Oh, a storm is threat'ning
My very life today
If I don't get some shelter
Oh yeah, I'm gonna fade away
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
Ooh, see the fire is sweepin'
Our very street today
Burns like a red coal carpet
Mad bull lost its way
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
Mick Jagger
My very life today
If I don't get some shelter
Oh yeah, I'm gonna fade away
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
Ooh, see the fire is sweepin'
Our very street today
Burns like a red coal carpet
Mad bull lost its way
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
War, children, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away
Mick Jagger
I don't know what the future holds. But, since history has a way of repeating itself, I think it wise to remember that the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor after the US cut off fuel supplies to their war effort. I would say that we did the right thing in that regard. But, the fact remains that cutting off the fuel brought us into WWII against the Japanese and did not avert war at all.
4
I believe this is a good thing, because obviously a direct military confrontation with North Korea is not an appealing prospect, but some sort of punishment is in order.
Deny this, sanction that, none of these actions will deter NK. There is nothing to make tougher it should already be the toughest sanctions and threats.
I think the USA will suffer its greatest foreign policy failure. Imagine how totally absurd NK will act when we know they have a missile and weapon to put on it to threaten almost anyone. At that point we will have no options to deal with them. That's it game over!
I think the USA will suffer its greatest foreign policy failure. Imagine how totally absurd NK will act when we know they have a missile and weapon to put on it to threaten almost anyone. At that point we will have no options to deal with them. That's it game over!
1
Why does all coverage of the North Korean nuclear threat focus on the assumption that until NK can miniaturize warheads and deliver them by ICBM, the US is not directly threatened? How hard would it be for NK to deliver bombs by other means? Our coasts are mostly open, with hundreds of thousands of pleasure boats moving in and out of our major harbors. Could bombs be delivered by such boats? Drugs are brought in by boat, plane, truck, ... - how hard would it be to bribe criminals to smuggle in containers unaware that the contents are hydrogen bombs? Drone submarines are now becoming available commercially - could they be used? ICBM's are not the only possible delivery vehicle.
1
USA's authority is compromised , when it garnishes discontent , from our close Allies and Enemies. Observing how Trump is threatening Iran by reversing Obama's policies on Iran... Couple that with Trump's recent cancellation of Obama's DACA... Previous administration Word has been slandered.... World recognizes the republican patterns to feed their Military Industries huge profits at the demise of nations..
Little wonder he has no respect from our Allies and our Enemies.. False be the colors of this republican administration , that is recognized through out the world. Our Word is no longer appreciated , as much as doubted.. Lies that could result in Millions upon Millions of lives to be destroyed.. Such a tangled web Trump has weaved to deceive..
Little wonder he has no respect from our Allies and our Enemies.. False be the colors of this republican administration , that is recognized through out the world. Our Word is no longer appreciated , as much as doubted.. Lies that could result in Millions upon Millions of lives to be destroyed.. Such a tangled web Trump has weaved to deceive..
1
Kim's laughing at us.
Trump's inflammatory rhetoric and his ignorance and ignoring of statecraft and our State Dept. makes him a dangerous fool, one who may end up starting a nuclear war. He's out of control and escalating the situation. It's no NK which is 'Begging for War', it's DJT hungering for a war as a way to get his dismal popularity numbers up.
4
Trump is the front puppet for the corporate state and the military Industrial complex. He is a symptom of a problem we have had since the Bush regime lied us into Iraq and Afghanistan. We have been at war ever since.
3
Ms. Haley is a typical untrustworthy politician. eg:
1/ As the governor of SC she refused to take on removing the Rebel flag from the legislature grounds until the Charleston massacre of 7 African Americans and then public opinion made her. She quickly got out in front of the parade.
2/ She called Trump many names during the primaries and did not support his candidacy yet when it benefitted her she went to work for him as UN ambassador.
She is a politician of the worst kind.
1/ As the governor of SC she refused to take on removing the Rebel flag from the legislature grounds until the Charleston massacre of 7 African Americans and then public opinion made her. She quickly got out in front of the parade.
2/ She called Trump many names during the primaries and did not support his candidacy yet when it benefitted her she went to work for him as UN ambassador.
She is a politician of the worst kind.
5
Trump tweet:
"We are going to have the greatest, most beautiful fall-out shelter built in the White House, Mir-A-Lago, Trump Towers, etc. etc. Beautiful gold toilet seats and other such tasteless glitzy decor. I promise you."
Oh no. I went over my allowed 140 characters - Sad!
"We are going to have the greatest, most beautiful fall-out shelter built in the White House, Mir-A-Lago, Trump Towers, etc. etc. Beautiful gold toilet seats and other such tasteless glitzy decor. I promise you."
Oh no. I went over my allowed 140 characters - Sad!
5
Dear Ms. Nikki,
Have you not noticed the declining credibility and trust that your Boss has caused with World Leaders using the language and displaying the behavior of a tin pot dictator? Your language in the UN sounds like that of a Twitter Troll. You are supposed to represent the people of the US, not donald trump. You sound like you are begging for war so Donald can use the US military to get him a win using those big, beautiful bombs made in the US by American workers.
Have you not noticed the declining credibility and trust that your Boss has caused with World Leaders using the language and displaying the behavior of a tin pot dictator? Your language in the UN sounds like that of a Twitter Troll. You are supposed to represent the people of the US, not donald trump. You sound like you are begging for war so Donald can use the US military to get him a win using those big, beautiful bombs made in the US by American workers.
4
Kids may brag, "My father can lick your father," but we Americans of all ages now face a more serious taunt which could very likely be flung at us by militant North Koreans: "Your leader is more unhinged than our leader!" Let's hope neither side chooses to test the truth of it.
1
Fuel embargo is an act of war and would be responded to as such. Pear Harbor attack was such a response.
3
What was the reason for Japan to attack the USA ....oh, I remember FDR cut oil export to Japan, leaving them no choice but attack Pearl Harbour.
History and Trump is not good companionship, isn't?
History and Trump is not good companionship, isn't?
3
"Kim Is ‘Begging for War,’ U.S. Says"
She doesn't speak for me. He's begging for a peace treaty and the end of our provocations with nearby war games.
She doesn't speak for me. He's begging for a peace treaty and the end of our provocations with nearby war games.
2
Without the cooperation of China (which supplies the vast majority of North Korea's imported fossil fuels) 'cutting off' the north's fuel supplies would be a move unlikely to convince anyone of anything except to demonstrate the powerlessness of the U.S. to convince China that they too should join the embargo.
3
While it is tempting to try to strangle North Korea with ever harsher sanctions, one of the most significant risks of doing so is that we would force them into a position where the only way they could generate the necessary funding for their survival would be to sell nuclear technology to non-state actors — that is, terrorists. I don't believe Kim would commit suicide by initiating a military first strike, but I have little doubt that several non-state actors would.
3
The real question is not whether Kim is suicidal, but whether or not Washington is. Trump is the front puppet for the shadow players who want world HEGEMONY and regime change in countries rich in resources and without a centralized banking system. Our wars are not fought for our freedom, they are fought for defense contractors, wall Street and banks.
1
Let's go into this with our eye's wide open.
And just in case any of you new comers are late to the Game, here's a primer:
We are in a global war with the Chinese people- not their authoritarian government- their people. All 1.4 billion of them. In order for the Chinese nation to achieve middle class status for the majority of their nation they need to dominate most, if not all of the industrial capacity of the globe.
That is why their government is so aggressive in pursuit of the theft of our industrial, intellectual and military secrets.
The New York Times has already documented the rampant theft of our intellectual property, the militarization of cyberspace, and the growing menace of Chinese military power in Asia, Africa and the Arctic.
While we dither and hand wring over politics, race relations and whether or not to let the Chinese loan us more coin- their march towards world dominance goes on.
Do we really want to live in a world where authoritarian governments rule the globe? Where journalists are jailed and free speech is punishable by death?
If not, then the time for bickering is OVER.
Write your congress person and insist on a robust and confrontational approach to the Chinese nation. This is, in fact, a zero sum game as they see it. We need to see them the same way they see us- not as friends or trading partners, but as mortal enemies in a battle for global dominance.
Open your eyes.
And just in case any of you new comers are late to the Game, here's a primer:
We are in a global war with the Chinese people- not their authoritarian government- their people. All 1.4 billion of them. In order for the Chinese nation to achieve middle class status for the majority of their nation they need to dominate most, if not all of the industrial capacity of the globe.
That is why their government is so aggressive in pursuit of the theft of our industrial, intellectual and military secrets.
The New York Times has already documented the rampant theft of our intellectual property, the militarization of cyberspace, and the growing menace of Chinese military power in Asia, Africa and the Arctic.
While we dither and hand wring over politics, race relations and whether or not to let the Chinese loan us more coin- their march towards world dominance goes on.
Do we really want to live in a world where authoritarian governments rule the globe? Where journalists are jailed and free speech is punishable by death?
If not, then the time for bickering is OVER.
Write your congress person and insist on a robust and confrontational approach to the Chinese nation. This is, in fact, a zero sum game as they see it. We need to see them the same way they see us- not as friends or trading partners, but as mortal enemies in a battle for global dominance.
Open your eyes.
3
That is absolute rubbish. This is not 1977 anymore.
That is a projection. For you just described Washington and the active corporate media propagandists and the censorship and removal of our privacy and civil liberties through policy. The Patriot and Freedom Act are just two of many examples.
We are in debt to China up to our ears, and as their manufacturing flourishes, ours were sent overseas to places like, well CHINA.
Open your eyes.
We are in debt to China up to our ears, and as their manufacturing flourishes, ours were sent overseas to places like, well CHINA.
Open your eyes.
When is the Republican leadership going to become so......, recognize that our so-called president is endangering the entire world with his immature, impulsive, and aggressive verbal provocations of North Korea, AND initiate impeachment proceedings for DJT? This man is clearly out of his league as well as out of his mind and has NO business leading our nation. The Republican Party's lack of action under the circumstances is, nonetheless, an explicit DECISION that will go down as one of the greatest acts of infamy in the history of the United States. It will be a blemish on our nation's history for untold generations.
1
@Robert Wilson: spot-on. The current "administration" is awash in people so power-hungry, and simultaneously ill-equipped both intellectually and emotionally to properly run ANY country, let alone the U.S.
The constant "tweets", incessant bravado, and strident pronouncements remind one of adolescent boys still in their "tweens", desperately trying to prove their manhood. Over compensation rules in direct proportion to deep seeded insecurity.
Adults are needed, before it's too late.
The constant "tweets", incessant bravado, and strident pronouncements remind one of adolescent boys still in their "tweens", desperately trying to prove their manhood. Over compensation rules in direct proportion to deep seeded insecurity.
Adults are needed, before it's too late.
And Democrats and Republicans remain SILENT. Don't you find that strange? Why aren't they standing up to this insanity? How many of our state elected corporate executives benefitted during their campaigns by Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing or AIPAC??
Perhaps this is why they are all COMPLICIT with the King of Tweets
Perhaps this is why they are all COMPLICIT with the King of Tweets
Despite North Korea's grumblings, there is nothing diplomatic about Ambassador Nikki Haley and the Trump administration's provocative words. We wait and watch in growing horror while these two pathetic bullies play chicken.
I can't think of a better time for all parties to sit down together, share a giant U.N. bowl of popcorn, and watch the 1983 film War Games for the simple reminder that when it comes to global thermonuclear war, NOBODY WINS.
I can't think of a better time for all parties to sit down together, share a giant U.N. bowl of popcorn, and watch the 1983 film War Games for the simple reminder that when it comes to global thermonuclear war, NOBODY WINS.
1
Everything we've tried to date with North Korea has come to naught, so maybe it's time to give up on bellicose bombast and nuclear missile-ratting.
What if we were to adopt the Papua New Guinea practice of Moka, a form of ritualized aggression focused on gift-giving, instead of making military and economic threats. A Moak is an outlandish, overly-generous gift, proffered by one tribe to another. The more outlandish the Moka, the more status it confers on the donor. The recipient, in turn, by accepting the gift, incurs an cultural obligation to make an equal or greater Moka in return, if they are to maintain status. Failure to reciprocate brings a serious loss of status.
Under a Moka system of international relations, the threat of unproductive war is significantly diminished; no one has to die for one's group. People are happier, and life is better, all the way around. It's time for every nation of the world to consider adopting this approach to resolving international conflict.
What if we were to adopt the Papua New Guinea practice of Moka, a form of ritualized aggression focused on gift-giving, instead of making military and economic threats. A Moak is an outlandish, overly-generous gift, proffered by one tribe to another. The more outlandish the Moka, the more status it confers on the donor. The recipient, in turn, by accepting the gift, incurs an cultural obligation to make an equal or greater Moka in return, if they are to maintain status. Failure to reciprocate brings a serious loss of status.
Under a Moka system of international relations, the threat of unproductive war is significantly diminished; no one has to die for one's group. People are happier, and life is better, all the way around. It's time for every nation of the world to consider adopting this approach to resolving international conflict.
1
It is Trump who is 'begging for war.' Either way, with two immature and inexperienced leaders, it doesn't look good.
3
I rarely find anything to appreciate about President Putin, but his warning that the escalation of military hysteria may lead to a planetary catastrophe and a colossal casualty rate seems well worth our attention. We Brits have a saying: "Don't get your knickers in a twist". This is exactly what the Trump administration is doing with its shrill, fear-based denunciations of North Korea and its unwillingness to negotiate.
Trump is using the same kind of rhetoric that George W. Bush used to lead us into an unnecessary war in Iraq. We used diplomacy and incentives to get the Iranians to give up their nuclear program. We could do the same with North Korea but it does not seem there is anyone capable of advancing this approach in Trump's team. This is a slow motion disaster in the making.
Trump is using the same kind of rhetoric that George W. Bush used to lead us into an unnecessary war in Iraq. We used diplomacy and incentives to get the Iranians to give up their nuclear program. We could do the same with North Korea but it does not seem there is anyone capable of advancing this approach in Trump's team. This is a slow motion disaster in the making.
1
China probably has more control or influence over North Korea than it has admitted. And it seems that negotiations have not been exhausted. China has no interest in seeing hostilities break out on the Korea peninsula. There is a geopolitical solution to this pervasive problem which involves China and the United States. Kim Jong em's actions in developing thermonuclear weapons and an accompanying delivery system as as threatening to stability n Asia as they are to the United States. The solution would be modeled on the informal accord that resolved the Cuban missile crisis. In exchange for a promise that guaranteed North Korean and South Korean sovereignty, China would enforce a denuclearization of the North. The United States would agree to reduce its military presence in the South to level of forces below current staffing. China would achieve a stable North which keeps the peninsula divided and also reduce tensions in Asia that threaten its foreign policy goals.
1
S. Korea is WEARY of our military presence. And really WHY do we have more than 900 military bases around the globe? Why is Washington provoking Russia, China and the North too?
Know who is stable? Russia, China and Iran, who wish to work with the US toward DIPLOMACY on all fronts.
But Washington will have none of it. But why? Follow the money. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are making a killing with all of this.
But why is Congress allowing this and worse, WHY are the American PEOPLE ALLOWING THIS???
Know who is stable? Russia, China and Iran, who wish to work with the US toward DIPLOMACY on all fronts.
But Washington will have none of it. But why? Follow the money. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are making a killing with all of this.
But why is Congress allowing this and worse, WHY are the American PEOPLE ALLOWING THIS???
I suspect that North Korea is actually very, very weak and has some pretty dismal little missiles compared to anything that the United States has--and that our military could do a rather impression initial decapitation as we did with Iraq.
But we'd face a post-invasion ground war which would destroy South Korea, ruin North Korea, and bring us much closer to war with China. And war with China? That would NOT be a slam dunk.
But we'd face a post-invasion ground war which would destroy South Korea, ruin North Korea, and bring us much closer to war with China. And war with China? That would NOT be a slam dunk.
1
The current sanctions against North Korea--and the proposed oil cut off are already acts of war. They are siege warfare. You know, like when an army surrounds a castle to prevent food and goods from getting through?
Kim Jong Un is building and testing weapons (something widely done by nations, especially the United States), but having weapons at hand is not in itself an act of war. (It's not diplomatic, but it's not war.)
Nikki Haley's desire for the US to ratchet up its militant tactics against North Korea makes it clear that she is the one who is desperate to see a full-blown war. Not only is she begging for war, she is salivating!
Kim Jong Un is building and testing weapons (something widely done by nations, especially the United States), but having weapons at hand is not in itself an act of war. (It's not diplomatic, but it's not war.)
Nikki Haley's desire for the US to ratchet up its militant tactics against North Korea makes it clear that she is the one who is desperate to see a full-blown war. Not only is she begging for war, she is salivating!
1
Oh yeah, cutting off oil supplies worked fabulously well when imposed on Japan in 1941.
5
Exactly what I was thinking. Japan's rationale for bombing Pearl Harbor was to "destroy the status quo for the sake of self-preservation." No doubt the North Koreans, every bit as paranoid as Japan's leaders were in 1941 and gripped by worship of the Kim Dynasty in the same way Japanese were gripped by fanatical emperor worship in 1941, are thinking the same thing.
At a time when there is a strong need for an adult in the room, the adults have been elected out of the building. This bluff and blunder posturing portrayed by the current admiration is reminiscent of past wars we were talked into just to prove that we are the big dogs.
Just as my father used to tell me “take your sail out of their wind”, a stronger person does not let others dictate their own actions, a strong person stands by their conviction regardless of provocations.
But alas, the bullies are now in charge of the playground.
Just as my father used to tell me “take your sail out of their wind”, a stronger person does not let others dictate their own actions, a strong person stands by their conviction regardless of provocations.
But alas, the bullies are now in charge of the playground.
5
As James Clapper, former director of US Intelligence, said on CNN, Muammar Gaddafi renounced his program of development of nuclear weapons, and now is dead. Clapper said that the international community will have to accept the fact that North Korea is now a nuclear power. And by the way when Pakistan and Israel build their nuclear arsenal, the US Government and his allies did not protest very loud or not at all.
5
I find it astounding that their hatred for Trump causes so many readers to support the North Korean dictatorship. As bad a Trump might be he was elected according to the rules in place in 2016. And how quickly the millions starved to death by decisions of the Kim family are forgotten!
4
No one posting here supports the North Korean dictatorship. We think that aggressive, regime-change war imposed from the outside is not a good way to fix the problem. We have no good plan that would not involve the deaths of millions of South Koreans and also the death of many innocent North Korean citizens (who might at this moment be working on their own ways to overthrow their leader).
If we had pursued openness and truly extended diplomatic options, we might have been working with North Korea in the same way that we are now working with China. Not perfect, that's for certain, but on a path that enables oppressed citizens to learn about alternate ways of being governed and to consider their own ways to bring that about.
If we had pursued openness and truly extended diplomatic options, we might have been working with North Korea in the same way that we are now working with China. Not perfect, that's for certain, but on a path that enables oppressed citizens to learn about alternate ways of being governed and to consider their own ways to bring that about.
1
Don't history books tell us that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was preceded by American efforts to restrict the supply of oil to the Japanese empire in 1940 and 1941 ? What is the purpose in continuing to refuse to sit down with the North Koreans (with South Korea at the table) and discuss peaceful co-existence ? Now if the North Koreans simply insist that America abandon its ally South Korea, period, we will know that the North Korean regime is just looking for an opportunity to reopen the war against the South Korean government and we should act accordingly. If they are looking for revenge on America for fighting in the Korean war, we also need to understand this and act accordingly. If there is no reasonable way to be clear about their future intentions and they continue to act aggressively and threaten South Korea, well, hell. But Trump and his merry little band of cutthroats are not anywhere near knowledgeable enough or wise enough to make these types of decisions, which require serious consultation with America's foreign policy establishment and not simply bupkis pronouncements to satisfy his know-nothing supporters.
3
It sounds good until you remember that the U.S., China, Russia, and others sat down in the late 1990's and had serious negotiations about nuclear development By North Korea. North Korea cheated and the Chinese and Russians ignored their cheating and may even have facilitated it. There is no point in talking to North Korea until China and Russia are willing to provide reasonable guarantees that they will effectively enforce any 'treaty' that is negotiated.
Our foreign policy is corrupt. Why do you think we have this problem in the first place? The solution is potentially an easy one. S. Koreans do not care for US military presence either. Here's an idea: why don't we get OUT of Asia, STOP the yearly military exercises that are provocative to the North, in exchange for limiting their nuclear ambitions, while recognizing that they have them and then leave them ALONE.
N. Korea is not the problem. But the US military Industrial complex IS.
Over half of our federal budget goes to the military. The defense department has 'lost' trillions. Why don't we use that money to help our own people instead of killing others overseas...
N. Korea is not the problem. But the US military Industrial complex IS.
Over half of our federal budget goes to the military. The defense department has 'lost' trillions. Why don't we use that money to help our own people instead of killing others overseas...
These comments are just appalling. Liberals are so blinded by hatred of Trump they arent thinking clearly.
I know for a fact that if HRC was prez all the NYT would be talking about is the humanitarian situation in NK and how evil Kim Jung Un is for murdering thousands of his own people. This, of course, would be to get liberals emotionally fired up about NK the same way the NYT got them emotionally fired up over immigration by featuring a sob story a day for the last 2 years.
If Hillary was president, she would have gone to war with NK, and liberals would have LOVED it because its the right thing to do.
Liberals dont even think anymore. They just read what Trump says and disagree automatically with it.
You know whats also sad, how NYT comments have devolved to the level of Breitbart comments. Its a different hatred of course, but its still the same. Crass words, no discussion or analysis. Just "trump is a coward" or "whites are all racist" or "trump-voters deserve their pain." Its just vindictive and its also wrong.
The other thing is the reliance on calling everyone racists and bigots. I had a drunk woman sexually harass me at a bar and when I told her very loudly that she was sexually assaulting me she then proceeded to call me a "he-she anti-woman bigot." Im a transgender woman.
Liberals know they can just yell bigot and it will draw a mob that will then defend them, even they just sexually assaulted the person they are calling a bigot.
I know for a fact that if HRC was prez all the NYT would be talking about is the humanitarian situation in NK and how evil Kim Jung Un is for murdering thousands of his own people. This, of course, would be to get liberals emotionally fired up about NK the same way the NYT got them emotionally fired up over immigration by featuring a sob story a day for the last 2 years.
If Hillary was president, she would have gone to war with NK, and liberals would have LOVED it because its the right thing to do.
Liberals dont even think anymore. They just read what Trump says and disagree automatically with it.
You know whats also sad, how NYT comments have devolved to the level of Breitbart comments. Its a different hatred of course, but its still the same. Crass words, no discussion or analysis. Just "trump is a coward" or "whites are all racist" or "trump-voters deserve their pain." Its just vindictive and its also wrong.
The other thing is the reliance on calling everyone racists and bigots. I had a drunk woman sexually harass me at a bar and when I told her very loudly that she was sexually assaulting me she then proceeded to call me a "he-she anti-woman bigot." Im a transgender woman.
Liberals know they can just yell bigot and it will draw a mob that will then defend them, even they just sexually assaulted the person they are calling a bigot.
3
I'm no liberal... But I don't agree with sacrificing the lives of tens of thousands (maybe more) South Koreans just to get one guy in North Korea (and who knows how many civilians there too). It's time to stop the folly and sign and official peace treaty to end the Korean War. "Regime change" is the reason the Kims hve been seeking sucker ICBM's. That has nothing to do with political persuasion - but sound reasoning.
1
I don't hear much about what US should do except going to war with North Korea. But should we talk to North Korea first before raising the possibility
of going to another war in another country? We demand every other country
need to do more, what is this administration doing more besides war talk?!
of going to another war in another country? We demand every other country
need to do more, what is this administration doing more besides war talk?!
2
Haley -- yet another utterly out-of-depth incompetent (what are her qualifications in diplomacy or foreign affairs?) -- parrots lines written by the likes of Breitbart and only makes the situation worse...
Can we please get someone who's competent and knowledgeable to run foreigh affairs?
Can we please get someone who's competent and knowledgeable to run foreigh affairs?
4
Let's see... cutting off the supply of fuel to a country to punish its warlike behavior. We did that once before -- to Japan -- which led directly to the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.
Seems that Trump and his people don't pay attention to history. What do we expect NK to do if their economy (such as it is) is crushed? Do you really think they will say "I'm sorry" and offer up their weapons? More likely, they will attack S Korea and maybe Japan, with their real target being the US. Does anyone really think they couldn't deliver at least one nuke to a US city?
Maybe someday Seattle or Anchorage will be listed beside Hiroshima.
Instead of trying to prove who's the biggest playground bully, the US should listen to China and find a way to defuse the situation.
Seems that Trump and his people don't pay attention to history. What do we expect NK to do if their economy (such as it is) is crushed? Do you really think they will say "I'm sorry" and offer up their weapons? More likely, they will attack S Korea and maybe Japan, with their real target being the US. Does anyone really think they couldn't deliver at least one nuke to a US city?
Maybe someday Seattle or Anchorage will be listed beside Hiroshima.
Instead of trying to prove who's the biggest playground bully, the US should listen to China and find a way to defuse the situation.
2
I may have forgotten my history on this but don't we usually fire away after discovering "weapons of mass destruction?" Maybe we should have Colin Powell examine the NK propaganda photos.
1
Actual physical scientific provable verifiable reproducible evidence for H-Bomb, where, what, how? Seems this is just talk or just a big show off.
Ugh I cant stand how the NYT frames things.
NK is run by an actually evil dictator who kills tens of thousands of his own citizens per year. The millions of people he rules live in a poverty and fear that makes Darfur look like a nice place to go.
NK constantly threatens to destroy Seoul, a city of 10 millon people. If Mexico had 1000 artillery pieces in TJ pointed as San Diego, do you think everyone in San Diego would be ok with that?
As soon as NK shows that it has nuclear weapons, its not going to stop. NK will sell nuclear technology for money to countries like Iran. NK will continue to threaten SK and would work to reunite the nation on the norths terms. NK will use its nuclear weapons to force the US to give them aid, and the US will be forever hobbled and will eventually be forced into leaving SK to be destroyed or going into thermonuclear war.
I mean, does anyone seriously think that NK will stop once they have built a few missles? No, they will start a new arms race and build as many nuclear bombs as they can.
We really truly cannot kick the can down the road anymore. Obama, both Bushs, and Clinton should have already dealt with this issue. Unfortunately, Trump is the only option now. Sad, yet liberals will just blindly oppose Trump while Kim Jung Un laughs and drinks Hennessey while sitting on a growing pile of nuclear death.
NK is run by an actually evil dictator who kills tens of thousands of his own citizens per year. The millions of people he rules live in a poverty and fear that makes Darfur look like a nice place to go.
NK constantly threatens to destroy Seoul, a city of 10 millon people. If Mexico had 1000 artillery pieces in TJ pointed as San Diego, do you think everyone in San Diego would be ok with that?
As soon as NK shows that it has nuclear weapons, its not going to stop. NK will sell nuclear technology for money to countries like Iran. NK will continue to threaten SK and would work to reunite the nation on the norths terms. NK will use its nuclear weapons to force the US to give them aid, and the US will be forever hobbled and will eventually be forced into leaving SK to be destroyed or going into thermonuclear war.
I mean, does anyone seriously think that NK will stop once they have built a few missles? No, they will start a new arms race and build as many nuclear bombs as they can.
We really truly cannot kick the can down the road anymore. Obama, both Bushs, and Clinton should have already dealt with this issue. Unfortunately, Trump is the only option now. Sad, yet liberals will just blindly oppose Trump while Kim Jung Un laughs and drinks Hennessey while sitting on a growing pile of nuclear death.
4
Strange because most people in South Korea aren't as worried as you are. Also false equivalency in comparing San Diego and the Mexican border (except remember California was Mexico). We went there to "contain communism". The Soviet Union collapsed - and China (who helped North Korea stop us from beating them in the Korean War) is still standing precisely because it changed its economy (though not political party) to a capitalist one.
"The Trump Administration, warning that North Korea is “begging for war,” is pressing China and other members of the United Nations Security Council to cut off all oil and other fuels to the country."
Seriously, sanction is not going to work and is more likely to end up N K engaging in nuclear blackmail on S K. While it sounds good on paper, in reality, once Kim decides to conduct nuclear blackmail, it will trigger a downward spiral.
Sanction will only hurt the masses in N K first before it bite into the N K Kim's inner circle. When it come to this stage, he will be inclined to conduct nuclear blackmail, so sanction is a very foolish idea.
No, NK is not begging for war. N K face existential threat, so his nuke is his insurance policy. Faced with an existential threat from US, even China cannot control Kim.
Of course if he use nukes to blackmail, transfer tech to Iran, then NK should face more drastic consequences and China Will likely agree in such a situation.
Seriously, sanction is not going to work and is more likely to end up N K engaging in nuclear blackmail on S K. While it sounds good on paper, in reality, once Kim decides to conduct nuclear blackmail, it will trigger a downward spiral.
Sanction will only hurt the masses in N K first before it bite into the N K Kim's inner circle. When it come to this stage, he will be inclined to conduct nuclear blackmail, so sanction is a very foolish idea.
No, NK is not begging for war. N K face existential threat, so his nuke is his insurance policy. Faced with an existential threat from US, even China cannot control Kim.
Of course if he use nukes to blackmail, transfer tech to Iran, then NK should face more drastic consequences and China Will likely agree in such a situation.
2
North Korea is holding South Korea, Japan, part of the US hostage by holding nuclear bombs in their face.
The reluctance of the US to engage the North Korea in a full scale war is precisely that we are afraid of losing lives in case the North threw a bomb, even one is too much.
We cannot move forward with a war; and we cannot retreat from this communist totalitarian regime armed with nuclear weapons...
How do we end up in this position?
I still hear people say, "Pressure China". Have we heard of this in the past 20 years? More Chinese involvement, more nuclear war heads the North builds and more ICBMs. And we still hear "pressure China".
Will we have a second Korean War? Not likely. The reason? Look at China. It seems that China is the least worried about any escalating military conflict in Korean Peninsula - it dispatched it military to the Chinese-Indian borders lately, not to Chinese-Korean border. In fact, North Korea is a copycat of China in the nuclear bomb development! Like the father like the son.
Both the US and the N. Korea are not going to make the first move since the consequence is unbearable for either sides. So we shall see this rhetorical "war" going and going until Kim got into trouble suddenly either in accident or for medical reasons. That's the only solution.
The reluctance of the US to engage the North Korea in a full scale war is precisely that we are afraid of losing lives in case the North threw a bomb, even one is too much.
We cannot move forward with a war; and we cannot retreat from this communist totalitarian regime armed with nuclear weapons...
How do we end up in this position?
I still hear people say, "Pressure China". Have we heard of this in the past 20 years? More Chinese involvement, more nuclear war heads the North builds and more ICBMs. And we still hear "pressure China".
Will we have a second Korean War? Not likely. The reason? Look at China. It seems that China is the least worried about any escalating military conflict in Korean Peninsula - it dispatched it military to the Chinese-Indian borders lately, not to Chinese-Korean border. In fact, North Korea is a copycat of China in the nuclear bomb development! Like the father like the son.
Both the US and the N. Korea are not going to make the first move since the consequence is unbearable for either sides. So we shall see this rhetorical "war" going and going until Kim got into trouble suddenly either in accident or for medical reasons. That's the only solution.
1
I think it's too late, and this guy who obtained a degree in physics from a University in Switzerland, is obsessed with nuking the USA. South Korea have now said that the detonation of the last missile was much bigger than they originally thought.
In my opinion, the only way the USA are going to stop this guy, with an obsessive compulsive disorder, is to invent some sort of remote control that will make the missile backfire and North Korea nukes itself.
I think Mr Kim is cunning and is trying to start a war as China said it wouldn't get involved if North Korea nukes USA first but will get involved if USA nukes North Korea first so the North Korean despot is trying to provoke USA to strike first so as to get China on it's side.
Vladmir Putin has warned of a global planetary catastrophe with many victims unless a solution is found to the North Korean crisis, rejecting the idea of imposing sanctions on Pyongyang and calling them useless.
A day ago I read an article in the NZ Herald titled, Report: North Korea moving missile towards west coast.
The ICBM started moving on Monday, a day after North Korea's sixth nuclear test. The rocket was spotted moving at night to avoid surveillance, the report said. North Korea has launch facilities for its missile program on its west coast. The rogue nation is planning to fire an ICBM as early as this weekend, when the Republic celebrates its foundation on September 9th 2017.
In my opinion, the only way the USA are going to stop this guy, with an obsessive compulsive disorder, is to invent some sort of remote control that will make the missile backfire and North Korea nukes itself.
I think Mr Kim is cunning and is trying to start a war as China said it wouldn't get involved if North Korea nukes USA first but will get involved if USA nukes North Korea first so the North Korean despot is trying to provoke USA to strike first so as to get China on it's side.
Vladmir Putin has warned of a global planetary catastrophe with many victims unless a solution is found to the North Korean crisis, rejecting the idea of imposing sanctions on Pyongyang and calling them useless.
