Just after the Israelis bombed that site in Syria that contained Nork nuke machinery, I commented that it might be part of a deal between the US and the North Koreans. They sell the stuff to Syria. The Syrians pay up on delivery. The Norks tell us where it is. Then the Israelis bomb it. The Norks keep the money.

At first this might not make sense. But it would burn the Norks as a future source. It also raises the risks of involvement “as a customer” in the illicit trade — and sets a precedent for military action. You could pay billions and watch, not just the money, but years of effort and planning go up in smoke. And your entire clandestine apparatus is penetrated.

A nonproliferation international regime cannot be a nonaggression regime. On the contrary, aggression must always be a credible threat.

One of the side benefits of the Iraq war is that no one thinks they can hide behind the UN for long. When you need full rain gear you will find the UN is a warm-up jacket. Just ask Saddam. Oh, sorry, he was hung.

The Norks did not burn themselves as a supplier in a lucrative trade because we ask nice. They do it because their backs are against the wall. Who’s back will be against the wall next? If McCain wins…