Trump and North Korea 2.0

Fifteen times North Korea has fired off a missile this year.

Fifteen times Nikki Haley has talked to the Security Council.

Fifteen times Haley has talked about threats to North Korea.

Fifteen times Haley has talked about more sanctions more severe than previous sanctions she had talked about.

Fifteen times Rex Tillerson has talked about diplomatic options.

Fifteen times James Mattis has talked about diplomatic options.

Fifteen times Mattis, Haley, and McMasters have talked about all options being on the table.

Fifteen times Trump has talked about all options being on the table.

Fifteen times Trump has talked about diplomatic efforts still ongoing.

Fifteen times Trump has talked to hostile regimes, China and Russia, asking them to rein in their ally, North Korea. So far, no such luck.

Fifteen times Trump talked about North Korea's actions to be unacceptable.

Fifteen times Trump talked about the idea that talking is over.

One, the number of times Trump has threatened to shoot down North Korea's missiles.

Zero, the number of times Trump has ordered the North Korean missiles shot down.

Perhaps, a new approach is in order.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.

 

It's a delicate situation, but what's happening is that NK's neighbors are starting to realize that they need to step up to the plate. So SK has asked about the possibility of the US deploying nuclear weapons on their soil, and Japan is going to be right behind them. This asian arms race is something that China doesn't want, so they're going to have to do something about NK, or there will be a whole lot more nukes in the area than they might feel comfortable with.

And then there's Russia which also shares a border with north korea...

There are enough juggernauts in the region that we don't have to do anything about NK. It's an asian problem, so let asians sort it out.

 

Shooting down missiles won't end NK's nuclear program.

Doing that would open a Pandora's Box of possible consequences, none of which are good.

Your problem is that you just don't like Trump.

If a nice acceptable Republican like Jeb Bush was president, and he was doing everything he could to end this problem peaceably before using military force - like U.N. sanctions, and talking to the Russians and Chinese, and warning North Korea, you would be in full support.

But, it's Trump, so ....

 

That said, it wouldn't be a bad idea to give Japan the same kind of Missile defense Dome that we gave the Israelis. We can say we're fulfilling treaty obligations while at the same time establishing a firmer presence in Asia as a stern warning to Kim Jong.

 

Yes, and if the Japanese were to threaten to develop their own nuclear deterrent, that would really get the attention of the Chinese and Russians, and it might spur them to do something about NK.

 

Shooting down North Korean missiles would also reveal more precise technical capabilities of US ABM/Theatre defenses to not only the North Koreans but to the Chinese and Russians as well.

 

I would love to think that but that hypothetical ICBM with that hypothetical miniaturized hydrogen bomb is aimed at us, hypothetically. Besides, China and Russia aren't worried about SK taking over the peninsula. They are concerned about American-led forces taking over the peninsula.

Asking for nuclear weapons is not the same thing as getting nuclear weapons.

I just don't think Russia and China are ready yet to help the U.S. by putting restraints on their ally, NK. They are probably enjoying the fear and anger Kim is causing in the U.S. The Trump administration wants us to believe that, but such a notion belies common sense.

 

Only one thing will stop NK's nuclear program. No one wants to go that far ... yet. The point is, we are doing something proactive. We aren't just talking anymore. The idea of talking Kim to death isn't working.

As for Pandora's Box, I don't think so. Kim is no fool. He is not suicidal, and he is not crazy. That fourth rate power is driving the lone superpower, us, crazy. That takes smarts. If his missiles drop harmlessly into the sea because we shot them down, what can he do that we can't do tenfold? He knows that.

Why does he do what he does? Because he assumes we will do nothing. He assumes we don't have the stomach for military action. For two decades he has been right. Trump can change that.

Seth, things have gotten far worse since the days of Clinton, Bush, and Obama. Maybe it is because Trump is such a novice. Kim has launched 15 missiles. that is more than all of last year. He now has an ICBM, capable of reaching the U.S. For the first time, he tested a hydrogen bomb, a thermonuclear device far stronger than previous tests. He now has a miniaturized nuclear war head capable of being mounted on an ICBM.

This has nothing to do with my feelings toward Trump. These are developments that have taken place while he has been President.

What is the alternative? Well, we can keep talking, and talking, and talking some more.

As if that will accomplish a damn thing.

 

Do you honestly think that will have any effect on Kim? We are in his cross-hairs, not Japan. IF there is a war, Japan might experience some collateral damage. IF there is a war, SK is our big concern.

 

Do we really want to add more nuclear-tipped nations? Do we really want Japan to have nuclear weapons. That adds a bunch of new problems without any guarantee it will solve the original one.

 

Great idea. Let's have a practical demonstration on how effective our anti-missile system is. That could solve a lot of our current problems.

 

What Kim is doing has nothing to do with Trump. North Korea has been on this path for decades. As their nuclear weapons program reaches maturity, it is coincidental that Trump is president.