A day ago I read an article in the NZ Herald titled, Report: North Korea moving missile towards west coast.
The ICBM started moving on Monday, a day after North Korea's sixth nuclear test. The rocket was spotted moving at night to avoid surveillance, the report said. North Korea has launch facilities for its missile program on its west coast. The rogue nation is planning to fire an ICBM as early as this weekend, when the Republic celebrates its foundation on September 9th 2017.
2
Trump embarrassed me beyond measure with his "fire and fury" bombast not long ago, and now our ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, did the same with her remark that North Korea is "begging for war". In each case, one who is supposed to represent our country comes off sounding like a weak bully or a leader of a tin pot banana republic.
Have these people no sense at all. It's a given that we could destroy North Korea and would do so in the face of a North Korean first strike. It should therefore be obvious to even normally oblivious people that our job right now is to deescalate the situation.
Mr. Trump; Ms. Haley - please be quiet. Leave North Korea to China, and be quiet.
Have these people no sense at all. It's a given that we could destroy North Korea and would do so in the face of a North Korean first strike. It should therefore be obvious to even normally oblivious people that our job right now is to deescalate the situation.
Mr. Trump; Ms. Haley - please be quiet. Leave North Korea to China, and be quiet.
4
Least we forget: The Korean War began when North Korean soldiers crossed the 38th parallel into South Korea to impose communism on its neighbor. The UNITED NATIONS voted to send troops to South Korean to drive the North Koreans back across the boarder. When it looked like the North Koreans were about to loss the war the Chinese sent at least a million troops to prop up the North Koreans.
4
I wonder if Russia and China are reading the Trump administration as a ripe historical moment to diminish the American Empire by enabling NK's provocative behavior behind the scenes. If we go into this war, we're finished! If we sit down to negotiate, the North Korean sine qua non for abandoning its nuclear program will be US withdrawal from the Korean Peninsula. As several readers have pointed out, the latter is the obvious path forward, but will our military-industrial complex allow it? I fear not.
2
A possible fix for North Korea – Give it to Russia or China as long as they take control of this mess before it is too late of course. The US cannot fix this mess as this American war has been on the books since the 1950s, that is unless the US wants to set bigger records for wars and take in to more than 100 years. However, we are spending far too much already and cannot afford expanding this war. Also, both nations mentioned above want to add property to their national registers (Russia wanted Crimea and China keeps creating its own islands) and neither are dumb enough to start a world war where everyone would lose. So, Mr. Trump have your United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nimrata "Nikki" Haley make this offer asap if you wish to avoid spending money this nation can no longer afford especially after we have to pay for the hurricane damages we now face.
1
Begging for war? More like begging for attention or trying to create a bargaining position. Mr. Kim knows full well that he cannot afford to start a war - he would be annihilated and he knows it. Launching a missile, even a conventionally-armed one, at US territory would be suicidal. Neither the Russians nor the Chinese would defend his actions, and he would pay a horrific price for his boldness. So why are we getting distraught over the posturing of a pipsqueak bully? We can afford to ignore him; he has no cards to play.
3
Any parent who has dealt with a rebellious teenager at home ought to appreciate the situation we're in and may have the answer to the crisis. If you fight fire with fire things will quickly spiral out of control. Everybody is too busy throwing accusations at each other to sit down and calmly figure out what the other side really wants. Unfortunately, we don't have any adults in the room who are willing to take the high road and diffuse this.
3
So Japan had its fuel embargoed and they later attacked Pearl Harbor... So the logic is to cut off North Korea's fuel to prevent them from attacking?? Someone help me here!! What's that saying about te definition of insanity? But I guess those same people are the ones who advised Bush to get out of te agreement made with NK before and who also thought continued military exercises would make them stop their weapons development. I guess common sense isn't so common after all.
1
The primary cause of the Pearl Harbor attack in WWII was the US embargo on Japan of oil. Japan had only a limited time to act before its economy collapsed without the oil. Its leaders felt that they had no choice but to attack. Even if China agrees to stop the oil it may force North Korea into the same situation.
1
I simply can't believe we don't have the technology to electronically jam and thus destroy their missiles as the launching takes place in North Korea.
I am sure the reason we haven't is because we need to see their capabilities...
Or maybe because Trump is looking for a reason to show is masculinity to the world.
I am sure the reason we haven't is because we need to see their capabilities...
Or maybe because Trump is looking for a reason to show is masculinity to the world.
2
That oil embargo against Japan in 1941 ended up real well too.
1
Since the U.S. Air Force leveled North Korea, killing hundreds of thousands of people in the 1950s, the survivors and their progeny, with the help of The Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China built a new and substitute country. They have been successful, and should be justly proud. Therefore such an assertion as that of the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. is ridiculous. A consideration of the searing geopolitical system in the world today yields the conclusion that perhaps it is the U.S. which is begging for war, due to its tarnished image as a beacon of freedom, its declining infrastructure and its miserable record regarding human rights. The U.S.'s deplorable complicity, either direct or indirect, in the situation in Yemen points to an utter disregard for the welfare of people generally. It is these glaring failures which serve as the motive for wanting war: that is, through "the magic of victory and the horror of envelopment" which comprise the result "greatness" is somehow thought to be achieved and the immorality which precedes it is obscured in the process. What should come of the relationships of North Korea and the rest of the world is a concrete, world-wide effort to bring about nuclear disarmament. If the west continues its proclivity to schadenfreude this will not happen, and a chance for a better world will have been missed due to the ineptness and insouciance of those who control power.
1
Maybe the Trump brain trust calculates that a man-made nuclear winter would solve the problem of man-made global warming.
2
The decapitation option is rapidly becoming the least bad. Now, which side will use it first...
1
Been thinking & this analogy popped to mind on the current situation with NK. It's like those school dramas,where you have the entitled school jock (almost always a jerk) "bullying" the loner, until one day, that loner breaks! With all the telly watching Trump does,he still hasn't learned a thing.
These have been the most arduous and longest 8 months to date!
8 MONTHS!!!
Trump surely HAS accomplished a lot in those months:insulted AND alienated most of our closest allies, incited more divisiveness at home, created hostility among already vulnerable nations relationships, internationally, slandered a predecessor as well as other important governing branches and more importantly prodded a dangerous volatile nation without a care of the lives he has readily endangered all the while we are in limbo of what might happen...shall we continue with the winning accomplishments?!...
These have been the most arduous and longest 8 months to date!
8 MONTHS!!!
Trump surely HAS accomplished a lot in those months:insulted AND alienated most of our closest allies, incited more divisiveness at home, created hostility among already vulnerable nations relationships, internationally, slandered a predecessor as well as other important governing branches and more importantly prodded a dangerous volatile nation without a care of the lives he has readily endangered all the while we are in limbo of what might happen...shall we continue with the winning accomplishments?!...
1
The only way this can end is for USA to get China on their side and conclude that the outcome will not be nice for them with nuclear dift and that they need to work with USA to take over North Korea and their missile testing. The only way this will end without a nuked North Korea, and nuclear drift into China, is for a takeover of North Korea by China. I'd prefer China to annex North Korea to China and see this as the only solution. China controls most of the fuel going into North Korea and they already get lots of their low paid workers from the North on temporary visas. China has a lot to lose if it falls out with the USA, as well, as the USA is the biggest buyer of Chinas exports. You can talk to the cows come home with North Korea but it won't change anything. Time to take a fresh look at this situation and see that China is the power without the glory in North Korea. China and Russia are allies and I'm sure Russia would rather see China take control of North Korea than the USA. China also doesn't want the USA as a next door neighbour so that gives the USA some advantage in getting China to see the reality of the situation. Something has to be done; talking is just empty words going nowhere.
1
@CK: I whole heartedly agree with everything you have written here until your last sentence: the current state of affairs is not getting us nowhere, but is marching us all too swiftly to the brink of a nuclear exchange. The resulting catastrophe would make Hiroshima and Nagasaki look insignificant by comparison.
Nikki Haley is such a joke. She seems to think that looking tough is all it takes to function in a diplomatic role. The former Governor of South Carolina; now that surely prepared her.
She takes her marching orders from Rexxon Tillerson. And he needs a compass to find out in which direction the sun will rise.
I don't know who writes her scripts, but if I was sitting at the U.N. I'd have to cover my mouth so I wouldn't be seen laughing.
She takes her marching orders from Rexxon Tillerson. And he needs a compass to find out in which direction the sun will rise.
I don't know who writes her scripts, but if I was sitting at the U.N. I'd have to cover my mouth so I wouldn't be seen laughing.
3
Comeuppance is sweet when a loudmouth braggart is reduced to meaningless tweets and when a bully nation is reduced to lashing out with empty threats of war. Russia and China must be smiling all the way. The leaderless superpower does not know how to lead any more. No one bothers to listen to its mutterings. Make America Great Again ... in your dreams!
3
Sounds more like Nikki Haley is begging for war.
3
Last night, the night before the first day of a new school year, our son (just 9) caught a news report/update on this crisis while the TV was on and it of course led to a Q&A and discussion.
He's a smart kid so there was no need to not be mostly frank but of course you try to be reassuring too and about the fact that the leadership of the world is mostly united in working to contain NK's belligerence...
As much as I appreciated his blossoming maturity I walked out of his room having seen a brand of fear and worry on his face that no child should have to bear and that I'd guess parents all over the world are coping with, particularly those in Seoul, Tokyo, Guam, etc..
This administration holds the world in its hands.
He's a smart kid so there was no need to not be mostly frank but of course you try to be reassuring too and about the fact that the leadership of the world is mostly united in working to contain NK's belligerence...
As much as I appreciated his blossoming maturity I walked out of his room having seen a brand of fear and worry on his face that no child should have to bear and that I'd guess parents all over the world are coping with, particularly those in Seoul, Tokyo, Guam, etc..
This administration holds the world in its hands.
11
" fear and worry on his face that no child should have to bear ", I too am so sad about this. The Cuban Missile Crisis had a huge impact on me when we went away for the weekend to the mountains and then my next door neighbors put in a bomb shelter. This is a deep existential experience for some children.
JKvam,
It is Kim who threatens war and sets off nuclear bombs and send
newer and larger missiles.
Yet you act like Trump has all the responsibility.
It is Kim who threatens war and sets off nuclear bombs and send
newer and larger missiles.
Yet you act like Trump has all the responsibility.
Cut off fuel? That's how we got Pearl Harbor.
2
If you to strangle the Koreans by blocking their oil imports, they will try to strangle you, using whatever tools they have available. In their eyes, that probably means ICBMs, since they don't have any effective economic options.
3
Might China and Russia, at some level, be using North Korea's actions and the threat of its further nuclear development, to foster negotiations that might give all three what they want--the withdrawal of the US from the Korean peninsula and, to a significant extent, from the region?
2
I feel that the only ones that pushing for a war here is the the Chicken hawks in government who many of have never served and this has nothing to do with noble tendencies only money to be made in weapons and weapons systems sold and replaced. We currently have 3 actions ongoing at this time can we at least put those to bed before going out gallivanting for another one. Containment has worked somewhat for the last 67 years except this time there is great risk of many more innocent deaths from weapons of mass destruction.
2
Let's say the KIm regime is toppled somehow without any significant loss of like.
What then?
Remember Saddam?
Kim's loyalists, brainwashed for three generations, are going to create havoc for anyone that tries to replace the Kim regime.
The bloodshed will be far worse than Iraq.
Toppling the regime is really not an option, any evolution will have to have the regime's consent.
What then?
Remember Saddam?
Kim's loyalists, brainwashed for three generations, are going to create havoc for anyone that tries to replace the Kim regime.
The bloodshed will be far worse than Iraq.
Toppling the regime is really not an option, any evolution will have to have the regime's consent.
4
How is it possible President Trump has not yet appointed an Ambassador to South Korea nor two of the other most important posts in the State Department regarding this matter - the Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and the Assistant Secretary for Non-Proliferation -- despite former President Obama warning this would be the most challenging security problem Trump would face?
Do the amateurs now controlling these US international policies have the intellect, wit, experience, knowledge of history, facility of language, or (frankly) even the vocabulary to deftly gauge and confront problems in their true complexity and assure citizens security or safety?
"Kicking the can down the road and we've run out of road?"
Is that our Ambassador to the UN's recent remarks or the lyrics to a very bad song? It is certainly not a compelling argument for anything other than literally not kicking a can down a road.
Even the Bush veterans - who learned difficult lessons in their service - advise certain specific intermediary steps before pushing for the obviously ill-fated supreme sanctions the current Ambassador is pushing for.
If course, it gestures to the real problem. The President is way over his head. He can't retain advisors except his own family - a bad sign for any leader - and his reluctance to appoint State Department jobs should be addressed by House and Senate leadership - particularly Republican.
Do the amateurs now controlling these US international policies have the intellect, wit, experience, knowledge of history, facility of language, or (frankly) even the vocabulary to deftly gauge and confront problems in their true complexity and assure citizens security or safety?
"Kicking the can down the road and we've run out of road?"
Is that our Ambassador to the UN's recent remarks or the lyrics to a very bad song? It is certainly not a compelling argument for anything other than literally not kicking a can down a road.
Even the Bush veterans - who learned difficult lessons in their service - advise certain specific intermediary steps before pushing for the obviously ill-fated supreme sanctions the current Ambassador is pushing for.
If course, it gestures to the real problem. The President is way over his head. He can't retain advisors except his own family - a bad sign for any leader - and his reluctance to appoint State Department jobs should be addressed by House and Senate leadership - particularly Republican.
15
Quite right.
The Trump administration's failure to make these key appointments means that strategy and key decisions are being hatched in the White House, overseen by a man whose previous international experience consists of owning the Miss Universe pageant.
Pause for a moment and consider how terrifying that is.
The Trump administration's failure to make these key appointments means that strategy and key decisions are being hatched in the White House, overseen by a man whose previous international experience consists of owning the Miss Universe pageant.
Pause for a moment and consider how terrifying that is.
2
North Korea is a useful tool to this administration, just like the U.S. is useful to the North Korean leader. Both sides can use rhetoric and harsh language to instill fear on the people, and therefore distract from real issues.
North Korea is only a "rogue" state because it isn't doing what the U.S. is telling it to do.
It knows better than all that releasing a missile into our land or waters will equal their destruction.
What does North Korea want then? To be recognized.
North Korea is only a "rogue" state because it isn't doing what the U.S. is telling it to do.
It knows better than all that releasing a missile into our land or waters will equal their destruction.
What does North Korea want then? To be recognized.
2
Trump and his gang need to stop playing school playground politics. History has shown that war rarely accomplishes anything good and then theres that whole "sticks and stones..." thing. Some of these guys never got past that on the playground, just throttled the taunter and never learned anything different. Well the stakes are a lot bigger now and good people other than Trump and co. will pay.
When does Kim Jong-Un appear happier? After a successful missile launch or while machine-gunning his opponents and relatives to pieces with an anti-aircraft gun?
1
another lumpy fiasco in the making - good job brownie - mission accomplished.
1
Though Russia has a few more missiles in stock than the U.S., President Trump has ordered more nuclear implements. There is no doubt that the U.S. is well prepared in nuclear armaments.
There are options in regards to North Korea's fat angry communist dictator. The option of firing nuclear missiles into North Korea is not necessary because North Korea's missiles will not reach the U.S. (at least not immediately).
The biggest fear is that the fat N. Korean dictator will lob a missile to hit Guam, Hawaii, Japan, Russia, or China. That will get everyone sending missiles everywhere including here to the U.S.
The best option I think is to mass the U.S. troops in South Korea and attack North Korea (in conventional warfare). However, I believe China already told the U.S. not to do that, and dangerous Russia (not our buddy) will begin pushing buttons once this nuclear fight gets started. I don't know if fat N. Korean dictator will order missiles to blow up N. Korea due to his Nazi Germanic nature.
It would be nice if we had the backing of Russia and China. We'll see if this serious conflict will be resolved or end up in a global nuclear holocaust murdering 7.5 billion humans on earth.
In anything that man thinks, says, or does.....we must ask if it is the will of man or the will of God.
There are options in regards to North Korea's fat angry communist dictator. The option of firing nuclear missiles into North Korea is not necessary because North Korea's missiles will not reach the U.S. (at least not immediately).
The biggest fear is that the fat N. Korean dictator will lob a missile to hit Guam, Hawaii, Japan, Russia, or China. That will get everyone sending missiles everywhere including here to the U.S.
The best option I think is to mass the U.S. troops in South Korea and attack North Korea (in conventional warfare). However, I believe China already told the U.S. not to do that, and dangerous Russia (not our buddy) will begin pushing buttons once this nuclear fight gets started. I don't know if fat N. Korean dictator will order missiles to blow up N. Korea due to his Nazi Germanic nature.
It would be nice if we had the backing of Russia and China. We'll see if this serious conflict will be resolved or end up in a global nuclear holocaust murdering 7.5 billion humans on earth.
In anything that man thinks, says, or does.....we must ask if it is the will of man or the will of God.
What is your problem with fatness?
I think we have a moral responsibility to act.
I'm very surprised (and kind of afraid of) how much "anti-interventionist" a lot of people here are.
Funny how liberals bash conservatives (and rightly so) about the fact that they tend to never change their minds when confronted to contradicting facts because it doesn't fit their agenda/beliefs.
Well guess what, you're doing exactly the same. But sure, let's keep doing what hasn't worked over the past 40 years, that sounds like a great plan.
And after all, doesn't Kim have a right to have nuclear weapons? Who are we to judge him?
I'm from France, and I sure am grateful that this line of thought didn't prevail back during WW2.
And yes, I would serve.
I'm very surprised (and kind of afraid of) how much "anti-interventionist" a lot of people here are.
Funny how liberals bash conservatives (and rightly so) about the fact that they tend to never change their minds when confronted to contradicting facts because it doesn't fit their agenda/beliefs.
Well guess what, you're doing exactly the same. But sure, let's keep doing what hasn't worked over the past 40 years, that sounds like a great plan.
And after all, doesn't Kim have a right to have nuclear weapons? Who are we to judge him?
I'm from France, and I sure am grateful that this line of thought didn't prevail back during WW2.
And yes, I would serve.
3
Am I the only one startled by the New York Times calling a Russian/Chinese proposal (to accept a "freeze" on N Korea's illegal nuclear program) as "the only diplomatic option" while finding Donald Trump's desire to open a hotel in Moscow somehow treasonous?
Why we should unilaterally agree to allow N Korea to retain its illegally obtained nuclear resources in exchange for giving up our military exercises with our allies in South Korea is certainly insulting, as Nikki Haley says (reported by the Wall Street Journal).
But since when does toeing the Moscow line become acceptable instead of somehow grounds for impeachment?
Why we should unilaterally agree to allow N Korea to retain its illegally obtained nuclear resources in exchange for giving up our military exercises with our allies in South Korea is certainly insulting, as Nikki Haley says (reported by the Wall Street Journal).
But since when does toeing the Moscow line become acceptable instead of somehow grounds for impeachment?
What is the problem? War is good for the economy if financed properly. With the upcoming negotiations about revising the tax code something like a permanent surtax for war and the military should be in order.
"War traditionally has motivated major changes in tax policy. The Civil War brought the first income tax. World War I made the federal income tax permanent. World War II brought tax withholding. In 1969, at the height of the Vietnam War, the United States ran a budget surplus because of a tax surcharge Congress forced President Lyndon B. Johnson to accept." This is from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/opinion/a-tax-to-pay-for-war.html
A major mistake by Bush Jr. was not financing the 2nd Iraq war leading (along with a few other things) to the great recession.
2
You do realize that war is death and suffering, don't you?? Or doesn't that matter to you??
Great idea? And send your child to fight the war you propose, and bury that child along with the thousands of other families that come to grief. Then tell us it's good idea.
A bit of satire helps to relieve some tension in the comments relating to a possible tragic outcome unless sensible minds prevail.
Haley is like many of Trumps appointees inexperienced, in diplomacy,and prone to bombastic saber rattling, like trump, which could lead to nuclear war! The call to stop oil shipments to North Korea,is the same policy that the US did to Japan,this embargo helped ignite the attack on Pearl harbor!
2
The US is the country that is besotted with war. It is time for the US to apologize to North Korea for the brutal devastation of its cities and the slaughter of its people during the Korean war. They are trying to protect themselves with nuclear weapons. Why doesn't the Times tell the truth for a change?
2
As we stand on the precipice of full out war, and possibly nuclear war, with a nation led by a megalomaniac, it is an obvious and shameful result of the short sightedness of millions of our fellow citizens. Trump is the epidemy of being thin skinned and his over compensations of blatant cowardness have led us to this completely avoidable predicament.
I hold no grandeur of an ideal that the United States was some beacon of truth and honor before the current administration, but we at least had the mental and political fortitude to know when to back down. Trump is void of the mental wherewithal to even comprehend his deficiencies and the inevitable fallout of his actions.
If we end up tipping over the edge into disaster, history will lay the blame squarely on him and not the caged animal he keeps poking. A share of the blame falls with all americans, though. We as a nation could have avoided this regretful calamity. Some are more culpable than others. Yet none of us are devoid of some responsibility.
Even if the worst comes to pass, it would be beyond wishful thinking that we all could be introspective enough to recognize our collective short comings and strive to never allow this to happen again. That is a real loss.
(or in the words of our completely deficient president.....SAD)
I hold no grandeur of an ideal that the United States was some beacon of truth and honor before the current administration, but we at least had the mental and political fortitude to know when to back down. Trump is void of the mental wherewithal to even comprehend his deficiencies and the inevitable fallout of his actions.
If we end up tipping over the edge into disaster, history will lay the blame squarely on him and not the caged animal he keeps poking. A share of the blame falls with all americans, though. We as a nation could have avoided this regretful calamity. Some are more culpable than others. Yet none of us are devoid of some responsibility.
Even if the worst comes to pass, it would be beyond wishful thinking that we all could be introspective enough to recognize our collective short comings and strive to never allow this to happen again. That is a real loss.
(or in the words of our completely deficient president.....SAD)
I think it's time for China to overthrow Kim Jung Un and replace him with his brother Kim Jong Nam who is friendly with Beijing. Wait!? He killed off his brother so that's no longer an option. In that case, China can find another leader who is friendly to Beijing. Good solution. China maintains a buffer state and can hold North Korea on a leash as a tributary state.
2
Who is "begging for war?" The regime in North Korea that is continuing to do what it's been doing for decades, or the regime - I mean "Presidency" - in the U.S. that needs desperately to distract attention from dozens of other issues?
We have a horrible situation with 2 unstable leaders - I can't believe we're at a point where China has to be the "grown up"!
We have a horrible situation with 2 unstable leaders - I can't believe we're at a point where China has to be the "grown up"!
This is all on Trump! North Korea has become more of a threat since Trump has been in office than it ever has been, and many other dictators will see the wisdom in North Korea's actions and follow. Trump, making America weaker than we have ever been.
Do not do that. Cutting fuel will add more fuel to the crisis. Remember what happened in 1941 during the runnoff of the diplomatic crisis between USA and Japan. In june 1941, after the USA cut all oil exports to Japan, leaving the last one with 6 months oil available. Six months later Japan attacked Pearl Harbour.
1
Nikki Haley is always shooting off her mouth.
Nikki Haley, prior to becoming U.N. Ambassador, had an accounting degree and worked in her family's textile business prior to becoming Governor. She has no background in world history, diplomacy or foreign affairs. It's ghastly to watch her keep interjecting hyperbolic statements in times of international crisis.
She is one of the most highly visible of Trump's ridiculously unqualified appointees, eager to be on the national stage.
Another Trump appointee put in as window dressing to Trump's right wing fans. Woman? Check. Minority? Check. Knows nothing about the position? Check.
Nothing like the brilliant Pulitzer-Prize winning history and expert on foreign policy and international war crimes Obama appointed to the same job: Ambassador Samantha Power. Power kept wise counsel, unlike Haley, who is eager to be in the spotlight.
Trump can't get anything right. Haley is too conceited and ambitious to turn down a position she has no qualification for.
Nikki Haley, prior to becoming U.N. Ambassador, had an accounting degree and worked in her family's textile business prior to becoming Governor. She has no background in world history, diplomacy or foreign affairs. It's ghastly to watch her keep interjecting hyperbolic statements in times of international crisis.
She is one of the most highly visible of Trump's ridiculously unqualified appointees, eager to be on the national stage.
Another Trump appointee put in as window dressing to Trump's right wing fans. Woman? Check. Minority? Check. Knows nothing about the position? Check.
Nothing like the brilliant Pulitzer-Prize winning history and expert on foreign policy and international war crimes Obama appointed to the same job: Ambassador Samantha Power. Power kept wise counsel, unlike Haley, who is eager to be in the spotlight.
Trump can't get anything right. Haley is too conceited and ambitious to turn down a position she has no qualification for.
2
It seems to me the only country begging for war, as usual, is the United States. Trump's embarrassing fire and fury statement is childish and ridiculous. Actual diplomacy would mean sitting down and finding out what North Korea wants. It is a sovereign state who most likely wants a peace treaty. We don't agree with their ideologies but we also don't agree with other's ideologies. It doesn't give us the right to start a war with everyone we don't agree with. Diplomacy doesn't mean escalation or further embargoes. Sadly, the current administration and Congress are filled with insane old clowns who know nothing about diplomacy or caring for the American people's best interests. We need philosopher kings, not circus clowns in our government.
1
North Korea offered several years ago to end their nuclear weapons program if the US would agree to sign a mutual no-first strike agreement. Seems like a simple solution that doesn't cause any bloodshed. Too bad the American leader is a crazy man.
The conventional wisdom is that NK has developed nuclear weapons as a defensive posture. Yet this is not logical. We have been in a state of war with NK for 67 years and haven't attacked. Moreover, SK is a hostage to any action by the US with 20 million inhabitants living within 30 miles of the border and vulnerable to conventional weapons. Finally, China would never allow the US to occupy NK. We tried it in 1950 and 250,000 Chinese came across the border and kicked our butts. Think what modern China could do now.
The only solution is to force China to cut off fuel to NK and the only way to do this is to impose severe secondary sanctions on them, even though it will hurt our own economy. It is said that this would cause NK to collapse with refugees pouring into China but countries don't "collapse" overnight. Surely there would be time for the NK leadership to realize that the world is serious and that without Chinese fuel they will face oblivion. There is no easy answer but military force is not feasible. The only other alternative is to live with a nuclear armed NK, which is the most probably outcome, sad to say.
The only solution is to force China to cut off fuel to NK and the only way to do this is to impose severe secondary sanctions on them, even though it will hurt our own economy. It is said that this would cause NK to collapse with refugees pouring into China but countries don't "collapse" overnight. Surely there would be time for the NK leadership to realize that the world is serious and that without Chinese fuel they will face oblivion. There is no easy answer but military force is not feasible. The only other alternative is to live with a nuclear armed NK, which is the most probably outcome, sad to say.
Putin's warning,,primarily too NK but also to the U.S., will, we hope, be taken seriously (The NYT, by the way, didn't; it ignored it).
And it's about time; he's been almost mute about the issue so far, as if he thought it someone else's problem, not Russia's. But his explanation for Little Kim's behavior makes a lot of sense. The demise of the Soviet Union left NK a nuclear orphan. It was - or thought tit was - under Russia's nuclear umbrella. That gone, it decided it had better get it's own nukes. Understandable so far. Does France, for example, rely only on our nukes? But nuclear insecurity, like any other kind, can, if untreated, develop into paranoia. And paranoia, as all us amateur psychologists know, can lead to irrational and threatening behavior.
So Kim needs a shrink, right? Yes, but, unfortunately, there aren't any in North Korea. So what can we do? Answering threats with threats just raises the temperature and Cold War goes to Hot.. What may work? Putin advises dialog and he's right. Will it work? Try it. Only one thing's for sure; War is not the answer.
hasn't had much to say about 's
And it's about time; he's been almost mute about the issue so far, as if he thought it someone else's problem, not Russia's. But his explanation for Little Kim's behavior makes a lot of sense. The demise of the Soviet Union left NK a nuclear orphan. It was - or thought tit was - under Russia's nuclear umbrella. That gone, it decided it had better get it's own nukes. Understandable so far. Does France, for example, rely only on our nukes? But nuclear insecurity, like any other kind, can, if untreated, develop into paranoia. And paranoia, as all us amateur psychologists know, can lead to irrational and threatening behavior.
So Kim needs a shrink, right? Yes, but, unfortunately, there aren't any in North Korea. So what can we do? Answering threats with threats just raises the temperature and Cold War goes to Hot.. What may work? Putin advises dialog and he's right. Will it work? Try it. Only one thing's for sure; War is not the answer.
hasn't had much to say about 's
The red-state media is using every headline about North Korea to galvanize its base. Fox spills banner headlines, Limbaugh calls them some profane things.
We should get the 'alt-right' position out in the open. Do Fox News & Limbaugh et. al. advocate the utter obliteration of North Korea? Are they demanding immediate strikes, propagating massive war & retaliation?
Normally one would try to ignore sensationalist calls to military action as irresponsible faux-noise, but since we now know that Fox News basically built the Trump base, & appears to be the only source of news that the President doesn't consider 'fake', the Fox pundits actually, unfortunately matter.
As Kim desperately wants to matter in global affairs, Fox desperately wants to matter as a source of news & Trump desperately wants attention & distraction from his failures. Unfortunately all have succeeded to one degree or another.
If fox/limbaugh & the red-state punditry start pushing hard for war,war,war, there's this problem with Trump making impulsive decisions at 3:AM & threatening armageddon by tweet.
Also, somebody please settle the score about who is responsible for letting NK get these nukes, let's iron out how it happened, there was once some negotiating going on before NK went nuclear. Was this in direct response to Bush & his Iraq War, & is this not just another American chicken coming home to roost, or was this, per pundit interviewed on 'America's News HQ', yet another corruption by the Clintons.
We should get the 'alt-right' position out in the open. Do Fox News & Limbaugh et. al. advocate the utter obliteration of North Korea? Are they demanding immediate strikes, propagating massive war & retaliation?
Normally one would try to ignore sensationalist calls to military action as irresponsible faux-noise, but since we now know that Fox News basically built the Trump base, & appears to be the only source of news that the President doesn't consider 'fake', the Fox pundits actually, unfortunately matter.
As Kim desperately wants to matter in global affairs, Fox desperately wants to matter as a source of news & Trump desperately wants attention & distraction from his failures. Unfortunately all have succeeded to one degree or another.
If fox/limbaugh & the red-state punditry start pushing hard for war,war,war, there's this problem with Trump making impulsive decisions at 3:AM & threatening armageddon by tweet.
Also, somebody please settle the score about who is responsible for letting NK get these nukes, let's iron out how it happened, there was once some negotiating going on before NK went nuclear. Was this in direct response to Bush & his Iraq War, & is this not just another American chicken coming home to roost, or was this, per pundit interviewed on 'America's News HQ', yet another corruption by the Clintons.
1
This is going to get very ugly.
Remember how successful 1941 fuel (and steel) cut off of Japan was in curbing its aggression at the time
2
Yes, they are begging for a preemption by the other country. Kim's existence is hard to spot, so he should be safe. He does not care at all about casualties of NK people (already a lot by e.g., starvation). And that would give him a great benefit internationally and domestically. President Trump is doing a good job, speaking a lot but doing nothing.
I just don't see why North Korea would start a war with the United States. It would more than likely lead to their demise. Kim is a dictator of his own country and has the power to do what ever he wants. Why would he give that up for a war he won't win?
To be honest in my opinion if both the US and China stepped away and let the Koreans decide it would be better but both sides want this to continue. It keeps the US from getting on the border and it also keeps the US military industrial complex humming along. That is the real problem with Korea two super powers deciding for them.
I don't believe Ambassador Haley's assertion that North Korea is "begging for war." Mr. Kim is surely aware that war means annihilation for his regime. That is a poor and unacceptable choice of words that makes it look like it is the Trump administration itself that is begging for war. Are they?
This is also one more reckless statement in a long string of them from two of the most reckless leaders on the planet Kim and Mr. Trump.
That said, the way forward is not clear. The problem requires great subtlety and sophistication. Circumstances have changed, and not for the better from our perspective. China and Russia want us out of the Western Pacific. Seoul lies within artillery range of the North.
Is the White House up to the job? It is pertinent to say for the umpteenth time that the president is ignorant, unable to accept advice or criticism, inept, dishonest, impulsive, racist, and corrupt. The president's generals appear to think mainly in terms of military solutions.
We will get no help from North Korea. Kim is a dictator, torturer, murderer, and head of a national cult.
North Korea has demonstrated that it is already able to or will soon be able to fire nuclear missiles at the United States. Now the United States and Japan share the risk that was once limited to South Korea.
This is also one more reckless statement in a long string of them from two of the most reckless leaders on the planet Kim and Mr. Trump.
That said, the way forward is not clear. The problem requires great subtlety and sophistication. Circumstances have changed, and not for the better from our perspective. China and Russia want us out of the Western Pacific. Seoul lies within artillery range of the North.
