WaPo "PostGlobal" Blog: "Strike North Korea, Now"

Hold onto your finery, kiddos...

On the Washington Post homepage at 8:15 EDT, at "Today in Opinions" beneath Cueball Emeritus David Broder's comely photo, is one of the most irresponsible postings I've ever read in the so-called elite media.  Not to be outdone by the Jerusalem Post's infamous editorial "Kill Arafat" from a few years back, the Washington Post is now inviting us to link up to the considered piece, "Strike North Korea, Now".

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/...

As part of "(a) conversation on global issues moderated by David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria", PostGlobal stakes out its mission as follows:

"PostGlobal will operate as part of washingtonpost.com, the Post's award-winning website. Each of the roughly 30 commentators who are part of the network will have a blog, accessible through PostGlobal, which will maintain an archive of their postings and links to their publications and other writings. [snip]

"Understanding the world is a daily puzzle -- for the prominent journalists who make up the PostGlobal network and for our millions of potential readers around the world. We will try to make sense of where the world is going by putting our heads together."

-- David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria

Here's what these two brainiacs are offering us today, from an anonymous author who tends a blog called "China Confidential".  Remember, you're reading from a link right beneath Dan Froomkin's on the main page of Kate Graham's baby:

"(I)t is just a matter of time before North Korea sells a nuclear weapon to another rogue state or a terrorist group such as Al Qaeda for cash. If allowed to continue adding to its nuclear arsenal -- and one must assume that it will violate any agreement it signs and never submit to verification of nuclear disarmament -- North Korea might also resort to nuclear terror to extract economic assistance and other concessions from Japan. [snip]

"There is no precedent for permitting a mentally ill state to possess nuclear weapons. It would be incredibly irresponsible -- even suicidal -- to let this happen.

"Therefore, war: A surprise attacks aimed at swiftly destroying the enemy using all necessary means available to the U.S. military. Though it may seem extreme, the use of sudden, devastating force may be the only way to resolve this problem. Kim and his cohorts are not likely to go quietly into the night. Retirement and exile are out of the question; rather than submit to strangulation by sanctions and blockades, the regime will likely attack South Korea, where thousands of U.S. troops are stationed, and fire missiles at Japan. Even if North Korea is not presently capable of putting a nuclear warhead on a missile, it can strike out with chemical and possibly also biological weapons; and analysts generally agree that the casualties of a new Korean conflict would surpass the numbers of dead and injured in the Korean War."

How's that for "a conversation on global issues"?  An anonymous whack job calls for the certain deaths of tens of thousands of people in 500 words or less, and the Washington Post offers it up for our breezy consideration.

I remember when the Hutus used their media to call for a pre-emptive slaughter of Tutsis, based on the fabrication that the Tutsis were going to kill them first.  But as cynical as I am, I could not have imagined I would be commended to the pre-emptive slaughter of hundreds of thousands of North Koreans by someone the Washington Post won't identify.

Thank you for the penetrating analysis, Donald Graham.  But if it's all the same to you, I'm going to go back to reading my dog-eared copy of "Mein Kampf."