Quantcast
U.S. & World

Furious over sanctions, NKorea vows to nuke US

Comments

Return To Article
  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    March 11, 2013 5:30 p.m.

    @Worf
    "Just take out their military facilities! Easy solution."

    Pull out a map of the Korean peninsula. Then take a look at the North and South Korean border. Then remember that North Korea has one of the largest armies in the world. Now find the South Korean capital, Seoul. Taking out North Korean military facilities is not really feasible since they have a lot, one could really only hope to take out their nuclear facilities and then you'd have to pray you got the weapons too which can't be guaranteed. An attack on North Korea can easily endanger the lives of millions of South Koreans (and tens of thousands of US soldiers) depending on the reaction.

    So no, this is not an easy solution.

  • Archie1954 Vancouver, BC
    March 9, 2013 2:13 p.m.

    Are sanctions not considered more than an unfriendly act? Aren't they more of an interim assault, a precursor to war?

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    March 9, 2013 9:27 a.m.

    mg scott, we already know. And you are still misrepresenting what President Obama was calling for. He was not calling for a unilateral US disarmament like you imply, he was calling for a nuke free world. He was talking about his support for Global Zero. And he talked about how this is a long term plan.

    But don't worry, it probably is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. You will probably never live in a nuclear free world, and neither will your kids. So be happy, you will always live in a world with the threat of nukes.

    Goodness why would we want to change it?

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    March 8, 2013 4:31 p.m.

    Re: All the skeptics

    In 2009 Obama spoke in Prague about a nuclear free America......... I was wrong when I said Google it. I got it off of Bing.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 8, 2013 3:05 p.m.

    These are small countries. They can't hurt us---Barack Obama 2012

  • Vladhagen Salt Lake City, UT
    March 8, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    As someone with a degree in Korean and experience living in (South) Korea for a number of years, let me say that all this hooie in the US about N. Korea is so over blown that it is ridiculous. The US worries more about N.Korea than S. Korea does. This is beside the point, but I feel as well that all this "Smack Down" that the US government wants to do on N. Korea is unfortunate. You are picking a fight with a huge balloon. If you just leave it alone it will slowly deflate. If you keep prodding it, it will pop and we get hit with the shrapnel. Fix the US economy. Stop worrying about some guy 6000 miles away in a failing nation.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 8, 2013 1:30 p.m.

    @Blue--do some thinking.

    We don't need troops going in, and we don't need to spend on re-building.--That's what liberals do, and it's costly.

    A few missiles, and bunker busters will do the trick. Over, and done.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    March 8, 2013 10:25 a.m.

    Blue
    Salt Lake City, UT
    "Just take out their military facilities! Easy solution."
    - Worf

    "For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution and it is always wrong."
    - H.L. Mencken

    There's very little backbone or grit involved in going to war. War is easy. Peace is hard.

    Consevatives these days love talking about going to war but then neither offer to pay for it nor sign up their kids to go fight it.

    ==========

    Agreed,
    as a Liberal - who is also a proud Veteran,
    and is always willing to ponly up and pay higher taxes to pay for these stupid "wars" Republicans which they are always willing to start and never fund....

    I also know for a fact that worf, patriot, J Thompson, Mike Richards, mountaman, RedShirt, wrz, L White, and Voice of Reason to name just a few -- are always the very 1st to want to start yet another war, have NEVER served in the military, and then complain about our national deficeit.

    It's the #1 reason I have zero respect for their opinions about such matters...

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    March 8, 2013 9:13 a.m.

    I had hoped that Kim Jong Un would be more open minded and seek to lift his country out of poverty and away from belligerence.

    I was wrong.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    March 8, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    A false flag strike is more probable.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    March 8, 2013 7:33 a.m.

    President Spencer W. Kimball back in 1981 changed minds in Utah about having an MX missile system deployed in our west desert.

