He is being buried in this thread by some very smart people.

We don't really have to list all the US's war crimes, imprisonment of people without a trial, torture of people, execution of its own people for crimes (unlike any other Western country), imposition of rulers on foreign sovereign states etc do we? I'm having trouble imagining what this moral framework looks like right now.

And that's just before Trump gets started.

Say hello to Trump and his inner circle. What planet are you on?

Okay, but I'm mostly interested in your view about when, if ever, military force should be used to stop a regime like in NK from acquiring nuclear weapons.

No it doesn't.

As a last resort when all feasible attempts at diplomacy (including via third party countries) have failed, and North Korea has done nothing to assuage fears that it's about to become the world's first suicide bomber state.

When you put it like that it doesn't sound very plausible, does it?

If the far right patriotic loonies would prefer to hear it from a fellow American here, have this:

2+2 post

This is the result of leftist idiocy. Jalfrezi literally doesn't understand the state of the world. The entire world is contested.

China is on the rise, bullying their neighbors and trying to take control of the south China Sea, building artificial islands with weapons on them.

Russia is geographically challenged and is currently employing a destabilization strategy on their buffer countries and absolutely willing to flex their muscle if NATO tries absorbing any of them - rightfully so.

No one has any idea what the **** is going on in Turkey, a strategically vital NATO Ally that monitors waterways the Russian navy needs and is shining example of secular Islam. A complete joke.

The European Union is a constant concern, with Russia eyeing up natural gas opportunities, and licking their chops at the idea of their collapse.

Iran is a question mark and their true intentions are still not clear. And if course that makes the Israelis nervous and if they pre-empt we have a diaster on our hands.

We are already discussing how potentially dangerous the North Korea situation is.

Not to mention Islamic terrorism in ISIS, the Taliban, Hezbollah, boko Haram, and let's not forget across the Western countries who INVITED THEM IN.

Yeah, folks, the entire ****ing planet is a big fat mess, and it's our fault. We did all this, we caused these problems across the planet. Not all of us mind you, just the white supremacist, capitalist, Christian scum of the western world.

Pay very close attention. People like jalfrezi are the direct result of weak, unpatriotic, self-hating liberal whites across Western Civilization. This is what we get with that line of thought. This is the danger we are in with people who think like him.

Choose a side.

Without choosing a side, I think you're forgetting one of the most important things. Currency. We are in debt up to our eyeballs and (at least according to some experts), are on the brink of a bubble that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

There is risk everywhere. The next few years are going to be rough.

The US can continue to ignore the size of its debt and even increase it as long as the dollar is still the global reserve currency.

When that ends it's gg USA.

if debt is going to trigger a global crisis it'll happen from china or japan, our debt is "under control" as of this moment

This is what is in the works.

1) The US is gonna lay down some heavy sanctions on China for not holding it's end of the bargain in eliminating coal exports from NK. China Has also been supplying the launchers and missiles.

2) extreme sanctions will also be placed on NK. Certain banks and big companies will be warned not to do business with NK.

3) If the above doesn't show results, miner military action will be used. Specifically, NK will be warned that any test missile fired will be shot down.

Scott Adams has an interesting opinion...

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1626324...orea-situation

By-the-bye...

I suppose folks participating itt have already considered that the PDRK missile and nuclear programs seem to have taken a quickening of the pace since Iran agreed to the 2015 nuclear framework.

One aspect of the 2015 deal was that Iran would find themselves free from various financial sanctions which would have considerably increased their working capital.

It is my opinion that PDRK is a rational actor.

Thus, having a few ICBMs and perhaps a small number of nuclear (and chemical or biological) warheads does not mean they are under the delusion that they could repulse an invasion lead by the US using these weapons. The Kims know they face the identical outcome Saddam experienced should the actually provoke the US, "too far". They know that Russia and China will not go to war to protect the Kim family. Their primary defense remains their artillery targeting 5-15 million ROK citizens, who would die essentially defenseless within 36 hrs of the beginning of open warfare. The ROK will not risk open war with the PDRK given the current setup. So the stalemate will continue, IMO.

