North Korea: Do we or don't we (invade)?

[Musburger1]

What now? Well apparently the knee-jerk, drama queen, we're doomed conclusion is the default setting as usual.

Patience grasshopper. China has the power to leverage this and DT has them willing to actually do so for once. All sides are in the posturing/response phase.

China will reign them in as they're already speaking of crippling sanctions. If China joins the rest in sanctions, NK has no choice.

We have demanded they give up their nuke program. There is no way they will give that up. They view it as their Trump card to deter an attack so that they don't become the next Iraq, Libya, or Syria, none of which possessed a deterrent.

 

[Brad Austin]

We have demanded they give up their nuke program. There is no way they will give that up. They view it as their Trump card to deter an attack so that they don't become the next Iraq, Libya, or Syria, none of which possessed a deterrent.

China will be offering NK an agreement for guaranteed protection against invasion if they give them up. China has a huge strategic interest in NK for their own reasons. Offering them an agreement with invasion protection like a NATO member country has from the other NATO countries is not a hollow offering.

NK won't give up the program until they absolutely have to. But China can make that happen. Make no mistake, China can/will get what they want from NK if they demand it and are serious. They control their entire ability to exist by trade and security.

With DT, Xi now has nothing to lose and much to gain by backing this play to denuclearize NK. Everyone is safer without a nuclear armed NK and China will get benefits for making it happen. Not to mention, he was always going to protect them from an unprovoked invasion to protect his own interests.

 

[Brad Austin]

How about we stop knee-jerking and predicting doomsday three times a week and let things play out?

Last week we were supposedly invading Syria 150k troops strong because deep state has converted DT to their invasion agenda. A nonsensical claim that's already tossed out.

Relax, it'll all be fine, things take time to develop. Strategy involves patience.

 

[Musburger1]

If China makes that proposal, that they will guarantee protection, that sounds reasonable. But I haven't seen that.

 

[Brad Austin]

I've read it a few places...but here's a quick one I just found for you to glance at....

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/0...rea-protection-dismantling-of-nuclear-program

 

[Musburger1]

How about we stop knee-jerking and predicting doomsday three times a week and let things play out?

Just last week we were supposedly invading Syria 150k troops strong because the deep state has converted DT to their invasion agenda. A nonsensical claim that's already tossed out.

Relax, it'll all be fine, things take time to develop. Strategy involves patience.

It was deflected by Trump, but McMaster indicated it's still being discussed (the 50,000 or however many troops). Trump's latest tweet means zero to anyone. He changes his mind like other people change shirts.

 

[Musburger1]

I want China to invade North Korea and fix the mess they have enabled. China should bear the costs of removing the regime and bringing North Korea into the 21st century.

China isn't going to invade. It would result in a massive retaliation against anyone within range of Nort Korea's arsenal.

 

[Musburger1]

The offer to protect North Korea, while capable of defusing the recent tensions, could theoretically put China in a position to fight off any and all future aggressors on North Korea’s behalf. It was not clear how far China would go in doing that.

It was also not immediately known what guarantees China would be willing to offer to protect North Korea if Pyongyang did agree to end its military nuclear program. No details were available on what would happen to North Korea’s missile program, either.

Brad, sounds like a starting point but no specifics. It would come down to whether Kim trusts China enough to sign such an agreement and also whether China would be willing to follow through on such a promise. If North Korea refuses, China can cut off energy supplies (coal) but that's about the only sane punitive option. A US attack would be crazy in terms of the risk.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Why would NK give up it's nuclear ambitions? It gives them negotiating power across the board, including with China.

NK is simply looking for the best possible deal that allows them to transparently or covertly continue to forward with their nuclear program. In the past that deal has involved food.

 

[Musburger1]

Why would NK give up it's nuclear ambitions? It gives them negotiating power across the board, including with China.

NK is simply looking for the best possible deal that allows them to transparently or covertly continue to forward with their nuclear program. In the past that deal has involved food.

The incentive to give up the nukes is to escape annihilation. But the US has demonstrated it will annihilate countries which have no deterrent. Hence our threats are perceived as coming from an imperical power on search of conquest rather than from a country wanting de-escalation for the sake of stability.

 

[utempire]

If you have a psycho path running a rogue nation like N. Korea then everyone should be worried about the future. He kills his own family members. He's looking for power not protection. Obama let these guys do whatever they want and it's now time to fix his mess.