    I personally was being misled by politicians and the media at the time to think MX was needed.
    After the 1st Presidency statement on the subject, I went from cold war military build-up enthusiasm to; let's build-up the missionary force for teaching love one another and sending volunteer Church aid to hungry of world with it's humanitarian programs. Aid goes directly to the hungry children suffering under collectivist dictatorships without regard to the countries erroneous governing philosophies which were causing the starvation in the first place.

  • Iron Rod Salt Lake City, UT
    March 8, 2013 6:23 a.m.

    And we worry about Iran? Which is the greater threat to the United States North Korea or Iran?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    March 7, 2013 11:52 p.m.

    @patriot
    "Reagan EXPLODED military spending along with upgrading our nuclear arsenal. If you actually spent 5 minutes doing research you would discover it. The USSR could not keep up with the US build up militarily and finally threw in the towel. Without Reagan doing what he did the USSR would never have collapsed when it did"

    You're saying the USSR collapsed because we had a bigger pile of guns? No. They had an economic collapse and fell apart internally. Reagan's weapon supply had absolutely nothing to do with it. The notion doesn't even make sense.

    @m.g.scott
    Obama favors a world where nobody has nuclear weapons, not just getting rid of the U.S. ones and letting everyone else do what they want as you and patriot suggest.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    March 7, 2013 9:47 p.m.

    And they wonder why other nations are allowed nucs, but they are not.not.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 7, 2013 9:38 p.m.

    @kosimov,

    "I guess I am safe to say that you have a tendency to group together anyone who disagrees with you and address them as, say, "you folks"".
    I honestly have no problem with those that disagree with me. There are many valid viewpoints. And there are many valid opinions.

    The "you folks" I was referring to are those who take a statement and embellish it to make a point that was never intended. I call out erroneous statements put forth as fact, not erroneous opinions. I will try to be more specific in the future.

    The concept that Obama wants to reduce our number of nuclear weapons to zero (as was stated) is not supported by the facts. One could easily make a case against reducing our weapons.

    Notice how I included Obamas actual statement in my response?

    Why not disagree with what he actually said, instead of making a hypothetical argument.

    What I state as facts on this board, I research. And I look for reasonable sources. I hope others would do the same.

    We can have productive discussions about actual policies, positions and opinions.

    Lets stick to those and leave the unsupported partisan rhetoric out.

  • rvalens2 Burley, ID
    March 7, 2013 8:29 p.m.

    When North Korea vows to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the United States, too many people here assume that they mean "launching" a missile and hitting the U.S. mainland from North Korea.

    North Korea's current missile technology is woefully inadequate to do that. However, that does not mean they can't accomplish their goal of attacking the United States. Here are at least two ways they can do it.

    1. They launch a short range missile at one of our bases or military installations in South Korea. The U.S. currently has about 25,000 military personnel in South Korea.

    Such an attack would likely leave tens of thousands of Americans dead.

    2. They load a nuclear bomb on to a boat, falsify its flag and markings, and simply sail it to Hawaii or one of our ports along the West coast. With one of their short range missiles (60 mile range), they wouldn't even have to pull into the harbor. They could launch from more than 20 miles off-shore and we would never be able to stop it from devastating a large American city.

    Never underestimate your enemy, remember what happened at Pearl Harbor?

  • OCoug Ogden, UT
    March 7, 2013 7:50 p.m.

    Too bad all around. North Korea and every other nation could spend their resources and money on so many better things. But this is the world we live in and thus the reason we are wise to maintain a strong military.

  • Swiss Price, Utah
    March 7, 2013 6:58 p.m.

    Just keep selling arms to Japan and Taiwan. Japan probably has a better iron dome than Israel.We know they have better electric submarines than anybody in the world but the Germans. Now if China follows through and actually helps with the blockade we wont have to worry about North Korea.
    Obama just has to do what he does best nothing.
    Oh, I am sorry I didnt mean to call golf nothing:)

  • Jim Mesa, Az
    March 7, 2013 6:16 p.m.

    I can see the weather forecast for North Korea the minute they try it.......very flat glowing red, very cloudy and about 10,000 degrees.

  • kosimov Riverdale, UT
    March 7, 2013 6:10 p.m.