Seems to me, the rational coarse of action is to take over missile and nuclear development from Iran for a substantial fee (partially paid in oil). This notionally keeps Iran in compliance, and the PDRK can afford to suffer under ongoing sanctions, especially if China isn't going to take the whole matter seriously since it distracts Japan and the US from it's terra-forming endeavors.

Further, it is rational for the PDRK to understand that the American people have little appetite for invasion on the Korean peninsula. While continuing sanctions will... continue, this is likely the worst that the PDRK will suffer, even if it becomes apparent that they are building missiles for Iran.

Ymmv.

Because he thinks MAD will work and express that view he is unpatriotic. Kind of unamerican thinking there. Freedom and liberty and all. You might just fit in with some of those people on the other side of the oceans more then you think.

Apparently you don't understand what MAD means.

Let's do a little test - which counties on the planet are actually mutually assured destruction in a nuclear exchange?

It does not matter what it means or if its reasonable. Expressing ideas is one of the essences of America. Saying someone would be unpatriotic for doing that is messed up and completely misses the point of America and its values.

What do you mean they can afford to suffer? By what rationale do you think it's okay to let the people of PDRK to suffer? You don't really think any amount of sanctions is going to put a dent in the life of KJU, do you?

Again, you make it sound like the population of a nation suffering is no big deal. Is this some form of stoic showmanship, or do you really not care about people suffering?

I'm describing the situation from the POV of the PDRK ruling class.

They think its ok to let their people suffer.

I don't.

But should we sacrifice the lives of 5 million or more ROK citizens and 50,000 US troops because PDRK citizens are suffering? No.

This is the crux of the situation. People suffer across the world. At what point does someone intervene?

They intervene when their own interests are at risk. North Korea matters when our own security becomes an issue. South Korea and Japan matter due to economics but when it escalates to ICBMs threatening the united States the game changes.

India and Pakistan have nukes but we allow it because we are sure they don't nuke anyone but each other. Israel has nukes but we are sure they will only use it in defense, so we allow it.

The suffering of North Koreans is simply a talking point when conveniently used as a justification of our actions. The reality is they don't mean anything to us, as sad as that is. That's the truth.

party of fear and hate.

I just don't think the ruling class suffers one bit under sanctions. It's the average citizen that does.

I honestly don't know. At least you're offering a solution. If it's true that countries like Russia, China, etc.al. won't care enough to get involved then I think military options might prove most efficient.

My biggest concern if we topple another crazy dictator is would we be opening an Asian version of Iraq? I wouldn't think so, but I have no idea how many factions are over there struggling for power. We'd have to have a deal already made with China, NK, Japan, etc. how they would split it up.

I agree the loss of life is always unpleasant during war. But if we were to take action, I don't see this as being much of a ground battle. I'm not even sure we could win a ground battle with NK. This would be a war prosecuted almost entirely from the air. It would have to be fought with overwhelming force and be one of the quickest fought and won wars in our history. And yes, ironically that might necessitate the use of nukes. There would be way too much loss of life otherwise.

I have not stated my opinion on a course of action, btw, except that at the moment, I expect the current stalemate to continue.

I am merely pointing out that PDRK missiles and nuclear/biological/chemical warheads are not necessarily a direct threat to North America any time soon.

PDRK pulled out of the nuclear proliferation treaty. It seems fairly obvious that they are selling these technologies.

So in one breath, your were irate with me because you thought I was accepting of human suffering.

Then in the next breath you characterise loss of life (due to open war) as "unpleasant".

~~~

A war with the PDRK would be a human tragedy the scale of which hasn't been seen since 1916.

The PDRK would launch chemical weapons from heavily fortified artillery pieces which would probably be very difficult to attack by air.

To say it might involve the US using nuclear weapons is a complete failure to understand the current status of US nuclear weapons. We do not have any "tactical" nukes. We do not have anything that could reasonably be used to win a battle or punch a hole in a front. All of US nuclear weapons are used strategically -- they are massive, and would take out entire cities.