Who's got the better North Korea policy?

[AuH2O]

For the record, people that know what they're talking about say one of two things:

1) Multilateral talks (Bush)
2) Let NK have nukes, but make sure they don't export the technology

Two is a fairly hardcore neorealist position, but I imagine Waltz would support it. I raised the possibility in an IR class of letting NK have nukes but making them withdraw their artillery to the point where it can only reach their 'half' of the neutral zone, as well as reducing their army size.

Not only is Kerry wrong, but he is laughably, unarguably wrong. It's almost like he took his position just to be different from Bush and hoped no one would really think about it, because it's the worst idea either candidate has on any issue.

Kerry's position is a borderline voting issue all by itself.

Military force can theoretically be used against NK, but it would be very hard. You would have to hit their advance positions with everything we have... all our heavy bombers, 500+ cruise missiles, etc. Seoul would still not be in real great shape, but most of the people would probably survive.

The nukes are a problem, of course. It's fairly easy to stop tactical delivery by airplane, but missiles are hard to intercept. We'd have to know all their capable missile sites and destroy them. Then you have to hope they just decide not to use any that survive... after all, they probably have some kind of survival instinct.

[AuH2O]

You think the Chinese want some madman with a bunch of nukes and an unstable country on their border?

Uh, no.

Bilateral talks are a loser.

[AuH2O]

You think the Chinese want some madman with a bunch of nukes and an unstable country on their border?

Uh, no.

Bilateral talks are a loser.

Then why do the CHinese send so much foreign aid to North Korea?  The PRC has a long alliance with the DPRK, and they have been of no help in these failed six party talks.

How can you assert that bilateral talks are a loser when we have seen two years of six party talks fail?

They give NK so the country doesn't collapse. But that will happen eventually anyway... the real solution has to deal with their nuclear program.

Bilateral talks failed. Multilateral talks are in early stages and are the only chance for success.

Note that, in my opinion, the main concern is no NK having nukes- it's them helping other people get them. But, no one wants to accept NK as a nuclear state. Eventually, we may have no choice, but at the very least we need to stop proliferation beyond the current level.