Is the White House up to the job? It is pertinent to say for the umpteenth time that the president is ignorant, unable to accept advice or criticism, inept, dishonest, impulsive, racist, and corrupt. The president's generals appear to think mainly in terms of military solutions.
We will get no help from North Korea. Kim is a dictator, torturer, murderer, and head of a national cult.
North Korea has demonstrated that it is already able to or will soon be able to fire nuclear missiles at the United States. Now the United States and Japan share the risk that was once limited to South Korea.
1
If we push China by putting nuclear missiles in South Korea, will they trade de-nuclearizing North Korea for removing those nuclear missiles from South Korea similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis resolution?
1
North Korea has been a "rogue" state for the past four presidents. It amazes me how the US Intelligence neglected to detect suspicious activity long ago that would have been far easier to deal with then.
There has to be a way that the CIA can infect North Korea's national power system and government computer systems. The US has successfully used computer virus warfare recently.
There has to be a way that the CIA can infect North Korea's national power system and government computer systems. The US has successfully used computer virus warfare recently.
And now we have Putin as the voice of reason. Let that sink in...
If Trump is truly contemplating attacking North Korea, then he better have a plan in place on what to do afterwards. President George W. Bush thought that invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam Hussein was simple and relatively speaking it was. It's the aftermath that's been the problem for 16 years, because we really didn't have a follow-up plan. So far Kim Jong-un has only threatened the US and people that are calling for a first strike really haven't thought through the consequences. It's not just a matter of North and South Koreans dying, it's what such an action would set in motion throughout the world. China and Russia will not sit idly by while we bomb North Korea and I agree that sanctions alone will not work as Kim Jong-un will never give up his nuclear weapons.
Is it really such a problem to figure out a way to accept North Korea as a nuclear power? We seemed to accept Pakistan without much of an issue and it wouldn't be a Neville Chamberlain type of appeasement as it would come with conditions, but if we truly conclude that a military action is the only way, then we better have a plan after the bombs fly.
Is it really such a problem to figure out a way to accept North Korea as a nuclear power? We seemed to accept Pakistan without much of an issue and it wouldn't be a Neville Chamberlain type of appeasement as it would come with conditions, but if we truly conclude that a military action is the only way, then we better have a plan after the bombs fly.
1
Seems to me the one begging for war is Trump.
1
Trump has alienated many, many countries and now he asks them for help. He is a dreamer that might be the most dangerous man in the world.
He is been doing that for ages. This administration got suckered and made it into a ego fight. Now here we are. Huff and Puff and if you do that, its the end rhetoric, what facing saving is left for the president ? For a president who is by his own words, the only person who can fix, quite a bit of muddling going on.
We did the same thing to Japan right before Pearl Harbor. It is an act of war to an oil-less state. Now, they were busy invading China at the time. If we want to instigate a paranoid response, this is it.
1
The astonishing arrogance of our current crop of diplomats almost beggars belief. Did we learn nothing from how we handled the run-up to the Iraq war?
"Begging for War" indeed. Look in a mirror, team. Kim is doing nothing he was not doing all along except setting off a thermonuclear device. He is not begging so much as calling our bluff. We are the ones now begging our own people to accept our rational for war, for endangering South Korea and Japan with our bellicose stand.
The only difference with Iraq is that blustering Saddam did not have nuclear WMD's and the ability to attack Israel with them, while Kim can certainly attack Seoul in devastating ways. Both South K and North K want unification, but each on its own terms. Answering bluster and bluff with the same |Louder!| is not diplomacy.
We claim he is a nut-case who will not listen to reason, like Saddam (pr. 'Sodom'), so there is no choice but attack. That is thus a choice we are forcing ourselves into without testing if North K will actually negotiate. Committing our armed forces to war without being attacked is us bringing war on our own forces as well as the enemy.
"Begging for War" indeed. Look in a mirror, team. Kim is doing nothing he was not doing all along except setting off a thermonuclear device. He is not begging so much as calling our bluff. We are the ones now begging our own people to accept our rational for war, for endangering South Korea and Japan with our bellicose stand.
The only difference with Iraq is that blustering Saddam did not have nuclear WMD's and the ability to attack Israel with them, while Kim can certainly attack Seoul in devastating ways. Both South K and North K want unification, but each on its own terms. Answering bluster and bluff with the same |Louder!| is not diplomacy.
We claim he is a nut-case who will not listen to reason, like Saddam (pr. 'Sodom'), so there is no choice but attack. That is thus a choice we are forcing ourselves into without testing if North K will actually negotiate. Committing our armed forces to war without being attacked is us bringing war on our own forces as well as the enemy.
1
I would take Mr. Trump, Ms Haley and other loudmouths, lock them in a room and force them to watch FailSafe, or On The Beach, and most importantly the late 20th century TV drama The Day After.
Maybe they get a sense then what it is like living through a nuclear attack.
Because this time it won't be some faraway place that would be hit.
Maybe they get a sense then what it is like living through a nuclear attack.
Because this time it won't be some faraway place that would be hit.
Why on earth must we continue to fan the flames with line-in-the-sand type rhetoric like "begging for war"? It's as bad -- and useless -- as " fire and fury." And as some have observed, it does not add stature or standing to American power -- just the reverse. Bellicose posturing is no solution to anything here.
Somebody in the government or the diplomatic corps should be more careful with their words and how they use them. I doubt that ANY person, ANY where, is "begging for war". Seems to me that that is a very careless expression to be bandying about.....
1
So many calling for NK to be recognized as a sovereign state or claiming that NK is non-aggressive. Who has attacked NK? Why are their citizens starving and being tortured - some for their entire lives?
And people here are defending this psychopath?
While it is not the business (most days, according to readers here) of the US or any nation to do anything about NK, it does appear that they are working hard to extort more billions. The west, especially the US, has paid many billions to this country(?) in an effort to thwart aggression. But it isn't used for anything but aggression and NK has NEVER kept it's word.
Like most, I'm not up for war. However, when a country tells you that they are building missiles and nuclear weapons to attack your shores, I call that tantamount to an act of war. We didn't want to deal with Germany when it was obvious the Nazis were building up their military and weaponry. If we'd acted earlier (or even if EU had acted earlier) then WWII would have likely never happened. But we chose to ignore it, wishing it would just go away and somehow Hitler would lose favor. Not a good approach, in hindsight.
And people here are defending this psychopath?
While it is not the business (most days, according to readers here) of the US or any nation to do anything about NK, it does appear that they are working hard to extort more billions. The west, especially the US, has paid many billions to this country(?) in an effort to thwart aggression. But it isn't used for anything but aggression and NK has NEVER kept it's word.
Like most, I'm not up for war. However, when a country tells you that they are building missiles and nuclear weapons to attack your shores, I call that tantamount to an act of war. We didn't want to deal with Germany when it was obvious the Nazis were building up their military and weaponry. If we'd acted earlier (or even if EU had acted earlier) then WWII would have likely never happened. But we chose to ignore it, wishing it would just go away and somehow Hitler would lose favor. Not a good approach, in hindsight.
1
The Chinese proxy state known as the DPRK is 100% dependent on China. Your purchase of shoddy Chinese imports is funding Kim's nuclear program. Hold off on your purchase of the next new shiny iPhone, folks, (just for a little while) and see how quickly Xi slaps down Kim.
1
No more talk (not even diplomatic) in public, until Mr Kim does something worthy of praise. If that is signing a "peace treaty" with the South, that is worthy of recognition and praise. In the meantime, we can (can't we?) intercept and destroy any threatening missies... without fanfare or even admitting we have any idea what might have gone awry... Bluster and threats will do nothing to deter Mr Kim. That is the attention he craves. NO attention until he earns it.
1
The North has wanted such a treaty, and the US has refused, for decades.
1
Many times in my life I have heard my government say some variation on the cowardly theme "All diplomatic alternatives to war have been exhausted." To say an additional sanction is the last resort lacks imagination, responsibility, and basic sense. Of course there are alternatives. "Let's talk" is one. On the eve of the Iraq war in 2003 Saddam Hussein searched through back channels for a way to save face and avoid war, and we rebuffed him. We preferred to splash our military might before the world. This time, we do not have that option, as the stakes are immeasurably higher.
As a father, a citizen, a human being, I beg my government to be brave, man-up, and tell North Korea "Let's talk." We say to our infants, "Use your words." That is what we must do now.
Kim Stafford
As a father, a citizen, a human being, I beg my government to be brave, man-up, and tell North Korea "Let's talk." We say to our infants, "Use your words." That is what we must do now.
Kim Stafford
15
Nikki R. Haley's comment, Kim Jon-un "is begging for war" is shocking to hear from a so-called diplomate and will be looked on as a self-serving claim by the rest of the world. This is scary in its recklessness and shows an extreme lack of education, awareness of North/South Korea history, and of the value of U.S. diplomatic relations.
2
It's fairly obvious what's motivating North Korean leadership: fear of South Korea and the U.S., and a North Korean population devastated by poverty. But mostly, the North Korean government can no longer hide the rest of the world from their people because of internet technology. This alone would cause NK leaders to fear their own people. This has the potential to render efforts to force unity on North Koreans by the communist leadership as ineffective.
Ultimately, this weakens NK militarily . China also fears this. NK has not been converted over to the Chinese system of autocratic government combined with international capitalism. Nor is it within the NK leadership's psychology to do so.
Therefore, there is no way for the North Koreans to be raised out of a poverty that stands in stark contrast to the experience South Korea and China as well.
The conclusion is that the NK leadership decided to use the status of nuclear weaponry and perpetual war-readiness to occupy the minds and lives of the NK people.
Therefore, the actions of NK leadership is in the nature of national politics: winning over the people. Otherwise their poverty would sooner or later doom the North Korean communist party leading to an unknown result.
Probably, China take control of the country in some way. So, we see the NK leadership fighting for their life. Rattling the nuclear 'saber' is the way they have chosen to do it.
Ultimately, this weakens NK militarily . China also fears this. NK has not been converted over to the Chinese system of autocratic government combined with international capitalism. Nor is it within the NK leadership's psychology to do so.
Therefore, there is no way for the North Koreans to be raised out of a poverty that stands in stark contrast to the experience South Korea and China as well.
The conclusion is that the NK leadership decided to use the status of nuclear weaponry and perpetual war-readiness to occupy the minds and lives of the NK people.
Therefore, the actions of NK leadership is in the nature of national politics: winning over the people. Otherwise their poverty would sooner or later doom the North Korean communist party leading to an unknown result.
Probably, China take control of the country in some way. So, we see the NK leadership fighting for their life. Rattling the nuclear 'saber' is the way they have chosen to do it.
2
Ultimate power. Who will kill for me? Who will die for me?
Why do men make "heroes" out of those foolish enough to kill and/or be killed in their mindless wars? The real heroes are those who PREVENT war.
Why do men make "heroes" out of those foolish enough to kill and/or be killed in their mindless wars? The real heroes are those who PREVENT war.
6
I am disheartened that the most popular comments are calling for appeasement. Except they are using the politically correct term, "negotiation".
That was tried by Great Britain when a madman threatened war in 1938. Didn't work then, and won't work now.
That was tried by Great Britain when a madman threatened war in 1938. Didn't work then, and won't work now.
18
Huge difference. Hitler prepared for and threatened aggressive war of conquest. North Korea has not; their arms program is clearly aimed at defense. Another example of arguing from false equivalence.
1
Actually, yes it did. If you will ponder the situation in 1938, England's army was grossly undermanned and under-equipped, and Chamberlain knew that.
He negotiated a year of peace and went back to England and ramped up war preparations. He was no fool, and because of his actions England survived, just barely. If he'd have gone to war in 1938, England would have been swamped.
He negotiated a year of peace and went back to England and ramped up war preparations. He was no fool, and because of his actions England survived, just barely. If he'd have gone to war in 1938, England would have been swamped.
1
Worked out rather well. Not too long after that, Texas won its independence and became a self-governing republic.
To accede to annexation, Texas demanded and received numerous concessions -- including the US assuming responsibility for the Texas' $10 million debt -- and had been actively negotiating to become an independent state of Mexico as an alternative. The US buckled and accepted the Texas position on several other issues -- unfortunately, including the recognition of slavery as legal, not a position Texans are particularly proud of, but it does indicate the lengths the US was willing to go to get Texas to join the union.
To accede to annexation, Texas demanded and received numerous concessions -- including the US assuming responsibility for the Texas' $10 million debt -- and had been actively negotiating to become an independent state of Mexico as an alternative. The US buckled and accepted the Texas position on several other issues -- unfortunately, including the recognition of slavery as legal, not a position Texans are particularly proud of, but it does indicate the lengths the US was willing to go to get Texas to join the union.
The solution to this Kim Jong problem is clear, though difficult : hack the targeting/guidance computers for a substantial number of his missiles and re-target them to unpopulated places inside North Korea. When a few of his missiles land and blow up in his own country... he will settle down for some time.
I would fully expect NSA to be working on this task.
I would fully expect NSA to be working on this task.
3
The opening line of this article makes me sick. These idiots in power have no knowledge or appreciation of history - like the fact that our oil embargo of Japan in 1941 was one of the main causes for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
4
True. But what is the alternative? Those who see sanctions, and diplomacy, as an alternative to war also have to know that sanctions, to have any effect, need to have impact.
commentariat again showing its deplorable Trump derangement. It's an untenable situation, what to do about NK. Of course, our last president decided to ignore NK and look how that is working out. I'm sure Trump is thanking the big O now for letting him know NK was our biggest foreign issue. It would have been nice if Obama had actually done something other than warn Trump, but doing something wasn't his strong suit.
In many situations there are not good answers. There are only bad ones -- and the best choice is to end up with the least bad solution. Trump and his admin seem to be doing everything they reasonably can to stop NK now, which is the only reasonable choice because letting NK build their nuclear arsenal only increases our risk -- and as time passes our risk will increase. War now may be the outcome but that is preferable to nukes hitting us while Kim and a select few watch from bunkers.
In many situations there are not good answers. There are only bad ones -- and the best choice is to end up with the least bad solution. Trump and his admin seem to be doing everything they reasonably can to stop NK now, which is the only reasonable choice because letting NK build their nuclear arsenal only increases our risk -- and as time passes our risk will increase. War now may be the outcome but that is preferable to nukes hitting us while Kim and a select few watch from bunkers.
3
It is my understanding that Russia has had so many more nuclear warheads than the US for so long but I haven't heard of anybody moving into caves. Why the hysteria? Somehow a tiny country like Korea doesn't deserve to be able to defend itself by any means possible? Is anybody questioning whether Israel deserves to keep it's nuclear arsenal? Are the so-called Superpowers of the world jealous? Is this machismo at work?
The best and most humane way to deal with North Korea would be to take a leaf from recent history with the unification of Germany and work with China to help make this happen. China fears a flood of refugees should the hell hole regime collapses. This would not be the case if China, instead of quickly and cruelly deporting escapees where certain lifetime gulag imprisonment or death awaits, set up a transport system across from the Yalu River to South Korea central region where leadership development communities would be established for the purpose of training future bureaucratic technicians and managers to run the country. The resultant brain drain will inevitably lead to the collapse of the missle and nuclear weapon development entities. In term, both South Korea and the U.S. would proceed to rapidly dismantle the demilitarized zone and remove all armament. To help reassure China that a unified Korean democracy or republic would pose no threat, just look at Poland and Germany. Even though Poland is devolving towards a dictatorship, it does not find a unified Germany to be a threat.
2
how many NK citizens have been imprisoned, tortured and killed by their government. they starve their people so they have funds to support their nuclear ambitions and people are supporting this leader's rights to hold the world ransom?
I get it, liberals hate Trump but what about the people of NK? don't they deserve better??
I get it, liberals hate Trump but what about the people of NK? don't they deserve better??
5
"elections have consequences" and so do dictatorships. We asked for our current situation, the North Koreans actaully had NO CHOICE since they do not have free elections.
AND, how many nuclear bombs do they have. Barely 1 and maybe a rocket? This is like taking an UZI to a knife fight. Kim may kills his generals with abandon to boost his ratings but he doesn't really have an arsenal to back up his bluster. WE on the other hand can wipe out half the world. So why are we starting a war with a handicapped dictator?
AND, how many nuclear bombs do they have. Barely 1 and maybe a rocket? This is like taking an UZI to a knife fight. Kim may kills his generals with abandon to boost his ratings but he doesn't really have an arsenal to back up his bluster. WE on the other hand can wipe out half the world. So why are we starting a war with a handicapped dictator?
1
It is not our job to force a change in the regime in N. Korea. Nor is it even a sane course of action. How much destruction, death, devastation, and an economic catastrophe are you will to absorb? What if that first nuke hits Tokyo? We respond and one lands perilously close to China and they engage, then Russian, then India, then Pakistan - then what? Will you feel better then?
1
Stop isolating North Korea and let contact with a better way of life do the job, as it has with the USSR, East Germany, Japan, etc. Our sanctions have helped impoverish the North Koreans and done nothing to improve relations; it's time to try something new.
We now have a president who would start a nuclear war (a) to improve his poll ratings, (b) to show how tough he is, and/or (c) to satisfy his now seven decades long need to blow things up. As with every other matter he approaches, it's all about him, all the time.
Think about this for a minute. He literally does not care that tens of thousands of North and South Koreans, and perhaps tens of thousands of Americans in the Pacific islands or the West Coast perish in a series of nuclear strikes. He is a walking trail of devastation. He is a mad man who cannot even control his tweets. Does anyone now seriously question that he would press the nuclear keys without a second thought? Our lives are at the mercy of a deranged, narcissistic tyrant.
That this is now literally -- and not just figuratively true ought to have all of us -- at least those of us who did not vote for this insane man -- in the streets en masse. The past eight months have shown us that there are absolutely no checks and balances on this man. This Republican Congress will not check him. He has five Supreme Court votes in his pocket. Events since January have shown that he is -- literally -- limited only by his imagination and the laws of physics.
What I do know is that there are several outcomes to this North Korean nuclear crisis -- and not one of them is good.
Think about this for a minute. He literally does not care that tens of thousands of North and South Koreans, and perhaps tens of thousands of Americans in the Pacific islands or the West Coast perish in a series of nuclear strikes. He is a walking trail of devastation. He is a mad man who cannot even control his tweets. Does anyone now seriously question that he would press the nuclear keys without a second thought? Our lives are at the mercy of a deranged, narcissistic tyrant.
That this is now literally -- and not just figuratively true ought to have all of us -- at least those of us who did not vote for this insane man -- in the streets en masse. The past eight months have shown us that there are absolutely no checks and balances on this man. This Republican Congress will not check him. He has five Supreme Court votes in his pocket. Events since January have shown that he is -- literally -- limited only by his imagination and the laws of physics.
What I do know is that there are several outcomes to this North Korean nuclear crisis -- and not one of them is good.
8
"Wag the Dog" in real life. But a much, much bigger dog.
Time to sign a full fledged peace treaty with NK, remove our troops over a relatively short time frame, and allow SK to have its own nuclear arsenal so it can defend itself rather than relying on the world's policeman. If nothing else this Korean thing shows the limits to that role going forward.
4
I think Trump is also begging for war so he can show the world how tough he is. And he is taking us all down with him. Some one has to tape his mouth shut and tie his hands behind his back, so he can't talk or tweet
9
The market is down big today.
Think Kim sold short?
Think Kim sold short?
4
Kim knows nothing. It was Trump.
1
All I heard during the election from Trump is that he is a great negotiator. I have heard him negotiate anything. Trump is the one inflaming this situation. He's treating N. Korea like his treats everyone - he bullies them.
3
NK is constantly theatening us and our allies. I suggest we take his word for what he wants to do. .. diplomacy has done no good...We cant trust them..only one option left and we must strike hard and fast in order to prevent any retaliation...
Enought with talking with this maniac..and yes the US has done plenty to cause trouble in the world..but that doesnt mean we should therefore do nothing in the face of this nuclear threat...
Enought with talking with this maniac..and yes the US has done plenty to cause trouble in the world..but that doesnt mean we should therefore do nothing in the face of this nuclear threat...
4
This feels like a moment of projection. Accusing Kim of begging for war actually reveals Trump's own intentions. The aggression towards a diplomatically inclined South Korea seconds this notion. The absence of U.S. diplomacy and Trump's domestic difficulties at home help reinforce the same idea. All the warning signs are there. Trump is begging for war. Mercy on us all.
5
North Korea lost the Korean War but was "saved" by China sending in "volunteers" from the PLA at the cost of great "face" to the Korean Military. As a result of this loss of "face" the Korean War is still "in progress" as it has been for over 60 years. The North's goal then as now is to gain full control of the entire Korean Peninsula. There will be no "peace" for the South except the "peace of the grave". The only "negotiations" will be for a U.S. Withdrawal and the South's surrender to the north.
You need look no further than the cadre of aged military Officers surrounding "Dear Leader Kim" to see who really runs the North. Kim doesn't give resources to the military. The Military takes them as they always have not to defend North Korea but to prepare to overwhelm the South and regain the "Face" which was lost in the '50s when it was forced to turn to china to avert defeat by the U.S. Defeating the U.S. by conquering the South is the ultimate goal of the North's Military Elite.
The Chinese and the Japanese better understand the North and are more than willing to let the U.S. bear the responsible for "negotiating" away South Korea as neither country will loose "face" no matter what happens.
Anyone who thinks North Korea will settle for less is a fool! The North will only feel secure when they control all of Korea and still have a nuclear arsenal to threaten Japan, China and the U.S. If you don't agree then you should review the last few hundred years of Korean history.
You need look no further than the cadre of aged military Officers surrounding "Dear Leader Kim" to see who really runs the North. Kim doesn't give resources to the military. The Military takes them as they always have not to defend North Korea but to prepare to overwhelm the South and regain the "Face" which was lost in the '50s when it was forced to turn to china to avert defeat by the U.S. Defeating the U.S. by conquering the South is the ultimate goal of the North's Military Elite.
The Chinese and the Japanese better understand the North and are more than willing to let the U.S. bear the responsible for "negotiating" away South Korea as neither country will loose "face" no matter what happens.
Anyone who thinks North Korea will settle for less is a fool! The North will only feel secure when they control all of Korea and still have a nuclear arsenal to threaten Japan, China and the U.S. If you don't agree then you should review the last few hundred years of Korean history.
3
Is Kim truly begging for a war or is Trump hoping to start a war?
5
Maybe its time to reflect on the fact that US causes many more problems than it solves. The rest of the world has suffered while US presidents have kept US citizens happy at the cost of much unhappiness to the rest of the world. And we have now entered the era where US is no longer the post-second world war economic or military bully. Let other countries solve their problems. India and China did so without US intervention recently in Doklam. Let Japan and South Korea handle the situation with North Korea. Where the US enters, things get dirty...
4
Maybe I have not been following the news but where exactly is North Korea getting its arms? Even a country as large as India has to import arms. Surely a country that was on the brink of starvation hasn't ratcheted up their manufacturing capability so much as to have this technology. Is this a way for China and Russia to use North Korea as a proxy to jointly stand up to the United States? Pay attention to the rhetoric from Putin downplaying the effectiveness of sanctions and threatening to counter with missile defenses in Asia. ... And China's strategic "silence" on the whole thing while allowing supplies into North Korea. . Could Russia and China be colluding while supplying "toys" to this North Korean leader?
2
"Is this a way for China and Russia to use North Korea as a proxy to jointly stand up to the United States?"
Hasn't it always been?
Hasn't it always been?
'The Trump Administration, warning that North Korea is “begging for war,” is pressing China and other members of the United Nations Security Council to cut off all oil and other fuels to the country.' What, one might ask, is the United States 'begging for' with its frequent flights of B-1 bombers above the border between the two Koreas' ?...
Henri
Henri
17
People seem to be forgetting that putting an oil embargo on Japan was the deciding factor in japan's decision to attack Pearl harbor. The game's the same, just different players.
1
Trump wants this war far more than North Korea does. Putin owns Trump as well as the recent Russian influenced election.
War with North Korea (or anywhere) is a salve to Trump, who is very tired of the Mueller investigation. Anything to distract the American people from the crimes Trump has committed is a good thing. Being bellicose toward North Korea is typical trumpian bravado: empty and pointless. Only this time it could lead to massive destruction of lives and property. That will take the focus off Putin, won't it?
War with North Korea (or anywhere) is a salve to Trump, who is very tired of the Mueller investigation. Anything to distract the American people from the crimes Trump has committed is a good thing. Being bellicose toward North Korea is typical trumpian bravado: empty and pointless. Only this time it could lead to massive destruction of lives and property. That will take the focus off Putin, won't it?
I read all the comments as of 7:00 AM PST, Tuesday, September 5th.
Why do people assume that Kim is RATIONAL ?
It was not Rational for Herr Hitler to start World War II
or to invade the Soviet Union.
Was it Rational for Japan to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor
or to refuse to surrender after the loss of the Philippines/Iwo Jima
and Okinawa ?
Was it Rational for Fidel Castro to ask the Russians to put
Nuclear Missiles in Cuba ?
I will say it again:
Robert McNamara - the very embodiment of Rationality -
met with Castro two decades after the Cuban Missile Crisis as documented
in the "Fog of War" and Castro told McNamara to his face that
had the Soviets allowed him to - he would have launched Nuclear Missiles
at the U.S.
McNamara could not believe what he had just heard.
It made no Rational Sense -
Why attack America knowing you would be killed and Cuba destroyed.
Castro made it clear that to go down in History as a small Socialist
Nation that stood up to the most powerful Capitalistic Nation was
worth the Price.
Is not Kim more delusional than Castro ?
Is he not more of an absolute Dictator than Castro ?
Stop assuming there is some sort of Common Rationality between
Kim and the rest of the world.
Start accepting that he may initiate a War
and that he may go Nuclear.
Why do people assume that Kim is RATIONAL ?
It was not Rational for Herr Hitler to start World War II
or to invade the Soviet Union.
Was it Rational for Japan to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor
or to refuse to surrender after the loss of the Philippines/Iwo Jima
and Okinawa ?
Was it Rational for Fidel Castro to ask the Russians to put
Nuclear Missiles in Cuba ?
I will say it again:
Robert McNamara - the very embodiment of Rationality -
met with Castro two decades after the Cuban Missile Crisis as documented
in the "Fog of War" and Castro told McNamara to his face that
had the Soviets allowed him to - he would have launched Nuclear Missiles
at the U.S.
McNamara could not believe what he had just heard.
It made no Rational Sense -
Why attack America knowing you would be killed and Cuba destroyed.
Castro made it clear that to go down in History as a small Socialist
Nation that stood up to the most powerful Capitalistic Nation was
worth the Price.
Is not Kim more delusional than Castro ?
Is he not more of an absolute Dictator than Castro ?
Stop assuming there is some sort of Common Rationality between
Kim and the rest of the world.
Start accepting that he may initiate a War
and that he may go Nuclear.
5
War is hell.
Perhaps the occupants of the Oval office might want to investigate Russian role in arming the North Koreans with Ukrainian missiles and war heads, before lashing out at North Korea.
An economic war of sanctions against those who arm North Korea might be in order.
Perhaps the occupants of the Oval office might want to investigate Russian role in arming the North Koreans with Ukrainian missiles and war heads, before lashing out at North Korea.
An economic war of sanctions against those who arm North Korea might be in order.
First thing to do to ensure that the world doesn't spiral down into the unspeakable hell of a thermo-nuclear detonation - DISABLE DONALD'S TWITTER ACCOUNT.
He is unfit to lead, and he is deaf to consequences of his impulsivity.
He is unfit to lead, and he is deaf to consequences of his impulsivity.
3
Let's see now...
Crazed leader with a reputation for impetuosity and narcissism gets nukes under his control. Might destroy world as we know it. Even his friends have trouble communicating with him and he increasingly grates on their good services. His words and actions strike fear in friend and foe alike.
Two nations have leaders who meet this criteria. Only one is dumb enough to tweet and make his own buffoonishness obvious.
How to deal with either one?
Good question, but we might be wise to consider the problem close at hand first, before we turn to deal with bringing wiser leadership to others.
The fear of North Korea despite the US arsenal facing him suggests that more or better nuclear weapons do not bring security. Better to find an alternative path here that goes beyond the sort of cheap and easy threats that come from brandishing essentially useless weapons unless one wants to engage in a mutual suicide pact.
Crazed leader with a reputation for impetuosity and narcissism gets nukes under his control. Might destroy world as we know it. Even his friends have trouble communicating with him and he increasingly grates on their good services. His words and actions strike fear in friend and foe alike.
Two nations have leaders who meet this criteria. Only one is dumb enough to tweet and make his own buffoonishness obvious.
How to deal with either one?
Good question, but we might be wise to consider the problem close at hand first, before we turn to deal with bringing wiser leadership to others.
The fear of North Korea despite the US arsenal facing him suggests that more or better nuclear weapons do not bring security. Better to find an alternative path here that goes beyond the sort of cheap and easy threats that come from brandishing essentially useless weapons unless one wants to engage in a mutual suicide pact.
1
"Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
"Just then flew down a monstrous crow, [Putin?]
As black as a tar-barrel;
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot their quarrel."
Or so we hope.
Agreed to have a battle;
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
"Just then flew down a monstrous crow, [Putin?]
As black as a tar-barrel;
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot their quarrel."
Or so we hope.
For a minute there I trusted that Nikki Haley would remain independent, sturdy, and clear headed in her United Nations job. When she uttered the words, ""begging for war", I expected her to finish with, "begging for war is not the position I would take as stated by Thrump". This PINO is bad for everyone. All who passes by him becomes infected with his deplorable personality.
1
China could stop this nonsense if it wanted to. They don't need Americans at their door...which wouldn't be so bad anyway. We buy everything they make.
They could make him disappear and put another less-crazy despot in his place.
They could make him disappear and put another less-crazy despot in his place.
So apparently the jackals of the so-called Trump "administration" are eager to bring a final solution to the North Korea problem.
Trump of course knows about sacrifice in war personally. He evaded sacrifice not once but five times in the Viet Nam war ... a draft dodger par excellence while over 50,000 of his fellow americans let it all go as he carried on his hedonistic life style with absolutely no regrets or second thoughts.
3
This was not a war for the elite among us. Anyone who could avoid it tried as it was the first political war we had been engaged in. If this is the benchmark for patriotism, them it should be a part of the resume for office.
Trump's crazy 'full fire and fury' bravado has been called by the bigger crazy in N Korea.
It's scary when the inmates have control of the mad-house. There's no one in N Korea to rein in their crazy - hopefully, the sane heads will take over here.
It's scary when the inmates have control of the mad-house. There's no one in N Korea to rein in their crazy - hopefully, the sane heads will take over here.
2
How should we deal with all the fake nuke-dominance bluster while taking seriously the North Korean leader threatening other countries with his half-baked-nukes, testing his weapons ‘to’ threaten other countries, and shooting them over other people’s heads where an in-flight explosion could happen by mistake?
Maybe one way could be by China, Russia and The United States stopping their own drive of regional nuke dominance in the region to discourage the North Korean Government from establishing their country’s own nuke dominance?
Maybe one way could be by China, Russia and The United States stopping their own drive of regional nuke dominance in the region to discourage the North Korean Government from establishing their country’s own nuke dominance?
The Russians will certainly never agree to cutting off oil, they will happily accept a nuclear North Korea with ICBMs. Anything that weakens American hegemony is great in their eyes.
China will not acquiesce to the steps necessary to stop North Korea, and even if they didn't the chances are tiny that Kim Jeong Eun would ever give up his nuclear program. He is close to having a fleet of ICBMs capable of hitting the US with nuclear weapons. That is his safe zone. Anything else is playing with fire: he has in a sense made this a life or death bet on that nuclear umbrella.
The above is speculation, but speculation based on the overwhelming evidence on the past 20 years.
Either we take every measure to deal with a fully armed nuclear North Korea, or we go to war very soon. Those are the two choices, like it or not.
China will not acquiesce to the steps necessary to stop North Korea, and even if they didn't the chances are tiny that Kim Jeong Eun would ever give up his nuclear program. He is close to having a fleet of ICBMs capable of hitting the US with nuclear weapons. That is his safe zone. Anything else is playing with fire: he has in a sense made this a life or death bet on that nuclear umbrella.
The above is speculation, but speculation based on the overwhelming evidence on the past 20 years.
Either we take every measure to deal with a fully armed nuclear North Korea, or we go to war very soon. Those are the two choices, like it or not.
I am just trying to be glad that we don’t have Putin for president and the Russian Intel who wanted to put Trump in charge of the worldwide U.S. Nuclear Program in order for Putin and Russia to prove their selves the smarter!
We need to have faith in our government system of Democracy, where we know that more than one person is in charge of ‘our’ government.
We need to have faith in our government system of Democracy, where we know that more than one person is in charge of ‘our’ government.
How bad would a prosperous Korea run by the South be for China. I suspect trade with the South will or already has surpassed that of the North. Korea isn't exactly an ideal launching place for a land war in china. a peninsula and very mountainous.
