"I say nuke 'em": Conservatives bang the drum for war with North Korea

››› ››› SEAN EASTER

Following a North Korean attack on a South Korean island, conservative voices have appeared on air and online to promote the use of U.S. strikes against North Korea.

Right-wing media: Act "like a superpower" and attack North Korea

Scheuer implores U.S. to act "like a superpower" and "destroy" North Korean navy. On Fox & Friends, Michael Scheuer, who has frequently appeared on Fox News billed as a terrorism expert, said that the US should have attacked North Korea "months ago" after "they sank that North Korean or South Korean boat." From the November 23 edition of Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends:

KILMEADE: Joining us now is the former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer. Michael, first off, what message did North Korea send, and what message can we send back as the chief ally to South Korea, this morning after they sent fire into that island last night?

SCHEUER: I think the message they sent was they don't believe we're going to defend the South Koreans to any great extent. The message we should have sent when they sank that North Korean boat or South Korean boat several months ago was we should have destroyed as much of North Korean Navy as we could immediately. I also suspect that we should have destroyed -- had been ready to hit them again this morning because now the media and the politicians will talk their way out of defending South Korea and let the North Koreans get away with another act of war.

KILMEADE: So Michael, the heck with what China thinks? Just go take them out because we are assigned -- we are an assigned defender of South Korea?

SCHEUER: I think that's right. We need to act as what we are. We are a superpower, we have interests of our own and the North Koreans can do without a navy for a while. They can rebuild it. Instead of spending money on nuclear stuff, they can build new boats.

KILMEADE: Yeah, let their people starve.

Big Peace: "Now would be the right time to contemplate and carry out limited military strikes on the infrastructure of the North Korean government." In a November 23 post on Andrew Breitbart's Big Peace, blogger Peter Schweizer wrote that "we need to take this opportunity to punish the North Korean government for what they have done." From the post:

So how should we respond? Both ignoring their actions and giving them the aid they seek gives them what they want and rewards their behavior. Having lost strategic surprise, we need to take this opportunity to punish the North Korean government for what they have done. Now would be the right time to contemplate and carry out limited military strikes on the infrastructure of the North Korean government. Or more specifically, to strike at the heart of their nuclear capabilities. Doing nothing will only encourage more of the same behavior. And giving them aid in response to this temper tantrum will embolden them further.

Instapundit: "If they start anything, I say nuke 'em. And not with just a few bombs." In a November 23 post on Instapundit, blogger Glenn Reynolds wrote that if the North Korean military were to "start anything," the US should "nuke 'em." Reynolds went on to say that a nuclear attack on North Korea "would be a useful lesson for Iran, too." From the post:

If they start anything, I say nuke 'em. And not with just a few bombs. They've caused enough trouble -- and it would be a useful lesson for Iran, too. We can't afford another Korean war, but hey, we're already dismantling warheads. . . .

Conservative media regularly push for preemptive attacks

Conservative media figures frequently push for strong arming other countries with the threat of military force.

Fox's Hannity supports military attack on Iran: "We'd need every bunker buster bomb we've got, but I would use them." On the July 12 edition of his Fox News show, Sean Hannity advocated pre-emptive strikes against "every darn military site" in Iran. From the show:

HANNITY: I would support Israel as soon as possible, physically, militarily, and I'd knock out every darn military site they have. You're asking what I would do? I would not let the world risk a madman, like Admadinejad, have nuclear weapons with multiple threats to wipe Israel off the map. I would take out those nuclear sites.

Savage: "I think we should emolliate [sic, immolate] the entire tribal region of Pakistan." On the October 11 edition of his syndicated radio show, Michael Savage suggested that the US should "unleash a neutron bomb on the tribal region of Pakistan." From the show:

SAVAGE: I think that they should go after the terrorist in his homeland. I think we should attack them first. I think we should emmoliate [sic] the entire tribal region of Pakistan. I think we should unleash a neutron bomb on the tribal region of Pakistan, after giving them 24 hours notice that we're going to emmoliate [sic] the entire tribal area, we want the women and children out.

Kristol on Iran: "I'd prefer an unstable Middle East without an Iranian nuclear weapon." Fox News contributor Bill Kristol appeared on the April 19 edition of Special Report with Bret Baier and said that the Obama administration's "Iran policy is floundering." Kristol said that "it would be destabilizing if there were an attack on Iran's nuclear weapons program, but Iran wouldn't have nuclear weapons." He added that he would "prefer an unstable Middle East without an Iranian nuclear weapon, than an unstable Middle East with an Iranian nuclear weapon."

Kristol: U.S. needs "a credible threat of force and the preparation to use force against Iran." In anappearance on the April 4 edition of Fox News Sunday, Kristol called US policy on Iran "feckless" and advocated "a credible threat of force and the preparation to use force against Iran." From the April 4 edition of Fox News Sunday:

KRISTOL: I think that we are just feckless here in the sense that we are not being serious about the Iranian nuclear program. [...] I think we have to have a credible threat of force and the preparation to use force against Iran. It'd be much better if we used force to delay the Iranian nuclear program than if Israel did, and there's no evidence that the US government is being serious about the use of force there.

We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.