From a usually correct source at: http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2010/Q4/view650.html#Wednesday
, scroll down to the last comment of the day.
A quick note on the Korean situation: from everything I can tell, this has more to do with events internal to North Korea than anything else. I do not expect any long lasting implications. The United States is not going to send in Task Force Smith, or attempt to roll back the frontier the north edge of the DMZ, or do anything that will look like actual punishment of North Korea. Whatever formal messages we send to China, the informal communication will be "We understand your problem but you have to keep your dog leashed more securely." Administration policy makers will probably add "Anything we can do to help?", and the result will be a bribe of one kind or another, precisely to whom is not clear. China has its own goals, and their client state is expensive and distracting. On the other hand, North Korea is a client state, and would be paying tribute if they had any tribute to pay, and Korea as a client state of the Empire is part of the Chinese picture of a long term future. They eventually intend for Korea to be united and become a tributary client, with South Korea taking care of the poverty of North Korea, and ending the mass refugee pressure from North Korea. If anyone in Mexico has an incentive to migrate northwards, think now about North Koreans.
We'll get past this "crisis" without much cost, thus delaying having to decide just what is the US goal in Asia now that Russia is not Communist, and Communist China is not Marxist. Perhaps that is better put off until we have a Presidential team more familiar with foreign policy and diplomatic history. Sometimes the best thing to do with a small crisis is to damp it out and wait for better policy makers