This is fear mongering at its worst. North Korea is absolutely no threat to the US. The real threats are the maniac John Bolton Neo-Cons in the military industrial complex and Pentagonistas who are itching to get our missile defense system (THAAD) on China's border - and North Korea is the perfect excuse. Tactical nukes in South Korea, convince Japan it's in their best interests to "get over it" (Hiroshima & Nagasaki) and put nukes there - all aimed at China. We're doing the same thing with Nato and using Putin's "aggressive" behavior as the excuse to install the same tactical nukes on Russia's bordering states - all aimed at Moscow.
It's the new cold war all over again. And any excuse will do - especially if it means more billions spent on weaponry, troops, nukes, and building up our bases overseas.
Trump is the perfect foil for the Neo-con agenda - bluster, cupidity, naivete, no capacity for rational nor logical thought - and he's fallen into the trap that the militarists in our government have wanted to spring. Trump has inherited and now oversees the longest and most expensive military buffoonery in our history - despite promises to keep us out of illogical and dubiously expensive conflicts. But oil and gas pipelines and natural resources trump the best intentions. There's no war too long nor too costly for the Military Industrial
Complex. Trump needs exercise his presidential powers and fire all those responsible in Washington for our debacle of a global foreign policy.
It's the new cold war all over again. And any excuse will do - especially if it means more billions spent on weaponry, troops, nukes, and building up our bases overseas.
Trump is the perfect foil for the Neo-con agenda - bluster, cupidity, naivete, no capacity for rational nor logical thought - and he's fallen into the trap that the militarists in our government have wanted to spring. Trump has inherited and now oversees the longest and most expensive military buffoonery in our history - despite promises to keep us out of illogical and dubiously expensive conflicts. But oil and gas pipelines and natural resources trump the best intentions. There's no war too long nor too costly for the Military Industrial
Complex. Trump needs exercise his presidential powers and fire all those responsible in Washington for our debacle of a global foreign policy.
1
If South Korea wants to remain independent, then perhaps they will need to put some tactical nukes on their soil again. Otherwise, they are going to be intimidated and, and blackmailed by the threat of nuclear attack by the North. Because it looks like reunification, with the whole peninsula dominated by the North, is Kim's real goal, and Kim has been lobbing ICBM's in our direction, and threatening our cities as his way of telling us to stand aside as he attempts to conquer the South.
So, IMO, Ms. Haley is right: Kim is "begging for war." But, IMO, the war he wants is with South Korea, and if he could accomplish his goal by threats and intimidation alone, he would do that, too. And the only question now is how far the United States is willing to go in defense of South Korea?
Ms. Haley and President Trump have both shown their support for South Korea. So, those here can either continue with your childish insults toward the administration, or you can support President Trump and Ms. Haley as they work through this confrontation - and I don't care whether you voted for him, or not - this is a dangerous situation and our country, and the peace of the world, are also under threat by Kim Jong Un, and by him alone.
So, IMO, Ms. Haley is right: Kim is "begging for war." But, IMO, the war he wants is with South Korea, and if he could accomplish his goal by threats and intimidation alone, he would do that, too. And the only question now is how far the United States is willing to go in defense of South Korea?
Ms. Haley and President Trump have both shown their support for South Korea. So, those here can either continue with your childish insults toward the administration, or you can support President Trump and Ms. Haley as they work through this confrontation - and I don't care whether you voted for him, or not - this is a dangerous situation and our country, and the peace of the world, are also under threat by Kim Jong Un, and by him alone.
As this mad drumbeat for war between nuclear states grows alarmingly louder, it is instructive to remember that the UN General Assembly recently passed the first legally binding treaty to ban all nuclear weapons. It is also revealing to note that the only nuclear-weaponized state to vote in favor of negotiations leading to this total ban on nukes was North Korea. That notable break with other nuclear powers took place just before the "law and order candidate", as Trump repeatedly self-identified, won the 2016 election. Passage of the historic nuke ban by the UN in July 2017, puts the Trump regime, as well as all other nuclear states, in de facto violation of international law right now. Making matters worse, is the fact that the Korean War never officially ended. Those war criminals insanely pushing to end it with a mushroom cloud need to be subjected to a pre-emptive strike and immediately confined by law enforcement until they regain their senses.
Trump is correct. Previous US administrations have done nothing to solve this problem and it grew into its current monster.
No we have to take radical steps; no small ones remain. And that means it is unlikely that the "oil embargo" will not work. Highly unlikely.
So N. Korea will get its missiles and bombs perfected and it will be a nuclear power.
Guaranteed.
And then there were 9.
No we have to take radical steps; no small ones remain. And that means it is unlikely that the "oil embargo" will not work. Highly unlikely.
So N. Korea will get its missiles and bombs perfected and it will be a nuclear power.
Guaranteed.
And then there were 9.
North Korea--in fact the whole world--knows the Trump Administration speaks with many voices, is incompetent, and is understaffed and inexperienced, especially in foreign affairs. North Korea sees this as an excellent time to shoot off bombs and generally rattle sabers to get the attention and accommodations that they want. Historically, this is how many wars begin. I will not be surprised if the factors above don't bring us armed conflict and very soon.
2
I'm not sure what the two lunatic leaders are going to decide to do, but I do know I'm fearful that my grandchildren are going to need to start the same nuclear attack drills that happened when I was a child. The sad part is we know now they are only lip service, and will do little good. Wealthy folk are already buying shelters.
It's getting hard to pay attention to daily life, and the urge to take vacations and time off increases with every day. I wonder if other's productivity is suffering as mine is: This "administration" brings constant worry and angst. I thought our government should be making us feel better and more secure, not continually upset and insecure. I guess I was wrong.
It's getting hard to pay attention to daily life, and the urge to take vacations and time off increases with every day. I wonder if other's productivity is suffering as mine is: This "administration" brings constant worry and angst. I thought our government should be making us feel better and more secure, not continually upset and insecure. I guess I was wrong.
1
Do you get the feeling our sad sack of a president is creating diversions to take attention away from all his other failings? Seems to be standard operating procedure for Trump. Whenever the heat gets too high, create a crisis and maybe everyone will forget
This “diversion”, however, may lead to another crisis graver and more deadly than any that has gone before it. Our president does not know how to be subtle or diplomatic. He is in over his head and he has met his twin in Kim Jong-un. It’s like two bullies standing toe to toe in the schoolyard, neither one willing to back down.
This “diversion”, however, may lead to another crisis graver and more deadly than any that has gone before it. Our president does not know how to be subtle or diplomatic. He is in over his head and he has met his twin in Kim Jong-un. It’s like two bullies standing toe to toe in the schoolyard, neither one willing to back down.
Both China’s and Russia’s Governments have acted or ‘notably not acted’ on their fake-inferred-fear that the U.S. could nuke them someday. Flaunting nasty disrespect by not giving The United States any international credit for seeking nuclear disarmament for decades to justify their countries fake-power-stand to sustain the dominant nuclear power in the region; all unnecessarily. Both countries governments have been playing ‘their selves’ the stupid-man-card, pretending to not know better. (I mean, ‘where’ do you think that the North Korean leader might get his idea that he can ‘publicly pretend to not know’ that ‘the U.S.’ would nuke him back?)
Think about it; does China’s sensationalizing their comparisons with their nuclear power and The United States nuclear power ‘give’ North Korea the wrong message to infer that the U.S. ‘could’ nuke them someday because North Korea thinks China takes the threat ‘half-seriously’ for ‘a show’ of power? Did Russia’s attacking The Ukraine, with Putin taking political advantage of the The United States not wanting to tempt Russia’s other crazed bluster-leader, Putin, to a war or nuke war to defend The Ukrainian Government, become a poor example of encouragement for the North Korean leader, who also wants to take advantage of the U.S. not wanting a war or nuke war?
I want to know what Hillary Clinton thinks we should do; can the media ask her?
Think about it; does China’s sensationalizing their comparisons with their nuclear power and The United States nuclear power ‘give’ North Korea the wrong message to infer that the U.S. ‘could’ nuke them someday because North Korea thinks China takes the threat ‘half-seriously’ for ‘a show’ of power? Did Russia’s attacking The Ukraine, with Putin taking political advantage of the The United States not wanting to tempt Russia’s other crazed bluster-leader, Putin, to a war or nuke war to defend The Ukrainian Government, become a poor example of encouragement for the North Korean leader, who also wants to take advantage of the U.S. not wanting a war or nuke war?
I want to know what Hillary Clinton thinks we should do; can the media ask her?
Don't worry, Americans. We've got our worst people on it.
1
Use conventional weapons to obliterate N.Korea's military, leadership, and nuclear facilities. If we had done so last week, we wouldn't be discussing N.Korea's nuclear test this week.
At a moment when a clear, unified American response to a critically belligerent situation is desperately needed, we get confusion and mixed signals from this woefully unfit administration: Trump, Mattis, Haley, McMaster (even the Secretary of State, the caponized T-Rex) speak with different tongues. Meanwhile, northeast Asia threatens to burn to a radioactive cinder on the wings of utter madness.
Northeast Asia, that is, if the rest of the world is lucky.
Northeast Asia, that is, if the rest of the world is lucky.
1
cutting off all fuel to NoKo isn't a bad idea but does anyone actually see China cooperating? I doubt it.
Putin warns that the hysteria over NoKo is going to lead to a global catastrophe. Then why isn't he helping stop NoKo? Because he thinks he can team with NoKo and control them. Doubtful.
The best chance I see is hacking NoKo computers to shut down their power and communications as an opener. Why not? NoKo loves to hack others. Give them a taste of their own medicine. Then military strikes are possible with probably no risk to SoKo & Japan. We hacked Iran before we invaded them and it worked. We just have to hack more of their computers.
If we can't do it on our own, how about offering a reward to hackers around the world to hack in and disrupt anything they can if they can document they did it. I bet few of them would mind any extra money. $100k/shot should do it. Hacker kids around the world sitting by their computers in their mom's basements would be all over this.
Putin warns that the hysteria over NoKo is going to lead to a global catastrophe. Then why isn't he helping stop NoKo? Because he thinks he can team with NoKo and control them. Doubtful.
The best chance I see is hacking NoKo computers to shut down their power and communications as an opener. Why not? NoKo loves to hack others. Give them a taste of their own medicine. Then military strikes are possible with probably no risk to SoKo & Japan. We hacked Iran before we invaded them and it worked. We just have to hack more of their computers.
If we can't do it on our own, how about offering a reward to hackers around the world to hack in and disrupt anything they can if they can document they did it. I bet few of them would mind any extra money. $100k/shot should do it. Hacker kids around the world sitting by their computers in their mom's basements would be all over this.
Trump like Nikki H is clueless, fire and fury and bluster. Who thought NK would be this hard!
I'm not going to watch the SOTU speech this year for the first time. It will be too painful to watch Trump standing with his index finger glued to his thumb as though it lent to the content of what he'd say. Maybe he might be convinced to Tweet it in, to where it wouldn't preempt all the networks and we could escape it. I'd rather watch reruns of .... you name it.
North Korea is a small nation who's autocratic government is developing a nuclear capability as an integral part of its defense strategy. much the same as Israel did during the cold war. They have been helped by both Russia and China in this effort just as Israel was helped by the US.
1
China will never agree to an embargo of North Korea on the level being proposed by the United States. China simply will not tolerate an ally of the United States on one of its borders. The United States was warned not to cross the 38th parallel when the Korean War started, General MacArthur ignored the warning, and consequently here we are once again trying to deal with this problem. China will support North Korea at varying levels of sustenance, but it will never agree to North Korea's destruction. One wonders if history could be rewritten, that if the United States had stayed out of the Korean conflict, whether we would be looking at things differently now. Certainly China and South Vietnam have been for more rational actors over the years, than what was anticipated back in the heyday of communism. Perhaps our goal should be to seek reunification of the two Koreas and let time play out with regard to the ultimate results. In other words let's put this back into the hands of the Koreans.
1
Haley saying NK is "begging for war" is the same as Bush telling us about (non-existent) WMDs in Iraq. It's a cover, a pretext, for the US to attack a country that has not attacked us or our allies. For Trump as well as Bush the reasons for starting a war were and are to show the world they are tough.
The last "pre-emptive" war we started, in Iraq, is ongoing and unleashed chaos in the Middle East. We should have learned something. The destruction and death toll from war with North Korea will be far worse than Iraq.
Trump is a loose canon who can't think logically or strategically. If he gives the order to strike, let's hope no one listens (and then he's impeached).
The last "pre-emptive" war we started, in Iraq, is ongoing and unleashed chaos in the Middle East. We should have learned something. The destruction and death toll from war with North Korea will be far worse than Iraq.
Trump is a loose canon who can't think logically or strategically. If he gives the order to strike, let's hope no one listens (and then he's impeached).
The real crux of this whole problem is the US history look at our regime changes in the last 20+ years and you will see why nations are wanting to get nukes. I mean just look at Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen all those nations faced US regime change whether covert or invasions and now they are destroyed. Who wouldn't want to get a deterrent like a nuclear weapon it helps to prevent the US from ever invading you and destroying your nation for profit.
Isn't it time to include nuclear weapons among the ones prohibited by the United Nations "Convention on Certain Weapons" (CCW or CCWC) as causing excessive and indiscriminate injury to civilians in armed conflicts as well as unnecessary suffering to combatants?
Why are our political leaders still behaving and thinking as they did in the 1950s Cold War periods when we had a virtual monopoly on such weapons, but now, at the beginning of a new century filled with potential future nuclear armed adversaries and conflicts, we no longer have that military advantage?
President Trump ought to stop hinting at a first strike nuclear preemptive attack on the DPRK as though the reasons that the world bans similar weapons does not apply to nuclear ones.
World leaders Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping, and leaders of other nuclear amed nations ought to take a long hard look at where the world is headed with its many unresolved bitter conflicts. Military intervention, as now in the Korean Peninsula, to contain regional conflicts, limiting casualties, will no longer contain an armed nuclear war. Remove nuclear weapons from military confrontations through binding international agreement.
Why are our political leaders still behaving and thinking as they did in the 1950s Cold War periods when we had a virtual monopoly on such weapons, but now, at the beginning of a new century filled with potential future nuclear armed adversaries and conflicts, we no longer have that military advantage?
President Trump ought to stop hinting at a first strike nuclear preemptive attack on the DPRK as though the reasons that the world bans similar weapons does not apply to nuclear ones.
World leaders Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping, and leaders of other nuclear amed nations ought to take a long hard look at where the world is headed with its many unresolved bitter conflicts. Military intervention, as now in the Korean Peninsula, to contain regional conflicts, limiting casualties, will no longer contain an armed nuclear war. Remove nuclear weapons from military confrontations through binding international agreement.
Compare Putin's response:
“Ramping up military hysteria in such conditions is senseless; it’s a dead end," Putin said to reporters in China yesterday, "It could lead to a global, planetary catastrophe and a huge loss of human life. There is no other way to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, save that of peaceful dialogue.”
to the Trump Administration's response.
“Ramping up military hysteria in such conditions is senseless; it’s a dead end," Putin said to reporters in China yesterday, "It could lead to a global, planetary catastrophe and a huge loss of human life. There is no other way to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, save that of peaceful dialogue.”
to the Trump Administration's response.
I continuously hear or read opinions from our decision makers that are empty and abstract which equates to doing nothing about North Korea. The problem with doing nothing is that North Korea is persistently growing stronger and more threatening, and at a frantic pace. Is it not clear to everyone that Kim Il-sung has no interest in negotiating with the US, or anyone else for that matter? He wants to use nuclear weapons to fast-track North Korea to major player status. THERE WILL BE NO END TO IT.
South Korea is understandably reluctant to see any military action against North Korea. Problem is, they'll be much worse off when the North has ten hydrogen bombs pointed at their southern neighbors. And now the North has the power to remove Japan from existence. Would we be willing to live with that dynamic? We'll soon know.
Point being, North Korea will continue to build nukes and threaten more world nations unabated, and as long as no one does anything--and that, so far, is the way the world is handling North Korea--the more dangerous they become, and the more dangerous they become, the less willing anyone will be to confront them. Would it have been wise to allow Hitler to build up an arsenal of nuclear weapons? That's the dynamic we're now facing.
We either confront North Korea militarily now and minimize the inevitable catastrophe, or we continue to wait until North Korea can hold the entire world hostage, making Kim Il-sung the most powerful person on earth.
South Korea is understandably reluctant to see any military action against North Korea. Problem is, they'll be much worse off when the North has ten hydrogen bombs pointed at their southern neighbors. And now the North has the power to remove Japan from existence. Would we be willing to live with that dynamic? We'll soon know.
Point being, North Korea will continue to build nukes and threaten more world nations unabated, and as long as no one does anything--and that, so far, is the way the world is handling North Korea--the more dangerous they become, and the more dangerous they become, the less willing anyone will be to confront them. Would it have been wise to allow Hitler to build up an arsenal of nuclear weapons? That's the dynamic we're now facing.
We either confront North Korea militarily now and minimize the inevitable catastrophe, or we continue to wait until North Korea can hold the entire world hostage, making Kim Il-sung the most powerful person on earth.
Nikki Haley hasn't the experience ,intellect or international acumen to be in this position . Her rhetoric "Begging for War " says it all , we are witnessing our government just winging it !!!
President Trump's failure to appoint an ambassador to South Korea is a dangerous neglect of his constitutional duties as POTUS, and leaves us in precarious security position with North Korea. Moreover, Trump's decision to escalate a trade dispute with South Korea at this time is dangerously shortsighted. At a time when we need all the friends we can get in the region to de-escalate tensions and prevent a shooting war with North Korea, the dangers of Trump's inexperience, ignorance, belligerence, and lack of diplomatic guidance or even personal credibility leave us in a position where both sides may see a catastrophic military conflict as the only option.
In the old days a country might be blockaded. Cut-off their incoming and outgoing supplies and it might move them to think seriously about their behavior. This wouldn't be easy and it would require the cooperation of many nations. Also, we would have to follow through on threats to stop trains, ships, or planes, but they would have been warned and that's better than all out war.
Can the Chinese influence the people of N. Korea with information about the seriousness of the course the country is taking?
Also, I hear over and over that the North is paranoid because of the massive "war games" that the US and South Korea conduct a couple of times a year off the coast (happening right now). These aren't necessary and they are certainly provocative. We could have taken our foot off the gas before, but now it would take a decision that would make us look "weak" and I know that the US will not do that.
Can the Chinese influence the people of N. Korea with information about the seriousness of the course the country is taking?
Also, I hear over and over that the North is paranoid because of the massive "war games" that the US and South Korea conduct a couple of times a year off the coast (happening right now). These aren't necessary and they are certainly provocative. We could have taken our foot off the gas before, but now it would take a decision that would make us look "weak" and I know that the US will not do that.
Let the Korean military take care of Kim. Your bellicose comments are waste of energy and your valuable time.
This is precisely the kind of headline that denotes the arrogance and self-abrogated importance of an imperial entity towards the rest of the world. Besides, those of us who are curious enough to familiarize ourselves with the history of the Korean Peninsula vis a vis the U.S., are well aware of what's at stake here. NY Times, give us a break when it comes to reporting objectively and not feeding us the usual doses of Washington's tiresome propaganda. Enough already, that we're not non-thinking robots as you would have us be.
MS. Haley may not be the right person for the job she has as she and our president React before thinking anything through, specifically toward NK.
Why react prior to thinking this issue through? Is it trump's fear, whereby he knows that he is not mentally or professionally prepared to handle a war the reason for this or is it that he cannot control other countries and therefore he reacts with anger and threats against them.
Or could NK Simply be playing with trump?
Why react prior to thinking this issue through? Is it trump's fear, whereby he knows that he is not mentally or professionally prepared to handle a war the reason for this or is it that he cannot control other countries and therefore he reacts with anger and threats against them.
Or could NK Simply be playing with trump?
When it is obvious that The United States is more into empowering the people of other countries to have the type of government they want, these days; why would the North Korean leader be as threatened of our wanting regime change as Putin was threatened that Hillary could take him from power?
Well, maybe Putin thought Hillary was competing with his level of secrecy because he has a lone private ‘classified’ server of his own unbeknownst to the rest of his government, or something; but I think Jung-Un got his nuke education and nuke political playbook against the U.S. straight from China’s and Russia’s governments.
Well, maybe Putin thought Hillary was competing with his level of secrecy because he has a lone private ‘classified’ server of his own unbeknownst to the rest of his government, or something; but I think Jung-Un got his nuke education and nuke political playbook against the U.S. straight from China’s and Russia’s governments.
What is trump thinking? North Korea is a nuclear state. How in the world can Trump advocate nuclear war? He should be in Peking making deals with the Chinese to put the lid on North Korea. War is the last thing that we need to consider.
Maybe if the USA and South Korea had not been playing and practicing constant war games and military drills acting threatening and provocative North korea wouldn't be acting provocatice and threatening. Why is it ALWAYS everyone elses fault but god forbid we look at our own behavior.
It seems indeed that N.Korea is playing a game of self destruction which only makes sense if China is in full control of it. China it seems is maneuvering to become superior over the US. For a tiny country, N.Korea, building these weapons and soon being able to destroy South Korea and Japan and, soon, portions of the US while China is keeping totally quiet is highly suspicious.
"The Trump Administration, warning that North Korea is “begging for war,”
while the Apprentice runs alongside shouting threats at NoKorea ( to calm their zeal?)
We could not have a more foolish leadership group at the apex than we do now. The Apprentice frightens me.
while the Apprentice runs alongside shouting threats at NoKorea ( to calm their zeal?)
We could not have a more foolish leadership group at the apex than we do now. The Apprentice frightens me.
I'm not sure which country is "begging for war" more, NK or the US... and to be truthful, really, it is not the residents of those countries that are "begging for war." It is, simply, the two nutcase that lead both of those countries.
Do you know that feeling of being in a car, riding with an irresponsible person that is going faster and faster while you are begging them to slow down? Well, Trump and Kim are the drivers right now. I hope the road ahead is straight.
Do you know that feeling of being in a car, riding with an irresponsible person that is going faster and faster while you are begging them to slow down? Well, Trump and Kim are the drivers right now. I hope the road ahead is straight.
Kim jung-un had better be careful. He has no idea how ignorant and childish the grifter in the White House is.
2
As Francois-Marie Voltair (1694-1778) may have put it: "In life, we are not only hold responsible for our deeds, but equally for our omissions."
Thus, if the leaders in the US government and military do not find a way to prevent the rogue NK regime from getting nuclear tipped ICBMs, then we might all finish as nuclear hostages.
To ask and hope for further talks (with no credible military option in your hand) equals just a blunt surrender.
Thus, if the leaders in the US government and military do not find a way to prevent the rogue NK regime from getting nuclear tipped ICBMs, then we might all finish as nuclear hostages.
To ask and hope for further talks (with no credible military option in your hand) equals just a blunt surrender.
Are the USA and Russia playing good cop/bad cop with NK?
As we stand on the precipice of full out war, and possibly nuclear war, with a nation led by a megalomaniac, it is an obvious and shameful result of the short sightedness of millions of our fellow citizens. Trump is the epidemy of being thin skinned and his over compensations of blatant cowardness have led us to this completely avoidable predicament.
I hold no grandeur of an ideal that the United States was was some beacon of truth and honor before the current administration, but we at least had the mental and political fortitude to know when to back down. Trump is void of the mental wherewithal to even comprehend his deficiencies and the inevitable fallout of his actions.
If we end up tipping over the edge into disaster, history will lay the blame squarely on him and not the caged animal he keeps poking. A share of the blame falls with all americans, though. We as a nation could have avoided this regretful calamity. Some are more culpable than others. Yet none of us are devoid of some responsibility.
Even if the worst comes to pass, it would be beyond wishful thinking that we all could be introspective enough to recognize our collective short comings and strive to never allow this to happen again. That is a real loss.
(or in the words of our completely deficient president.....SAD)
I hold no grandeur of an ideal that the United States was was some beacon of truth and honor before the current administration, but we at least had the mental and political fortitude to know when to back down. Trump is void of the mental wherewithal to even comprehend his deficiencies and the inevitable fallout of his actions.
If we end up tipping over the edge into disaster, history will lay the blame squarely on him and not the caged animal he keeps poking. A share of the blame falls with all americans, though. We as a nation could have avoided this regretful calamity. Some are more culpable than others. Yet none of us are devoid of some responsibility.
Even if the worst comes to pass, it would be beyond wishful thinking that we all could be introspective enough to recognize our collective short comings and strive to never allow this to happen again. That is a real loss.
(or in the words of our completely deficient president.....SAD)
We do need to finalize a peace treaty with North Korea. We do need for Donald Trump to "shut up". He reminds me of the very person he is threatening when he makes "fire and fury" comments that are in the same fashion as the little guy in NK. He also reminds me of the past and present leader or truthfully, dictator, in Venezuela. A lot of bluster and nothing to back it up with. When a loud-mouth continues to make threats but doesn't back them up, he or she becomes irrelevant and when one is the leader of the most powerful country in the world, that is a very dangerous trait to possess.
Many who criticized Obama now have Trump doing the same thing but worded differently. Obama used his ability to speak to get his point across, Trump just bellows out Tweets to anyone who crosses him. Sooner or later, some leader will actually respond in a way Trump won't be able to handle. I just hope the next POTUS is a person of reason, diplomacy, common sense, and understands that he or she is the leader of the United States of America and will do whatever it takes to bring us back together and regain our standing in the world again. If Trump goes back in in 2020, our future of failure will be set in concrete. No turning back.
Many who criticized Obama now have Trump doing the same thing but worded differently. Obama used his ability to speak to get his point across, Trump just bellows out Tweets to anyone who crosses him. Sooner or later, some leader will actually respond in a way Trump won't be able to handle. I just hope the next POTUS is a person of reason, diplomacy, common sense, and understands that he or she is the leader of the United States of America and will do whatever it takes to bring us back together and regain our standing in the world again. If Trump goes back in in 2020, our future of failure will be set in concrete. No turning back.
Why would we say that North Korea is "begging for war". The literal conclusion of their initiation of a conventional or nuclear war would be their total annihilation. Aren't we smarter than that? I know, I just answered my own question.
Yeah Trump,corner him for a nice nuclear war!
Where is
China in all of this? 90% of North Korea's imports of food and fuel come from China. A snap of their fingers could cut off those imports, and force Kim Jung-un to capitulate. But China chooses not to act, proving that they are no friend to the U.S. or the rest of the world.
China in all of this? 90% of North Korea's imports of food and fuel come from China. A snap of their fingers could cut off those imports, and force Kim Jung-un to capitulate. But China chooses not to act, proving that they are no friend to the U.S. or the rest of the world.
The original, dreadful mistake here was made by Hillary Clinton, when as Secretary of State she directed the destruction of the Muammar Khaddafy'r regime in Libya even after he had agreed to end his adversary relationship with the United States. President Obama, I believe, considered his agreement to overthrow the Khaddafy regime to be his worst mistake as president. Because of this history, Kim Jong-Un believes he will suffer the same fate unless he develops a nuclear deterrent. The destruction of the Khaddafy regime has also allowed ISIS to move in and given it a huge base in North Africa.
1
Create a new inland sea where the NK capital used to be.
Shoot down the next NK missile test.
Shoot down the next NK missile test.
1
Kim isn't begging for war. He recognizes weakness and is poking Trump in the chest.
Who is the MOST crazy??? My vote is with Trump. Seriously. The absolute, prime Trump Directive: Trump can, and will, make any situation WORSE. That's his Superpower. That's what he DOES.
1
Two blowhards who tell tall tales.
I'll begin to worry when we start witnessing the estimated 230,000 Americans in South Korea existing the peninsula. Particularly those military families who choice to leave on their own dime.
I'll begin to worry when we start witnessing the estimated 230,000 Americans in South Korea existing the peninsula. Particularly those military families who choice to leave on their own dime.
North Korea is no threat to the US. The real threat are the maniac John Bolton Neo-Cons in the military industrial complex and Pentagonistas who are itching to get our missile defense system on China's border - and North Korea is the perfect excuse. Tactical nukes in South Korea, convince Japan it's in their best interests to "get over it" (Hiroshima & Nagasaki) and put nukes there - all aimed at China. We're doing the same thing with Nato and using Putin's "aggressive" behavior as the excuse to install the same tactical nukes on Russia's bordering states - all aimed at Moscow.
It's the new cold war all over again. And any excuse will do - especially if it means more billions spent on weaponry, troops, nukes, and building up our bases overseas.
Trump is the perfect foil for the Neo-con agenda - bluster, cupidity, naivete, no capacity for rational thought - and he's fallen into the trap that the militarists in our government have wanted to spring. Hillary would have been no exception - and Obama…what can I say. He oversaw the longest and most expensive military buffoonery in Afghanistan and in Iraq when he promised to get us outta there. But oil and gas pipelines and natural resources trump the best Nobel Peace Prize intentions.
Trump needs to fire all those responsible in Washington for our debacle of a foreign policy in the Middle East - and now Eastern Europe and South East Asia. Get the fools out of the government who brains are about the size of their genitalia.
It's the new cold war all over again. And any excuse will do - especially if it means more billions spent on weaponry, troops, nukes, and building up our bases overseas.
Trump is the perfect foil for the Neo-con agenda - bluster, cupidity, naivete, no capacity for rational thought - and he's fallen into the trap that the militarists in our government have wanted to spring. Hillary would have been no exception - and Obama…what can I say. He oversaw the longest and most expensive military buffoonery in Afghanistan and in Iraq when he promised to get us outta there. But oil and gas pipelines and natural resources trump the best Nobel Peace Prize intentions.
Trump needs to fire all those responsible in Washington for our debacle of a foreign policy in the Middle East - and now Eastern Europe and South East Asia. Get the fools out of the government who brains are about the size of their genitalia.
Haley is wrong. The USA is the most war-mongering nation in the world. Let South Korea try diplomacy. Maybe they can get through to the NK regime. I believe Kim maybe crazy but I don't think he's stupid. He knows war will cause the annihilation of NK.
The real world is complicated and dangerous. Having an incompetent, narcissistic fool who's in way over his head leading our country is not a good situation.
The genie is out of the bottle, folks. There is nothing to be done. Nothing done by the Trump administration caused or can defuse NK.
The nuclear program in NK is not new, not surprising, and has not gone unobserved. No action was taken from the 1950s to today...other than "exploring diplomatic options" which consisted entirely of finger wagging in 15 different languages.
The current NK nuclear program is built on direct assistance from China, Pakistan, Russia and some unnamed European countries. The pathways for supplies from USA and Canada are well established and known to go mostly through China.
If NK has successfully built their program against the law....how can diplomacy have any effect?
If NK has successfully built their program with help from US trading partners...how can diplomacy have any effect?
The time for diplomacy was during the last 5 decades as NK found its tech and supplies through obvious illegal channels. Now that lunatic is sitting in his hermit kingdom just itching to launch something with real effects.
President Trump did not sign any of the deals that allowed for NK to get its tech and its supplies. President Trump was not charged with thwarting NK's acquisition of tech and supplies. President Trump was not charged with convincing world leaders to curtail NK's acquisition of tech and supplies. All the world leaders active in the last 50 years are collectively responsible for today's situation with regard to NK's threat level.
The nuclear program in NK is not new, not surprising, and has not gone unobserved. No action was taken from the 1950s to today...other than "exploring diplomatic options" which consisted entirely of finger wagging in 15 different languages.
The current NK nuclear program is built on direct assistance from China, Pakistan, Russia and some unnamed European countries. The pathways for supplies from USA and Canada are well established and known to go mostly through China.
If NK has successfully built their program against the law....how can diplomacy have any effect?
If NK has successfully built their program with help from US trading partners...how can diplomacy have any effect?
The time for diplomacy was during the last 5 decades as NK found its tech and supplies through obvious illegal channels. Now that lunatic is sitting in his hermit kingdom just itching to launch something with real effects.
President Trump did not sign any of the deals that allowed for NK to get its tech and its supplies. President Trump was not charged with thwarting NK's acquisition of tech and supplies. President Trump was not charged with convincing world leaders to curtail NK's acquisition of tech and supplies. All the world leaders active in the last 50 years are collectively responsible for today's situation with regard to NK's threat level.
"...begging for war."
Really? They don't have to wait for us to start a conflict. If they are worried about world opinion they have a funny way of showing that so I doubt that is why they refrain. The N. Korean people are fed a steady diet of propaganda so their opinion isn't important. Kim is a dictator so he doesn't need internal permission. What is left? Oh! Right! I get it. We have an administration that engages in hyperbole and lies, not diplomacy and detente.
Oh well. I knew the possibility of dying in a nuclear holocaust was a real possibility when Trump illegitimately assumed office. We all have to die some time, right?
Really? They don't have to wait for us to start a conflict. If they are worried about world opinion they have a funny way of showing that so I doubt that is why they refrain. The N. Korean people are fed a steady diet of propaganda so their opinion isn't important. Kim is a dictator so he doesn't need internal permission. What is left? Oh! Right! I get it. We have an administration that engages in hyperbole and lies, not diplomacy and detente.