 

[Seattle Husker]

The incentive to give up the nukes is to escape annihilation. But the US has demonstrated it will annihilate countries which have no deterrent. Hence are threats are perceived as coming from an imperical power on search of conquest rather than from a country wanting de-escalation for the sake of stability.

Once a country has a demonstrated nuclear capability, they get far different treatment than during the build up. Assuming NK really believes it is at risk of an attack from the US, I don't see why they'd cave to even China's demands unless the situation (i.e. starvation) was so dire in NK that their hand was forced.

 

[Seattle Husker]

If you have a psycho path running a rogue nation like N. Korea then everyone should be worried about the future. He kills his own family members. He's looking for power not protection. Obama let these guys do whatever they want and it's now time to fix his mess.

I'd agree NK is unpredictable. How do you fix it though?

 

[Musburger1]

I'd agree NK is unpredictable. How do you fix it though?

The scenario Brad alluded to - combination of Chinese sanctions as a stick and promise to protect as a carrot - is probably the best possibility. If North Korea doesn't take that offer, you hope China stays with the sanctions and they come around. And if sanctions don't work, you live with the fact they will obtain intercontinental nuclear weapons and accept a MAD relationship will have to hold the peace. Kim may be unstable but North Korea hasn't launched any wars I'm aware of. On the other hand, that's all the US does now.

 

[Brad Austin]

One thing to remember is severe Chinese sanctions against NK would be uniquely crippling in comparison to others we've seen around the world.

85% of NK's imports (2.95b) come from China. 83% of NK's exports (2.34b) go to China. NK has a trade deficit of 610 mil per year with China.

Not to mention China could replace NK's functions as a trade partner at the drop of a hat by spreading it out among several other willing partners.

NK doesn't have such an alternative because of previous sanctions limiting the ability of others to trade with them.

And if China were to threaten severe sanctions, U.N. countries would join in by ratcheting up their sanctions to prohibit anyone else picking up the slack.

Iran won't swoop in to save the day as they don't have the cash nor desire to fill China's shoes for a country with no regional strategic military use to them.

If China says 'do this or else' and Lil Fatty tells Xi to kick rocks. China has the ability to swiftly cripple the NK economy like we've never seen sanctions do before.

Lil Kim would have three choices...willingly forfeit the nuclear program, guaranteed economic collapse (always leads to regime change), or suicidal military engagement.

 

[Seattle Husker]

The scenario Brad alluded to - combination of Chinese sanctions as a stick and promise to protect as a carrot - is probably the best possibility. If North Korea doesn't take that offer, you hope China stays with the sanctions and they come around. And if sanctions don't work, you live with the fact they will obtain intercontinental nuclear weapons and accept a MAD relationship will have to hold the peace. Kim may be unstable but North Korea hasn't launched any wars I'm aware of. On the other hand, that's all the US does now.

I'd agree that China is the only hope of curbing NK's nuclear ambitions but I'm also not sure that China cares enough. They benefit from how much attention the US gives to NK.

Kim Jong-un was educated in western culture. I don't suspect he's suicidal or particularly crazy enough to launch a nuclear attack, not unlike Sadam Hussein. Instead, Kim is more worried about maintaining/expanding his own power of which is military confrontation with the US would run counter to that aim.

 

[Seattle Husker]

One thing to remember is severe Chinese sanctions against NK would be uniquely crippling in comparison to others we've seen around the world.

85% of NK's imports (2.95b) come from China. 83% of NK's exports (2.34b) go to China. NK has a trade deficit of 610 mil per year with China.

Not to mention China could replace NK's functions as a trade partner at the drop of a hat with other willing partners.

NK doesn't have such an alternative because of previous sanctions limiting the ability of others to trade with them.

And if China were to threaten severe sanctions, U.N. countries would join in by ratcheting up their sanctions to prohibit anyone else picking up the slack.

Iran won't swoop in to save the day as they don't have the cash nor desire to fill China's shoes for a country with no regional strategic military use to them.

If China says 'do this or else' and Lil Fatty tells Xi to kick rocks. China has the ability to swiftly cripple the NK economy like we've never seen sanctions do before.

If you think China will say "do this or else" in support of a US position then I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[Musburger1]

China doesn't want to see a THAAD system in South Korea, and I'm not sure the Chinese think US leadership is stable with Trump, McMurtry, Mattis, and even Patreus calling the shots. And I'm not sure the US leadership is stable. I think China will try to get some concessions out of North Korea and also insist if North Korea plays ball, that the US does not follow through with the THAAD anti-ballistic system in South Korea which neither Russia, China, or many of the South Korean citizens want.

