Just a reminder:



https://twitter.com/vali_nasr/status/852946281815322624

Who needs ambassadors when you can have nuclear apocalypse?

the time for diplomacy is over

Weird thing about this is how detached your average American is from it. Think most people are just used to the US having their way with middle eastern countries in combat and no shared sacrifice being involved in these missions.

If **** really popped off with NK/japan/SK/US it could really potentially change our lives forever. And yet people aren't exactly on edge about it.

Checked Japan news on Google and apparently there is a "potato chip crisis" which NYT and WaPo have both picked up. Guess it might just be a bad week.

They'll all be too busy on their twitter feeds to see the bombs coming anyway.

Like how is the nikkei down only .49% in the last trading session.

I guess if the world ends it won't really matter what the final price it closed at is, but umm, there is a little volatility in that region right now.

It just feels like nobody expects anything bad to happen because the world has been a relatively safe place for the last 70 years and they can't fathom a nuke bloodbath.

Well, my alcohol consumption has gone up recently if that is any indication.

The risk of huge catastrophic events tends to be underrated in markets... I think that was one of the takeaways from The Big Short.

North Korea showcasing a few new ICBM's

https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/stat...51562788999168

That's assuming they are real of course.

"The number of missiles and the capability on display here is quite disturbing."

That's how every other country looks at the U.S. every day.

same fake missles, different year.

North Korea has been more bark than biye for a long time. Issuing threats us utterly standard.

I've lost count of the times POTUS states 'we'll solve North Korea' (sending a few rusty warships their way) and NK retaliates with 'all out nuclear war will be met with all out nuclear war'

Standard

Have To Make A Deal

From the perspective of the United States, the options with respect to North Korea are bad - and worse. That's why no U.S. President (going back to at least Clinton) has dealt with the problem of North Korea and nuclear weapons - they've all preferred to pass the buck on to their successor. Now, with NK right on the brink of having deliverable nuclear weapons, the time for passing the buck is over.

From the perspective of Kim Jung Un and dictators around the world, they're vividly aware of what happens to leaders the United States doesn't like. They wind up hanging at the end of a rope (Saddam Hussein) or dragged out of a drain pipe and beaten to death (Muammar Khaddafi) or killed on the steps of the Presidential Palace (Salvador Allende) in a CIA-sponsored coup. Dictators, especially paranoid repressive dictators, know that the only real protection against being deposed and/or murdered by the United States is the possession of deliverable nuclear weapons. The "bomb" is the great equalizer. Once you have the ability to literally destroy another country - wipe it off the face of the earth - that "other country" thinks twice before trying to eliminate you. (Surrounded by enemies, the nation of Israel has managed to survive in no small part due to the nuclear arsenal they possess. Nuclear weapons = security.)

So, given these facts, it would appear that we're at an impasse. Kim Jung Un is determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability as he sees that as his only true guarantee of survival and remaining in power. Donald Trump is equally determined that Un never obtains that capability. Donald Trump sees this as a matter of national security - North Korea having the bomb is a direct threat to our survival. As the lyrics to the old Johnny Mercer song go: Something's gotta give.

There is a possible solution to this problem which does have a precedent in history. It's a variation on how the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 was resolved and nuclear war was averted. The United States and Russia stared down the abyss of Armageddon and quickly realized that they both had to figure a way out since destroying the world over a damn island wasn't a good idea - for either side. In the end, a deal was struck. In exchange for agreeing to withdraw their "offensive missiles" from Cuba, (under UN monitoring and supervision), Russia obtained a pledge from the United States that we would cease trying to overthrow Fidel Castro and Cuba's [communist] government. That "agreement" has held in place to this day as Castro managed to outlast eleven U.S. Presidents - despite numerous CIA plots and attempts to destabilize and try to eliminate him.

North Korea is not going to halt their attempt to obtain nuclear weapons. There is a deep mindset in NK that having these weapons is their only guarantee against eventually being invaded and/or toppled by the United States. This fear (for their security) is visceral. A deal, a binding deal, (possibly brokered by the UN), will have to be reached where the United States agrees never to attempt to depose, by force or direct military action, the Government of North Korea. North Korea, in exchange for this pledge, will agree - under UN supervision - to halt their pursuit of nuclear weapons and not attempt to develop such weapons in the future. There are a lot of details that will have to be worked out for such an agreement to come to fruition, but the alternative to reaching such an agreement, (i.e. eventual war), will avoid [possibly] millions of deaths and casualties.

The United States - not to mention China - has a vested interest in reaching such an agreement. A major conflagration on the Korean peninsula will produce enormous strains for both nations - not to mention South Korea and Japan. This is another reason why past U.S. Presidents have put the North Korean problem on the back burner. They've known that dealing decisively [militarily] with NK will unleash a Pandora's box of problems ...

Whether we like it or not, trying to reach a negotiated settlement to this problem is preferable to going down the military road. (It's also preferable to having a nuclear armed North Korea.) One thing is almost certain. Without such an agreement, the status quo will not hold indefinitely ... If North Korea keeps advancing toward having a nuclear capability, there will [eventually] be war - and it won't be pleasant.

Sounds like the US welched on its pledge.

So NK just launched a missile - - but it failed. US military is assessing for more details.

**** I thought we faded a NK test this weekend when they didn't launch last night or early this morning.

Edit: my pony test failed.

Nope. Trying to think, why now at this hour of the morning? Is Pence just arriving in SK or something? Wonder where it was headed and what was in it. And what response will there be from our maniac? This is getting intense.

Trump was just briefed. China might become a currency manipulator again.

I'm beginning to wonder if the US is any better than ISIS.

It would be "interesting" to observe the reaction of US allies to a nuclear strike without provocation.

Apparently the President's comment is to not comment.
https://twitter.com/mitchellreports/...08667579887616

trump dgaf if pence dies in the seoul nuke, people keep calling him dumb, but he gets **** like this better than most on 2p2 would.

Yank the 'Fearless Girl' imo. (or just face her in the same direction ... or whatever really idgaf I just thought this was a decent read :x)

Nice Take.