Which will Cheney Choose?

Which option should Cheney choose?

  • Attack North Korea first.

    Votes: 19 20.7%
  • Use Diplomatic Pressure to deter North Korea

    Votes: 11 12.0%
  • threaten the use of military force

    Votes: 62 67.4%

  • Total voters
    92
  • Poll closed .
July 3rd, 2002

On July 2nd, a US spy plane flew over North Korea. The plane captured on film what appeared to be a large movement of North Korean soldiers and armored vehicles toward the DMZ line. These pictures are sent to the Pentagon and it is confirmed that these pictures do depict a large movement of North Korean forces. Having forces near the DMZ is not unusual, both sides do it, however the amount North Korea is placing, along with the positioning of it’s naval forces in the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan.

President Cheney is alerted to these developments and calls for an emergency meeting between himself, the Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard B. Myers, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, and several other advisors.

The topic of this meeting was what to do about the mobilization of North Korean forces. It seems that an attack by North Korea is eminent. After the naval clashes between North Korea and South Korea on June 29th Kim Jong-il threatened war. This too is not unusual, but the amount of effort being put into this mobilization is alarming. It is known that North Korea has a nuclear weapons program, though they haven’t successfully detonated one as of yet.

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice advises President Cheney to prepare an attack on North Korea. “North Korea is a State Sponsor of terror. They have a nuclear weapons program that threatens the region, the country, and the world”.

Secretary of State Colin Powell responds “We can’t ignore this, but war would be a mistake. If we attack North Korea China will have no choice but to respond. Not to mention the international backlash. We need to neutralize China by having them condemn any North Korean attack”.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates responds “We should mobilize our forces in Korea and threaten counter attack., and position our ships in the Sea of Japan and the Yellow sea for air strikes against their vital targets.”

After President Cheney listens to all of those who had something to say he was left with 3 options: Condoleezza’s attack first, Colin Powell’s diplomatic pressure, and Robert Gates’ threat of force. He sat at his desk quietly contemplating the options. After several minutes he made his decision.

--------------------

Well, now I leave it up to you what will happen. Which option will Cheney choose. To attack North Korea, use diplomatic pressure to isolate Korea, or use a threat of force? You can have an impact on my timeline, Blood Stained Carpet and the Pretzel of Death.
Here's a link to the timeline's thread https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=164890
 
Last edited:
Robert Gates' threat of force sounds most plausible. The "Attack Now!" sounds far more like Rumsfeld than like Condi, to be perfectly honest, and it doesn't sound like something that even a Darth Vader like Cheney would do.
 
Last edited:
Robert Gates' threat of force sounds most plausible. The "Attack Now!" sounds far more like Rumsfeld than like Condi, to be perfectly honest, and it doesn't sound like something that even a Darth Vader like Cheney would do.

It's not too unlike Condi to put up an option like that. She was heavily in support of an invasion of Iraq. I don't think her position on North Korea would be too different.
 
how good is Cheney's relationship with China?

I know G. H. W. Bush is an "old China hand."


ideally, they'd send Papa Bush to Beijing to hold hands and reassure that we ain't going to cross no stinking Yalu River. after promising to bar the Dalai Llama from American territory, the Americans are gifted with a joint communique urging North Korea to Consider Their Options Most Judiciously.

and, in the meantime, get all the military assets into position.
 
heeey, the good news is that this might keep us out of Iraq :D

put me down for assuage the Chinese big-time, and... lay down some ultimatums, and attack first.
 
It's not too unlike Condi to put up an option like that. She was heavily in support of an invasion of Iraq. I don't think her position on North Korea would be too different.

China wouldn't go to war over Iraq.

China might go to war over North Korea if they felt it was in their interest to do so.

BIG difference.

Rice suggesting "Hey! Let's attack North Korea based on troop movements and before we have any concrete intel on just what the situation is!" is...

Gimme an....

A!

Gimmie an....

S!

Gimmie a....

B!

I think you're going with the caricatures of the Bush Administration over the real people.

That, and Cheney doesn't need to be told by Powell, Gates and Rice what his options are. He knows what his options are. This meeting would be him co-ordinating his response:

Powell's working on the State Department's public statement should this turn into something more and then he's on the horn to South Korea, Japan, China (especially) and Russia. (France and Britain probably are getting a call too, being permanent members of the UNSC.)

Rice, Gates and Myers are advising Cheney on a scenario-by-scenario basis while trying to formulate a plan that keeps whatever's happening from getting to the point where force is necessary and Tenet's probably being told to haul ass back to Langley and find out what he can and keep the White House on hourly reports.

If Langley uncovers anything that looks like an imminent attack on South Korea, Cheney authorizes a warning at the UN (hope he's got Bolton for this...) while Powell's busy melting the phone lines with the UNSC members, especially China.

In the grand scheme of things, China can deal with a nuclear North Korea. That's why they never do anything about it.

What China DOESN'T want to deal with is a re-unified Korea under a Krazy Kim regime and packing nukes.

That's not good for business, that's not good for anybody.

It's what they call a "There goes the neighborhood!" scenario.

Trick with China is, North Korea would be invading South Korea, ally to the U.S. and can't justify a smackdown of their own.

At the same time, they're an emerging super-power, they don't want to have a major U.S. military action upstage them in their own backyard. (Even if they want the U.S. to swat the fly for them, so to speak.)

China, the U.S. and the rest of the UNSC's permanent members have to work this out carefully so everybody knows their lines:

The U.S.: "We're upholding a 50+ year old commitment to the security and freedom of our allies in South Korea and Japan." (Meaning: Time to put this thing to rest once and for all.)

China: "North Korea's actions are unacceptable, but the U.S. must tread a fine line and not overstep their bounds." (Meaning: Make it quick and clean, we'll discuss details of re-unification later.)