    To: Joe Blow
    Re: "Why do you folks consistently go over-the-top."

    I guess I am safe to say that you have a tendency to group together anyone who disagrees with you and address them as, say, "you folks". Or were you replying to someone in particular? I am not worried about what you think or say; you have the right to think and say what you wish - as do I. So, following your lead, I would say: "Why do 'YOU FOLKS' pigeon-hole those who don't march in step with you to the beat of some drummer somewhere, and make such broad, baseless remarks that they could apply to almost anyone anywhere?" You seem to do this quite a bit. I am absolutely sure that this kind of abrasive rhetoric is one big reason why we are all lashing out at each other instead of trying to understand each other and work out solutions to problems, rather than creating more and more problems with each remark. I am truly worried about the U.S. I like Obama as a person but he is not behind what is happening to us. He is being used by someone....

  • aceroinox Farmington, UT
    March 7, 2013 5:21 p.m.

    I must say, I am SHOCKED, SHOCKED I tell you that North Korea is not heeding the sanctions placed upon them!!! Simply stunned.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    March 7, 2013 4:58 p.m.

    "Just take out their military facilities! Easy solution."
    - Worf

    "For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution and it is always wrong."
    - H.L. Mencken

    "We need grit, and backbone in Washington."

    There's very little backbone or grit involved in going to war. War is easy. Peace is hard.

    Consevatives these days love talking about going to war but then neither offer to pay for it nor sign up their kids to go fight it.

    It takes lots of brains, backbone and

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    March 7, 2013 4:51 p.m.

    A nuclear-free world is quite different from everyone else having nukes and reducing ours (the US) to zero. Talk about taking something and putting spin on it. I would hope that it is everyone's hope to have a nuclear-free world and a world of peace. Maybe not.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 7, 2013 3:40 p.m.

    Just take out their military facilities! Easy solution.

    We need grit, and backbone in Washington.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 7, 2013 3:31 p.m.

    cmon MG.

    Seriously.

    Can any reasonable person read this

    ""So today, I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment and desire to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons."

    Lets just say, that if in high school, you were told to paraphrase that sentence and you answered

    "Barack has vowed to reduce the US nuclear arsenal to 0"

    you would get an "F". The two statements are a complete disconnect.

    Why the need to embellish?

    I tell you what. I would be thrilled to live in a world without nuclear weapons.

    And, If I were the president today, I would tell the world

    "The US will NEVER, let me repeat, NEVER use our nuclear weapons offensively. They would only be used in response to a nuclear attack, or the imminent threat of a nuclear attack."

    Maybe then, countries would not feel the need to acquire nuclear.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    March 7, 2013 3:08 p.m.

    re:JoeBlow

    Reporting from Washington — President Obama's ambitious plan to begin phasing out nuclear weapons has run up against powerful resistance from officials in the Pentagon and other U.S. agencies, posing a threat to one of his most important foreign policy initiatives.

    Obama laid out his vision of a nuclear-free world in a speech in Prague, Czech Republic, last April, pledging that the U.S. would take dramatic steps to lead the way. (LA Times Jan 4 2010).

    So is this the non-proof you were referring to Joe? You might want to spend 5 minutes on google BEFORE making the absurd statement that you made.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    March 7, 2013 3:08 p.m.

    re:one old man

    Well I suspect the Pope did have some influence but if you recall- go back to the 1980's - you will remember what Reagan actually did. Reagan took over from sorry little Jimmy Carter who spend 4 years humiliating the US and Reagan EXPLODED military spending along with upgrading our nuclear arsenal. If you actually spent 5 minutes doing research you would discover it. The USSR could not keep up with the US build up militarily and finally threw in the towel. Without Reagan doing what he did the USSR would never have collapsed when it did. Yes old man - peace through strength does actually work. Appeasement and apology didn't seem to work too well with Iran or North Korean did it.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    March 7, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    m.g. scott:

    Sorry, but something that you read somewhere on some tinfoil-hatted website sounds like a dubious source to be quoting.

