One of several multi charming charms possessed by girls (often deployed as a control mechanism) is their magical ability to create an angle with their bodies that, uh, simultaneously creates other angles.
Could such angle dangle be sexyfully segued into the realm of the dipolopolitiary?
All the cool kids know about the two Koreas - the yankee part is little more than a starving, slave trading underground rocket factory with an unfree, unfun new clear weaponized nation state attached led by the undying Dear Leader with Young General in the wings just in case.
The below the 30 sump parallel (angles haha) belt's southermost portions - SoKo (or ROK as the ancients insist on nom d'guerr'ing her) is fully crunk with a conscript military totally off the hook with literacy, bling bling, fun and free choice.
As best understood - an essential comte d'gurre ensembe l'hyperpuissance is all those little sister democrazies sweetly lounging about Great Satan's benign peripheries - many created by Great Satan herself and of them all - SoKo has been an excellent hot little sister democrazy that hasn't ever bothered anyone.
Protected, nurtured, play play and more angles - Great Satan has always looked out for her - tho now the asianly asiatic Info Age Arms Race is creating other angles in PACRIM.
Like the new clear angle!
Totally tactically tactile of course, the angled concept of Flexible Response - semi sorta all angled up with the new school Extended Deterrence
Is Great Satan's new clear umbrella concept for SoKo out of date?
Extended deterrence is back on the analytic and policy agenda. North Korea's nuclear test, China's rising power, Russia's assertiveness, Iran's unceasing uranium enrichment, and American interest in nuclear disarmament have renewed U.S. allies' attachments to extended deterrence.
How are the challenges and requirements of credible extended deterrence evolving? How should deterrence be integrated with reassurance and cooperation in overall security strategies in Europe and Northeast Asia? What role, if any, should nuclear weapons play in extended deterrence?
Trick quiz? After all -
The effectiveness of deterrence is difficult to prove, since by definition nothing happens. If a country is deterred from attacking, it is a non-event. Sceptics can plausibly argue that perhaps the presumed aggressor never intended to attack, or at least refrained from the assault for other reasons. Still, the North Korean invasion of the South was never repeated, perhaps due to US threats to retaliate—something that was lacking before June 1950.
Extended deterrence is a function of capacity, will, and perception, Courtney. It requires that the guarantor has the capacity to defend another country under attack as well as the intent to do so, and this capacity-will combination must be perceived by the target as sufficiently strong that the potential aggressor decides to refrain.
South Korean security experts have cited several other reasons why they believe that US extended deterrence guarantees have become less credible during the last two decades. For example, they point to the withdrawal of the US troops that had been stationed along the DMZ, where they had served as a trip-wire ensuring that any North Koreas cross-border incursions would meet a US response, to below the Han River. Furthermore, the number of US troops based in South Korea continues to decline from Cold War highs. South Koreans are also concerned that the United States might seek to negotiate a nuclear elimination deal with Pyongyang at their own country’s expense.
Finally, the administration’s nuclear weapons elimination rhetoric alarms South Korea, especially the way the April 2010 US Nuclear Posture Review modifies US conditional negative security assurances to state that: ‘Great Satan will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.’
The North Koreans would be even more credibly deterred if South Korea possessed its own nuclear weapons since the Seoul government and military would be even more inclined to retaliate to a nuclear attack against its population or territory.
Regardless of how decision makers in Seoul see it, South Korea’s neighbours wouldn’t welcome a return of US nuclear weapons to the Peninsula—or South Korea’s acquisition of an independent nuclear deterrent. Beijing would be most likely to oppose these developments, since any nuclear weapons that could attack targets in North Korea would most likely be able to devastate targets in China as well.
K. Fair enough, yet so what? The reverse angle is also true - NoKo's new clear weaponry and despite 6 Scuds and a dud day - all that missiling rocket jazz would most likely be able to devastate targets in Nippon, SoKo, Hawaii, Great Satan as well as China.
Instead of SoKo going new clear over a long weekend and increasing the number of those nasty things in the world - perhaps it's zero sum time!
China could use her pussiance over her only client state to fast forward Koreunification, de nuking the former NoKo and enjoy ten years of watching former SoKo feed and assimilate her own kin while Great Satan splits the new clear free A.O.
Failing that, another angle is like maybe Great Satan should do another Pakistani panty raid, seize and sell (after all - we are not Bolsheviks) all of La La Land of the Pure's atomic assets and sweetly distribute them to SoKo, Taiwan, Nippon and Little Satan.
Pic - "1st I took it (Boom! Boom)! Now I huhk it (Boom! Boom)!" (hit it and get it @ the 3 minute mark)