>Maybe I am being overly naive here, but isn't North
>Korea's idea that "If we are a nuclear power then the
>rest of the world has to accept us and trade with us
>and coddle us" partly true?
Not really. The Bush administration included them in the "axis of evil", so , they took some measures to avoid to go the same road that Iraq.
" They have nuke? Who let them in the axis of evil? We didnt mean that, honest".
Cant say it didnt work. Bush is much more peaceful when talking about North Korea, and reaching for a diplomatic solution. They are just... taking care of their economical and political interests. Isnt that you just stated about the US policy?
Anyway, Korea just wants to be payed off. "Make it with the monetary aid and we'll go your way". Happened before in a number of occasions.
> The Cold War changed a lot of playing cards in hands
> of superpowers
Well, Russia offered weapons to their "allies". The US sold them. You have to give them credit for it : extort money from a country in exange of weapons that permitted them to kill themselfs. Its like drug traffic in larger pakages.
Happend alot during the cold war, and the more blunt examples are in the middle east (like afganistan), or even in corea. Both sides (russian and usa) played the strategic game.
>The difference between the US and other large military
>powers throughout history is that we have NOT
>historically used our forces to conquer other countries
>and build an empire.
Well, the indians pop in my mind. The ones that survived were the ones that submitted themselfs to the settlers.
Besides, its common knowledge the CIA incrusions in regimes that werent "sponsored" by the USA.
Currently it works another way, due to the economical might and the use of markets, television, publicity , etc. , the "civilized" world its getting more "americanized" each passing year. It's a cultural takeover.
This is getting down to a religious discussion .