    @nesby:

    And when it comes time to invade North Korea, you and your family will be the first ones to volunteer for military service, right? You wont just slap a Support The Troops sticker on your car and then complain when the government wants to raise taxes to pay for that little opus?

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    March 7, 2013 2:20 p.m.

    Quick PS

    I googled Obama nuclear free world and found what Patriot and I are talking about.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    March 7, 2013 2:17 p.m.

    Re: Joe Blow and xscribe

    In response to the Patriot point of zero nukes by Obama, I do believe Patriot is correct in that I too remember something about Obama as having suggested the removal of all nuclear weapons worldwide. Can't source it at this time, but I think it is something Obama once said.

    To others, thanks for the reference on "The Mouse that Roared".

    And speaking of "one old man," I will agree with your assertion that Reagan may be getting more credit than he deserves on the fall of the Iron Curtin. However that will only play as long as you liberals will admit that it was the continuation of the Bush policy that led to Obama getting Usama Bin Laden. OK?

  • raybies Layton, UT
    March 7, 2013 1:45 p.m.

    I think a lot of people have no idea just how devastating even a failed nuclear strike can be to our nation, its people, and the health of the entire world. It's really nothing our youngsters even talk about anymore...

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    March 7, 2013 12:35 p.m.

    I, too, tried to find something where Obama states he wants our nuclear arsenal at 0, but, alas, can't seem to find it. How convenient for Patriot to say it, but not provide evidence for it. In fact, Obama's only statement was to reduce them further than the 1500 point that had been agreed upon earlier. Wonder how many of those little bombs it would take to dessimate the world? Nice try, though, Patriot, but it's hard to take one seriously with anything they say when they could have just as easily made their point with the truth instead of making things up!

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    March 7, 2013 12:00 p.m.

    Patriot, if you will do some reading of history -- real history, not the Glen Beck type -- you will learn that although Reagan deserves a bit of credit for closing down the old Soviet Union, the REAL credit goes to a Polish Pope and a bunch of very courageous union workers in Poland and elsewhere on the east side of the Iron Curtain.

    That hogwash about giving Reagan full credit for the end of the Soviets is awfully old. It exposes only the lack of truthful information possessed by those who spout it.

  • codger Southwest Utah, UT
    March 7, 2013 11:01 a.m.

    m. g. scott: "The Mouse that Roared" (1959), in which The Grand Duchy of Fenwick declared war on the U.S. Great Movie!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 7, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    @Patriot

    "Never fear folks - Barack has vowed to reduce the US nuclear arsenal to 0."

    Oh Really? I missed that quote. Care to point us to that gem?

    Why do you folks consistently go over-the-top.

    If you are concerned about a president reducing our nuclear capabilities, that is a valid concern to some.

    Discuss it rationally and honestly. Why resort to totally false statements to prove a point?

    Is the truth just not provocative enough so you need to take it to a dishonest level?

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    March 7, 2013 10:29 a.m.

    Nebsy: What would YOU like him to do?

    Looks like we may own NK soon!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 7, 2013 10:26 a.m.

    "North Korea just threatened to drop a nuclear bomb on your children.....what will your President do?"

    I dont know Nebsy. What do you suggest?

    I hope it is a calm, well reasoned response.

  • Elcapitan Ivins, UT
    March 7, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    It's all biblical people. A darker day is coming. Where are your feet plantred? Listen to this and pray about it.

    "but unto them that fear my name, shall the Son of Righteousness arise with healing in his wings, and they shall grow up before me as calves in a stall." Malachi 4: 1-2

    Stay out of the fray.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    March 7, 2013 10:18 a.m.

    re:one old man

    Does the phrase "peace through strength" mean anything at all to you? President Reagan said it and it was THE reason we WON the cold war with the old USSR. As I recall - your socialist president Obama was going to sit down with little ole North Korea back in 2009 and convince them to be our friends. Didn't work out too well did it...but liberal policy never does. As far as isolation being tied to the Tea Party....I have no idea what your point is. If you knew ANYTHING about what the Tea Party actually stood for you would find yourself in agreement ...but doing actual research is hard work for a liberal ... I understand. By the way, MSNBC doesn't count as research.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    March 7, 2013 10:00 a.m.