Oh well. I knew the possibility of dying in a nuclear holocaust was a real possibility when Trump illegitimately assumed office. We all have to die some time, right?
1
No Ms. Haley, North Korea isn't begging for war; It's our big mouthed bully in the White House that's looking for an excuse to show Kim and the rest of the world what his stubby little index finger can do to create shock and awe.
We have to accept the fact that North Korea has joined the rarified nuclear club and I believe Kim knows the danger in nuking the united States and any of our allies. He knows if he starts WW III, it's the end of his country for all time; nothing will be left of his country to pass along to future generations of Kims.
We must go back to jaw jaw instead of war war.
We have to accept the fact that North Korea has joined the rarified nuclear club and I believe Kim knows the danger in nuking the united States and any of our allies. He knows if he starts WW III, it's the end of his country for all time; nothing will be left of his country to pass along to future generations of Kims.
We must go back to jaw jaw instead of war war.
1
This is just what Trump needs to distract attention from the investigative net tightening around his throat. Never mind that North Korea has been under an existential threat from the U.S. for over 65 years. Never mind that Bush and Trump have both threatened them with nuclear annihilation, which only a nuclear arsenal can hope to prevent. It is obvious that Jong-un is sending the Trump administration a clear message: attack us and you will pay dearly.
We can only hope that level heads like "mad dog" Mattis can bring sanity back to Washington. I'm not betting on it.
We can only hope that level heads like "mad dog" Mattis can bring sanity back to Washington. I'm not betting on it.
Kim is making the entire Korean peninsula a powder keg with his behavior. Trump is acting like a school yard bully, making all kinds fo threats, to which Kim will answer threat with his own threat. This is not diplomacy. This is madness and will likely wind up with something approaching what happened in August of 1914, namely, a war no one really wanted but with weapons which result in massive—perhaps thermonuclear destruction, not just armies tangling with each other.
The mix of actors in this matter is poisonous. China seems to be the only way out of this mess and they are being ridiculously obstinate and short sighted in being fearful of an American ally adjacent to her. China shares a border with India (more or less) peacefully!
We should cut a "deal" with China and South Korea: Help to overthrow Kim Jong-un, allow Korea to reunite, stay non-nuclear, and *all* American troops leave the Korean peninsula in return.
The mix of actors in this matter is poisonous. China seems to be the only way out of this mess and they are being ridiculously obstinate and short sighted in being fearful of an American ally adjacent to her. China shares a border with India (more or less) peacefully!
We should cut a "deal" with China and South Korea: Help to overthrow Kim Jong-un, allow Korea to reunite, stay non-nuclear, and *all* American troops leave the Korean peninsula in return.
The call for a complete fuel cut off will not happen because China will never accede to what in effect will become a casus belli for the DPRK. Were it possible for the U.S. to have done so unilaterally, the DPRK, like Japan in 1941 at Pearl Harbor, would already have made a pre-emptive strike on U.S. bases in Guam and Japan. So who is "begging" for war? The U.S. loves war: our history belies Haley's claim to the contrary. As the saying goes: Be careful what you wish for.
Let's stop beating around the bush shall we ... it's trump who is “begging for war”. This is the perfect storm for him enabling him to raise a false flag operation aimed at distancing himself from his Russian overlords in the face of increasing public and congressional scrutiny in regards to malfeasance and the 2016 elections. That it's absoluting lethal stuff he's recklessly playing with doesn't concern him one bit. Everything trump does is a stunt with a very calculated eventual outcome. His actions are not 'normal' or benevolent in any way. He's an evil, manipulative man.
1
At some point something will have to be done about Kim Jung Un and his continued provocations. This guy is just not going to stop and wants any negotiations to begin with the world's acceptance of his country being a nuclear power. His position is to keep his arsenal and to have sanctions simply removed with nothing in return.
It may be best to address this sooner rather than later. North Korea's position has little to do with the idiot in the White House, although his rhetoric is not helpful. This would be taking place no matter who was president as Barack Obama pointed out.
Dangerous times for the world.
It may be best to address this sooner rather than later. North Korea's position has little to do with the idiot in the White House, although his rhetoric is not helpful. This would be taking place no matter who was president as Barack Obama pointed out.
Dangerous times for the world.
Ms. Haley, the time was yesterday, and before Mr. Trump make a fool of our nation. Kim Jong-un is in coltrol of "The Trump" and is making a chump out of him. Kim Jong-un doesn't care what you think. Sanctions mean nothing to him. He has nothing to lose.
1
Big, smoking crater. Theirs or ours?
3
We have a president who takes the old t-shirt meme, "Kill 'em all, let God sort it out" as policy. What are we doing?
This is a rich guy solution. Let a lot of poor people die of freezing to punish another rich guy. Do we really think that cutting a basic resource to the people of NK is going to translate into anything meaningful other than some inconvenience to the leadership? They are already starving. Now we want to freeze them?
We have gathered up all of the greatest minds in foreign policy. We have all the data and technology. We have spent billions on the problem of North Korea. The end result? ... nothing! What a bunch of losers!
We have gathered up all of the greatest minds in foreign policy. We have all the data and technology. We have spent billions on the problem of North Korea. The end result? ... nothing! What a bunch of losers!
President )o( needs to be gagged with duct (duck?) tape.
President Trump and Kim Jong-un both don't have a clue where they are headed. If they believe they can box the other into some form of capitulation we are in for a world of hurt.
Clearly no one can foresee a good outcome to this peeing contest but the present path will fail catastrophically.
I would suggest a gathering of senior statesman from around the world to convene quickly and make clear to both leaders that there are other options, time is running out.
Clearly no one can foresee a good outcome to this peeing contest but the present path will fail catastrophically.
I would suggest a gathering of senior statesman from around the world to convene quickly and make clear to both leaders that there are other options, time is running out.
Perhaps the leaders of the world have never seriously considered that Kim is another deranged Nero who longs for self-immolation in a great pyre that would take Rome and the entire world with him into Hell. The worst one could do with such a mad mind is to brag about having bigger and better torches. They should have sought other ways to deal with him.
It is deeply alarming to hear Haley blustering about DPRK's "begging for war." No, Madam Ambassador - he is not. Unfortunately, your boss and Kim Jong Un continue to trade increasingly hostile, bellicose barbs at each other, because both share a need to perpetually prove their "manhood," creating a dangerously fraught situation. In reality, Kim Jong Un has achieved what he could previously only have dreamed about: he is receiving wall-to-wall, nonstop international news coverage, and has successfully contrived to bait people like you into sputtering nonsense about his isolated nation. No doubt His Fraudulence is deeply envious of Kim's escalating Reality TV ratings, which endangers us all, as you and he up the ante. What he wants is to be viewed as an international superpower - and unfortunately, he is well on the way to attaining exactly that. Stand down, Ms. Haley - war is not the answer here. 9/5, 9:49 AM
33
The more this horror unfolds the clearer it is that the International Mafia are the ones who want war. Putin, Trump, Duerte, Erdogan, are all supposed "strong" men who are in place, or being put in place, by the 500 or so individuals who own half the wealth in the world. North Korea is just a pawn they are using to try to cause worldwide chaos and WAR. They would create incomprehensible profit for themselves if they are successful.
They think they are playing some video game. They are not. They are playing with the lives of 90% of the people on the planet. That is the story of HIStory. Hate-anger-fear-violence-WAR-Lies,Lies,Lies-suppression by religion to control.
WE THE PEOPLE are the only ones who can/will stop them. NOW is the time. WE must not let them further destroy civil society and the planet with their insatiable greed.
They think they are playing some video game. They are not. They are playing with the lives of 90% of the people on the planet. That is the story of HIStory. Hate-anger-fear-violence-WAR-Lies,Lies,Lies-suppression by religion to control.
WE THE PEOPLE are the only ones who can/will stop them. NOW is the time. WE must not let them further destroy civil society and the planet with their insatiable greed.
2
May be time for a culling of the herd, so to speak. Let the warmongers blow each other up in to the atmosphere, and those that survive can start over and have peace for a 1000 years.
i think kim will blow something up next time he launches... it may only be a deserted island or a reef but he i think he needs to blow something up. he is threatened, cornered and the rhetoric coming from our side is just getting hotter. i am sure he feels that he has nothing to lose.
1
An idiot with a bad haircut running a country into the ground, and then we also have Trump, our own idiot. What could go wrong?
5
This is so scary to have Trump and his gang whp are all about big, like a big bomb that kills millions. KJU knows that Trump is a huge baby and he is taunting him.
That picture looks like who is on first, what's on second and Nikki Haley looks way over her head in this job.
We are screwed basically. Thank you GOP for not standing up to Trump soon enough. All those people who just stood silently by his side because they didn't want to get there hands dirty. All those seemingly nice people who voted for him but have not said anything about his disgusting actions because they didn't want to get dirty, angry, involved. Well guess what, millions of people are going to be killed most likely because we have this completely incompetent, lazy, grifter, mobster as President.
That picture looks like who is on first, what's on second and Nikki Haley looks way over her head in this job.
We are screwed basically. Thank you GOP for not standing up to Trump soon enough. All those people who just stood silently by his side because they didn't want to get there hands dirty. All those seemingly nice people who voted for him but have not said anything about his disgusting actions because they didn't want to get dirty, angry, involved. Well guess what, millions of people are going to be killed most likely because we have this completely incompetent, lazy, grifter, mobster as President.
5
If North Korea's dictator is truly 'begging for war,' then it seems we'd to all in our power to deny him his wish. Yet the bellicose rhetoric of our own leader and his mouthpieces would seem to indicate that's what we're begging for too. It's a mad mad mad mad world, and we're making it madder rather than doing our utmost to extricate ourselves from this sanity while there's still time. It's been a long time since the U.S. was a true leader of a free and relatively peaceful world, seeking pacific solutions to our most intractable conflict. And we've elected a president who reflects that ultra-hawkish sensibility, tragically -- one who, unbelievably makes Hillary Clinton (herself an extreme hawk) look like a pacifist in contrast.
4
Embargo or blockade. go Navy.
1
North Korea has a land border with both China and Russia.
So a big b e a u tiful wall then...and NK will pay for it too.
Take a look (on google maps) sometime at their border with Russia. There are no roads and one bridge.
Ugh. It is so painful to follow the news.
3
I doubt that North Korea could presently hit the U.S. mainland with a nuclear warhead. However, I do not doubt that this is something they are striving to achieve, and their reckless bellicosity makes it likely that they might actually use one if they could develop one.
Doesn't Kom Jong Un know that we have several nuclear missile submarines, each with over a dozen MIRV'ed missiles, and there is no way to defend his country against them? They are invulnerable to any defense he may try to mount, and carry enough firepower to kill nearly all of the people of North Korea, with whatever survivors remaining in pain and suffering and left wishing for death?
Does he have faith that, whatever the provocation, we will refrain from using the weapons in our arsenal? Does he not realize that we currently have a madman of our own at the nuclear button?
This is very close to getting entirely out of hand.
Doesn't Kom Jong Un know that we have several nuclear missile submarines, each with over a dozen MIRV'ed missiles, and there is no way to defend his country against them? They are invulnerable to any defense he may try to mount, and carry enough firepower to kill nearly all of the people of North Korea, with whatever survivors remaining in pain and suffering and left wishing for death?
Does he have faith that, whatever the provocation, we will refrain from using the weapons in our arsenal? Does he not realize that we currently have a madman of our own at the nuclear button?
This is very close to getting entirely out of hand.
5
After President Trump threatened to nuke them they responded by speeding up both their nuclear and ICBM programs.
"The best defense is a good offense" is often thought of as a sports metaphor. It's actually a strategic principle of war. Maybe he isn't nuts?
"The best defense is a good offense" is often thought of as a sports metaphor. It's actually a strategic principle of war. Maybe he isn't nuts?
Apparently the winds at high altitude at this time of year would blow north from Korea which would take nuclear fallout into China and Russia. Therefore they might have some interest in this course of action. The USA would also be stuck with the rebuilding cost like the Marshall Plan after WW2.
Nobody in America needs another land war in Asia. Neither should we put the lives of our South Korean allies at risk by starting another war. It is time to bring the Korean War of 1950 to an end by a negotiated treaty.
Use of nuclear weapons have immediate destructive and lasting residual effects.
Instead of bombing our way to the future, let's fight Climate Change and become leaders in the transition to renewable energies.
Use of nuclear weapons have immediate destructive and lasting residual effects.
Instead of bombing our way to the future, let's fight Climate Change and become leaders in the transition to renewable energies.
4
We tell 3 year olds to "use words" not to hit. The current administration needs to follow this rule. They are need to use less-inflammatory words. "Begging for war" is entirely unhelpful.
We need a Peace Dept. It would have all kinds of implements for peace, just as the Defense Dept., would has all kinds of implements for war. Too bad we are so very lopsided.
We need a Peace Dept. It would have all kinds of implements for peace, just as the Defense Dept., would has all kinds of implements for war. Too bad we are so very lopsided.
1
Trump is likewise "begging for war," always the perfect distraction for beleaguered Republicans devoid conscience, humility, compassion or ideas.
Our electoral-college appointed president is the mirror image of the North Korean dictator.
Our electoral-college appointed president is the mirror image of the North Korean dictator.
2
Do you suppose the U.S. Government already would know if giving South Korea the Iron Dome that we gave Israel would help to protect South Korea, if it would give our military better and quicker access to be able to defend South Korea?
Nikki Haley is so out of her league here...
4
The United States has refused to negotiate directly with North Korea. Haley just put that on the table. But will the administration listen to the experts on North Korea who are both in the United States and in South Korea ? Or will they talk "tough" for their less sophisticated supporters, and take unnecessary risks of harm, including the risk of stumbling into a war that will cause all sorts of economic catastrophe here and abroad and likely cause the inconceivable to happen somewhere.
3
Yeah never mind the United States of America has been begging for, and getting, war for 72 years.
2
Trump should thank Kim.
Nothing helps a U.S. president like a war.
If Bush hadn't invaded Iraq, he might have lost in 2004.
And Bush's Iraq invasion led to the takeover of much of Syria and Iraq by ISIS, which before the invasion did not exist. That's a gift that just keeps giving, and giving, and giving.
Nothing helps a U.S. president like a war.
If Bush hadn't invaded Iraq, he might have lost in 2004.
And Bush's Iraq invasion led to the takeover of much of Syria and Iraq by ISIS, which before the invasion did not exist. That's a gift that just keeps giving, and giving, and giving.
3
"There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction". - John F. Kennedy
I am a liberal Democrat but do not think that the defense of our territory, even if preemptive is negotiable. I expect action, as I wanted from Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. If that action would have been taken earlier, there would have been far fewer casualties, but now we face the cost of the long term period of comfortable inaction, kicking the can down the road, as it were. We must act now.
I am a liberal Democrat but do not think that the defense of our territory, even if preemptive is negotiable. I expect action, as I wanted from Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. If that action would have been taken earlier, there would have been far fewer casualties, but now we face the cost of the long term period of comfortable inaction, kicking the can down the road, as it were. We must act now.
The dangerous standoff between the United States and North Korea is a direct result of two insecure, coddled, pampered, inexperienced, narcissistic, megalomaniacal leaders engaged in a losing game of one-upmanship. Neither one can be trusted. It is up to China, Russia and even the EU to step in and talk sense into Kim and Trump in an effort to ease a tense and potentially calamitous situation.
1
Kim is "begging for war" and Trump is begging to accommodate him. Two crazy people on the same crazy path.
1
Since we know they're planning a test, why don't we take advantage of it to test our own Star Wars equipment - the one supposedly capable of hitting a bullet in flight with another bullet - that one. Why waste money shooting down our own rockets when we can practice on theirs. Why is it we build so much military junk just to park in the garage?
13
The problem is that ballistic missile defence is an extremely challenging and costly undertaking. Some systems are better than others, and they are still rather limited in their capabilities and roles. If the US tries to hit a missile launched by North Korea and the attempt fails, Pyongyang will see it as a provocation and will certainly retaliate.
2
I respectfully disagree on so many levels. If you believe that the hundreds of billions spent on a Star Wars system was anything but a ploy started by Ronald Reagan to make America feel safe why are we still testing this system. I believe it was Carl Sagen who said dealing with nuclear weapons requires a 100% success rate, diplomacy must prevail or just one blast would no doubt begin the war to end the human race.
Because there is a high probability that the interceptor will not work as designed. The failure rate was quite high in the middle east conflicts, although we are usually told only about the successes.
The "clear divisions" among government officials in South Korea about how to deal with the nuclear threat from the North reveal the anxiety and fear. While Preisdent Moon Jae-in still hopes to "persuade" Pyongyang to give up its own nuclear weapons, Defence Minister Song Young-moo told his American counterpart, James Mattis, "to send long-range bombers, aircraft carriers and other strategic assets to the Korean Peninsula more often or regularly to reassure the South Koreans."
What makes things worse was Trump's erratic behaviour. Given the tensions, it was the wrong timing to jab at Seoul's potential "appeasement" with North Korea, while threatening to "scrap" a free trade deal with the South. It shows how mercurial he is. No wonder Moon seeks a peaceful resolution to the crisis on his own, to avert a possible armageddon. He has the lives of some 20 million people to think about.
What makes things worse was Trump's erratic behaviour. Given the tensions, it was the wrong timing to jab at Seoul's potential "appeasement" with North Korea, while threatening to "scrap" a free trade deal with the South. It shows how mercurial he is. No wonder Moon seeks a peaceful resolution to the crisis on his own, to avert a possible armageddon. He has the lives of some 20 million people to think about.
2
Although Ms. Haley was a capable governor of a small southern state, I am not reassured that she has the diplomatic expertise or experience to be our key "point" person in a matter of this magnitude. Between her inexperience and Trump's mental instability and macho narcissism, we may well blunder into a catastrophic war.
20
The United States has neither a credible president nor policy. The use of nuclear weapons is off the table and has been since August 8th, 1945. It would result in mutual destruction. Of these facts, North Korea is aware.
If the United States had a more consistent and credible policy, It would be able to work with Japan, Australia, South Korea, and maybe China in persuading North Korea to enter negotiations.
If the United States had a more consistent and credible policy, It would be able to work with Japan, Australia, South Korea, and maybe China in persuading North Korea to enter negotiations.
8
In 2003, we were duped by a president into a pointless and catastrophic war over non-existent weapons of mass destruction. My greatest fear is that in 2017 we will be duped by another president into a pointless and catastrophic war with a nation that actually has weapons of mass destruction.
6
20 million South Koreans killed with a first strike now or 50 60 or 100 million Americans killed a year or two from now. It's time we take the pistol away from the child ruler.
6
If I consider those numbers in comparison to the supposed entire number of people on earth, they don't seem all that significant. It's hardly extinction, if that's what you're worried about? Not that there's anything wrong with that, considering the relief it would bring.
WHICH child ruler???? I know whom I consider MORE dangerous.
1
And you mean Trump, right?
Nimrata Haley is doing exactly what Condi Rice did with Iraq.
Unsettling the world for no good reason.
Unsettling the world for no good reason.
8
It has become more than aparent that Kim Jong-un must have some kind of a latent death wish by goading the situation with his non-stop nuclear testing, but it would be foolish of the U.S. to comply by making a pre-emptive first strike.
Now is the time for diplomacy on all levels in an attempt to thwart any further escalation -- and if the countries most closely involved are unable to come to any kind of detente, maybe it's time to reach out to the world.
German SPIEGEL magazine has recently reported even the Swiss have offered to negotiate with North Korea.
If China is unwilling to take a stance, this country should take advantage of every opportunity to avoid any kind of nuclear fallout.
Once we begin down that road, there's no turning back.
Now is the time for diplomacy on all levels in an attempt to thwart any further escalation -- and if the countries most closely involved are unable to come to any kind of detente, maybe it's time to reach out to the world.
German SPIEGEL magazine has recently reported even the Swiss have offered to negotiate with North Korea.
If China is unwilling to take a stance, this country should take advantage of every opportunity to avoid any kind of nuclear fallout.
Once we begin down that road, there's no turning back.
3
Two days ago (09 03 17), Donald Trump tweeted the following:
"South Korea is finding, as I have told them, that their talk of appeasement with North Korea will not work, they only understand one thing!"
It is impossible for Americans to remain sanguine when we have a "president" who equates diplomacy with appeasement and a UN ambassador who uses phrases like 'begging for war'.
NOT my president
"South Korea is finding, as I have told them, that their talk of appeasement with North Korea will not work, they only understand one thing!"
It is impossible for Americans to remain sanguine when we have a "president" who equates diplomacy with appeasement and a UN ambassador who uses phrases like 'begging for war'.
NOT my president
13
If placating spoiled dictators isn't diplomacy, what is? Just cutting deals with foreign countries to make multi-national corporations richer? If that's all diplomacy is good for, then good riddance to it.
Why not just be glad we don't have Putin for president who wanted Trump in charge of the worldwide U.S. Nuclear Program in order for Putin to prove himself the smarter?!
I think U.S. U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley has some class compared to others in Trumps administration.
I think U.S. U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley has some class compared to others in Trumps administration.
You must be kidding. Do you think China will not find ways to supply oil without us noticing a thing? The problem is that both China and North Korea want us out of the region and we have no response to this policy. Period. It is Trump's problem now. But it has a long history of way before Trump. Obama did not do any better than Trump is doing now. The world has changed and we have not lived up to the pace of change. And that is the real problem.
3
@Gennady ----Huh? At least Obama didn't shove us toward a nuclear war!
1
Forget Obama, Gennady. What he did or didn't do is history right now. The buck stops on Trump's desk. Trump is driving the car at an excessive rate of speed. Nobody ever thought Obama was going to get us into a war with NK.
1
It has reached a point in time for major international level of conflict, most probably war. The extent of loss of human life is the real question. Along with North Korea human will be very big, so help us God.
War seems all but inevitable. The real question is the intensity of the war and to what extent and how China will intervene.
1
Given the complications of the this administration, it is hard to discern what is going on. Is Nikki Haley competent? Certainly the perception of the administration is colored by the politics of Trump and the Republican agenda (the Koch Bros, Mercer, etc). Trump is always in divert mode. Is war worth it to move the attention away from the investigation. It was a prediction from the beginning of his presidency.... if Trump is investigated, he will go to war...unleash the alt right. The Republicans are moving the Koch agenda along and certainly war profiteers are as usual supportive.
6
North Korea is not begging for war, North Korea is desperately trying to guarantee its own security by developing a credible retaliation force. The NYT shouldn't be repeating the blatant propaganda Trump is using to justify waging war on North Korea.
There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and there is no begging for war by North Korea.
There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and there is no begging for war by North Korea.
5
North Korea could easily guarantee its own security by feeding its people instead of spending billions on arms it will never use.
2
Ready to go to war with North Korea? Ready for millions of South Koreans to be killed over the first 24 hours of the conflict? If so, ready for tens of thousands of our military to die too?
Harsh, escalated and misleading rhetoric from Trump and now Haley isn't helpful, resulting in increased defiance and belligerence from NK.
The U.S. is already backed into a corner with Trump's threat of "fire and fury" if there were "any MORE threats" from NK. NK assumes he's bluffing and why not? The NK regime knows they are dealing with an incompetent U.S. President in way over his head trying to run foreign policy with the bluster tactics he used in NY real estate deals.
Should we reward NK for their belligerence and threats? No.
Should we continue dogged back channel pressure on China? Absolutely.
Fiery rhetoric trashing South Korean "appeasement" and threatening to drop nukes on NK is elevating and escalating a very dangerous situation.
Harsh, escalated and misleading rhetoric from Trump and now Haley isn't helpful, resulting in increased defiance and belligerence from NK.
The U.S. is already backed into a corner with Trump's threat of "fire and fury" if there were "any MORE threats" from NK. NK assumes he's bluffing and why not? The NK regime knows they are dealing with an incompetent U.S. President in way over his head trying to run foreign policy with the bluster tactics he used in NY real estate deals.
Should we reward NK for their belligerence and threats? No.
Should we continue dogged back channel pressure on China? Absolutely.
Fiery rhetoric trashing South Korean "appeasement" and threatening to drop nukes on NK is elevating and escalating a very dangerous situation.
7
The war against Hitler appears to have been the last honorable und moral war the US has fought. The atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, historians claim, were not necessary for the capitulation of Japan but were meant as a warning shot for the USSR. The Gulf-of-Tonkin resolution was a lie and led to one of the most destructive wars in history. The interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Jemen - to name just the most recent ones - wrought havoc on some of the oldest civilisations of the world and produced the IS. No wonder that I have lost faith in the foreign policy of the US in the case of North Korea. I do not see the diplomatic, political and psychological skills in the Trump administration necessary to bring this conflict to a positive end. The words of Nikki Haley, "Kim Jong-un is begging for war”, are not very promising.
3
Imagine Trump as the leader of North Korea. He'd be doing exactly what Kim Jong-un is doing right now.
5
@Nancy. Quite right. That's why they're Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee.
What does it say where a world-leader is determined to continue a failed war effort going back seven decades? (And, I'm not writing here about North Korea's Kim.)
Apparently, the United States ~ to its increasing peril with the "help" of a spongy United Nations "security" council ~ is more-blind than ever that victory isn't a matter of backing the opponent into a corner. To both fanatics and our hysterical United Nations representative Haley, it seems far easier to leverage bluster into a world of doom than to offer a hand to a perceived "enemy" by suggesting "What can we do to help us both?"
As it is, we are faced with a near-certain cataclysmic fate when the leadership in a nominally democratic society is a psychopathic megalomaniac.
Apparently, the United States ~ to its increasing peril with the "help" of a spongy United Nations "security" council ~ is more-blind than ever that victory isn't a matter of backing the opponent into a corner. To both fanatics and our hysterical United Nations representative Haley, it seems far easier to leverage bluster into a world of doom than to offer a hand to a perceived "enemy" by suggesting "What can we do to help us both?"
As it is, we are faced with a near-certain cataclysmic fate when the leadership in a nominally democratic society is a psychopathic megalomaniac.
7
@Edgar Numrich-----------BRAVO.
Ms. Haley sounds like Colin Powell in the run up to Iraq.
9
We invaded a destroyed Iraq under suspicion of weapons of mass destruction. Now we're faced with real weapons of mass destruction and don't have a workable solution to defend the world's interests. The fall of Iraq only took a few weeks of battle with conventional arms. That is unlikely now with North Korea. There is no definition of success that seems appropriate and fear of failure is life altering for the planet. It's not in anybody's interest to kill millions and irradiate the atmosphere for generations to take down a dictator.
Doing nothing seems like a concession. But it's peaceful compared to attack and destroy. Too bad for the history of the world that 2 characters toe to toe could cause more devastation than all the world wars to date when they throw thermonuclear stones at each other.
Doing nothing seems like a concession. But it's peaceful compared to attack and destroy. Too bad for the history of the world that 2 characters toe to toe could cause more devastation than all the world wars to date when they throw thermonuclear stones at each other.
Nimrata reads her word lines like a good puppet, and remains clueless as to the sordid meanings.
Like a classic careerist/collaborator she's building a resume, as she sells the country down the river.
Like a classic careerist/collaborator she's building a resume, as she sells the country down the river.
"Now we're faced with real weapons of mass destruction and don't have a workable solution to defend the world's interests"
Silly fatalism; you almost seem to enjoy despair.
Silly fatalism; you almost seem to enjoy despair.
Despite the blustering talk, it's fictional we have military options with North Korea because it would start a major destructive war.
P.S. --It was from Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster, NJ where Trump tweeted his provocative "fire and fury comment."
That should tell us something.
And he seemed deluded the NK leader was starting to respect him, as two days later came a test of a bomb in NK more deadly-- it's said-- than Hiroshima's. We need to stick with the United Nations on this: a 7th set of sanctions deprives NK of a billion in revenues from sales of iron, coal, fish.
Next, Trump tried to demasculate South Korea using the word appeasement.
It's toxic masculinity: The generals need to inform Mr. Trump he should be more quiet. He's drawing red lines with a huge red crayon while either on vacation, coming back from one, or going away on the weekend.
P.S. --It was from Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster, NJ where Trump tweeted his provocative "fire and fury comment."
That should tell us something.
And he seemed deluded the NK leader was starting to respect him, as two days later came a test of a bomb in NK more deadly-- it's said-- than Hiroshima's. We need to stick with the United Nations on this: a 7th set of sanctions deprives NK of a billion in revenues from sales of iron, coal, fish.
Next, Trump tried to demasculate South Korea using the word appeasement.
It's toxic masculinity: The generals need to inform Mr. Trump he should be more quiet. He's drawing red lines with a huge red crayon while either on vacation, coming back from one, or going away on the weekend.
9
I am not sleeping well these days knowing that we have someone no more sophisticated than a frat boy in the White House. I don't know if North Korea has some plan with all of this or if Kim Il-sung has gone mad. I have read both scenarios. Whatever the case I don't have much faith that the over grown frat boy can figure it out.
19
Donald Trump is not the only person in charge of our government. We have federal agencies that do certain jobs who are in charge, too.
You should not disparage frat boys with this moniker aimed at the Village Idiot at 1600. He is far more dangerous and far less intelligent.
@Mott---Yes. And, worse, Frat Boys aren't interested in solving problems. Mostly, they're just interested in proving a shallow, childish version of masculinity.
This is madness. Madness on the part of NK's Kim Jong-Un, and equally madness on the part of the mentally ill and deficient #45 in the WH. What Nikki Haley rules out right off the bat is of course the clearest path to a solution here-- the freezing of military exercises by everybody concerned. What is our joint exercises with South Korea if not posturing on a grand scale, just as North Korea plays the same with their posturing? No lessons of history learned, of course, because our feckless leader doesn't READ! China and Russia could take the lead here in negotiations, since #45 is totally incapable.
13
What is painfully obvious is the utter lack of diplomatic perspective and skill from Trump on down. After listening to an APM interview with a former US ambassador to China Max Baucus this morning who said that No. Korea doesn't want war, contrary to Ms. Haley's statement. Baucus was critical of the current approaches considered. Yes, diplomacy is complex. The concept of NK 'saving face' is critical here. He's clearly mentally unstable, as is our current POTUS.
I think North Korea is doing this for the money. Things are so bad there that they are sabre rattling to extort the world. They are very poor. There is starvation. They even eat dog.
That said, I am not averse to paying them to stand down provided that they dismantle their missile and nuke projects under UN auspices including unannounced, regular inspections to assure compliance.
Yes, this is akin to blackmail but, on the other hand, wars cost money too, not to mention lives.
The other alternative, which is probably impossible, is precise missile strikes to take out their leadership, including the boy, plus their nukes and missiles.
Thems your choices.
That said, I am not averse to paying them to stand down provided that they dismantle their missile and nuke projects under UN auspices including unannounced, regular inspections to assure compliance.
Yes, this is akin to blackmail but, on the other hand, wars cost money too, not to mention lives.
The other alternative, which is probably impossible, is precise missile strikes to take out their leadership, including the boy, plus their nukes and missiles.
Thems your choices.
2
N. Korea is begging for respect, a seat at the table, and the position of power to tell others what to do. It is 'respect' they have far from earned.
There is nothing to make 'clear' to N. Korea, and nothing to talk about with Russia and China. They know all of these things. They are expecting us, as we tend to do, make concessions that will favor them (and hurt Japan and S. Korea).
We know that China can help, but is disinterested. Sages observe that totalitarians wish for buffer states (like we wish for free oil). China is well aware that we can talk a lot, but we are heavily staked in their economy and political system that has at least produced stability, nationalism, and growth. They know that big business interests in the US will pressure lawmakers against any hostile move.
N. Korea matters of course, but China matters even more. Are we ready, for instance, to quarantine (I would favor occupation) of the Chinese islands in the South China sea? Because every Chinese submarine becomes vulnerable after that. Are we ready to send a fleet to the Malacca straits, that looks like a blockade is coming? Are we ready to sell all the arms S. Korea and Japan want from us - and start shipping them already?
Because if we are not, and are skittish, we cannot tame China (something they know all too well). And China unrestrained means N. Korea playing a global nuisance for ever.
I like that Madam Haley called it; now can we act like we mean it?
Kalidan
There is nothing to make 'clear' to N. Korea, and nothing to talk about with Russia and China. They know all of these things. They are expecting us, as we tend to do, make concessions that will favor them (and hurt Japan and S. Korea).
We know that China can help, but is disinterested. Sages observe that totalitarians wish for buffer states (like we wish for free oil). China is well aware that we can talk a lot, but we are heavily staked in their economy and political system that has at least produced stability, nationalism, and growth. They know that big business interests in the US will pressure lawmakers against any hostile move.
N. Korea matters of course, but China matters even more. Are we ready, for instance, to quarantine (I would favor occupation) of the Chinese islands in the South China sea? Because every Chinese submarine becomes vulnerable after that. Are we ready to send a fleet to the Malacca straits, that looks like a blockade is coming? Are we ready to sell all the arms S. Korea and Japan want from us - and start shipping them already?
Because if we are not, and are skittish, we cannot tame China (something they know all too well). And China unrestrained means N. Korea playing a global nuisance for ever.
