Replay: The Bear Doctrine

We’re in the midst of much “why are we talking about invading Iraq and not North Korea, since North Korea just admitted they’re working on nukes” nonsense right now.
So I figured I’d reach back into the good old archives and repost a simple set of rules I declared for when I believe the United States is justified in using military force. The orignal post is here, but to save you that extra click (we’re service oriented here at TTLB), here it is:
The United States should consider military action to effect a change of regime against a foreign power when:
1) That power has demonstrated that they are hostile to the U.S. and its citizens, either by directly attacking us; by threatening or planning such an attack, or by supporting other actors who have executed or have threatened such an attack.
or
2) All of the following are true:
a) We have the means to decisively execute such a military operation without significant casualities, to our own forces or to innocent civilians.
b) Deposing the regime is clearly in the best interest of its citizens, and our intention is to establish a democratic government upon completion of the operation.
c) Such an operation is in the selfish best interest of the United States (economically; politically, etc.).

If you apply these principles to Baghdad and Pyongyang, I think it becomes rapidly clear why we’re not considering an assault on North Korea as a valid option (hint: it gets clearer if you’re a resident of Seoul).