Sanctions relief is free.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/855044659999117312

North Korea warns of 'super-mighty preemptive strike' as U.S. plans next move

I guess last week's warning of a mighty pre-emptive strike wasn't strong enough.

Yes and no. Some country or countries will directly benefit from the new trade. Also, in the past hasn't there been straight up cash payments transferred to the regime?

I believe there have been cash payments.

Lifting sanctions should benefit some other countries sure. That's better than free.

Rereading this, the bold is the problem. The N. Koreans never "go quiet" (in terms of advancing their nuclear/delivery programs) after signing agreements to change their behavior. . That's why this issue is about to boil over.

I believe last week Tillerson said as much -- that the U.S. isn't going to play the signed agreements game anymore with the N. Koreans. Frankly, I don't blame the administration for changing the U.S.'s posture in this regard.

Actually they do. Go look at the history of when they've started acting all belligerent, what's been done as a response, and when they start back up again. Basically they've been paid off for like 30 years now and it's been working fine. Lots of brinksmanship for sure, but nobody so far has died that I'm aware of. Hell the US has probably made a profit off the deals.

It's not like there are any other good options by the way. It's basically either a) you pay him off or b) you go in there and kill him. But since option b would probably result in about five million dead Koreans and about 150,000 dead American soldiers -- and that's to say nothing of the trillion or so dollars it would cost -- it's not really a very attractive notion if you ask me.

Has it been? More importantly, does the Trump administration think so?

Here are the dates of the five nuclear tests the N. Koreans have conducted:

Oct, 2006
May, 2009
Feb., 2013
Jan., 2016
Sept., 2016

It's no wonder ppl are alarmed and additional tests could create a tipping point.

Experts say the N. Koreans are building up their stockpile (estimates of 13-21 weapons now).

We see the N. Koreans taking active steps to perfect their missle delivery systems.

How is all this progress taking place if everything is working fine?

Should the West just allow the N. Koreans to perfect their delivery systems and produce more weapons? Would appeasement embolden the Iranians to push their nuclear program forward?

These are certainly tricky questions. Unforunately, several foreign policy experts don't see the U.S. standing idly by while this happens. Things are coming to a head quickly. What really sucks is that the timing is taking place during the Orange Clown's administration.

Well again, the question becomes what do you actually want the administration to do? Because if the answer is to go in there and kill him then you're looking at hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dead soldiers and civilians, trillions of dollars spent, and potential global conflict, and all in an effort that might lead to the very disaster that's trying to be avoided, which is namely a nuke being set off in some capacity either as a defensive or offensive weapon.

Compare that to making a deal of some sort and it's an easy decision in my opinion. Kim doesn't want to die, so in that regard he's nowhere near as scary as some of the folks in Pakistan, and they've had nukes for like 20 years. The USA talked tough about non-proliferation back then too, but at the end of the day there wasn't anything it could do. There isn't this time either.


Also worth pointing out is that I'm not really sure who I'd rather have in control of a bunch of nukes; Kim Jong Un, or Donald J Trump. It's kind of a close call, to be honest.

My pay grade/knowledge is too low to answer.

The Dear Leader

So, China is on high alert today, SK is on high alert today, and I just read that Russia has moved troops and equipment to their NK border. Are we expecting a missile failure or nuclear test soon (before the armada actually arrives)?

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/855402215544061953

Source? This is utterly new to me. My memory is that officially, Washington refuses to say.

Set in concrete on what issue? What is the dispute to be defused?

They have been periodically having barkfests for decades. It is a well-established pattern. What is different this time?

The last US invasion of North Korea got creamed. They don't want to go there again. A new conflict would be many times worse. I believe the Joint Chiefs would bundle Trump into a chopper and drop him in the Chesapeake before they let him get Seoul incinerated.

Not to be all patriotic, but creamed is a weird way to characterize it and I think is the wrong lesson. Well before the end of the war and well before bombing ended our air force was complaining that there were no targets left. There may have not been any building of more than one story left in all of NK.

The lesson is that an outside power cannot win a civil war.

I can give you a source for shortstanding military and strategic policy that the US may be the first to use nuclear weapons.

I agree with that lesson. My choice of hyperbole was because it is not widely appreciated how badly that war went. After the Chinese entered, it was the longest retreat, distance wise, in US history. Secretary of State Dean Acheson called it the worst defeat since Bull Run. MacArthur wanted to create a barrier of radioactive cobalt between NK and China.

The shortage of air targets was for a short time after NK was trounced and before China entered the war. And yes, as you hint, civilians in the cities were specifically targeted, just like WWII, and reduced to living in caves.

There's another lesson here. And that is that proxy wars are endless wars. If this were World War II we would have bombed the hell out of China while we were invading North Korea. It's also why Germany could never have won World War II. If you cannot touch the areas where all the weapons and resources are coming from then you can't win the war.

NK is in a tough spot. They give up nuclear weapons, they are done, at least the leadership. They keep the nuclear weapons and we continue to starve them.

I don't see them giving them up. Their identity. Keeps them relevant. A pre-emptive strike is scary. NK is definitely prepared for that and I am sure they have a secret nuclear weapon somewhere that they will use. It could be world-altering if they do hit a major city. Do we then go in and obliterate the entire country in response? It isn't like you can use the land. Probably be barren for 50 years.

I think you have to use diplomacy whatever that means.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The countries that currently have nuclear weapons telling other countries they can't have nuclear weapons would be like the biggest school bullied allowed to hassle anyone.

In a world where everyone is an aggressor or in danger of being attacked, it would seem logical that you try to build a nuclear weapon. Countries haven't yet attached a country that has them. Known that Israel and South Africa have them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...uclear_weapons

Status of World Nuclear Forces

North Korea 'ready to sink' US aircraft carrier

I'll believe their bull**** threats when I see it. Don't get me wrong KJI is a psycho but I can't believe he's that stupid to basically declare war on the US / risk the US declaring war on NK.

...or alive enough.

lol sick catch.