Libya: The Forgotten Reason North Korea Desperately Wants Nuclear Weapons

anatta

100% recycled karma
Partially in response to Washington’s war that ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the spring of 2003, ostensibly because of a threat posed by Baghdad’s “weapons of mass destruction,” Libyan leader Muammar el-Qaddafi seemed to capitulate regarding such matters.
He reconfirmed his country's adherence to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in December of that year and agreed to abandon his country’s embryonic nuclear program.
In exchange, the United States and its allies lifted economic sanctions and pledged that they no longer sought to isolate Libya. Qaddafi was welcomed back into the international community once he relinquished his nuclear ambitions.

That reconciliation lasted less than a decade.
When one of the periodic domestic revolts against Qaddafi’s rule erupted again in 2011, Washington and its NATO partners argued that a humanitarian catastrophe was imminent (despite meager evidence of that scenario), and initiated a military intervention.
It soon became apparent that the official justification to protect innocent civilians was a cynical pretext, and that another regime-change war was underway.

The Western powers launched devastating air strikes and cruise-missile attacks against Libyan government forces. NATO also armed rebel units and assisted the insurgency in other ways.

Although all previous revolts had fizzled, extensive Western military involvement produced a very different result this time.
The insurgents not only overthrew Qaddafi, they captured, tortured and executed him in an especially grisly fashion. Washington’s response was astonishingly flippant. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton quipped: “We came, we saw, he died.”
 
North Korea promptly cited the Libya episode as a reason why it needed a deterrent capability—a point that Pyongyang has reiterated several times in the years since Muammar el-Qaddafi ouster.
There is little doubt that the West’s betrayal of Qaddafi has made an agreement with the DPRK to denuclearize even less attainable than it might have been otherwise.
Even some U.S. officials concede that the Libya episode convinced North Korean leaders that nuclear weapons were necessary for regime survival.
Washington’s conduct in Libya was a case of brazen duplicity. It is hardly a surprise if North Korea (or other countries) now regard the United States as an untrustworthy negotiating partner. Because of Pyongyang’s other reasons for wanting a nuclear capability, a denuclearization accord was always a long shot.
But U.S. actions in Libya reduced prospects to the vanishing point.
American leaders have only themselves to blame for that situation.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...on-north-korea-desperately-wants-23129?page=2
 
the fact NK keeps nukes for security from yet another US intervention, doesn't change the fact
a NK with atomic ICBM's is existential threat .. It's a sticky wicket to navigate for sure
 
You might want to read this, I have no doubt that they will attempt to sell their nuclear know how to others.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...m_recirculation&spotim_referrer=recirculation
Sent from my Lenovo K8 Note using Tapatalk
more existential threats from that regime..thanks for the link.

I have to admire Trump for bringing this to a head, instead of more 6 party talks and stuff-
kicking the can down the road.

a nuclear NK simply cannot stand, and your link is yet another reason why.
 
If NK is not allowed (by the rest of the world) to possess nuclear weapons, what is your solution to prevent that?
 
Trump is a realist, sometimes to a fault.
In the case of North Korea it should be evident to the free world, and apparently so by the joint efforts to address the situation, that NK should not and can not possess nukes.

It is a legitimate theory however that as the OP suggests NK is worried, or at least their leader is worried of meeting the same fate as Gaddafi.
And why shouldn't he be.

The Obama administration basically assassinated Gaddafi. Which by the way unsettled the region to the point that Northern Africa is awash with some very bad players. But another story another thread.

I don't think Trump is the same clueless leader that Obama was, he thinks things through, it's in his DNA to do so.
the Obama years have left one big mess in the middle east and beyond, so treading lightly but with a big stick I believe, is the right path.
So far so good it looks like, Trump is very well received around the world.
 
It wasn't just libya, but also iraq that got invaded by america for no good reason.

How can we tell countries they can't have nukes when we have thousands of them?
 
If NK is not allowed (by the rest of the world) to possess nuclear weapons, what is your solution to prevent that?
well that is the crux of the biscuit isn't it? but what do you mean? how do you "prevent it"?

we are using an aggressive diplomacy - we are leaning on China
( in return dropping concerns about currency manipulation) -while at the same time trying to advance our alliances
with the littoral and SE Asian states -AND- trying to do bilateral trade as well!!
 
yes this all thanks to GWBUSH and team


they went after Iraq built on fucking lies so they could own the oil and gather huge piles of green paper.


SADAM had none


the Bush team LIED AND LIED ABOUT THAT so they could build huge piles of green paper



now every other leader in the world thinks the USA will reward them for denuking by attacking them on lies once they give them up


thank the republicans party
 
yes this all thanks to GWBUSH and team
they went after Iraq built on fucking lies so they could own the oil and gather huge piles of green paper.
SADAM had none
the Bush team LIED AND LIED ABOUT THAT so they could build huge piles of green paper
now every other leader in the world thinks the USA will reward them for denuking by attacking them on lies once they give them up


thank the republicans party
Hillary lied about humanitarian war. she's an interventionist
Bush/Hillary/Obama are all one and the same
 
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


but he was black so you hate him for trying to finish what your fucks lied to the world to create so Cheney could collect big piles of green paper
 
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


but he was black so you hate him for trying to finish what your fucks lied to the world to create so Cheney could collect big piles of green paper
goofball.
Libya wasn't finishing anything, except the duly seated government of Qadaffi.
 
the iraq war caused all of this idiot


Isis was created by the Abu Garhib stacking of naked men for fun buy your party
 
the iraq war caused all of this idiot


Isis was created by the Abu Garhib stacking of naked men for fun buy your party
moron.
ISIS did not cause Libya war 2011, ISIS had nothing to do with the war.
ISIS moved into the power vacuum afterwards -but that was because Libya's new real civil war
caused by our overthrow of Qadaffi,
 
remember when we told you taking the shit cork out of the bottle of bees would fuck up the middle east


asshole
 
Back
Top