Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Personally, I don't think it's acceptable for the North Korean tyrant to always keep the U.S. and South Korea and Japan living on a knife's edge, terrified of breathing the wrong way lest he fire off his missiles. He's got us over a barrel, and I think it's time we put a stop to it. The mere fact that he constantly threatens us, and delights in holding the Sword of Damocles over our heads, is justification for us to enact regime change, in my opinion.
I suggest gradually ramping up the pressure. Start with tightening sanctions, as we've already done. Getting the United Nations (including China and Russia) on board is helpful, symbolically if nothing else. If that doesn't work (which it probably won't), start responding more forcefully. Shoot down his missiles, if we're able to, at any time that they fly over Japan or any other ally. Fire warning shots across the bows of any ships heading to or from North Korean ports, and then sink them if they refuse to be boarded and inspected. Yes, these actions would move things closer to the brink; but it also just might let Kim Jung-un know that we're serious. And maybe it would be enough to cause him to back down.
Along with the stick, we need carrots. We need ways to demonstrate that we desire peace, and for every step he takes to reduce his nuclear program, we do something in return. No, I'm not saying we should just bribe him, as Clinton did. That didn't work and never will. But something concrete, and verifiable, done step-by-step, might work. For every step he takes, we ease off the sanctions. Maybe the ultimate prize would be that if he totally abandons his weapons program, and points his artillery away from Seoul, we reward him by withdrawing our military from South Korea. (Of course, the relevant treaty obligations regarding mutual aid between the U.S. and South Korea would remain in force, if needed.)
Of course, there's still the horrific human-rights abuses that he is heaping upon the unfortunate North Korean people. Forcibly deposing Rocket Boy would be morally correct, for that alone. But apparently the world community doesn't have the stomach to unite as one to militarily compel regime change, so the North Korean people are just out of luck.
In short, your only plan is to start a war to avoid a war. Do you not understand how insane that sounds?
In short, your only plan is to start a war to avoid a war. Do you not understand how insane that sounds?
My plan is to stop a demonstrably evil madman from holding one of the world's largest cities hostage, by any means up to and including force. What's your plan?
I see a lot of people on the left and in the MSM really getting a kick out of using the NK issue as a way to attack the president disingenuously. Imo, it is somewhat damaging to the country and other countries such as South Korea as well.
What do they think he should do in regards to this issue that was thrown into his lap less than a year after he was elected? Past administrations did not have to deal with a fully armed, and nuclear capable North Korea.
If diplomacy and sanctions do not work, NK just ignores the world, and they finish their nuclear program... what should he do?
Let's throw down the gauntlet and see the left and the MSM take their stance now. Let's hear your answer.
If NK threatens to launch nukes at South Korea and the U.S., does he just wait and see if it's a bluff, or does he launch a preemptive strike? Does he wait until NK fires the first shot, or not?
Did we launch a preemptive strike against Russia, how about China? You seem to think this is the first time we have had to deal with our enemies having the Bomb.
Who knows but one needs to continue to attempt diplomacy before concluding we have just cause to nuke them first. What is your answer, kill Millions of humans because they might?
It was only a matter of time before the so-called rogue nations became nuclear capable. past admins either ignored it or did as little as possible. There is a reason we spend all that money on the UN. Why not let those in the region come up with a solution that doesn't rely on the US Military leading the charge, taking most of the risks, and sacrificing the most blood.
The question begs. Why is it the responsibility of the United States to always be the ones to swing the big stick? How many countries are we currently in swinging that big stick?
Japan has a massive economy as does South Korea. They stand to lose the most and are at the greatest risk.
Where is Australia in this mess? Where is Europe? China has made their position clear as has Russia. If we attack first they are taking sides against us.
What should Trump do? Let the UN and those in the region lead the effort. Our forces should join once their is a world consensus, but not be the majority player or carry a burden greater than is agreeable to the American People.
" If diplomacy and sanctions do not work in regards to North Korea, what do the critics of Trump think he should do? "
Not a critic but.... At a testing site, they had a cave in with deaths and injuries. If they keep making mistakes, maybe we won't have to do anything. I keep thinking somebody is going to suicide the little bastard, we shall see.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