    "When people or countries isolate themselves, they pretty soon lose touch and start to be afraid of everyone."

    Do you mean like conservative Tea Party Republicans?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    March 7, 2013 9:59 a.m.

    Never fear folks - Barack has vowed to reduce the US nuclear arsenal to 0. The idea here is if we just get rid of our nuclear weapons then so will North Korea and I'm sure that will be the case. Liberals are so smart... it warms the heart to know we are in safe hands.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    March 7, 2013 9:58 a.m.

    m.g. scott -- have you ever read The Mouse That Roared by Leonard Wibberly? Great book. Exactly what you're talking about.

  • George Bronx, NY
    March 7, 2013 9:41 a.m.

    @nebsy

    not react like children in a school yard.

  • eastcoastcoug Danbury, CT
    March 7, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    Another POV: When people or countries isolate themselves, they pretty soon lose touch and start to be afraid of everyone. It's human nature. The best antidote is not more isolation but to find ways to engage them again. If Kim likes basketball, send the Globetrotters in. Propose Michael Jordan as first ambassador to the PRK.

    You guys all know how this works with these kinds of neighbors. We talk about it in Conference and Sunday School. Why is it in the real world that we would rather nuke them first? Do we want to solve the problem or just have revenge (for something that hasn't happened yet)?

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    March 7, 2013 9:12 a.m.

    Another paper tiger.

    Raise the rhetoric.

    Increase in Military spending.

    Cold Wars are expensive.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    March 7, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    It is no big deal if North Korea wants to nuke us. Iran wants to also, and they want to nuke Israel too. No one in office worries about them. I am sure our defense secretary will be able to contain them both. He said he will.

    We also have the secret weapons of the United Nations (which has done such a good job with Iran's threats) and Dennis Rodman. We should send Rodman back to North Korea long term, until he makes the North Koreans love us like he loves Kim jong un, or ... whatever happens happens.

    Maybe we should let them be the host of the United Nations. That should make them nicer.

    No need to keep a strong military though, and we should dismantle all our nukes. They are too expensive to maintain and set a bad example. We can balance our budget on military cuts, and send any money we have to spare to the North Koreans for humanitarian aid.

    Kittens and roses all around.

  • dbrbmw Orem, UT
    March 7, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    If I threatened to send a missle at the white house I would go to jail. Does Ohama have the guts to send N Korea to jail?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 7, 2013 8:53 a.m.

    These countries are small! They're no threat to us----Barrack Obama

    When a country has the ability, and threatens nukes, it's time to take out facilities.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:44 a.m.

    Nebsy: "North Korea just threatened to drop a nuclear bomb on your children.....what will your President do?"

    Probably think rationally, stay calm, look at the evidence, understand the political, military and economic forces at work, and have the State Department communicate with the Chinese about them getting a better grip on Kim Jong Un. Also, some careful communications with South Korea about their position and how we can help each other. Probably also have DoD, CIA and NSA ratchet up their intel and planning in the event that North Korea makes moves that look like they might try to do something stupid.

    And as opposed to... what? A knee-jerk, emotion-driven escalation of childish sabre-rattling until someone actually _does_ do something stupid and a lot of innocent people die and the world re-enters the Stone Age?

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:43 a.m.

    Maybe North Korea is trying to get into a war so that when it is over and the U.S. has won, we will rebuild their country. Kind of a Marshall Plan for Korea. Wasn't there some movie about some small country trying just that? Kim Jong Un might be watching too many Hollywood movies.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:40 a.m.

    This guy makes Saddam look like a ally. Why did we go to the Sunni-shite fight and not here? If war is declared everyone should pay cost in increased taxes to balance budget (unlike iraq fiasco).

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    @Nebsy
    Ephraim, UT

    "North Korea just threatened to drop a nuclear bomb on your children.....what will your President do?"