 

[Brad Austin]

I think China will try and also insist if North Korea plays ball, that we do not follow through with the THAAD anti-ballistic system in South Korea which neither Russia, China, or many of the South Korean citizens want.

Totally agree and it's exactly why we're in the process of putting THAAD there (won't be operation for a while). Sure it was for defense, but more so to have a big poker chip to deal with. I fully expect DT to agree to remove THAAD systems as part of any NK deal.

He knew this all along. Hell I knew it the day I heard they were going through with it...to get China to wake up and take it serious.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Is it possible to keep a determined "bad actor" country from a achieving nuclear/chemical capabilities absent full-scale invasion? An option is to make their journey as onerous as possible to delay the inevitable.

I don't think it is possible. This is 1930s and '40s technology. Any country that really wants nuclear weapons can figure out how to develop a program. Probably the hardest part is getting the enriched uranium and a delivery system, but even that is getting easier and easier to do.

My big issue is that I don't see how these deals actually make the journey more onerous. What seems to happen is that the Western democracies give tangible and definite concessions (sanctions relief, nuclear reactors, oil, money, etc.) in exchange for largely unverifiable promises not to develop a nuclear program. If the country is entirely trustworthy, then great, but if they are trustworthy enough to keep up their end of the deal, then they wouldn't be the first country I'd fear having nuclear weapons. What I'd rather see us do is use economic and political leverage to delay the process and then be economically and militarily prepared if and when the bad apple gets a bomb.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I don't think it is possible. This is 1930s and '40s technology. Any country that really wants nuclear weapons can figure out how to develop a program. Probably the hardest part is getting the enriched uranium and a delivery system, but even that is getting easier and easier to do.

I agree wholeheartedly. Political pundits that blame X administration for not removing the nuclear capability assume it's possible. To be sure, the lessons since 1945 is that any country that has nuclear bombs will not be invaded by another country. Countries like Iran and NK know this.

My big issue is that I don't see how these deals actually make the journey more onerous. What seems to happen is that the Western democracies give tangible and definite concessions (sanctions relief, nuclear reactors, oil, money, etc.) in exchange for largely unverifiable promises not to develop a nuclear program. If the country is entirely trustworthy, then great, but if they are trustworthy enough to keep up their end of the deal, then they wouldn't be the first country I'd fear having nuclear weapons. What I'd rather see us do is use economic and political leverage to delay the process and then be economically and militarily prepared if and when the bad apple gets a bomb.

Neither NK or Iran can be trusted to kill their nuclear ambitions.

I don't know the deals well enough to be sure. It does seem that the Clinton deal delayed NK's evolution for 5-10 years and it only cost us some food aid.

Iran? The jury is still out on that front. Releasing their frozen $$ seemed to be a steep price to pay albeit it wasn't our money to begin with. I think the sanctions, while currently effective, would have waned over time as the other less supportive members of the Big 6 (Russia, China) would have resumed trading shortly. The question there will be whether the inspections are enough to delay Iran's attainment of a nuclear ICBM.

 

[Seattle Husker]

So, the Carl Vinson whom the White House said was heading to the Korean Peninsula as a show of force? It actually traveled to the Indian Ocean for military exercises there. Evidently a miscommunication between the White House and military brass. Oops!

 

[iatrogenic]

Apparently, the story about liberal gullibility concerning fake news is true.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Apparently, the story about liberal gullibility concerning fake news is true.

What fake news? Here is a timeline of the events. Ultimately, the USS Carl Vinson will get to the Korean Peninsula but the initial bluster which was celebrated by some was just that, bluster. It appears the military exercises with Australia in the Indian Ocean were more important thus North Korea can wait.

April 8th:

Adm. Harry Harris, the commander of US Pacific Command, directed the USS Carl Vinson strike group to sail north to the Western Pacific after departing Singapore on Saturday, Pacific Command announced.

 

[iatrogenic]

Exactly. Fake news.

 

[Joe Fan]

Word is that entire Senate has been summoned to White House for a briefing on North Korea
Rare event

FWIW, Wednesday night is a no moon night over NoKo

 

[Musburger1]

The carper bombing begins if you shut down the government.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Seattle Husker]

I won't be concerned until they threaten to strap nuclear bombs onto highly trained sharks.

 

[Joe Fan]

Apparently we are saying China now views North Korea as a threat