the night.

Is Kim a mad Lear raging against his ungrateful, inadequate children? Will he bring it all down with him? I haven’t thought Kim was actually deranged — he was playing the cards he had about as well as they could be played. But when the king comes face to face with his failure as a father, when he sees that his dream of dynasty may be in peril, that worries me.