    If we reacted every time the North Koreans made a threat, we would have been in a state of active war with them since 1953. In this case, it's an empty threat since they lack the means to deliver any sort of attack against us, "Red Dawn" notwithstanding. And they didn't threaten to attack our "children". They threatened to attack all of us. Making a more emotional appeal by the use of "children" doesn't make a military response any more necessary than by looking at the facts. If a homeless old guy on the street announced that he was ready to bring the US to its knees, would you feel the need to shoot him, or would you just walk away shaking your head?

    In any case, Obama will do the same thing that Romney would have done had he been elected. He'll continue to maintain our military presence in Korea and support continued sanctions against the north.

  • Seabss Murray, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    Do the soldiers in the photo have light sabers? Cool..

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    I think that they would have a better chance if they threw the Hold Hand Grenade of Antioch. Sorry, when Eliyahu made his Monty Python reference, I just couldn't resist.

    So Mountanman, what is your point?

  • Nebsy Ephraim, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    North Korea just threatened to drop a nuclear bomb on your children.....what will your President do?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    March 7, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    Japan bombed Pearl Harbor for the exact same reason (economic sanctions) and then we nuked Japan after FDR put Japanese Americans in interment camps!

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:02 a.m.

    North Korea reminds me of the black knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" who, after having both his arms and legs lopped off in a sword fight, continues with the bluster and threats against his opponent. North Korea's military is mostly equipped with outdated aircraft and can't even afford to fly them regularly for training or to properly maintain them. Use Google Earth to look at the many military airfields in NK. You'll see a lack of black tire marks at either end of them, something normally present when landing strips receive even moderate use, along with outdated aircraft parked in rows near the airstrips. The only thing they could mount with any effect is an artillery barrage, and there are questions about how long they could sustain such an effort. The reality is that they would fall as fast as Iraq did.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    March 7, 2013 8:01 a.m.

    China needs to put their thumb down. Everyone knows China allows North Korea to exist.

  • techpubs Sioux City, IA
    March 7, 2013 7:44 a.m.

    Unfortunately, if they launched a nuclear warhead on a missile and we intercepted it, this could have a tragic outcome.
    If the warhead were to detonate several miles in the atmosphere the radiation fallout could spread for thousands of miles as the winds carried it across oceans or continents.
    Part of this problem could be due to the fact that after WWII we refused to go to war. Instead we engaged in a series of policing actions that left the issues unresolved and festering.
    Maybe Patton was right when he said we needed to continue through Asia and loop back around to Africa at the end of the war.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    March 7, 2013 7:38 a.m.

    How about letting Dennis Rodman arrange a visit for Kim Jong Un to come watch some basketball. As nutty as that may sound, wouldn't it be worth a try. Who knows, we might be missing an opportunity to turn the kid into an ally.

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    March 7, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    FatherOfFour

    Thanks. That makes way more sense. I appreciate it.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    March 7, 2013 7:24 a.m.

    Send Dennis Rodman back!

  • FatherOfFour WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    March 7, 2013 7:21 a.m.

    "North Korea vows to nuke US." Good luck with that Skippy. Let me know how that works out for ya. I'll be sitting here with my coffee.

    @TOO - North Korea is not completely self-sufficient. It depends on trade with other countries to obtain food, gasoline (of which the US is the top exporter in the world), oil, medicine, and other such necessities for its people. Imposing sanctions means that those trade deals are either severely limited or completely cut off. Your hospitals run out of pharmaceuticals. Your stores run out of food. Your power grid begins to decay.

  • SME Bountiful, UT
    March 7, 2013 7:13 a.m.

    Lots of big talk on both sides. North Korea won't follow through, due to a lack of capability, not a lack of desire. Will the UN follow through?

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    March 7, 2013 6:49 a.m.

    Could someone educate me?

    What exactly does it mean sanctions? Mitt Romney and Barack Obama always talk about sanctions, but what does it mean to put sanctions on someone? I haven't really understood that.