but then... UH-OH

Here in Seoul, I live less than 40 miles from North Korean artillery. Most of the time, this doesn't bother me. I don't think about it. Then I read something like this and get pissed.

To all you conservative bloggers saying, "Well... Bush is just gonna have to bomb NK's reactor to stop it from making nukes," may I respectfully submit that you don't understand shit about the situation here. Cross my off-white ass and hope to spray shotgun diarrhea.

Granted, from the strict, puckered-sphincter disciplinarian point of view, bombing a NK nuclear facility sounds like a good way to get Kim's attention. "Tell 'im we mean business, and they'll think twice about attacking us!" or some such baloney, right? One psychology fits all, right?

Just FYI, Koreans are tougher than those Middle Easterners. Way tougher. You think Allah is fuel enough for holy rage? Allah's got nothing on a constant diet of Korean chili peppers. Try shitting fire your entire life and see if that doesn't toughen you up. Koreans, once engaged in battle, aren't going to throw aside their weapons and surrender to the first Jeepful of foreign journalists they see. Not when they can fling themselves into the air with incendiary flatulence and rain ass-fire on you from above. Who needs paratroopers? The North Koreans're gonna LEAP over the DMZ!

South Korea is almost 80% mountain. North Korea's almost as bad. That's not the same thing as the nice, easy, flat expanses we dealt with in Iraq. Tons of hidey-holes, very little room for beeline armored columns. So let's say you've got a bunkerful of NK soldiers, all hiding inside a South Korean mountain. The last thing one of our hi-tech Teflon-wearin' soldiers will see when he peeks into that bunker is an array of Korean asses, all breathing fire. You wanna expose our guys to THAT?

Oh, we'll win a war on the peninsula eventually, but half the population will be crisped.

You really think this is going to be as easy as Iraq, don't you. Idiot. You're not listening to a damn word I'm saying.

Look, Rumsfeld knows that almost 40,000 American troops, many (if not most) stationed close to the DMZ, will be cannon fodder in the first 24 hours of ground combat here. This is why he's pulling our guys back, and I agree with him. Personally, I think Gulf War 2 did prove one thing: we can drop ourselves just about anywhere at will, even if Turkey says nyet. I think we could even afford to leave the peninsula, and we'd still be able to fight NK and win. But any win is still going to be costly. Losing a handful of personnel in Iraq gives us the wrong impression; we may have convinced ourselves that all future wars will be that easy. They won't. Certainly not in Korea.

So gimme a damn break and quit talking about bombing NK sites. The peninsula's one huge Tarantino-style Mexican standoff. One guy pulls the trigger, everybody loses. If you think that's the coward's way of thinking... if you think that peace and democracy on the peninsula are worth a few million dead citizens and a few thousand dead soldiers, then what separates you from any other Hitlerish asshole who looks in the mirror, beholds the reflection of his twitching eyelid, and breathes, "Can't make an omelette without breakin' a few eggs!"?

To win without fighting is best, Sun-tzu said. Resorting to violence means we've failed in some way. Try that "preemptive" shit on the peninsula and watch what happens.
_