I like that Madam Haley called it; now can we act like we mean it?
Kalidan
3
Kim Jong Un is a stupid man, but cynical person in me wonders, if Trump is looking for something like a military action as a way to jump his poll numbers and his presidency.
We have a problem with a President that is so in over his head, and so limited in world issues....simplistic would a kind way of putting Donald Trump grasp on world issues, it's not real estate!
We have a problem with a President that is so in over his head, and so limited in world issues....simplistic would a kind way of putting Donald Trump grasp on world issues, it's not real estate!
3
This is what happens when a bunch of neophytes and second-rate intellects are given the reins of government. Trump and his administration haven't any perspective on North Korea or it's leader, and they don't have the diplomatic skill to deal with a touchy situation. Kim isn't begging for war, he's showing off, which is what North Korean leaders have done off and on for my entire lifetime. Other presidents have managed to deal with it, but it seems beyond the ability of Trump & Co.
If only there was someone in the Trump administration with a clear head, diplomatic experience and a vision of a way forward that didn't include bombastic threats and over-wrought pronouncements. Where is Henry Kissinger when you need him? His pragmatic approach facilitated the end of the Vietnam war, opened relationships with China and initiated the policy of detente with USSR. Instead we have the Keystone Cops version of diplomats. Woe to us.
If only there was someone in the Trump administration with a clear head, diplomatic experience and a vision of a way forward that didn't include bombastic threats and over-wrought pronouncements. Where is Henry Kissinger when you need him? His pragmatic approach facilitated the end of the Vietnam war, opened relationships with China and initiated the policy of detente with USSR. Instead we have the Keystone Cops version of diplomats. Woe to us.
7
So the last couple of weeks, the South and the US have been showing the North their stuff. Guess what, the North just one upped them. Now what! Haley is now telling us that they are begging for war. Huh! The US is wearing it's citizens out (not to mention the rest of the world) trying to run the world. It is an impossible job and it is not turning out too well. Who is the bully here, the crazy Korean or the ding bat in the White House? Which of the two leaders has bigger hands? Let's hope millions don't die trying to find out.
3
Ignoring the bullying will allow N.K. to ket building its profile and give its people a (false) sense of pride (Make NorthKorea Great Again) . A lot of money wasted. A LOT of money wasted. Now we must ask Mr. Kelly to tone down the aggressive response. Does everyone except our President understand that we have an appropriately overwhelming response to any ACTUAL aggression by N.Korea against us or our friends.
1
This paragraph underscores why this should be China's and S.K.'s war "first.": It is far from clear that China’s president, Xi Jinping, would be willing to go along with the highly aggressive step of cutting off fuel to the North. Roughly 90 percent of North Korea’s trade, and nearly all of its imported energy supplies, come from China. China’s overall trade with the North was up significantly in the past 12 months, and it has long feared that an oil cutoff would lead to the collapse of the regime. Economic sanctions seem to be advisable to losing soldiers' lives.
13
The only way to end this conflict is talks, talks and more talks. The alternative is unthinkable.
3
There ultimately is no other option than regime change by force.
Kim is a demonstrated homicidal maniac, he has nuclear weapons, and he wants to use them. Remember, he used anti-aircraft guns on his uncle, and killed his brother. This man is crazy. Violence is at his core.
He must be taken out. Soon. By whatever means. Preferably with the work being done by the Chinese.
Imagine if Hitler has nukes in 1936. What would have been the only logical course of action?
Kim is a demonstrated homicidal maniac, he has nuclear weapons, and he wants to use them. Remember, he used anti-aircraft guns on his uncle, and killed his brother. This man is crazy. Violence is at his core.
He must be taken out. Soon. By whatever means. Preferably with the work being done by the Chinese.
Imagine if Hitler has nukes in 1936. What would have been the only logical course of action?
4
Trump admin seems to be doing everything it can to blunder toward war. And Kim Jong Un seems to have a pretty good bead on our blunderer-in-chief. Unless there's some effective back channel talk happening right now (doubtful), then this either ends in war or with NK getting to call the shots at the negotiating table.
2
"Most wars don't start with intent. Most wars start because people stumble into them. Mistakes are made. It's the way World War I started. So rising tension of the kind we've seen in the Korean Peninsula for the last six months is deeply concerning from that respect," -- Michael Morell, former CIA Director
We need to heed Mr. Morell's warning. During WWII, a popular slogan was "Loose lips sink ships." In the nuclear age, loose lips (and Twitter rants) can do much more than sink ships.
We need to heed Mr. Morell's warning. During WWII, a popular slogan was "Loose lips sink ships." In the nuclear age, loose lips (and Twitter rants) can do much more than sink ships.
3
If the US attacks North Korea, who started the war? The USA has a bit of an attitude problem, to put it mildly, and at some point other countries around the world are going to stop playing along.
1
Ms Haley, while it may be in vogue in the Trump Administration, most Americans expect more from their representatives that childish trash talk, which only serves to worsen an already dangerous situation. A war on the Korean peninsular would be catastrophic.
8
Aside from the self-preservation argument, I'm surprised NK hasn't used what may be their most logical argument: If Pakistan and India can have nukes, why not us? Who are you to tell us what we can/cannot have?
2
What? That is not a logical argument at all. India, unlike NK, is one of the biggest democracy in the world. India (& maybe let's say Pakistan) being a sovereign republic with an independent military does not need any permission from anyone to build nukes; US did try to road block in every possible way but they weren't quite successful. Also, India never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so India had a legitimate argument for possessing nuclear weapons. And also mentioned there's a vast difference between India and say North Korea. I read this somewhere few years ago: "Think of it this way... You have two uncles. One is a nobel winner, has a stable job, has a great family, and twice in his life got into a scrap at the local pub. The other uncle is a drunk, lives on minimum wage, has been to jail twice for violent assault, and takes a dim view of women and racoons. Now, in terms of gun control, do you think that if you declared it "okay" for the first uncle to have guns that it would make you a hypocrite for not being "okay" with the second uncle having guns." It would be completely illogical for NK to use this argument.
You're making a judgment that one nation has more rights than another. Where's the logic in that?
Firing missiles into the ocean impresses no one, except perhaps Kim Il-sung's mother, if he has one.
Can we hold the drumbeats for war until someone has at least suffered a scratch? Last time I looked, North Korea is a long boat ride from the US. I don't seem to recall North Korea having a blue water navy. Or a credible air force.
If anyone is "itching" for the chance to fire at the moment, it's probably South Korea, which is ready, willing and able to unseat Little Kim with a sharp and decisive defeat of his so-called army.
Everyone understands these realities except our so-called president.
Can we hold the drumbeats for war until someone has at least suffered a scratch? Last time I looked, North Korea is a long boat ride from the US. I don't seem to recall North Korea having a blue water navy. Or a credible air force.
If anyone is "itching" for the chance to fire at the moment, it's probably South Korea, which is ready, willing and able to unseat Little Kim with a sharp and decisive defeat of his so-called army.
Everyone understands these realities except our so-called president.
2
"Chinese reluctance" is more like Chinese applause. Getting USA out of Asia is their goal and North Korea the useful idiots to do it, while China keeps up the lopsided trade complete with technical and intellectual property theft. It's a twofer...
1
US govt should get a hold of itself, stop the hysteria, and start NORMAL diplmatic relations with N. Korea, just as w/ all other countries whether ally or not, whether nuclear-armed or not. NK has invaded no other countries; US has invaded dozens. NK vociferously, even bellicosely, defends from being "backed into a corner" for zero *rational* US reasons. Contrast to how US treats normally with *all* other nuclear-armed countries, even those who promised: "We will bury you!". Remember that? Sure you do. So, No! to continued US threats/agression on North Korea! No! to any more US sanctions! Yes! to US dealing with N. Korea as a fellow nation.
2
We have lived with the nuclear threat since I was in grammar school 'ducking and covering' under are desks during mandatory drills. What is different now?
We have two inept negotiators if you will in a former unpopular governor Haley wrenched from her state and thrust into a position of supposed influence-she has none and of course the Donald who is the commander, need I say more.
Of course if you cut off fuel going into a Korean winter only the peons suffer not the regime and they will keep making bombs. These bombs will never be used by them but they want to insure they have security that H-bombs may bring to keep them in power.
After all this country does have a habit of bombing people of color not to mention that we are the only one to use atomic weapons on Japan. In southeast asia thousands are wounded/killed each year from unexploded bombs Nixon dropped. But since americans have no memory that episode is neatly put aside.
We have two inept negotiators if you will in a former unpopular governor Haley wrenched from her state and thrust into a position of supposed influence-she has none and of course the Donald who is the commander, need I say more.
Of course if you cut off fuel going into a Korean winter only the peons suffer not the regime and they will keep making bombs. These bombs will never be used by them but they want to insure they have security that H-bombs may bring to keep them in power.
After all this country does have a habit of bombing people of color not to mention that we are the only one to use atomic weapons on Japan. In southeast asia thousands are wounded/killed each year from unexploded bombs Nixon dropped. But since americans have no memory that episode is neatly put aside.
3
We've gone from "fury and fire" to Ambassador's Haley's remark that "N. Korea is begging for war". In other words N.Korea is begging to be totally destroyed.
Of course a war in the Korean peninsula would be devastating to millions without question. Eventually the overwhelming power of the US alone would destroy the N. Korean country bringing that regime to an abrupt end. It's quite evident that Kim Jong Un is just "begging to be destroyed".
The choice of Ms, Haley's words to describe the N. Korean threat should have been better expressed, considering the resulting consequences of that war will lead to as many and probably more problems that the US faced after the invasion in Iraq. Attack first, think later.
The N. Korean situation is going to require some very deep analysis and thought, it does not call for stupid, uncalled for comments from our UN ambassador.
It would be best ma"am not to imitate your boss when expressing yourself, when many lives are at stake, both ours and the enemy.
Of course a war in the Korean peninsula would be devastating to millions without question. Eventually the overwhelming power of the US alone would destroy the N. Korean country bringing that regime to an abrupt end. It's quite evident that Kim Jong Un is just "begging to be destroyed".
The choice of Ms, Haley's words to describe the N. Korean threat should have been better expressed, considering the resulting consequences of that war will lead to as many and probably more problems that the US faced after the invasion in Iraq. Attack first, think later.
The N. Korean situation is going to require some very deep analysis and thought, it does not call for stupid, uncalled for comments from our UN ambassador.
It would be best ma"am not to imitate your boss when expressing yourself, when many lives are at stake, both ours and the enemy.
1
China has a legitimate national security concern in that it does not want a US ally to come up to its border. So of course it will stick by its errant ally North Korea despite provocations, many of which annoy China as well.
Which means we should approach China, along with South Korea, to discuss the possibilities so as to assuage its concerns. For instance, should North Korean collapse, we should either accept China's right to impose its preferred governance upon it. Alternatively, were South Korea to absorb the North, no US troops would be involved, and subsequent to the reunification of the peninsula, all US troops would be withdrawn and South Korea would commit to total denuclearization. Should China experience a deluge of refugees from North Korea, the US and the South will subsidize China so as to make it whole and cooperate with it to resolve the situation. Should Chinese sanctions result in a resolution of the North's nuclear threat, we should publicly guarantee we will not invade or attack it.
No matter our preference, no solution will take place in Korea without China's full buy-in and that will require full consideration of its legitimate security concerns as well as paying respect to its newfound status as the regional superpower.
Which means we should approach China, along with South Korea, to discuss the possibilities so as to assuage its concerns. For instance, should North Korean collapse, we should either accept China's right to impose its preferred governance upon it. Alternatively, were South Korea to absorb the North, no US troops would be involved, and subsequent to the reunification of the peninsula, all US troops would be withdrawn and South Korea would commit to total denuclearization. Should China experience a deluge of refugees from North Korea, the US and the South will subsidize China so as to make it whole and cooperate with it to resolve the situation. Should Chinese sanctions result in a resolution of the North's nuclear threat, we should publicly guarantee we will not invade or attack it.
No matter our preference, no solution will take place in Korea without China's full buy-in and that will require full consideration of its legitimate security concerns as well as paying respect to its newfound status as the regional superpower.
Kurt you are asking for diplomatic moon with those no-limits-for-china agreements to China. I see your point but unlikely to happen for dozens of reasons.
And then China takes SoKo. Not such a great idea. And if we don't let China take SoKo, still a strong American ally on the China border. another bad idea. Perhaps bring down their government but then let the UN help the Noko's choose their own govt with some guaranty we won't ally with that govt. Why not hack all of NoKo's computers? Shut down all their communications and power. Get the hackers of the world to help. They'd probably do it just for the fun of it and if it's coordinated, there's no way they can keep up against the cyber attack. Get the hackers to coordinate it themselves all at one time and overwhelm them. We've got to be in touch with hackers that could spread the word. then carpet bomb all their artillery so they can't threaten Japan or SoKo. Let their govt stay if they don't try to rebuild their artillery and give up their nukes and work to take care of their people and work on their economy instead. If they don't cooperate within a short time frame, then more military action.
“the time has come for us to exhaust all of our diplomatic means before it’s too late.” So where's s seasoned secretary of state who can bring diplomatic solutions to the table when the country needs him or her? Is Rex Tillerson the answer? Yes, Kim Jong-un has been cruising for a bruising for some time now but economic sanctions against North Korea may be the only way to resolve this stand-off between these two unstable presidents.
If Ms. Haley says "there is no more road left", then the president better find a way to develop more real estate for himself, America and the world to avoid any military conflict. His angry and undiplomatic outbursts have given Jong-un the very platform he craved for which is world attention.
If Ms. Haley says "there is no more road left", then the president better find a way to develop more real estate for himself, America and the world to avoid any military conflict. His angry and undiplomatic outbursts have given Jong-un the very platform he craved for which is world attention.
48
Time to get rid of T already. He's worse than useless. He's dangerous. A shame the R's don't see it. Lot's of the deplorables that voted for T don't want war, particularly a world war. Start playing to that. Right now the major concern of the R's is being primaried. This could be an opportunity to change enough minds so that the R's have less to fear. It's either than, military action, probably including cyber warfare to disable them first or let NoKo have the nukes.
Avoidance is not the thing.
What I fail to understand is why N.K. would want to start a war when they know quite well that they would be annillated within minutes. N.K. would cease to exist. It just doesn't make sense.
My only conclusion is that there is much more going on behind the scenes that the American public is not privy to. Considering the major world players, I somehow know that it has something to do with oil, money and power.
Lastly, I fear that Trump and his players have been preparing us for this eventuality, over the past 2 years with his talk of U.S. nuclear weapons and why we should use them if we have them.
As I said, this situation just does not make any sense!
My only conclusion is that there is much more going on behind the scenes that the American public is not privy to. Considering the major world players, I somehow know that it has something to do with oil, money and power.
Lastly, I fear that Trump and his players have been preparing us for this eventuality, over the past 2 years with his talk of U.S. nuclear weapons and why we should use them if we have them.
As I said, this situation just does not make any sense!
27
Why would they think that? They beat us back once, without nukes. They know Americans are notoriously afraid of casualties. They hold more cards than you think.
I think you're giving Trump too much credit. Him strategizing two years beforehand on how to defuse a potential nuclear war? I think his timeline for strategic planning is the time it takes for an idea to pop into his head until two seconds later when the first thought that comes to his mind leaves his mouth.
The "begging for war" is nothing but Trump's propaganda to actually start such a war. It is his way into the history books.
South Korea who has the most to lose, disagrees with our saber rattling & prefers a diplomatic solution to peace with North Korea.If they are sincere, & I have no doubt they are, then let them ask us to leave, & stop the military maneuvers with us, which seems to preclude the missiles tests from North Korea.We have spent far too much treasure & Blood to keep the status Quo, which has reached a point of a possible nuclear confrontation. It’s time to get out of this quagmire, & let South & North Korea settle their own problems.
11
Kim is begging for the threat of war to keep the home folks under control. Trump fulfills Kim's wish and then some.
1
Kim is not begging for war. He is blackmailing US for direct negotiation between the two nuclear countries. He can do this with the support of his people by propaganda saying US economic sanctions made N. Korea people suffer. And they believe him. North Korea is also betting that we will not initiate the first strike when our 50,000 plus troops & families members are still in S. Korea & Japan. In addition, China will not allow us to attack North Korea first. Both China & Russia cannot stand the 25 million plus refugees from North Korea if war broke out. In comparison, 5.5 million refugees from Syria already made Europe suffer resulting Brexit. A 25 million refugee from North Korea will paralyze northeaster China, South Korea, and Japan. Everyone knows that it is easy to start a war but very difficult to end it. Kim know this best. And he is daring US thinking otherwise.
7
He has no interest in negotiations. The idea has already been raised and he's ignored it. He's seen what's happened in other countries where they lost their nukes and that their leaders died. He believes his survival is dependent on getting ICBMs.
1
Has anyone seen Rex Tillerson? I guess he's staying in the background and relying on our ambassador to South Korea. Oh that's right: we don't have one.
18
If in fact Kim uses his nuclear leverage to request a pull out of US military from the South do it. We coukd get him to destroy his nikes and save billions. Im not all that sure that the Moon government and the Korean people want us there.
2
NoKo never lives up to it's bargains. We do as you suggest, remove our troops, and he will still keep his nukes and then take SoKo. A all encompassing cyber attack against his power and communications to disable him is probably the best bet.
It would be great if we could negotiate, but he has no interest and NoKo never lives up to it's bargains anyway.
It would be great if we could negotiate, but he has no interest and NoKo never lives up to it's bargains anyway.
Two mentally ill leaders with nuclear weapons. Like two gunfighters facing off in a spaghetti western. Nothing to worry about.
18
Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that Kim Jong-un is allowed to develop his nuclear arsenal indefinitely, eventually amassing hundreds of nuclear-tipped ICBM's.
1. It is quite plausible that Kim could himself survive a nuclear conflict with the United States. A very deep and well equipped bunker would suffice.
2. Now let us imagine, if we dare, that half the population of each country is killed in such a conflict (160 million in the U.S., 12 million in North Korea), and that much of each country's infrastructure is destroyed. This would mean utter devastation in the U.S., and perhaps it's elimination as a great power. For Kim Jong-un it would mean a grave setback, but not necessarily the end of his regime or a situation entailing personal discomfort. He has already showed a willingness to use the people of Pyongyang as human shields; and North Korea's relatively rudimentary infrastructure could be rebuilt in a few years' time.
3. Given the asymmetrical nature of the consequences of nuclear war between the two nations, as well as Kim's amply demonstrated appetite for risk, we must assume that his actions could lead to such a conflict.
4. It is a principle of risk management that one must sometimes accept a bad outcome in the near-term in order to eliminate the possibility of a disastrous outcome in the long-term.
5. It is therefore necessary that the U.S. neutralize the threat posed by Kim as quickly as possible, while doing its best to minimize the human cost.
1. It is quite plausible that Kim could himself survive a nuclear conflict with the United States. A very deep and well equipped bunker would suffice.
2. Now let us imagine, if we dare, that half the population of each country is killed in such a conflict (160 million in the U.S., 12 million in North Korea), and that much of each country's infrastructure is destroyed. This would mean utter devastation in the U.S., and perhaps it's elimination as a great power. For Kim Jong-un it would mean a grave setback, but not necessarily the end of his regime or a situation entailing personal discomfort. He has already showed a willingness to use the people of Pyongyang as human shields; and North Korea's relatively rudimentary infrastructure could be rebuilt in a few years' time.
3. Given the asymmetrical nature of the consequences of nuclear war between the two nations, as well as Kim's amply demonstrated appetite for risk, we must assume that his actions could lead to such a conflict.
4. It is a principle of risk management that one must sometimes accept a bad outcome in the near-term in order to eliminate the possibility of a disastrous outcome in the long-term.
5. It is therefore necessary that the U.S. neutralize the threat posed by Kim as quickly as possible, while doing its best to minimize the human cost.
3
JC there's so many extreme hypothetical in your view of the future I dont know where to start.
K Henderson, managing risk means taking into account the possibility of unlikely events, sometimes several at a time, so as to reduce the possibility of an absolute disaster to near zero.
The essence of my argument is that when the relationship between two countries is lopsidedly asymmetrical, the principle of "mutually assured destruction" fails. The U.S. has a lot to lose; Kim Jong-un, perhaps not so much.
The essence of my argument is that when the relationship between two countries is lopsidedly asymmetrical, the principle of "mutually assured destruction" fails. The U.S. has a lot to lose; Kim Jong-un, perhaps not so much.
Remove this know-nothing bungling regime before it's too late...
We can deal with Kim later.
We can deal with Kim later.
21
Yes but not much later. Kim is progressing much too quickly. And Pence has to go too which is quite possible. The letter Mueller has the letter of the real reasons T wanted to fire Comey, Pence has seen it as well and is not a part of that. He can be prosecuted as well. Hey Mueller, step it up. We're running out of time.
Absent an attack on the US, it is Congress that has the power to declare war (Art 1, Sec 8, Cls 11). Goodness knows any war with NK deserves debate. Even George W. Bush received authorization for Iraq. Our legislative representatives must make it clear to the executive that he cannot initiate hostilities without a Congressional vote.
5
We sound so insecure. I would follow South Korea's lead, as they know Kim Jung Un best.
3
did you know that SoKo raised the question of US nukes in SoKo? That lead? China would love that. So maybe that's a path? China does whatever it takes to stop NoKo or we do put nukes there? Would C go along? C is great at hacking other countries computers. Could they take down NoKo's power and communications and keep them down? Perhaps they could take in the beloved leader and keep him alive. It appears that's his main reason for wanting ICBMs. He fears without them he's a dead man. I say the best next step is a coordinated cyber attack globally by hackers, china, the us and any other country with the capabilities. Then the beloved leader might accept an offer to go to china and live out his life there
It sounds crazy, and I know we're not there yet, but is it time to start asking questions at a state and local level like; 1.) Could our existing nuclear fall-out shelters survive a blast? 2.) Do we need to draw-up plans for how to shelter from a potential incoming nuclear missile -ie. do we evacuate or go to a shelter? 3.) Do we have the appropriate, clear, warning systems in place to inform citizenry if they need to seek shelter, 4.) Do our schools need to start planning for drills should the need to execute them arise?
I guess you missed the glorious 50s with duck and cover. Listen there is nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. Read up on nuclear winter.
Do we need to move to Canada and Mexico? We will if NoKo gets ICBMs. I've been against pretty much every war since Vietnam. This is one that could be justified. It's just too bad we have an idiot like T at the helm. He was never qualified for any part of the job.
Did Kim Jong-Un pick Hurricane Harvey as a good time to further rattle Trump?
He can see what Trump is like and he can see that Trump is way in over his head.
The US still has no Formal Ambassador to South Korea and probably other open positions as well. We could use the extra experienced help. Our President still operates out of ignorance thinking that trash talking the leaders of South Korea and China will somehow make them open to our position?
Trump's twitter bullying only highlights our lack of diplomatic skill.
War must not be an option. Nuanced diplomacy and further sanctions could work if all the players enforce them. That takes willingness to work with the US.
Trump makes that cooperation harder every time he opens his mouth or tweets.
He can see what Trump is like and he can see that Trump is way in over his head.
The US still has no Formal Ambassador to South Korea and probably other open positions as well. We could use the extra experienced help. Our President still operates out of ignorance thinking that trash talking the leaders of South Korea and China will somehow make them open to our position?
Trump's twitter bullying only highlights our lack of diplomatic skill.
War must not be an option. Nuanced diplomacy and further sanctions could work if all the players enforce them. That takes willingness to work with the US.
Trump makes that cooperation harder every time he opens his mouth or tweets.
4
I'm waiting for T to have a stroke and needing to be spoon fed for the rest of his life. It's too late for this lesson for the deplorables and protest voters to learn that their votes do matter. They can now see what happens when you vote out of hate against someone like Hillary and vote for Trump or 3rd party candidates. It's given us or two worst leaders ever, GW Bush and Trump.
The US, Russia, Pakistan and India all have nuclear warheads and ICBM's. They all train, support and finance global terrorist organizations. We never beg for war, we are at war continuously. We need a different approach. Not appeasement exactly but something that looks like peace. Why can't we have peace with North Korea? Kim is no crazier than Pakistan, India, the USA or Russia. He is acting like a scared child and for good reason. I'm afraid of the USA and as a taxpayer I'm actually funding my own terror.
8
first, noko never lives up to any agreements. second, noko wants the entire peninsula and will move toward that and then what? Noko won't stop there.
It is going to take a singular, catastrophic event to wake up the North Korean government out of it's dream state. In 1941 the Japanese were in a similar state, believing the bombing of Pearl Harbor was magically going to make the US surrender or go away. Instead it resulted in the annihiliation of Japan's cities.
1
You don't seem to understand that such a catastrophic would leave no one left to wake up.
North Korea has become an existential threat to the United States. The South Koreans have had 70 years to move their capital further south, but leave it there as a trigger for war. War with North Korea is inevitable, now or later, and if later then with massive casualties here, New York, Los Angeles, Seattle. In hindsight we have long criticized Neville Chamberlain, the Great Appeaser and many people at the time believed Hitler to be rational. We found out different.
2
If China massed its army on the border with North Korea with the stated aim of deposing its little leader, that might just solve all of the problems. 1) Kim Jong Un gone. 2) No threat to China of the U.S. attacking a client state. 3) China style capitalism might grow in North Korea to the betterment of its peoples. 4) No costly war for the U.S. to fight. 5) No danger of North Korean hordes entering China.
What say, China?
What say, China?
2
China needs some incentive like the request by SoKo for the USA to put our nukes in SoKo. if they don't want our nukes their, take out Kim Jung un. Has T appointed an ambassador to China yet? Bring back Rob Portman. He had the job before.
Nobody begs for war with the determination - and clout - of our war-profiteering, military-industrial sector, with the close ties to Washington policy makers.
Although the corporate-media attempts to have us think otherwise, all Kim Jong-un wants is deterrence. The threats to Guam, along with the fiery rhetoric, are for the purpose of keeping his people's focus away from North Korea's severe internal problems.
That's self-preservation, and any sensible analysis of the situation should conclude that he's not willing to have his society destroyed in a retaliatory attack.
Trump would love a ratings-boosting war - and the Times seems intent on providing the argument for it. A fuel cut-off and other destabilizing actions just might alter Kim Jong-un's self-preservation instincts.
Although the corporate-media attempts to have us think otherwise, all Kim Jong-un wants is deterrence. The threats to Guam, along with the fiery rhetoric, are for the purpose of keeping his people's focus away from North Korea's severe internal problems.
That's self-preservation, and any sensible analysis of the situation should conclude that he's not willing to have his society destroyed in a retaliatory attack.
Trump would love a ratings-boosting war - and the Times seems intent on providing the argument for it. A fuel cut-off and other destabilizing actions just might alter Kim Jong-un's self-preservation instincts.
66
no, the little un also wants the entire peninsula and when he has that he won't stop there. Japan could be next. and after that? no, not only deterrence. it's naive to believe that. soko will be the first to fall.
the TIMES editors (for their rebuttal to donny) would do well to review the situation that built up to WWII. Embargoes on raw materials to Japan were at least part of the problem. IF the tiger gets pushed int the corner, sooner or later it will spring forth to save itself. that is a dishonorable way to start a fight. And, Roosevelt wanted them to throw the first stone." Let's antagonize KIM" but now we are talking about ATOMIC BOMBS , not little 500 pounders. Kim is within his sovereign rights to do what he is doing. We are out of bounds.
Get rid of donny, mattis and kelly who want war depsite what the people want. As a tired old Vietnam War vet, I sure don't want it.
Get rid of donny, mattis and kelly who want war depsite what the people want. As a tired old Vietnam War vet, I sure don't want it.
More newspeak from the U.S. ambassador: aggression is diplomacy.
Cutting off fuel supplies to North Korea is economic aggression, not diplomacy. Diplomacy means negotiation, and the U.S. has steadfastly refused to negotiate with North Korea. What North Korea wants is simply a final peace treaty to end the Korean War.
When I hear pundits talk about the risk of a second Korean War, their ignorance is plainly obvious. The armistice signed in 1953 is only a cease-fire agreement, not a peace treaty. The first Korean War has never ended. And you can't start a second war until you end the first one.
The long game of the U.S. was apparently to keep the squeeze on North Korea, and keep U.S. troops in South Korea, to intimidate or "contain" Red China. Which is now our biggest trading partner.
I think it's safe, now, to relax our fear that China will take over the world by armed force. Let's negotiate a final peace treaty to recognize the existing borders of North Korea and South Korea, and withdraw U.S. forces from the Korean peninsula.
That step would remove most of the dynamic that keeps the Kim regime in power in North Korea. Because most of their power derives from the fear of a U.S. assault, which is fed regularly by our military exercises and war games in South Korea.
Add more pressure, by sanctions or military, and you strengthen the Kim regime. Remove the sanction and the U.S. troops, and you'll actually drain Kim's power.
Cutting off fuel supplies to North Korea is economic aggression, not diplomacy. Diplomacy means negotiation, and the U.S. has steadfastly refused to negotiate with North Korea. What North Korea wants is simply a final peace treaty to end the Korean War.
When I hear pundits talk about the risk of a second Korean War, their ignorance is plainly obvious. The armistice signed in 1953 is only a cease-fire agreement, not a peace treaty. The first Korean War has never ended. And you can't start a second war until you end the first one.
The long game of the U.S. was apparently to keep the squeeze on North Korea, and keep U.S. troops in South Korea, to intimidate or "contain" Red China. Which is now our biggest trading partner.
I think it's safe, now, to relax our fear that China will take over the world by armed force. Let's negotiate a final peace treaty to recognize the existing borders of North Korea and South Korea, and withdraw U.S. forces from the Korean peninsula.
That step would remove most of the dynamic that keeps the Kim regime in power in North Korea. Because most of their power derives from the fear of a U.S. assault, which is fed regularly by our military exercises and war games in South Korea.
Add more pressure, by sanctions or military, and you strengthen the Kim regime. Remove the sanction and the U.S. troops, and you'll actually drain Kim's power.
88
Duane, you ignore or are not aware of 30 years of failed negotiations with N Korea. Agreements have been made and repeatedly broken by the regime. Just a few highlight - 1985 - NK agrees to Nonproliferation Treaty. They use existence of 100 nuclear warheads in SK as an excuse to fail to comply. US unilaterally withdraws its nuclear warheads (Bush 1991). 1991, South and North sign "Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula". Intelligence shows that despite protestations NK is in violation. 1993 NK withdraws from Non prolif agreement under pressure to agreed upon inspections. 1993 - CIA estimate that NK has 12 Kg of refined plutonium. 1994 Carter negotiations a supposed halt to nuclear development. Next few years, negotiations on missile and nuclear proliferation. 1998 - Clinton appoints special rep William Perry to review NK situation. 1999 - NK again agrees to stop any long term missile tests. I can go on. Every agreement is simply wishful thinking as the North continues its development of both nuclear and delivery systems. Diplomacy without isolation, economic sanctions, movement of military assets including nuclear assets will not work.
3
Truly, this is the only path to long-term peace, but US policymakers seem either too stubborn or too scared to accept this reality.
1
Disagree. If I ran a country w the few & meaningless resources NK has, I'd try to make friends, not enemies. Just who initiated the "agrees since n"?
1
US actions and statements thus far have woefully failed and have certainly not exhausted all alternative means of resolving the current standoff with North Korea.
China remains key to keeping North Korea in bounds and bringing them to the negotiation table. However:
“China’s overall trade with the North was up significantly in the past 12 months, and it has long feared that an oil cutoff would lead to the collapse of the regime.
That, in China’s eyes, would only invite South Korea to take over the North, and put an American ally on China’s border.”
Extreme sanctions are not diplomacy per say, and increasing the pressure to unprecedented levels, such as totally cutting off all fuel supplies would be overtly inhumane and certainly destabilizing given the conditions in North Korea.
An oil cutoff might just as well drive Kim to the brink and turn the Korean Peninsula into a full blown conventional or nuclear battleground of epic proportions. The scope of the certain horrendous consequences of that outcome absolutely fracture the bounds of rational contemplation.
China remains key to keeping North Korea in bounds and bringing them to the negotiation table. However:
“China’s overall trade with the North was up significantly in the past 12 months, and it has long feared that an oil cutoff would lead to the collapse of the regime.
That, in China’s eyes, would only invite South Korea to take over the North, and put an American ally on China’s border.”
Extreme sanctions are not diplomacy per say, and increasing the pressure to unprecedented levels, such as totally cutting off all fuel supplies would be overtly inhumane and certainly destabilizing given the conditions in North Korea.
An oil cutoff might just as well drive Kim to the brink and turn the Korean Peninsula into a full blown conventional or nuclear battleground of epic proportions. The scope of the certain horrendous consequences of that outcome absolutely fracture the bounds of rational contemplation.
1
we can keep soko from taking noko if we had a rational leader. but no, he'd support taking noko.
