If you think his kidnapping of Japanese citizens, starvation of his people by denying humanitary supplies is not irrational, I don\'t know what else to say to you.
Your people are starving. There are food supplies from other sources besides the USA that have no catch 22, why deny them of this food? How is this rational thinking? The man is a kook.
Kim\'s a dictator. Like all dictators, he abuses his power within reasonable limits to satisfy his whims. But do his personality quirks lead to irrational policy choices? I have shown you in my previous posts that they do not. You are too seeped in this "Kim is mad" paradigm and refuse to acknowledge evidence that suggests otherwise.
Regarding your second point. It\'s clear you\'ve either been misled or don\'t know enough. Kim has kicked out humanitarian organizations because South Korea and China together supply enough aid to support the DPRK. Unfortunately, most of this aid goes to appease military officials, not to the people, simply because they are the only real threat to Kim\'s power. In short, Kim is doing precisely what you yourself expect him to do - 1) cut off aid sources that have a catch (not "catch 22," Gman...); 2) accept unconditional South Korean and Chinese aid; 3) kick out humanitarian organizations that may bring in destabilizing information about the outside world.
Why do I keep refuting Kim\'s irrationality? Because resorting to his "craziness" does not offer clear policy implications. You can superficially explain everything by saying Kim is crazy. He wants nuclear weapons? Oh, that\'s because he\'s crazy. He\'s kicked out humanitarian organizations? Yep, he\'s crazy. Firing missiles over Japan? Crazy, I tell ya. Turning to Kim\'s irrationality leads to a policy dead-end because it really explains nothing. But by actually analyzing North Korea\'s unique security and domestic concerns, one is able to find the real causes for Kim\'s behavior and negotiate with him.
Don\'t make this an emotional issue with the "your people are starving!" crap. I want Kim dethroned just as much as you do. But consider the implications of the regime instability or collapse that Kim\'s removal might cause. A North Korea in anarchy will become an open warehouse for anyone who wishes to take its nuclear weapons. Millions of refugees will flow into South Korea and China, severely destabilizing the regional and global economy. Some estimates predict that the number of refugees from North Korea will outnumber the total worldwide. Most importantly for me, South Korea will have to bear the largest burden of absorbing the North. Think about the costs of trying to modernize 20 million people stuck in the 1950s. Or the costs of renovating the North\'s tattered infrastructure. Or the costs of a potential transitional civil war with an exiled North Korean government. It is because of these concerns that South Korea wants to bring the North to a "soft landing" with economic and political engagement. Gradual reunification, not a sudden regime change, is the best outcome for the peninsula and the region as a whole. Update yourself on these issues, Gman, before shouting, "Kim is evil! We must take him down now!" Clouding your mind with such emotional baggage only leads to poor policy making.