Barring some miracle, we are going to war, Sandy.

We are giving peaceful options a chance, but mark my words... Right now, the Pentagon is drawing up war plans. The parts and pieces are being positioned and readied. Our U.N. ambassador just said publicly that she has no problem giving this problem over to General Mattis if no progress is seen from the sanctions. I don't know that our position can be more explicit. And don't tell me you think the U.S. is bluffing. They're not bluffing, Sandy.

I don't think we'll see anything happen for a little while. Nikki Haley and H. R. McMaster want the sanctions to have some time. They said so. I think we're looking at a matter of months, sometime in the first half of 2018. Could be all wrong, but that's my sense.

 

Nah, not really. I thought it might get China's attention and spur them to do something about NK. But I don't think it would make any difference to China, and I have just about lost all hope that their country might grow a pair and do something.

 

Wow, who recalls that super beautiful girl that boys were all wild about. So wild were they that nature caused a change to their private area.

I swear, i open the OP posts and see that same male enhanced thing taking place. Some say it is Trump derangement. The deliberate act of ignoring all the good to focus on what the OP perceives is the bad and ranting over the bad.

I long ago learned in good management the technique called the sandwich.

You make a kind comment.
Then you critique.
Then you end with a kind comment.

Makes a point and does not keep offending readers.

 

I now trust Japan with nuclear weapons. I think the world would get better off were Japan armed as we are armed. China has such arms. NK is run by a nut case. To go after Trump and not Un is kind of bewildering for my eyes to read. i don't get the excuses for the North Koreans and act as if their hostile acts are Trumps doing.

 

Look, Kim developed and developed when Obama was president. Remind me then when you kept lashing out at Obama? I don't recall you ever lashing out at Obama. Correct me then.

Do you want Trump and Congress to declare war? Then all holds are off and we can hurt NK like they can't even dream of being hurt.

 

And what if we missed? That will create a host of new problems.

 

Seth, that is a definite possibility. I simply said that critical developments occurred on Trump's watch. I didn't say it was personal.

I sincerely hope you are wrong. Mattis said that war on the Korean Peninsula would be catastrophic. The N.Y. Times reported, "North Korea has positioned as many as 8,000 artillery cannons and rocket launchers on its side of the Demilitarized Zone, analysts say, an arsenal capable of raining up to 300,000 rounds on the South in the first hour of a counterattack."

Seth, you and I both know these sanctions will be no more effective than the other 20 years of sanctions. That is because Russia and China refuse to cooperate. They give lip service to sanctions, and cause harsher steps to be removed so that they will pass S.C. resolutions.

 

Sandy, the U.S. has a very consistent pattern in the lead-up to a war. There are increasing public statements, diplomatic attempts, direct warnings, and then we act. Think about Gulf War 1, Afghanistan, and Iraq. That was the pattern in all of them. I am watching this exact same pattern unfold now.

And I have suggested that the U.S. act unilaterally, with no attacks launched from SK soil. And I have suggested that the U.S. inform the NK's that they may not attack Seoul with those 300,000 rounds of artillery. And I would inform them that, if they did, I would regard that as an illegal, unprovoked attack on a non-combatant ally of ours that was tantamount to a nuclear attack, and that the U.S. would immediately respond in kind - a nuclear attack. We would continue those attacks until NK ceased the attacks on Seoul. The responsibility for that outcome would lie with the NK's. They decide if they do or they don't, and they decide to accept those consequences or to avoid them.

We agree on this. These watered down sanctions won't work. A total embargo, with the Russians and Chinese wholeheartedly cooperating might work, but we're not going to get that from them. So lacking that, we're just going through the motions right now in the lead-up to war.

I'm sorry to have to say that.

Seth

 

That comment is a non sequitur. The issue has nothing to do with balls. China acts in China's best interests. Providing for the security of the U.S. is not in their best interests.

 

Read my post again, Robert. Once again, you created your own version of what I said. What you have said has very little to do with what I said, and I told you what I want to happen. You just need to read it.

 

That is so wrong. You did not speak of a consistent view such as you lashed out at Obama. Why flee from what you did over Obama.

Why not be simple. Do you want Trump to go to war with Korea? You are greatly stressed out he talks to them.

 

Yes, I have thought about that. It is a concern, but better to know now rather than when an ICBM is aimed at us. Besides, if we miss, what will Kim do? Gloat? Well, he is already doing that. Gloating over our total ineffectiveness. Trump, Mattis, McMasters, and Haley keep making threats, the same threats made a month ago, two months ago, six months ago, and nothing happens.

We need to change that scenario.

 

The OP would be the first one bitching if the US shoots down anyone's missile as "an unprovoked act of war"

 

I think I told you already that Trump plans to shoot down Kim's missiles were they to threaten our allies.