G. Sears--Cutting off fuel supplies will not be as overtly inhumane, as killing millions of people with nuclear weapons, and inciting China and Russia to do the same to us, and our allies. I really cannot imagine WHY South Korea would want to take over the North. THEY would then bear the burden of taking care of the North's entire population. China should remove Kim Jong un and replace him with their own agent. I hope they do that before it's too late.
1
if i remember correctly the Republicans have been bashing the UN for decades. Why is the US government now asking for its involvement?
7
Because like their Healthcare "wake-up call" Fiasco they ran face first into "Reality" outside of their media echo chambers,
The prior comment about signing a formal treaty to end the Korean War is most appropriate. Until that war has been formally ended, the North Koreans have many reasons to be fearful.
The lack of any mature leadership by our own government is what I fear most.
Ms. Haley's careless comments are exemplary---Not helpful and inflammatory.
If she is representing our government's official position, we are stumbling into a real war, with dire consequences for the South Koreans and nearby countries.
The lack of any mature leadership by our own government is what I fear most.
Ms. Haley's careless comments are exemplary---Not helpful and inflammatory.
If she is representing our government's official position, we are stumbling into a real war, with dire consequences for the South Koreans and nearby countries.
2
the idea of ending the war for Noko is them having Soko. That's something that will never be agreed to.
There is no mention of the 'freeze' in nuclear weapons that was negotiated by President Carter. It worked, albeit for a limited period of time, but was scrapped when Reagan was elected.
Along similar lines there is no mention of the 'freeze' that was in place during the Clinton administration. Neither side completely abided by the agreement, but it's basic purpose was fulfilled, no new nuclear weapons by North Korea.
But with the Bush doctrine of 'preemptive war' North Korea responded with an accelerated nuclear program that brings us to where we are now. This inconsistency has not worked.
We need to hear from these past negotiators because no one in the Trump administration seems to know where to start or what their goals are.
The Chinese have suggested and offered to host negotiations. No response from the US. The Russians have urged negotiations but we ignore anything that comes out of Moscow these days.
So far the Trump administration seems to lack any coherent policy on how to move forward and therein lies the danger. We can't expect China to cut off North Korea when they have asked for negotiations and we have responded by not responding.
There are clearly elements in the Trump administration that actually want a war with North Korea. And there are saner heads who have seen the war game scenarios and know what the devastation would look like. Absent coherent leadership from the White House it is possible that others may be orchestrating our policy.
Along similar lines there is no mention of the 'freeze' that was in place during the Clinton administration. Neither side completely abided by the agreement, but it's basic purpose was fulfilled, no new nuclear weapons by North Korea.
But with the Bush doctrine of 'preemptive war' North Korea responded with an accelerated nuclear program that brings us to where we are now. This inconsistency has not worked.
We need to hear from these past negotiators because no one in the Trump administration seems to know where to start or what their goals are.
The Chinese have suggested and offered to host negotiations. No response from the US. The Russians have urged negotiations but we ignore anything that comes out of Moscow these days.
So far the Trump administration seems to lack any coherent policy on how to move forward and therein lies the danger. We can't expect China to cut off North Korea when they have asked for negotiations and we have responded by not responding.
There are clearly elements in the Trump administration that actually want a war with North Korea. And there are saner heads who have seen the war game scenarios and know what the devastation would look like. Absent coherent leadership from the White House it is possible that others may be orchestrating our policy.
2
What we have is two Bull Moose in a china shop, bellowing and about to butt heads. Real Moose can butt heads without much damage to their surroundings but sometimes their antlers get so entangled they both die. Unfortunately our moose can go to deep shelters and the rest of us are just like the china.
Two alpha males threatening each other while complaining of the threats they are getting tops the absurdities of 2017.
The trouble is I don't think either is truly big enough to let the other save face. Each resists seeming weak with every fiber in their bodies.
If we get through this it maybe the plot for a few good movies.
Two alpha males threatening each other while complaining of the threats they are getting tops the absurdities of 2017.
The trouble is I don't think either is truly big enough to let the other save face. Each resists seeming weak with every fiber in their bodies.
If we get through this it maybe the plot for a few good movies.
How about letting China take and keep noko? at least china is rational.
What clinton did worked. Why is that never talked about. He stopped N Korea from getting nuclear weapons without firing a shot and without one person dying. Yet Bush jr. Ruined all that. If only there was a way in 2016 to get Bill Clinton back into the white house, maybe as an advisory if not president, and have him negotiate again...Oh wait there was an MURICA blew it
This is a problem that is a non-problem. Outside of nuking the entire country (which might cause enemies and allies alike to be upset with the US), we need to learn to live with North Korea. They aren't going to invade anyone because they don't have the power to win. If we invade them, Seoul or Tokyo gets destroyed and China has a huge refugee problem to deal with.
No, I am wondering if this isn't Trump's way of taking the heat off himself by becoming a "war" President.
No, I am wondering if this isn't Trump's way of taking the heat off himself by becoming a "war" President.
2
North Korea only needs to invade us once with a high altitude nuclear blast and most of this country will be back in the 19th century and starving to death. You are assuming they cannot do this and you are betting with the lives of hundreds of millions of people. I don't like that bet. As for China, they are complicit in this problem.
Diplomacy is more like high stakes poker than the OK Corral. In one, sophisticated exposure of strength leads the opponent to conclude weakness and fold to accept status quo over certain loss. In the other bullets fly until everyone is hurt.
Why this country elected a "Wyatt Earp" is beyond me, but the expected result is clear.
Why this country elected a "Wyatt Earp" is beyond me, but the expected result is clear.
4
A bit of twisted logic shows a connection between two wildly different news items: North Korea and Hurricane Harvey. What the world needs now is coordination and conformity to the dictatorship of science: we need to slavishly obey internationally established rules, determined by scientists that will bring the planet into environmental balance. North Korea controls its people per personal whims but it does give an emblem of the level of control that the world should have when it comes to finding and obeying good science that preserves our planet and humans as a species on it.
The response to Hurricane Harvey gives the symptom of the disease of not so living under such a dictatorship. We make fires by poor civil engineering, poor stewardship of the planet, and then once the fire comes we don't use technology or humanity to dictate quickly a good course of behavior -- fast evacs technological enabled, for example. We sit and stare at the helicopters plucking people off of roofs, toxic plumes, and all kinds of avoidable mayhem. If only a dictatorship was in place, and some humanity, suffering could be alleviated greatly.
Un and North Korea represent one module in the human mental works that is missing from our and Western societies (some, for sure): obedience for a need to central command. The module is not to be always employed, but it should be available and in some domains of interactions on Earth it is a dictator -- the best. Do whatever you want is a bad dictator.
The response to Hurricane Harvey gives the symptom of the disease of not so living under such a dictatorship. We make fires by poor civil engineering, poor stewardship of the planet, and then once the fire comes we don't use technology or humanity to dictate quickly a good course of behavior -- fast evacs technological enabled, for example. We sit and stare at the helicopters plucking people off of roofs, toxic plumes, and all kinds of avoidable mayhem. If only a dictatorship was in place, and some humanity, suffering could be alleviated greatly.
Un and North Korea represent one module in the human mental works that is missing from our and Western societies (some, for sure): obedience for a need to central command. The module is not to be always employed, but it should be available and in some domains of interactions on Earth it is a dictator -- the best. Do whatever you want is a bad dictator.
1
We definitely need "more diplomacy" and much less bellicosity like Ambassador Haley's "begging for war" comment in discussing the latest escalation in North Korea's nuclear program. The reality is that diplomacy is the only way forward given China's unwillingness to see North Korea's economy collapse under more severe sanctions. The best hope is to work toward a nuclear-free Korean peninsula with a binding agreement by the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council of non-interference in North Korea. And, the best model for that is for the P5+1 that successfully negotiated the Iran nuclear deal to work with both North and South Korea to achieve a non-nuclear peninsula with an ironclad agreement of total non-interference--both political and military--in North Korea. The main obstacle to such a deal, however, is the Trump Administration which vehemently opposed such a deal will Iran. As the world's reigning superpower the diplomatic "ball is in our court." Secretary of State Tillerson must, like his predecessor, take the lead in working toward a deal. The alternative is unthinkable.
2
The US is now in a similar position regarding North Korea as Israel was in regarding Iran.....except even worse. The leaders of Iran are hateful, but they do not want to risk starting a nuclear war. Whereas this hateful North Korean leader not only is willing to risk starting a nuclear war, he seems determined to heighten that risk. And he truly does not care one iota how much his people suffer from anything he does.
Our last 3 presidents have utterly failed to effectively stop him (and his evil father before him). Bill Clinton even aided him by agreeing to a foolish "deal" which we adhered to but North Korea did not. I am sure that Trump, too, would let this madness continue if he could. But now the failures of our 3 prior presidents have allowed this horrific threat to mature. Indeed, their failures have nurtured this mad man-child. They have taught him that he can get away with ever more outrageous and threatening behavior. Now, it must be dealt with.
Extreme care and caution must be exercised, lest we unnecessarily increase the risk of tragedy. But those who persistently counsel relentless "diplomacy" are not only incorrect, they are increasing the risk of eventual tragedy.
There is actually some small benefit to us at the moment precisely because Trump is a new president and is viewed as unstable and unpredictable by many. It makes Kim Jong Un less certain that his tactics will succeed.
Our last 3 presidents have utterly failed to effectively stop him (and his evil father before him). Bill Clinton even aided him by agreeing to a foolish "deal" which we adhered to but North Korea did not. I am sure that Trump, too, would let this madness continue if he could. But now the failures of our 3 prior presidents have allowed this horrific threat to mature. Indeed, their failures have nurtured this mad man-child. They have taught him that he can get away with ever more outrageous and threatening behavior. Now, it must be dealt with.
Extreme care and caution must be exercised, lest we unnecessarily increase the risk of tragedy. But those who persistently counsel relentless "diplomacy" are not only incorrect, they are increasing the risk of eventual tragedy.
There is actually some small benefit to us at the moment precisely because Trump is a new president and is viewed as unstable and unpredictable by many. It makes Kim Jong Un less certain that his tactics will succeed.
3
Every situation for good or bad has a time to plant and harvesting, to blame Trump is just unfair, we have many situations at this present time that are results of past decisions, for better or for worst. The UN as it is right now, and for the last decades, is just an unfit organism to deal with international crisis, is made of members that have dictators, theocrats, generals and other bizarre rulers that only care in first place to keep their power, add to this the financial interest of international companies and we have what we have, just chaos. Hopefully from chaos will come order.
Next time North Korea has one of those huge military parades with all its civilian and military leadership in attendance, drop a single nuclear weapon on the reviewing stand. I doubt there would be anyone left in the country who could or would order retaliatory strikes.
Terrible idea? Perhaps, but don't tell me the White House hasn't thought of it too.
Terrible idea? Perhaps, but don't tell me the White House hasn't thought of it too.
5
Yes, terrible idea.
2
Precisely because it's such a terrible idea makes it likely that this White House has thought of it.
That sounds like a clever idea, but...
What if Kim has already delegated the authority to fire their missiles in the event of the so-called leadership decapitation. The US would have committed a gravest crime and Korea would be amply justified in retaliating against US targets everywhere and millions of lives would perish in short order in Korea, Japan, and on the states side. Just a little reminder; Korea has already demonstrated it's ability to strike the west coast of the US and that includes where you live with your family.
What if Kim has already delegated the authority to fire their missiles in the event of the so-called leadership decapitation. The US would have committed a gravest crime and Korea would be amply justified in retaliating against US targets everywhere and millions of lives would perish in short order in Korea, Japan, and on the states side. Just a little reminder; Korea has already demonstrated it's ability to strike the west coast of the US and that includes where you live with your family.
The word in the UK is that Kim is trying for self preservation. That he feels nuclear status will save him from the fate of Saddam and Gadaffi. The word here is that NK is impoverished and suffered famine in the 1990s. That China doesn't want to make things worse. Prefers negotiation. It sounds like Trump jumping up and down at the moment.
34
Pam:
Intercontinental missiles are actually being repeatedly launched. Nuclear bombs are actually being exploded. And in your deeply partisan view, Trump is the problem. You have deluded yourself.
Intercontinental missiles are actually being repeatedly launched. Nuclear bombs are actually being exploded. And in your deeply partisan view, Trump is the problem. You have deluded yourself.
2
Yes, some British minds (sic) are thinking, "there will be peace in our time if we only let NK have its nuclear weapons and ICBM's". Its not the first time the British thought that way
Could this administration please stop using Trump like vocabulary to describe national and international crisis---"begging for war." Please someone in this administration find a thesaurus somewhere in that White House and craft responses that 1) are full sentences and 2) use terms designed to advance rather than shut down a conversation. I also recognize Trump's limitations on vocabulary use, but again, when talking to disaster victims terms like "well received," "beautiful," are out of place in such situations.
96
ACJ:
North Korea is actually exploding nuclear bombs and repeatedly launching intercontinental missiles. And you are worried about grammar. Ridiculous.
North Korea is actually exploding nuclear bombs and repeatedly launching intercontinental missiles. And you are worried about grammar. Ridiculous.
2
ACI** it's not just the administration. On CNBC a reporter said " this attack " when referring to the nuke test. Also the cable and mainstream media almost seem like they want a war, with they way they report this. You know the ratings go sky high. Only this time there may be nothing left ... including them.
Orange, NJ
Orange, NJ
1
The UN is toothless, the resolution is doomed. Good news is all parties already know that, not holding breath, just going through the motions. The only question now is how and when N.K. will invite bombing, which too an option only until the resolution formally fails. After which, it's Mattis' theater, it'll be a time and place of his choosing. Good luck.
10
Donald Trump is not the one who should make any decisions about the Korea situation - North or South. He threatens a trade war with the a South and a nuclear war with the North. All he can do is threaten. He doesn't have a clue about how to be President. Don't just threaten, Mr. "I am the greatest deal-maker," negotiate.
21
Here is the problem..
1-Trump and Kim are the same. Two ego maniac demagogues who don't care about anybody else but themselves.
2-Our UN Ambassador is more presidential than Trump but she has no power and is stuck with the demagogue Trump.
3-Bush 2 and Obama gave Kim too much of the carrot and not enough of the stick because he did not threaten the US back then.
Now that there is a closer possibility at least in theory that Kim could threaten the US soon with a nuclear attack here is what should be done.
Put China on notice to tell North Korea to end its nuclear program. They can do it, without China North Korea will cease to exist. Tell China if they don't do it, USA will dramatically increase their military presence in all areas of the Pacific and arm So Korea and Japan more, even with nuclear weapons if they want them.
Above is the last thing China wants. If China gets No. Korea to nuke down, give China the carrot, ie USA will dramatically DECREASE its military presence in the area.
1-Trump and Kim are the same. Two ego maniac demagogues who don't care about anybody else but themselves.
2-Our UN Ambassador is more presidential than Trump but she has no power and is stuck with the demagogue Trump.
3-Bush 2 and Obama gave Kim too much of the carrot and not enough of the stick because he did not threaten the US back then.
Now that there is a closer possibility at least in theory that Kim could threaten the US soon with a nuclear attack here is what should be done.
Put China on notice to tell North Korea to end its nuclear program. They can do it, without China North Korea will cease to exist. Tell China if they don't do it, USA will dramatically increase their military presence in all areas of the Pacific and arm So Korea and Japan more, even with nuclear weapons if they want them.
Above is the last thing China wants. If China gets No. Korea to nuke down, give China the carrot, ie USA will dramatically DECREASE its military presence in the area.
8
This shows how little understanding this administration has about global politics. NK isn't "begging for war", they seeking attention and the administration is giving them exactly that.
13
I'm totally fine with Trump doing what Obama did: drawing a line and not enforcing it. For once I agree with Steve Bannon: When it comes to North Korea, there is no military solution that won't involve the loss of hundreds of thousand of innocent lives. They got us. So let's head to the negotiating table and see what we can do. Please!!!!
15
Trump and Haley have no clue how to handle a situation like this, yet they refuse to admit it. It would be better if they would back off and let more experienced diplomats from other countries handle this.
7
Offer China our quiet retreat from south china sea. As Bill Belichick says, it is a trade, you have to give something to get something. Offer China that for fuel cut off. Oh, and they can control North under some kind of 20 year trustee status.
1
I will be profoundly embarrassed if I have to explain to my grandchildren that they are living in a fallout shelter and eating Soylent Green because we stood by and did nothing while Donald Trump picked a fight with the second craziest person on the planet.
111
interested party, 100 recs if I could. Not only are they both bigly-est crazy; they have the worst and second worst hairdos on the planet.
1
Same here. Except: picking the fight sooner rather than later has its charms.
1
Yes agreed but you seemed to refer to this as Trump's creation which is absolutely untrue but you probably know that. Your argument would better if you acknowledged this nuke issue started under Bill Clinton presidency forward or really when a treaty wasnot signed some 70 years ago.
The simple thing would be for the US to declare victory--we have convinced North Korea to spend billions of dollars that it can ill afford in order to build a weapons system that it cannot use, to deter an attack that was never going to come. (I realize that that last part will be a bit hard to sell given the bellicose inanities of Mr. Trump and his minions.) Now, let's sit down and talk about how the DPRK can take a more advantageous course.
If that sounds unrealistic, consider the alternatives that have been suggested.
If that sounds unrealistic, consider the alternatives that have been suggested.
2
I would think the Chinese would want a stable, trade and commerce country like South Korea to take over the north and have stability on its borders rather than an erratic and unstable regime it currently has to worry about. I even think that with a united Korea under the south, the U.S. would eventually pull its military out of Korea without a serious threat no longer existing there. I'm sure China would much rather trade than go to war over an unstable regime.
1
Both Kim and Trump maintain power by generating fear of war: it takes attention away from what wretched 'leaders' they are and how they are failing their own people so miserably.
Fear of imminent war provides a point of superficial unity in two countries poised to politically unravel. It also legitimizes obscenely high expenditures in their respective industrial-war machines, with political payoffs and profits generously distributed to the 'right' people.
Kim and Trump need us stay frightened.
Fear of imminent war provides a point of superficial unity in two countries poised to politically unravel. It also legitimizes obscenely high expenditures in their respective industrial-war machines, with political payoffs and profits generously distributed to the 'right' people.
Kim and Trump need us stay frightened.
5
The only reliable resource for security in the world today is relationship. When relationships are healthy, you don't need any military to protect you. When relationships are not healthy, the largest military in the world won't keep you safe. War - all war - is obsolete. The difficulty is that our old way of thinking has complexity and inertia, is familiar, and therefore will not go away easily.
What to do? I say make a hybrid response. If it is too soon to give up the horse and buggy (war), then at least begin engineering and testing the alternative. That is the only way we can have a preventative, non-violent method of conflict resolution ready when we need it.
Our annual military budget in the United States is over 600,000,000,000. Why not take 1/10 of one percent of that (60,000,000) per year and invest it in relationship-based solutions. The website http://alternatives2war.com/list.html has 68 suggestions for non-military peace making, with many videos, articles, books, a new bookcase and other resources. There are hundreds of other studies, articles and books on the Web and in bookstores.
What do we have to lose by exploring this hybrid? 60 million dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of a war.
What to do? I say make a hybrid response. If it is too soon to give up the horse and buggy (war), then at least begin engineering and testing the alternative. That is the only way we can have a preventative, non-violent method of conflict resolution ready when we need it.
Our annual military budget in the United States is over 600,000,000,000. Why not take 1/10 of one percent of that (60,000,000) per year and invest it in relationship-based solutions. The website http://alternatives2war.com/list.html has 68 suggestions for non-military peace making, with many videos, articles, books, a new bookcase and other resources. There are hundreds of other studies, articles and books on the Web and in bookstores.
What do we have to lose by exploring this hybrid? 60 million dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of a war.
4
24 years of Clinton/Bush/Obama policy have failed catastrophically. Time for a change. Start embargoing Chinese interests supporting the Korean regime and they'll fold quickly.
2
Donald Trump cannot bring us peace. Just his presence in the White House is a great disturbance. Nicki Haley cannot help the peace process while she represents us in the UN. She doesn't have the maturity to truly represent the best interests of the US. I'm not sure where her loyalties lie since she does nothing but reinforce Trump's bullying, aggressive stance. As long as these people "represent" us our government is nothing more than a reactionary bully that does not have the intelligence or maturity to deal with the issues we face, most especially the challenge of North Korea. Donald Trump brought this issue forward as soon as he was elected by reacting badly to North Korea and his own words have been the biggest problem in this whole situation.
4
The North Korean situation makes for a good exercise in making a compendium of false assumptions leading to confusion and mayhem. You can deduce with good assumptions what will happen. False assumption one: Un is a bad character because he starves his own people; he, therefore, can't be trusted. Stalin did the same and had nuclear weapons. In fact, the former USSR and the current North Korea are very similar. Also this assumption is false because technological ability implies trustworthiness with many. Starving his own people, just like we deny our people healthcare coverage, is no indication of diplomatic untrustworthiness: inhumanity yes. A second false assumption is that somehow a nuclear armed North Korea is unacceptable. This is just a rhetorical stance and carries no weight. A third false assumption is that we can diplomatically force North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons by putting sanctions on their trading partners. China's hegemony contains the US's economy. The economic catastrophe that would ensue from China's retaliation would hurt us too much. Fourth: threatening North Korea militarily will get them to change their minds. Un has merely to look at Trump's reneging on a nuclear deal with Iran to know we can't be trusted. The only defense against military attacks from the US, given its invasion of Iraq, is having the bomb. He does. Conclusion: North Korea will get nuclear bombs and mount them on ICBMs that can hit the US and we will live with it.
2
China.
Thanks for pointing out that “roughly 90 percent of North Korea’s trade, and nearly all of its imported energy supplies, come from China.”
Given this, North Korea is little more than a sub-division of China. How on earth do you attack North Korea expecting China to standby non-committed?
Sanctions.
Who do you apply them against? Clearly, China.
The only way forward – short of blowing up half the world - is for Presidents Trump and Xi Jinping to get together and forge a binding and lasting resolution.
This maybe means cutting China some slack with regard to trade. Unfortunately, it’s a price we may have to pay for allowing the world’s armament industries to boost the military capabilities of tyrants.
Thanks for pointing out that “roughly 90 percent of North Korea’s trade, and nearly all of its imported energy supplies, come from China.”
Given this, North Korea is little more than a sub-division of China. How on earth do you attack North Korea expecting China to standby non-committed?
Sanctions.
Who do you apply them against? Clearly, China.
The only way forward – short of blowing up half the world - is for Presidents Trump and Xi Jinping to get together and forge a binding and lasting resolution.
This maybe means cutting China some slack with regard to trade. Unfortunately, it’s a price we may have to pay for allowing the world’s armament industries to boost the military capabilities of tyrants.
5
Ummmm ... seems to me it was (among other things) cutoff of some critical materiel that convinced the war faction in Tokyo that Japan was isolated and war with the US was its sole remaining option.
Just saying ...
Just saying ...
2
Yes, Steve, that's a very apt parallel, and exactly what I was thinking. Perhaps it has escaped the attention of Drumpf, that scholar-president and noted historian. Yet, what's a few million killed here and there as measured against his mouthing off some more?
1
Somebody was bound to test this big-mouthed blowhard president of ours, he of the empty promises and empty threats. Not the least bit surprising that it's Kim, particularly now that he has real muscle to flex.
We're passing through Incheon on the way elsewhere in a month's time. Here's hoping that there's still an Incheon to pass through by the time we leave.
We're passing through Incheon on the way elsewhere in a month's time. Here's hoping that there's still an Incheon to pass through by the time we leave.
1
Prior presidents kicked the can down the road. The worst offender being president Obama who knew how dangerous the situation was. We need a bi-partisan advisory board to work with president Trump and we need to stop attacking him. It only makes matters worse
1
Presidents get criticized. Trump invites criticism when he says and does stupid, ridiculous things, like getting Mexico to pay for the wall, or suggesting maybe Japan should have nuclear weapons.
"Kicking the can down the road" is a dumb metaphor. It suggests nothing was done, and that now something must be done. Someone is always calling for decisive action, but often as not inaction is better. Particularly, as now with North Korea, when any action is apt to make the situation worse.
It is too late now to prevent North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. All that can be done is to manage the situation. If we act deliberately and intelligently, perhaps we can kick the can down the road another 50 or 100 years, and future generations will find war less attractive. Seems worth a shot, don't you think?
"Kicking the can down the road" is a dumb metaphor. It suggests nothing was done, and that now something must be done. Someone is always calling for decisive action, but often as not inaction is better. Particularly, as now with North Korea, when any action is apt to make the situation worse.
It is too late now to prevent North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. All that can be done is to manage the situation. If we act deliberately and intelligently, perhaps we can kick the can down the road another 50 or 100 years, and future generations will find war less attractive. Seems worth a shot, don't you think?
1
Use reverse psychology, please. If NK is "begging for war," don't give it what it wants. Just because someone invites you to fight, you don't have to accept the invitation.
2
The dimwit warmongers may have found the perfect solution to the horrible Korea free trade deal signed by previous incompetents.
Sacrificing South Korea has the added benefit of forcing a complete resupply of of our inventory of bombs and missiles.
Sacrificing South Korea has the added benefit of forcing a complete resupply of of our inventory of bombs and missiles.
2
North Korea is ruled by an unrepentant Stalinist regime. It invaded South Korea in 1950 and the US fought a costly war to repel that aggression. Its rulers believe in dictatorship and will never allow a fair plebiscite.
The North Koreans have used negotiations as a stalling tactic to deceive wishful thinking people. They cheated Clinton and Bush and made Obama look like a fool.
Letting the North Koreans put H bombs on ICBMs is the most irresponsible option possible. They could invade the South and threaten to nuke Hawaii . Rather than live with the threat of nuclear blackmail from an aggressive regime, we need to do more than call for negotiations.
We need to consider giving nuclear arsenals to both South Korea and Japan. The idea is to establish nuclear deterrence for those most threatened by North Korean . Also every time North Korea fires a missile over Japan or South Korea, we and our allies should fire two over North Korea.
We should stop threatening China with trade wars and should stop our sanctions against Russia and instead offer both countries carrots if they ramp up the pressure on North Korea.
These and similar measures should get North Korea itself to beg for negotiations. If they don't work after 3-6 months, we can always impose an embargo, mine their harbors, launch cyberattacks, and drop 1,000 warheads on their nuclear and missile facilities, and explicitly call for regime change.
The North Koreans have used negotiations as a stalling tactic to deceive wishful thinking people. They cheated Clinton and Bush and made Obama look like a fool.
Letting the North Koreans put H bombs on ICBMs is the most irresponsible option possible. They could invade the South and threaten to nuke Hawaii . Rather than live with the threat of nuclear blackmail from an aggressive regime, we need to do more than call for negotiations.
We need to consider giving nuclear arsenals to both South Korea and Japan. The idea is to establish nuclear deterrence for those most threatened by North Korean . Also every time North Korea fires a missile over Japan or South Korea, we and our allies should fire two over North Korea.
We should stop threatening China with trade wars and should stop our sanctions against Russia and instead offer both countries carrots if they ramp up the pressure on North Korea.
These and similar measures should get North Korea itself to beg for negotiations. If they don't work after 3-6 months, we can always impose an embargo, mine their harbors, launch cyberattacks, and drop 1,000 warheads on their nuclear and missile facilities, and explicitly call for regime change.
4
"We should stop threatening China with trade wars and should stop our sanctions against Russia "
Is that you Sec. of State Tillerson ?
Getting the US sanctions lifted on Russia would allow Exxon to resume their estimated $600 Billion contract/deal with Putin. When/if that happens Mr. Tillerson will out the back door of the WH faster than you can say Exxon.
Is that you Sec. of State Tillerson ?
Getting the US sanctions lifted on Russia would allow Exxon to resume their estimated $600 Billion contract/deal with Putin. When/if that happens Mr. Tillerson will out the back door of the WH faster than you can say Exxon.
1
We have a Cabinet of old soldiers running our foreign policy decisions with North Korea. It reminds me of that old axiom: If the only tool you have is a hammer, every job you do needs nails. We could easily be lead into war by an uninformed President, and men who see war as the only true option.
2
If Donald Trump were not so unreliable and inconsistent in his response to virtually every current affair, the Chinese, who hold nearly all the leverage with North Korea, may have been induced to finally bring about a cessation to North Korea's dangerous and belligerent brinkmanship. But what some acolytes of Trump value as "disruptive", is actually of little to no use in a real crisis. The Chinese, as do most other nations, need our president to be a thoughtful and rational strategic thinker, capable of building working alliances, as we once did in World War II. Nothing Donald Trump has done so far would lead any nation to conclude that he is this man at this most perilous moment in history.
106
According to a Times analysis the other day, one growing fear is that Jong-un will attempt to use his new IBCM arsenal to blackmail the United States into abandoning South Korea and Japan - and allow thus North Korea to subjugate South Korea.
This is something that the international community would soon live to regret, given the demonstrated character of the leader in question.
When a madman is a on roll, there's little that he thinks he can't accomplish (just think of Trump...).
To me, the call here is going to have to be made by the people of South Korea. Given Jong-un's demonstrated character and homicidal tendencies, they're likely headed to either war or enslavement The question is: do they want to fight that war on their terms, while they still can, or on Kim Jong-un's terms later.
Obviously, it would great if China exercised leadership here - but, according to reports, even they may not have the influence necessary to tame Jong-un's ambitions.
My thoughts are with the people of South Korea.
This is something that the international community would soon live to regret, given the demonstrated character of the leader in question.
When a madman is a on roll, there's little that he thinks he can't accomplish (just think of Trump...).
To me, the call here is going to have to be made by the people of South Korea. Given Jong-un's demonstrated character and homicidal tendencies, they're likely headed to either war or enslavement The question is: do they want to fight that war on their terms, while they still can, or on Kim Jong-un's terms later.
Obviously, it would great if China exercised leadership here - but, according to reports, even they may not have the influence necessary to tame Jong-un's ambitions.
My thoughts are with the people of South Korea.
5
M, it is far more likely Jong is using the threat of the bombs to make the other nations give him large concessions regarding trade. SK newspress is saying the same.
PLUS, no one wants to poke the bear when the bear has A-bombs at his side. Jong is playing that crazy card and so far it is working for him.
The problem is that no one has credible intelligence as to what is actually the case in North Korea.
If he just wanted a deal, it would be easy to get one.
But this is a guy who has his brother, no threat to him, murdered. This is country where the leader is treated as a demigod.
North Korea is a cult-of-personality. It is not a self-correcting state like the former Soviet Union or China (who imagined that the time time would come when a westerner could say favorable things about that form of communism?).
If he just wanted a deal, it would be easy to get one.
But this is a guy who has his brother, no threat to him, murdered. This is country where the leader is treated as a demigod.
North Korea is a cult-of-personality. It is not a self-correcting state like the former Soviet Union or China (who imagined that the time time would come when a westerner could say favorable things about that form of communism?).
I am in all honesty not really sure what to believe anymore with this issue, the press and the intelligence community or Mr Trump running his mouth about fire an fury, over a report by the same agency and journalist he stated are fake and misguiding us on issue of Russia helping elect Mr Trump. We the people need to be very careful about the motive here. We need to Trust there is genuine reason for War here before we start the drumbeat. This is where Journalist and Congress really need to show common sense. Before we start a war over, an idiotic statement and an Ego maniac. To before warned is to before armed they say.
52
Well you should already know not the believe the loud mouth blow hard. That is the given.
This isn't going to end well. If the Chinese cut off all trade with North Korea, that will box them in and force a desperate move. Kim Jong-un is crazier than Trump. He will react like any panicked lunatic would.
There is no way Kim will capitulate. No way. If his regime is faced with collapse he will lash out. He can either threaten a nuclear assault, which is blackmail, or he can attack the South. If he gets really desperate, he can attack with nuclear weapons.
We keep focusing on this ICBM thing, but South Korea is just down the street from him. Japan is practically nextdoor. He doesn't need an ICBM to hit Japan. A medium range ballistic missile can get there. He doesn't even need a missile. These things can be dropped from planes. They can be put on a boat and sailed into a harbor. He can put one on a truck and drive into the South. There are lots of ways for him to blackmail or wage war that do not require the use of an ICBM. He can launch 20 decoys and one nuke to overwhelm anti-missile defenses. Kim knows that. Our military knows that.
If the sane world would reach out to this unstable dictator, we might have a chance to avoid conflict. I keep hearing that we don't know what Kim wants. My question is, has anyone asked him?
What's the harm in asking the question? War is always an option if we don't like the answer. Why make war the only option?
There is no way Kim will capitulate. No way. If his regime is faced with collapse he will lash out. He can either threaten a nuclear assault, which is blackmail, or he can attack the South. If he gets really desperate, he can attack with nuclear weapons.
We keep focusing on this ICBM thing, but South Korea is just down the street from him. Japan is practically nextdoor. He doesn't need an ICBM to hit Japan. A medium range ballistic missile can get there. He doesn't even need a missile. These things can be dropped from planes. They can be put on a boat and sailed into a harbor. He can put one on a truck and drive into the South. There are lots of ways for him to blackmail or wage war that do not require the use of an ICBM. He can launch 20 decoys and one nuke to overwhelm anti-missile defenses. Kim knows that. Our military knows that.
