Independence Day 2006 was one of the more bizarre birthdays in our nation's history. After several days of postponement, NASA launched the Discovery shuttle, marking the first Independence Day launch ever. However, the numerous objections to the launch issued by experts within NASA, who argued that the shuttle was in need of further fuel-tank repairs was troubling.
Additionally, a group of anti-war protesters, led by Cindy Sheehan and a number of Hollywood elites, embarked on an Independence Day fast that some participants claim will continue until US troops return from Iraq. One might wonder whether Sheehan & Co. are protesting the war or entering into a suicide pact. After all, depending on one's body mass — which Hollywood elites are generally short of — a person can only survive a few weeks without food. To be sure, conservatives are eager to see how this one plays out.
Still, the most bizarre development yesterday was North Korea's decision to light off some fireworks of their own. Unlike the bottle rockets that Americans were setting off throughout the country, the North's rockets have the added potential of delivering a nuclear payload to US soil. While the six rockets launched by the North can be collectively described as a failed endeavor, the communist regime did learn an important law of physics: what goes up must come down; in this case, the missiles went up, and egg came down — all over their smug little faces.
The immediate response by the international community was to condemn the North's "provocation," which the United States, Japan, and others were working feverishly to avoid over the past few weeks. Of course, the major concern was the launching of the North's long-range missile, the Taepodong-2, which has the potential to strike targets in the United States. Despite the chorus of condemnations that the North's belligerence provoked, the communist regime went on to fire a seventh missile earlier today; only one of the seven missiles fired had long-range capabilities.
Today, the Bush Administration must decipher the message behind the North's launching. Is Kim Jung Il planning to make a move against his country's immediate neighbors and the United States? Or is he simply attempting to step out from under his father's dominating reputation?
More importantly, how will the Bush Administration respond to the North's violations of the 1999 moratorium on missile tests, which the North signed? Surely, President Bush intends to respond to the North with something more than a sharply-worded letter from the UN Security Council. Indeed, name calling and whining alone will hardly deter future violations by the North.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - Clavos
So Cindy Sheehan et al are embarking on a hunger strike until the troops come home? Now there's an incentive to prolong the war if I ever heard one!
Dr. P, I didn't see the WaPo Op-ed before, but I think Perry and Carter are dead on; preemption makes a lot of sense.
Funny that the administration that so eagerly involved us in Iraq is now asleep at the switch when confronted with real provocation.
Well done article, Dr. P.
2 - Ray Ellis
I think this shows that if you actually have weapons of mass destruction, we'll not attack you--if you don't, then shock and awe time!
3 - JustOneMan
Funny the same people who are rushing to get of Iraq are the same ones trying to rush into Korea...
If those rockets had a chance of hitting anyone I am confident one of our "nuclear" subs would launch something to knock it down
4 - Ray Ellis
I'm not advocating a pre-emptive attack on North Korea--I'm merely stating an irony. And JustOne Man, the time for dealing in hyperbole is long since gone. Either say something of substance, or don't bother. "our 'nuclear' subs would launch something to knock it down"--what does that mean? Our nuclear subs are nuclear powered--a long way away from a nuclear weapon.
5 - Bryan McKay
While I certainly agree we should be worrying a great deal about North Korea at this point, it undermines your argument to mock the North Korean missle launches as a failed embarassment and then turn around and talk about how they demonstrate a real threat that should be stopped. To paraphrase someone a while back in a thread dealing with al-Zarqawi, either the North Koreans are a joke and we shouldn't worry about them, or they're a real threat to national (and international) security and must be stopped. You can't have it both ways.
6 - Mohjho
"I find it hard to believe that calling a provocative act "provocative" constitutes an effective deterrence policy."
Nice Doctor
Are we willing to sacrifice South Korea on a hunch that preemption will work? I own stock in Hyundai, should I sell?
What about the Chinese? There is a historical animosity between these countries. How can we drag them into this mess?
It will take outstanding leadership to work this political fubar into a livable solution. God help us.
7 - Bliffle
"Where's The Response To North Korea's Missile Launch?"
No response. This foolish president has stupidly tied us up in Iraq, an unnecessary and unproductive war. He's like a chess player who sends out a rook to attempt capture of a pawn. OBL is a superior player, as we see.
I suppose that, as usual, he will try to shift the blame elsewhere, like the press, or protestors, or the lousy soldiers. the buck stops someplace else.
8 - Lumpy
Don't get your hopes up waiting for sheehan to starve to death. What they usually mean by these so-called hunger strikes is plenty of water and cutting calory intake low enough to keep them alive with a nice unhealthy gaunt look.
9 - RJ Elliott
"a group of anti-war protesters, led by Cindy Sheehan and a number of Hollywood elites, embarked on an Independence Day fast that some participants claim will continue until US troops return from Iraq. One might wonder whether Sheehan & Co. are protesting the war or entering into a suicide pact. After all, depending on one's body mass â€" which Hollywood elites are generally short of â€" a person can only survive a few weeks without food. To be sure, conservatives are eager to see how this one plays out."
No, there is no need to worry for anyone's health. These are to be "rolling fasts" ...
In other words, one Hollywood leftist will refuse to eat solid foods for 24 hours, and then will "pass" this fasting on to another Hollywood leftist, so that the first Hollywood leftist can then go berzerk at a Golden Corral buffet...
See? It's "sacrifice" without the, you know, sacrifice!
10 - RedTard
How are we to know when thin, gaunt, anorexic models and actresses go on a fast?
11 - Nancy
I've always felt an occasional fast was good for you, physically & mentally. This ought to be interesting. Who else is in on it besides Sheehan? I mean, what Hollywood types? Hadn't read/heard about this.
I am comforted to know that even those pundits & 'experts' in government & around the world considered experts on N. Korea are just as puzzled as I am with what is going on in Kim's tiny little mind, and what he hopes to accomplish by it. As for the missle tests failing, more likely they weren't failures, but deliberate aborts; after all, you can get an awful lot of good data from just a successful launch; you needn't go all out & hit Alaska. It will be interesting to hear what's up with this. Last I heard an hour or so ago, Kim has a few more lined up on the launch pad, in response to world condemnation & Japan hitting N.K. w/sanctions already. Literally, his response was, "I will if I want to, and I'm going to". So there.
In the final analysis, it'll be up to the Chinese to step up & stomp on Kim; they're his main trading partners & survival suppliers; if they are displeased, he has to pay attention, or go into economic as well as literal shutdown within days of them cutting him off. Whether they'll do it is another matter, but they may be getting tired of his antics. Besides, if he has missiles that can hit Alaska, they can hit Beijing, too, and I'll bet that hasn't passed by anyone at China Central. Not to mention China wants in with the West & the US pretty badly right now. To fail to discipline Kim - or be unable to bring him in line - would be a massive loss of face for them.
I guess we'll see.
Yeah, it was a bizarre 4th, wasn't it?
12 - Jared
" In the final analysis, it'll be up to the Chinese to step up & stomp on Kim; they're
his main trading partners & survival suppliers; if they are displeased, he has to
pay attention, or go into economic as well as literal shutdown within days of them
cutting him off."
That's exactly the problem. In what I've seen, China and Russia are the ones proving more apathetic, and they're tying everyone else's hands. I think that action here is a lot more necessary than action in Iraq ever was, but the administration still has the world's collective rebuke on their mind when it comes to Iraq. So they won't push back until they know EVERYONE is behind them. And China and Russia seem to have caught onto this.