Russia: "We agree with the People's Republic of China, the United States must measure it's actions in Korea carefully." (Meaning: Ditto what China said.)

Britain: "The North Korean's actions are unacceptable to the cause of peace and co-existance in the Pacific. Britain will co-operate with the United States to the fullest measure necessary." (Meaning: Tell us how we can assist in the current plan of operations and and give us an estimate on what our post-war UN mission's force requirement will be.)

France: "The U.S. is acting irresponsibly here! What about sanctions?!" (Meaning: We're feigning outrage so the rest of Europe will still view us as a credible permanent member of the UNSC.)
 
Powell's working on the State Department's public statement should this turn into something more and then he's on the horn to South Korea, Japan, China (especially) and Russia. (France and Britain probably are getting a call too, being permanent members of the UNSC.)

Don't forget Taiwan (ROC)!

The US stepping up its military assets vis-a-vis N. Korea is going to include more assets in and around Taiwan. And China (PRC) is not going to like that at all. Put in combination with the US making threats against N. Korea... :cool:
 
Don't forget Taiwan (ROC)!

The US stepping up its military assets vis-a-vis N. Korea is going to include more assets in and around Taiwan. And China (PRC) is not going to like that at all. Put in combination with the US making threats against N. Korea... :cool:

Yes, and Taiwan.

I knew I was forgetting someone in the equation.

That'd be part of the discussions and China might ask that only certain assets stage through Taiwan, for example, no carriers, B-52's can land there but only for refueling or repairs, don't station them there, things of that nature.

I think, so long as the U.S. ships and aircraft are moving through the area and not stopping for prolonged periods or staying "on station" in ROC, the Chinese won't have a problem with that.

There are plenty of facilities closer to Korea (Okinawa, Yokosuka, etc...) where the U.S. would conduct their operations from.
 
That'd be part of the discussions and China might ask that only certain assets stage through Taiwan, for example, no carriers, B-52's can land there but only for refueling or repairs, don't station them there, things of that nature.

I think, so long as the U.S. ships and aircraft are moving through the area and not stopping for prolonged periods or staying "on station" in ROC, the Chinese won't have a problem with that.

The question is would the US agree to terms such as those, and even if they did would they uphold their end of the bargain? The US has no great love for the PRC, and vice-versa. US military plans say if N. Korea becomes a loose cannon than the PRC will flex its muscles in the area - which might also involve the ROC. Whether or not this is the actual truth or plausible doesn't matter, its the perception within the US. Likewise, the perception in the PRC is that the US will use any affair involving the Korean peninsula as a way to get their foot in the door in China's backyard. So Taiwan isn't an issue that's going to be hand-waved away.
 
I voted Gates option, even though Cheney should really be doing it in tandem with diplomatic talks with China; if China expresses concern over these actions, they can be slowed to allow them a face saving option to pressure the PRNK to tone it down; and of course, if they aren't too concerned either way, troop movements can continue.
 
The question is would the US agree to terms such as those, and even if they did would they uphold their end of the bargain? The US has no great love for the PRC, and vice-versa. US military plans say if N. Korea becomes a loose cannon than the PRC will flex its muscles in the area - which might also involve the ROC. Whether or not this is the actual truth or plausible doesn't matter, its the perception within the US. Likewise, the perception in the PRC is that the US will use any affair involving the Korean peninsula as a way to get their foot in the door in China's backyard. So Taiwan isn't an issue that's going to be hand-waved away.

Well, for the first question as sigma7 says there are better locations for the US to use than the ROC--Guam, Okinawa, Japan in general, and South Korea itself. They would uphold their end of the bargain (keeping quiet about the US and generally letting us do our thing, so long as it doesn't get nasty) because with the bulk of US forces in the area, if they do start something, they're gonna get the stick pretty hard and quick. Just redirect those B-2s from Pyongyang to Beijing...oh, and maybe reequip them with B-61s, first.
 
Well, for the first question as sigma7 says there are better locations for the US to use than the ROC--Guam, Okinawa, Japan in general, and South Korea itself. They would uphold their end of the bargain (keeping quiet about the US and generally letting us do our thing, so long as it doesn't get nasty) because with the bulk of US forces in the area, if they do start something, they're gonna get the stick pretty hard and quick. Just redirect those B-2s from Pyongyang to Beijing...oh, and maybe reequip them with B-61s, first.

Exactly. The PRC as-is doesn't like the US having so many forward bases within their sphere, especially in Japan and the ROK. But the ROC is a lot closer to the heartland of China than either of those locations. If the US steps up any sort of operations in China's sphere, the PRC is going to react. The PRC isn't simply isn't going to let the US go trouncing around through their backyard, regardless of the situation. It would take full-on nuclear exchange between the DPRK and the ROK or Japan (perhaps even against the PRC itself) before China would allow America to exert any sort of influence in the region. This is what we've been seeing vis-a-vis diplomatic efforts regarding N. Korea since the late 80s. Furthermore, China fully has Russia's backing in this area, as the Ruskie's already have the US forward bases in Japan and S. Korea, as well as Alaska, Canada, and the US defenses in Europe (which doesn't even include the EU's own defenses). Russia doesn't like increasing US influence even more than China does - and both Russia and China set on the UNSC. They have in the past, and they will in the future back each other up in blocking American aims in Eastern Asia.

Instead of a US-led defense and counter-attack a-la Kuwait in the early 90s, in the case of the DPRK going really off the wall we'll most likely see (or not see) a PRC black ops or Chinese diplomacy and bribery bring about some 'regime change' within N. Korea.
 
I set this poll up sunday and today is the last chance to vote before I make an update based on the vote. So come on in and vote. Read the timeline to get a picture of what the world looks like.
 
Top