If the sane world would reach out to this unstable dictator, we might have a chance to avoid conflict. I keep hearing that we don't know what Kim wants. My question is, has anyone asked him?
What's the harm in asking the question? War is always an option if we don't like the answer. Why make war the only option?
4
It's time China sincerely joins international effort to curb North Korea's unrestrained nuclear ambitions that really pose a serious threat to world peace with destabilising consequences for the region. In return, the US and its East Asian allies South Korea and Japan too should be willing to address the security concerns of China arising out of the possible instability across the border, as also due to the US military action threat and the missile defense installations in Seoul. In short, the UN sanctions against North Korea, and demilitarisation of the Korean peninsula as the confidence building measure for the stakeholders should go hand in hand to prevent further escalation of the crisis.
2
Using such rhetoric as NK is "begging for war" suggests that the US may be willing to do so. Very scary. Skillful diplomacy, in the choice of words used, is notably absent.
19
Haley's comment that time is running out and war with NK is coming is incendiary and unnecessary. She needs to go. If anything, Jong ate that statement up like icecream. Jong WANTS UN diplomats to say things like that to the global press.
1. China is the diplomatic wild card here, not NK and Jong who is obviously sabre-rattling for attention as he has steadfastly done for at least 5 years.
2. China's Xi wants this all to go away, but it wont. Whenever Xi finally does something diplomatic about NK, it will be determine more about this mess than anything the USA does. But what will Xi do? No one has any idea. Nobody.
2. If Jong actually pushes the atomic button, he will be anathema to the rest of the globe and lose everything including his rule.
3. I have no confidence that Trump and his cabinet has a concrete notion what to do about Jong and his bombs.
1. China is the diplomatic wild card here, not NK and Jong who is obviously sabre-rattling for attention as he has steadfastly done for at least 5 years.
2. China's Xi wants this all to go away, but it wont. Whenever Xi finally does something diplomatic about NK, it will be determine more about this mess than anything the USA does. But what will Xi do? No one has any idea. Nobody.
2. If Jong actually pushes the atomic button, he will be anathema to the rest of the globe and lose everything including his rule.
3. I have no confidence that Trump and his cabinet has a concrete notion what to do about Jong and his bombs.
39
And Who is Jong???
"It is far from clear that China’s president, Xi Jinping, would be willing to go along with the highly aggressive step of cutting off fuel to the North"
That is not going to happen. It is true 90 percent of North Korea’s trade, and nearly all of its imported energy supplies, come from China and an oil cutoff would lead to the collapse of the regime. But China does not want Kim's downfall. The collapse of Kim Jong Un’s government will create chaos in North Korea which in turn could produce a refugee crisis, loose nukes, and an opportunity for the U.S. military presence in the region to expand right up to China’s borders. Why the Chinese government should want that? The Chinese government is therefore unlikely to crack down on North Korea to the extent the Trump administration wants, no matter how much pressure the United States applies, since that could lead to Kim’s downfall but that is exactly what China does not want.
That is not going to happen. It is true 90 percent of North Korea’s trade, and nearly all of its imported energy supplies, come from China and an oil cutoff would lead to the collapse of the regime. But China does not want Kim's downfall. The collapse of Kim Jong Un’s government will create chaos in North Korea which in turn could produce a refugee crisis, loose nukes, and an opportunity for the U.S. military presence in the region to expand right up to China’s borders. Why the Chinese government should want that? The Chinese government is therefore unlikely to crack down on North Korea to the extent the Trump administration wants, no matter how much pressure the United States applies, since that could lead to Kim’s downfall but that is exactly what China does not want.
10
And how likely is it that if NK knows it is going down that they would take some other countries down with them?
"In short, Mr. Trump has run the risk of doing what he charged President Barack Obama with doing in Syria: drawing a line and not enforcing it."
OK, North Korea is doing what it has always done, playing the rogue in developing civilization-annihilating bombs and missiles. But Donald Trump didn't help the situation by goading Kim Jong Un to ratchet up his nuclear program.
I feel that General Mattis must be seething that he has to keep "interpreting" what this president says and trying against all odds to use diplomacy to tame the inflamed situation.
But with reports of Russia meddling as well, trying to sooth the current crisis while secretly providing NK resources and financing, it's hard to know which of the major players (China and Russia) holds the key to preventing Armageddon.
Our inexperienced president, along with his hollowed out state department, is dealing with the most significant nuclear threats since the Soviet era in the 50s and 60s.
I suspect that the US is planning a preemptive strike, in essence declaring war through military intervention without even the approval of Congress that George Bush sought the first time the US launched a preemptive war.
George W. Bush set a precedent for this mess, and I hope to holy hell that the sane ones in this administration will back off a preemptive strike in a region of the world where there are simply too many players with competing interests.
OK, North Korea is doing what it has always done, playing the rogue in developing civilization-annihilating bombs and missiles. But Donald Trump didn't help the situation by goading Kim Jong Un to ratchet up his nuclear program.
I feel that General Mattis must be seething that he has to keep "interpreting" what this president says and trying against all odds to use diplomacy to tame the inflamed situation.
But with reports of Russia meddling as well, trying to sooth the current crisis while secretly providing NK resources and financing, it's hard to know which of the major players (China and Russia) holds the key to preventing Armageddon.
Our inexperienced president, along with his hollowed out state department, is dealing with the most significant nuclear threats since the Soviet era in the 50s and 60s.
I suspect that the US is planning a preemptive strike, in essence declaring war through military intervention without even the approval of Congress that George Bush sought the first time the US launched a preemptive war.
George W. Bush set a precedent for this mess, and I hope to holy hell that the sane ones in this administration will back off a preemptive strike in a region of the world where there are simply too many players with competing interests.
59
"I suspect that the US is planning a preemptive strike"
Unlikely and speculative -- If the USA were to go after NK solo, it is kicking a bees nest with Russia and China
Unlikely and speculative -- If the USA were to go after NK solo, it is kicking a bees nest with Russia and China
3
time to hold china accountable for its support of north Korea....they are playing a double game...
4
Sec of Treasury Munchkin, says that he will introduce a US trade embargo on any nation that deals/trades with NK. Since China is the only important trading partner of NK I guess he means to cut off US trade with China. Better get to Walmart ASAP as their shelves will soon be bare.
1
Are there any responsible, sane Republicans left? Apparently not. All we get are the Trumps, Cruz (remember when he said he would "make sand glow" as President) and this idiotic hand-wringing by Haley, who should know better, but evidently does not.
104
It is not clear at all what strategy or end-game President Trump is pursuing:
1. The hyperbolic rhetoric of Trump and Haley is not helpful. China would likely see any military offensive by the U.S. against North Korea as a threat against China. The biggest global threat is that this situation escalates to a war between the US and its allies and China. Knowing this, North Korea will ignore the rhetoric of Trump and Haley.
2. The reporting makes it clear that simply expanding South Korea into a fallen North Korea would not be acceptable to China. What type of regime change, if any, in North Korea would be supported by China? Or is the solution to have an Iran-style resolution (reduced sanctions in return for a changes to the North Korean nuclear program and inspections)?
1. The hyperbolic rhetoric of Trump and Haley is not helpful. China would likely see any military offensive by the U.S. against North Korea as a threat against China. The biggest global threat is that this situation escalates to a war between the US and its allies and China. Knowing this, North Korea will ignore the rhetoric of Trump and Haley.
2. The reporting makes it clear that simply expanding South Korea into a fallen North Korea would not be acceptable to China. What type of regime change, if any, in North Korea would be supported by China? Or is the solution to have an Iran-style resolution (reduced sanctions in return for a changes to the North Korean nuclear program and inspections)?
4
China would fully support a unified, demilitarized Korean Peninsula free from US troops and weapons.
Except, we won't leave.
Except, we won't leave.
Trump is the one begging for war. Trump is failing here. The north will never give up its nukes because the US has never invaded a country with nuclear weapons. The US is going to have to live with a nuclear North. The only step that will stop the north is a nuclear South and Japan. That will motivate China to stop the North. But facilitating proliferation will hasten nukes everywhere else including the Middle East where they might actually be used. Anyway, Korea is not a vital interest. Let the South defend itself. There is no need to put LA at risk for Seoul.
1
Haley is the new Rumsfeld.
Leading us to war.
Leading us to war.
54
Would N Korea terminate its nuclear program if the US and S Korea signed a treaty with the North ending the Korean war AND guaranteeing not to invade the North?
If I'm North Korea and I've seen what the US has done in places like Iraq, Iran, Libya, Cuba, all across S. America & Central America (especially Panama), I do whatever it takes to have nukes as a deterrent to a US invasion or CIA assassination program.
If I'm North Korea and I've seen what the US has done in places like Iraq, Iran, Libya, Cuba, all across S. America & Central America (especially Panama), I do whatever it takes to have nukes as a deterrent to a US invasion or CIA assassination program.
8
It's very interesting that so many describe North Korea as a "rogue state" that is "begging for war." How many countries has North Korea invaded? How many wars has it started in the past few decades? Why would Kim Jong-un launch a war of aggression against the US? What would it accomplish?
Meanwhile, the U.S. destroyed Iraq in a war of aggression, is continuing a 17-year occupation of Afghanistan and is actively bombing at least a dozen other countries. Meanwhile, the US regularly threatens Iran with war, and is actively sabotaging the treaty Obama negotiated. It doesn't take a genius to understand that Kim Jong-un's bluster is a defensive tactic, and that these tests are intended to keep the world's military superpower at bay.
Any act of aggression by NK -- an actual act of aggression, not shows of force -- should be met with appropriate responses by the US, of course. But there is no need for a pre-emptive attack by the US, which would have disastrous consequences. And the US would be entirely to blame.
Meanwhile, the U.S. destroyed Iraq in a war of aggression, is continuing a 17-year occupation of Afghanistan and is actively bombing at least a dozen other countries. Meanwhile, the US regularly threatens Iran with war, and is actively sabotaging the treaty Obama negotiated. It doesn't take a genius to understand that Kim Jong-un's bluster is a defensive tactic, and that these tests are intended to keep the world's military superpower at bay.
Any act of aggression by NK -- an actual act of aggression, not shows of force -- should be met with appropriate responses by the US, of course. But there is no need for a pre-emptive attack by the US, which would have disastrous consequences. And the US would be entirely to blame.
371
"It doesn't take a genius to understand that Kim Jong-un's bluster is a defensive tactic,"
That is the truth, Kim Jong Un does not have the guts to attack America, he is not a suicidal maniac, but at the same time he does not want to end up like Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gadaffi., he is not stupid either. But as you have stated, I am more worried about pre-emptive strike on North Korea by Americans with the Commander in Chief we have.
That is the truth, Kim Jong Un does not have the guts to attack America, he is not a suicidal maniac, but at the same time he does not want to end up like Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gadaffi., he is not stupid either. But as you have stated, I am more worried about pre-emptive strike on North Korea by Americans with the Commander in Chief we have.
In addition to which, if South Korea were not limited by US mandate from building longer range missiles of its own, with heavier and nuclear payloads -- then the US would no longer be required to show any response should North Korea invade South Korea. The South Koreans could handle it very well on their own, which of course is why, in those circumstances, North Korea would not invade. Besides, Kim wants to keep his personal fiefdom isolated from and ignorant of what goes on in South Korea. A united peninsula would be more than he could handle. He knows that.
1
NK has a history of attempting to violently overthrow the government of SK. The animosity towards that government has not changed, and NK considers the SK government to be illegitimate and a puppet of the US.
1
I'm not sure that I agree that Kim Jong-un is "begging for war," but he seems to be playing a cat-and-mouse game with the American "president." And I think Donald Trump is the mouse.
The "president" has spent much of his time in office excoriating the tenure of Barack Obama, in particular, the 44th president's reasoning that diplomacy--and lacking that, economic sanctions--might bring Kim to heel and show him the errors of his ways in trying to muscle North Korea into the top drawer of the world's nuclear powers.
But Trump, who is notoriously ignorant and complaisant, especially when serious studying of history, science, politics, and international law are greatly needed now, would prefer to "govern" by tweet. And a seasoned president would have scolded his Ambassador to the United States for employing such a provocative phrase as "begging for war."
Kim must know, unless he is a complete fool, that he cannot win a slugging match with America. He also must surely know the Xi, his next-door neighbor, won't lift a finger to help him and may angrily upbraid Kim for putting China at serious environmental hazard in the event of nuclear fallout. People can hardly breathe in large swaths of China so inhaling atomic dust would hardly be an improvement on the atmosphere there.
But Kim has been successful in goading his American counterpart, daring him to make the next move. Perhaps Trump is being restrained by "his" generals but it says here that their hold on him is like water.
The "president" has spent much of his time in office excoriating the tenure of Barack Obama, in particular, the 44th president's reasoning that diplomacy--and lacking that, economic sanctions--might bring Kim to heel and show him the errors of his ways in trying to muscle North Korea into the top drawer of the world's nuclear powers.
But Trump, who is notoriously ignorant and complaisant, especially when serious studying of history, science, politics, and international law are greatly needed now, would prefer to "govern" by tweet. And a seasoned president would have scolded his Ambassador to the United States for employing such a provocative phrase as "begging for war."
Kim must know, unless he is a complete fool, that he cannot win a slugging match with America. He also must surely know the Xi, his next-door neighbor, won't lift a finger to help him and may angrily upbraid Kim for putting China at serious environmental hazard in the event of nuclear fallout. People can hardly breathe in large swaths of China so inhaling atomic dust would hardly be an improvement on the atmosphere there.
But Kim has been successful in goading his American counterpart, daring him to make the next move. Perhaps Trump is being restrained by "his" generals but it says here that their hold on him is like water.
30
Dear Leader is begging for war.
So is Kim Jong Un!
So they have something else in common.
So is Kim Jong Un!
So they have something else in common.
19
Will history repet itself? It was our fuel embargo aginst Japan that most believe triggered the surprise attack on Perl Harbor.
9
N Korea is a nuclear power. The issue is now how to deal with them including many steps before an actual war. Examples abound. The US can cut off their international access to capital - proposed and rejected by the Bush Admin as too confrontational. The US can move land based nuclear missiles to the region as we did with Russia/Turkey, putting further pressure on China. The US has reportedly moved an Ohio Class and Los Angeles Class submarines to the region providing cruise missile and nuclear delivery threats. This should be made clear public and permanent. The US can announce the intent to build the capacity to have first strike capabilities against N Korea artillery and announce a significant build up of its cruise missile arsenal. Etc, etc.
2
I do not think North Korea is "begging for war". That really makes no sense at all as they would not have a chance.
14
More and more it is looking like we have to hit NK.
Their fool-boy-leader, Kim Jong W Un has repeatedly made clear his intention to attack US interests, Guam, South Korea, Japan, over which it has sent missiles, plus the US mainland itself. I am actually surprised that he hasn't threatened Hawaii or Alaska, both easier targets for this madman-boy.
If he carries out even one of those threats people will for good reason be pointing fingers at our leadership stating that we did nothing while the guy was running his mouth and telling us exactly what his intentions were.
Their fool-boy-leader, Kim Jong W Un has repeatedly made clear his intention to attack US interests, Guam, South Korea, Japan, over which it has sent missiles, plus the US mainland itself. I am actually surprised that he hasn't threatened Hawaii or Alaska, both easier targets for this madman-boy.
If he carries out even one of those threats people will for good reason be pointing fingers at our leadership stating that we did nothing while the guy was running his mouth and telling us exactly what his intentions were.
2
Yes, he's made his intentions clear, but they're not to commit suicide, which ue knows would be the result of any attack on the US or its alies. This is why his missile launches have always been carefully targeted *away* from Guam, mainland US, and only incrementally towards remote Japanese islands.
What his government has asked for *repeatedly* is a peace treaty with the US to formally end the hostilities, but the Trump administration is too fixated on looking strong to discuss formally ending hostilities with NK.
So yes, his intentions are clear, but the Trump administration is too busy saber rattling to pay attention.
What his government has asked for *repeatedly* is a peace treaty with the US to formally end the hostilities, but the Trump administration is too fixated on looking strong to discuss formally ending hostilities with NK.
So yes, his intentions are clear, but the Trump administration is too busy saber rattling to pay attention.
3
The only country that keeps harping about war is the U.S.
54
North Korea is unequivocally a product of western insouciance: in 2003, while Bush was banging the war drum against WMD's in Iraq, NK was loudly proclaiming that actually did have them. The aim then was the same as it is now, that is, leverage against the global community in order to save face against crippling sanctions. Fourteen years have allowed NK to expand and improve its weapons hoard and allows Trump a popular distraction from the Russia investigation which still rumbles quietly on.
So far, with Trump at the helm, the US has seen;
Meddling from a hostile foreign power in its electoral system in which Americans have been complicit.
All kinds of political mayhem within the White House.
The rise of white supremacy movements.
The abuse of due process, law, and the office of the presidency.
Now, almost inevitably, the spectre of nuclear war.
How much more does America and the wider world have to witness in incredulity and suffer in impotent rage?
So far, with Trump at the helm, the US has seen;
Meddling from a hostile foreign power in its electoral system in which Americans have been complicit.
All kinds of political mayhem within the White House.
The rise of white supremacy movements.
The abuse of due process, law, and the office of the presidency.
Now, almost inevitably, the spectre of nuclear war.
How much more does America and the wider world have to witness in incredulity and suffer in impotent rage?
14
Amen, Ambassador!
The former CIC won't like this!
The former CIC won't like this!
1
Right, all the tough talk from the Trump administration is really having a chilling effect on Mr. Kim, isn't it?
The "North Korean madman" is sane enough to realize that he's dealing with an amateur.
The "North Korean madman" is sane enough to realize that he's dealing with an amateur.
3
Which is more dangerous -- DT or Nork nukes? And which is more important to you, personally -- seeing the USA succeed in this? Or attacking DT?
Liberals just don't get it. North Korea hasn't yet been stopped by sanctions or fuel cutoffs. North Korea has always been focused on death and destruction. After killing off their own people, their focus turned to South Korea. They follow the same pattern of death and destruction that Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin have done - two others that Liberals praised highly during their reigns of terror.
Wake up.
Wake up.
2
I don't think you understand the repercussions of a pre-emotive nuclear strike. We are already involved in wars in the middle east. I'm a democratic who doesn't understand why right wingers are always so anxious to go to war. There would need to be a draft, how old are you Karlos? War should be avoided at all costs. The death and destruction and upheaval in the world, the refugees...but the war machine, the merchants of death will make a fortune.
3
It is the deranged narcissist in the White House who is "begging for war". He needs to show the world that he is a tough guy. Had his chance during the Vietnam War but took the coward's way out.
67
Hey! Our Great Leader had bone spurs. That's what prevented him from being a hero on the battlefield during the Vietnam War - otherwise he would have enlisted and fought. But despite that he still has a Purple Heart. He always wanted one of those.
The US needs to prepare its warships to launch a few Tomahawk cruise missiles at the North Korean ICBM as it waits on the launch pad prior to take off. Such a move will both paralyze Kim Jong Un and lend some credibility to our tough talk at the UN.
Will the DPRK level Seoul in reaction? I doubt it, for that would be the end of the regime in Pyongyang.
If the US wants to rely on deterrence to inhibit further North Korean weapons activities, we need to make the regime in Pyongyang believe we are serious.
Will the DPRK level Seoul in reaction? I doubt it, for that would be the end of the regime in Pyongyang.
If the US wants to rely on deterrence to inhibit further North Korean weapons activities, we need to make the regime in Pyongyang believe we are serious.
1
Try to remember that the generals and experienced people are pushing diplomacy and the advisors, Miller, Kushner, Bannon (he's still in there), are pushing the envelope. I think Kim Jong Un is like Trump in that if you hit him he'll hit you ten times harder. These two men are playing chicken with nuclear arms. What a revolting development this is.
3
"Begging for War" is such a poor choice of words. Like "basket of deplorables" it becomes a stand alone phrase that takes on a life and meaning of its own. Is "Begging for War" an excuse for some extreme action against a rogue state for whom an actual war would mean devastation?
2
It appears to me that the people "begging for war" are in the Trump Administration, Trump himself most notably. Get a good hold now. It's going to be a rough ride....
19
The US-NK nuclear standoff has entered Ionesco's theater of absurd phase.
Television talking heads keeping asking the so called experts what does NK want, what China does want in this dangerous situation.
Here is my suggestion. How about call Mr. Kim and Mr. Trump to the UN HQs in New York and ask each one of them to state what they want.
The world knows a long time what the US wants. The question is what Mr. Kim Jon-Un wants.
If for example, Mr. Kim's aspiration is world domination by acquiring nuclear weapons, global leaders could come up with a united front against such crazy idea. In this case, at least billions of people will know the reason for a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula.
Television talking heads keeping asking the so called experts what does NK want, what China does want in this dangerous situation.
Here is my suggestion. How about call Mr. Kim and Mr. Trump to the UN HQs in New York and ask each one of them to state what they want.
The world knows a long time what the US wants. The question is what Mr. Kim Jon-Un wants.
If for example, Mr. Kim's aspiration is world domination by acquiring nuclear weapons, global leaders could come up with a united front against such crazy idea. In this case, at least billions of people will know the reason for a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula.
4
Kim is begging for war and Trump is eager, like any of his real estates deal, eager to sell it to Kim. These two are made in heaven (or hell?)
3
It is time for the U.S.,Russia, Japan, and China to agree to let the Koreans negotiate their future themselves.
China and Japan fear the competition from a united Korea. The U.S. and Russia want to keep their importance in the region. The Korean war was about Communism vs. free enterprise. We know what system has won, let it happen!
None of this is worth eradicating the Korean Peninsula in a nuclear war.
China and Japan fear the competition from a united Korea. The U.S. and Russia want to keep their importance in the region. The Korean war was about Communism vs. free enterprise. We know what system has won, let it happen!
None of this is worth eradicating the Korean Peninsula in a nuclear war.
9
Freedom, democracy and capitalism outlasted the Soviet Union, not because we "let it happen," but because wiser men prevailed, and America & the West held the line against Russia!s aggressive expansionism, intervening where necessary.
2
Nuclear war has potential horrific consequences.
All parties should be aware of the warning of risks by Winston Churchill
“If you go on with this nuclear arms race, all you are going to do is make the rubble bounce.”
All parties should pursue peaceful solutions and strategies, through dialogue at the United Nations, as strongly as possible.
All parties should be aware of the warning of risks by Winston Churchill
“If you go on with this nuclear arms race, all you are going to do is make the rubble bounce.”
All parties should pursue peaceful solutions and strategies, through dialogue at the United Nations, as strongly as possible.
22
Shouldn't there be secret back channel diplomatic efforts underway? Diplomacy backed by strength seems the only realistic option here.
2
And from Einstein: I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.
2
The Korean War concluded without a peace treaty.
The time has come to sign a peace Treaty with North Korea.
Such a treaty would recognize the current borders and the current government of North Korea.
It would also do the same for South Korea.
It would contain a "no first strike" clause as well as ban the launching of missiles and maneuvers by anyone over and near Japan. It would provide for a hot line to the US from North Korea.
There would be opportunities for open borders and cultural exchange.
The treaty should be signed in Washington D. C. at a state dinner with all countries participating.
Its time to end the war, and give North Korea closure---really that's the source of all of this. The war accomplished the goals of the West, let's cap it with a treaty and call it a day.
The time has come to sign a peace Treaty with North Korea.
Such a treaty would recognize the current borders and the current government of North Korea.
It would also do the same for South Korea.
It would contain a "no first strike" clause as well as ban the launching of missiles and maneuvers by anyone over and near Japan. It would provide for a hot line to the US from North Korea.
There would be opportunities for open borders and cultural exchange.
The treaty should be signed in Washington D. C. at a state dinner with all countries participating.
Its time to end the war, and give North Korea closure---really that's the source of all of this. The war accomplished the goals of the West, let's cap it with a treaty and call it a day.
201
Sorry, the Korean War (or "police action") never concluded. Rather a "cease fire" was agreed to.
1
Robert, the only flaw in your excellent proposal is that Kim Jung Un is only concerned with his self-preservation and will never leave NK due to the security risk he would open by not being in his controlled kingdom.
I believe these are the facts in dealing with NK:
- Kim Jung Un is very vulnerable to violence, so he will never leave NK because it's not safe for him;
- any asset NK receives which can be turned into money or supplies for Kim's military advancement will be treated as such, despite many concerns about the humanitarian needs of the NK citizens. Humanitrian aid has been turned into money for armamants;
- Kim's grandfather and father began a dynasty rich in military weaponry which Kim is duty-bound to not only preserve but improve.
Any future plans by the US, China, SK, Japan, etc., must include these variables.
I believe these are the facts in dealing with NK:
- Kim Jung Un is very vulnerable to violence, so he will never leave NK because it's not safe for him;
- any asset NK receives which can be turned into money or supplies for Kim's military advancement will be treated as such, despite many concerns about the humanitarian needs of the NK citizens. Humanitrian aid has been turned into money for armamants;
- Kim's grandfather and father began a dynasty rich in military weaponry which Kim is duty-bound to not only preserve but improve.
Any future plans by the US, China, SK, Japan, etc., must include these variables.
4
Thank you for calling my attention to these facts. It DOES require that Kim Jung Un reach down into his heart and do the right thing. You seem to be saying that its not likely he will do that. We are all in trouble if that is the case. Its a shame it wasn't tried earlier.
1
If the Chinese will agree to cut off oil and North Korea falls, the US should agree to withdraw from South Korea and it become neutral.
7
We cut off oil to Japan to force WWII, proving we know how to start a war.
Times change, but politicians never do.
Times change, but politicians never do.
48
Japan started and invaded China 4 years prior to attacking Pearl Harbor.
1
We cut of oil to Japan to prevent their brutal dominance of Asian countries. They chose to bomb us in retaliation. They forced our hand and we entered a world war already being played out in Europe. We did not start WW II.
2
The Japanese formed an alliance with Nazi Germany and Italy in 1940. The Japanese would have started the war, with or without an oil embargo by the US.
We all know how that war ended with the loss of so many people on both sides of the war!
We all know how that war ended with the loss of so many people on both sides of the war!
1
Again, NK is trying to assume a strategic defense for itself by continuing its nuclear program. They have every right to do so. The paranoia in the US is driven by Trump and the media. NK will not unilaterally attack any country allied with the US, knowing full well its total destruction would be ensured.
On the other hand, by developing its arsenal, it may also keep the planet's perpetual aggressor from the west from otherwise destroying it.
If anyone should be concerned it should be the SK's. I have actually spoken to a few who reside in the US. They have said people in SK are unafraid and disinterested by NK's behavior. Maybe our gov't should consider their advice.
On the other hand, by developing its arsenal, it may also keep the planet's perpetual aggressor from the west from otherwise destroying it.
If anyone should be concerned it should be the SK's. I have actually spoken to a few who reside in the US. They have said people in SK are unafraid and disinterested by NK's behavior. Maybe our gov't should consider their advice.
177
So: the world's most repressive dictatorship, with its long record of trampling on human rights & hostile, agressive saber-rattling, is actually only "trying to assume a strategic defense"---to protect itself from "the planet's perpetual aggressor from the west"....i.e. the United States.
What's the weather like on your planet?
What's the weather like on your planet?
4
You worry about the US destroying the North Korean regime.
Sane people are not worried about that.
They know, and you should too, that the US and Allies destroyed the German and Japanese regimes.
Are you sorry about the way Germans and Japanese live today?
Sane people are not worried about that.
They know, and you should too, that the US and Allies destroyed the German and Japanese regimes.
Are you sorry about the way Germans and Japanese live today?
2
They do not have every right to do so. They have not been threatened by anyone until only very recently.
The idea that tin-pot dictators have a right to develop nuclear weapons is a rather odd proposition if you ask me.
The idea that tin-pot dictators have a right to develop nuclear weapons is a rather odd proposition if you ask me.
1
If the Donald would stop being a playground bully with Kim, things would have a better chance to calm down. He has already backed down to Kim by insulting South Korea, so he can probably be bought. Maybe a Trump Tower in North Korea?
77
I wouldn't the be the least surprised.
3
It seems clear that neither Xi and Putin have common interest with the US that would have them work to limit petulant Kim from deploying thermonuclear missiles certain they are that Kim would never aim them at China or Russia but enjoy the discomfort of the US.
21
Nuclear poker being played by a president who thinks a bluff is the same as a twitter tantrum. How secure does that make you feel?
229
This is a no-win situation.
One cannot conduct diplomacy with an immature, irrational madman who clearly does not understand the consequences of nuclear warfare. Until the rest of the world takes this threat as seriously as we do, i.e., China and other enablers, and ceases to conduct ANY business with North Korea that can keep them financially afloat, we are simply waiting for Kim Jong-un to make an egregious mistake.
And he will.
One cannot conduct diplomacy with an immature, irrational madman who clearly does not understand the consequences of nuclear warfare. Until the rest of the world takes this threat as seriously as we do, i.e., China and other enablers, and ceases to conduct ANY business with North Korea that can keep them financially afloat, we are simply waiting for Kim Jong-un to make an egregious mistake.
And he will.
25
And the immature, irrational madman is Donald Trump, right?
9
I'd think you would show a litttle more respect for our President....
9
Which "immature, irrational madman who clearly does not understand the consequences of nuclear warfare" are you referring to, Kim Jong-un or Donald J. Trump?
55
Why are people so surprised that North Korea finally has nuclear tipped ICBMs? We have had them for 60 years, since June of 1957 in fact.
60
Not surprised. Annoyed.
1
Beyond North Korea's threat as a nuclear armed rogue state--which would invite massive retaliation if they attracted--is the issue of North Korea selling nuclear weapons or materials to non-state actors, i.e. terrorists.
9
Well, one way to deal with that is to recognize North Korea as a nation (i.e., end the Korean War) and then encourage North Korea to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Our leadership doesn't understand what diplomacy is. A good synonym for diplomacy is negotiation. Rather than engage South Korea and China in an attempt to negotiate an immediate reduction in tension with North Korea our leadership takes the opposite tack attempting threats and coercion toward South Korea, China and North Korea as the primary tool to achieve their aim. This creates a divisive atmosphere and stands zero chance of achieving peace. Let us not that the alternative to peace is war. In this particular instance nuclear war.
The American voters chose a person certain to go down this road in Donald Trump. A leader who is a hypocrite, the perfect storm; we are heading for a nuclear holocaust. Have fear, it is the right way to feel.
The American voters chose a person certain to go down this road in Donald Trump. A leader who is a hypocrite, the perfect storm; we are heading for a nuclear holocaust. Have fear, it is the right way to feel.
129
".. we are heading for a nuclear holocaust. Have fear, it is the right way to feel."
Funny, this is precisely what the North Korean leadership publishes in its propaganda material.
Its nonsense, of course. But it appears that the DPRK has succeeded in frightening you.
Funny, this is precisely what the North Korean leadership publishes in its propaganda material.
Its nonsense, of course. But it appears that the DPRK has succeeded in frightening you.
So, do you think there was a diplomatic solution prior to WWII to achieve "peace in our time"? We are past the point of negotiating with DPRK, since they have violated every agreement they have signed. It is time for real pressure from China and ROK - and they need some hard pressure from Trump to get their heads out of the sand and do something. As far as I am concerned, this is one of the few areas where Trump is not screwing up (or is the last unanimous UN resolution on DPRK negotiated by Trump's team another sign of incompetence?).
No, Donald Trump succeeded in frightening me, not the North Korean leadership.
1
This group of sad individuals that comprise the mouth piece for the US had best understand the written definition of their words and how they might be construed by that country they direct their words.
Who does this country (USA), have as allies that will aide (...?), in event of military confrontation?
Blusterious talk is not held lightly by the likes of the NK leadership who certainly has gotten under the skin of one POTUS!
Who does this country (USA), have as allies that will aide (...?), in event of military confrontation?
Blusterious talk is not held lightly by the likes of the NK leadership who certainly has gotten under the skin of one POTUS!
24
Meanwhile, in Iran....
7
If anyone thinks the much heralded deal with IRAN will not turn out the exact same way; you are hopelessly naive.
1
. . . Iran has been observing, to the letter, the terms of the nuclear accord reached with USA, France, Germany, UK, Russia and China-- to the discomfort of Trump who will probably try to scuttle the agreement with some phony incident or other pretext. USA has a long history of doing stuff like that
3
But hey! Know who is benefitting from all of this? Raytheon and Lockheed Martin as we sell weaponry to S. Korea so they can protect themselves from a nuclear armed N. Korea! Get it now????
What we need is diplomacy and resolving this US manufactured crisis is simple. STOP the yearly military exercises in exchange for the North's compliance. They won't give up their nukes. Nor should they as the US government is a menace and bully in it's worldwide regime change fetish.
The US is not interested in diplomacy as it's refusal to do so sends the signal that it's the US begging for war.