John Kerry's peace plan.

Josh, sometimes they did. On August 18, 1976, a party of nine South Koreans, accompanied by two U.S. officers and four American military police, went into the DMZ to prune a tree that blocked a clear view between two U.N. checkpoints. The party from the South was met near the tree by a North Korean lieutenant and seven other men. At first, the North Koreans didn't seem bothered by the intentions of the tree-cutting crew. Then the North Korean lieutenant demanded the party halt its work. When he was refused, a truckload of North Korean reinforcements showed up. The incident quickly turned into a bloody conflict, resulting in two American soldiers being beaten then axed to death.
Later, the tree was successfully pruned. In addition to other measures, overhead was the "Abilene Tree Pruner's Protective Association" (B-52s). Sometimes, you just have to know how to "reason" with them.

Well score one for Gerald Ford! I don't remember that incident; I mostly remember trying to get my WIN button before the price went up.

...as I got to Kunsan AB, South Korea (15 min. flight time from NK air bases just north of the DMZ, BTW) in 1977. Someone had drawn a cartoon in the Airman's Club of a mass of warships sailing with a large number of planes overhead. A dialog bubble over one of the ships asked, "Where are we going?". The reply from one of the planes: "To cut down a tree".

Don't you remember how Jimmy Carter, under Clinton, negotiated an agreement that we would give North Korea oodles of energy resources and they would abandon their nukes?

I think Republican presidents, like Reagan, had more pressing matters on their minds. Remember the USSR and their nukes pointed at us? Reagan and Bush finally resolved that situation, so Clinton had lots more opportunity to deal with NK.

I wouldn't be so quick to give Reagan and Bush the credit for bringing down the USSR. Lots of things contributed to the collapse, most of which happened from within the country, and as a result of the USSR's focus on military spending at the expense of infrastructure and the needs of the people. "Some are more equal than others" and all that.

Western culture in general also played a role. The Soviet people knew what they were missing, at least to a degree, and the government couldn't repress them indefinitely.

You mentioned the USSR's focus on military spending. I read something once (and can't recall a clue to where it was right now) that the arms race was partly designed to impoverish Russia. Or at least, some of the latter escalation was. That with our national resources some planners felt we could easily outspend the USSR and either bankrupt them or become so overwhelmingly armed they'd be intimidated finally into back down in some degree.

I wish I could remember more. It's just a tidbit dredged up from faint memory by your comment.


roger

That's an interesting theory that probably has at least some basis in fact. In the beginning, though, the US arms buildup was mostly the product of fear that the Soviets wouldn't hesitate to attack if they thought they could succeed and survive it, and a general fear of Communist expansion. There was some real basis for that fear of course, with the Soviet acquisition of the H-bomb, the fall of China, the invasion of South Korea by North Korea, etc.

Certainly would probably be later. I wish I could recall more, I just recall there was more in whatever I was reading.

I think it was talking about the decade roughly before Reagan actually, but I may be way wrong since I recall so little of the storyline.

roger

that you wouldn't want to give Reagan or Bush the credit. However, the fact remains that Reagan built up the military and star wars so fast that the soviets collapsed trying to keep up.

Sure there were lots of other factors, but these had been there a long time without bringing the USSR to its knees.

Star Wars? You mean that space-based missile program that was never actually built because everyone (including the Soviets) knew it didn't work? That Star Wars?

Josh, are you sure that the Soviets didn't think that me might have something and waste no end of money trying to "keep up"? Ah, yes, the old "everybody knew" again.
BTW, did you ever wonder where the money came from for those "invisible fighters" (now known as "Stealth") that suddenly appeared when they were sent to to the Middle East? As Gomer Pyle used to say, Surprise, Surprise, Suprise!".

I highly doubt that the Soviets were seriously worried about Star Wars. We had our spies and they had theirs and I'm willing to bet they knew it wasn't going anywhere.

I remember the word had gotten out about the Stealth fighter quite some time before the military admitted they existed.

Josh, I don't remember "the word" as having gotten out, but I worked in D.C., not the Skunk Works.
I will admit, there were ocasional thoughts about "something funny going on" with some Air Traffic Controllers saying that they saw something and were told to shut up, and I don't mean as in a UFO coverup fantasy.
The real open talk that was all over the place when their existance was first publically revealed was how in the world did they manage to keep that a total secret for so long.

I guess we remember it differently then. I can recall much joking about it, even on the Tonight Show I think, as the military steadfastly denied the thing existed despite widespread talk about it.

I saw one once, at an air show in Maryland. Very cool looking. Some have speculated that the Stealth, because of its appearance, may have been mistaken for a UFO during its testing.

A couple of posts down, J., you profess to not remember how Stealth came to be public knowledge. Trust me, it wasn't bedause DoD wanted it so. It was Jimmy Carter - again. In 1979, he revealed the existence of the program as part of his justification for ending the B-1 bomber program. At the time, I was at a B-52 base, and we openely wondered: 1) Why tell everyone about it; 2) Why reveal the existence of a program that was still years away from having operational aircraft (the first F-117's went operational in 1984 AIR); and 3) What we were to do if need be trying to penetrate the stiffest air defense in history with 1950s and 1960s technology.
(The first major survivability upgrade to the B-52 fleet in 15 years having taken place in the early 80's, after someone (who might that be?) finally having funded the program).

Brilliant wasn't it? I think, however, you are over generalizing just a wee bit. "everyone (including the Soviets) knew it didn't work?" 'Everyone' presumably includes Reagan, his staff, the pentagon, the defense contractors, etc.? Nah, the Soviets weren't so sure it wouldn't work. Remember how they kept insisting that we should not build 'star wars'?

Reagan didn't have to build it, just say he was going to, and Gorbachev was soon meeting with him in Iceland. You do remember that don't you? That was the genius of it. And then there were the babbling dummies who insisted on telling the Soviets that it just couldn't be done.

By the way, it never was too clear just who was saying it couldn't be built. I have heard a lot of people say things couldn't be done only to be silenced when things were done. Do you remember how people snickered at the PC or Apple II in about 1981? Perhaps the people you're thinking about snickered at the idea of shooting down a missile? I wonder what they say about the Patriot system and where it might be in a few more years?

It wasn't that it couldn't be built. The problem was that it was outrageously expensive and the tests that had been conducted showed that the system simply did not work very well. The variant that GWB has promoted has also fared poorly in tests.

The North Koreans had secretly violated their agreement with us, and moved forward with their nuclear development even as we held up our part of the bargain, and you say "the situation was well in hand"? It's all Bush's fault? Now, that is insisting that the world is what you want it to be rather than what it really is. Simply incredible!

Hi, KP.

Just as with many other countries, they had the knowledge and raw materials for a bomb, but hadn't yet put one together, until the world's only superpower started rabbling its sabre at them.
-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Dave, are you saying that a President should never say "unflattering things" about North Korea? All Preidents, or just Republican ones?

Hi, J.

Of course not -- but Bush essentially used no diplomacy at all, other than sabre-rattling. And including them in his "Axis of Evil" was the last straw for them. Yet we still refuse to guarantee that we won't attack them as part of the "Bush doctrine" of "pre-emptive war." Try to picture yourself as a citizen of any other country but ours and ask yourself how you'd feel about a country that behaved as we have done since Bush took office. It's no wonder that the citizens of only three other countries (Canada, Britian, and Australia) still have a positive impression of us -- and even they don't have a positive impression of Bush. And our "favorability rating" is closing in on 50% in all of those but Australia.
-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Actually I think the last last straw was when Bush told an interviewer that he "loathes" the North Korean dictator.