Kim Jung Il: bluffing?

John Cross wrote: "Kim Jong Il knows that an attack would be fatal to his power, and that is why he is blaring the fact that he has a nuclear weapon....it's called "bluffing"...he's just casting the line out there, and hoping someone takes the bait. There is no way that he would attack..."

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that KJI is completely rational. To extend your 'child's temper tantrum' metaphor: KJI has been treated like a spoiled child his entire life. He was isolated from his mother because his father had her killed, and then given everything he could possibly express a desire for, as the heir apparent. He was given sports cars, boats, women (who acquiesed or faced a firing squad)... he even had government agents kidnap a south Korean actress to star in one of his self-indulgent film projects, because he fancies himself a great director and artistic genius, so he had to 'have the best' for his movies, which are about average quality for an American high school student's films.

KJI has been indulged and cosseted and sucked up to, and insulated from reality his entire life. The DPRK's financial resources are pathetic- the county I live in probably has a bigger budget, but when you put all the resources of even the poorest nation at the behest of one man to indulge himself anyway his whims wander, that's a lot of money and a lot of indulgence.

KJI clearly does not have a clear notion of the limits of his own power.

In fact, as weak of a nation as north Korea is, sadly, they seem to me to be the most likely actor in the world to cause us to actually have to use nuclear weapons again. The madman in charge over there could actually believe in his own craziness enough to either smuggle a nuke onto US soil, or give it to someone who did, (and have it traced back to hiim).

There is NO WAY we could ever let that happen without responding with nukes. IT would destroy the credibility of mutual assured destruction. The entire nuclear non-proliferation treaty and movement is based upon a promise and a threat: you are guaranteed safety from nuclear attack, as long as you don't have them. The explicit corollary to this is that if you DO have them, and if you USE them, then we will not hesitate to nuke you back.

Without the threat, the promise is meaningless.