Lil' Kim

Is there a better Other than Kim Jong Il? A Central Casting classic. And how very retro to have an Asian supervillian in these days of Arab-fear. Kim's regime, of course, poses no real threat to the US, other than one of defiance, which for many patriots is outrageous enough. But after North Korea shot 7-10 missiles harmlessly into the sea, you'd think, judging from the initial wire service reports, that it was Cuban Missile Crisis II. The White House also played it up while simultaneously playing it down, offering raw meat to nationalists about "united stands" while suggesting that Kim's arsenal isn't keeping them up nights, which it probably isn't. But then, given the manias that can and have gripped Bush's criminal gang, anything's possible, as is doubtless the case with Kim's regime.

Amid the rhetoric and red flags (of all kinds), the basic scenario remains as it has for decades: the US will decide who will or will not own or use WMD, and North Korea currently tops the NO list. Thing is, there's really not much Bush can do about Kim's stockpile, especially militarily, as any strike would immediately result in Seoul's destruction, assaults on Japan, and God knows what else. Indeed, a resumption of the Korean war would be a very bad thing all around, which is why Bush is reduced to telling Kim, "We expect you to adhere to international norms," a command that is both laughable and serious -- laughable in the sense that Bush is instructing anyone on global etiquette, but serious in that such blazing hypocrisy is indeed the "international norm." There are Masters and there are Servants, and Kim is decidedly the latter, a role he continually rejects.

And that is the true nub of this whole "crisis": Kim's refusal to assume the position. I know there are numerous obstacles, mostly domestic, that tie Bush's hands on this front, but still, how hard would it be to put Kim on the payroll? Lord knows the US has bankrolled far worse, and allows other nations to behave in ways that would get North Korea baked were they to act in kind (see Israel in Gaza), so I really don't see the problem here. Yes, the native ideologues would bark and foam at the very thought, but a serious geopolitical player would make them choke on their own bile. Picture Richard Nixon arriving in Pyongyang, shaking Kim's hand and slapping him on the back, reviewing his troops and toasting him at a state banquet. Think Kim could resist that? Please. Plus, the South Koreans would breathe a sigh of relief, and maybe even honor the US prez as a Hero of The People. The international press would buzz with excitement, and the Chinese would kick in some bread, pleased that we were helping keep Korea pacified. No Dem prez could do this, as he (or she -- imagine Hillary toasting Kim!) would be smeared as a pussy-commie-terror-dupe of the lowest order. As Nixon brilliantly demonstrated, only a Repub could get away with such a dramatic gesture.

But Bush is no Nixon. Hell, he rates below Agnew on the political hustler scale. So, here we'll remain, stuck between calls for military action and Cold War-style containment, when the solution is right in front of us: pay Kim off. What better way to show him the glories of capitalism?