Keeping our side of the bargain after NK reneged on the deal would be like trying to discipline a spoiled child by rewarding them for negative behavior.

The U.S. suspended its food assistance program in early 2009, partially because of concerns the food was being diverted to North Korea’s military or members of its political elite.

Here

If their government diverted resources away from the military they could feed their own people. Sending them food is essentially supporting their offensive capabilities.

Some of the North Koreans RFA spoke to were shocked to learn that the cost of the satellite-carrying rocket launch in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of the birth of North Korean founder Kim Il Sung will, according to some estimates, cost about U.S. $850 million—enough to feed most of the North’s 24 million people for a year.

Here

In the past, when we’ve sent them food aid they’ve methodically repackaged it at great expense and effort so the recipients would have no idea it came from the West.

Any aid of any kind will only be used to perpetuate the regime. This is not a poor country. They have one of the largest and best equipped and trained armed forces in the world, and they will use it before the regime falls, so a deterrent by their neighbors is essential. They are irredeemably dangerous and evil, a comment I make about few of our so-called enemies. But in this case, they are the worst of the lot.

This government has nothing going for it, all civil culture and institutions there have been methodically exterminated. Although there is no need (yet) for any pre-emptive or retaliatory war, nothing must be done to allow this regime to survive even a moment longer.

North Koreans would be very aware of the “axis of evil” comments and know what happens to those countries without nukes. The North Korean Army is a response to hostility and a way to suck up the younger people onto the side of the government and keep them employed. North Korea has nowhere to go, nothing to invade. It is not offensive. China won’t let it, Russia won’t let it, and the US won’t let it. The occasional saber-rattling seems like the hissing of a cornered cat rather than anything serious.

The Korean War occurred only after the US declared South Korea outside the US’s area of interest. Given that, it was a reasonable gamble. As was Kuwait for the Iraqis under the same circumstances, by the way.

The notion that the country’s leadership is irrational is simply an excuse for the US to meddle with it. As with Cuba, with many Western markets blocked and only poor countries with which to trade it is chronically economically depressed.

It’s hard to tell which came first, the sense of isolation and the world being against it, or the world being against it and it feeling isolated.

But I don’t think watching people starve is a way to influence a leadership or country which already thrives on feeling outcast. Just as we would if we were in the same position.

Unfortunately, Communist dictatorships also have their 1-percenters and their wealth-distibution scams, too. Only worse.

Right now, the Chinese are probably paying this bill, and I think they should certainly shoulder a heavier load than us. After all, they are the ones who need a buffer state and a strong military ally, not us. Sooner or later, they’ll tire of the immense drain on their resources and cut the umbilical, and this foul little government can be allowed to die a natural death.

Of course, what happens after the fall of NK will be subject to the Law of Unforeseen consequences. Korea will change, possibly re-unify into a real military and economic rival to China and Japan, or the North might simply become an outlaw or failed state, another Somalia. Or China might invade (another Afghanistan?).

Or we might wind up with a powerful and belligerent capitalist North, like China or Russia. Not all the world’s scumbags are Communist, you know.

Still I’m willing to take the chance. But its sad that a lot of innocent people are going to have to starve. Still, all we owe N Korea in the way of humanitarian aide is to feed them IF they agree to cut back their military to a size adequate for defense (with full inspection rights to back it up), and fair trading rights. I’m sure we can make a fair profit there without exploiting them, and get them interested in free market economics. Everybody wins. And you know what? I think this is exactly what Hillary is trying to do.

Why not? It worked for Vietnam.

Clearly the kind of food we’d send would get to the folks for which it’s intended. The leadership will get fed well no matter what.