lo yeeOn
2017-08-16 22:13:22 UTC
When the US National Security Advisor is speaking of another country's
"unspeakable brutality against its own people", it's a rallying call
to arms.
Tons of relevant people have talked about denuclearization and
dismantling of the North's ballistic missile programs. You might
think that nothing has changed. But powerful people are goading Trump
ever more into a first strike, sparing Pyongyang - for now - if the
regime doesn't do anything foolish, meaning if its forces do not shoot
back.
And Joint Chiefs Chairman Dunford has just signed a document with his
Chinese counterpart that essentially is telling China not to do
anything foolish - which they euphemistically term "miscalculations" -
or they will be hurt too.
Finally, there is enough popular support for airstrikes of military
targets to convince Trump that this is his chance to render his due
to the neocons who want the deal done.
Voters aren't more galvanized behind military action, according to
the poll. Last month, half of voters said they backed airstrikes
against military targets and suspected nuclear sites in North
Korea. But that is down slightly, to 47 percent, in the new
poll. (Thirty-five percent of voters oppose airstrikes in the most
recent survey.) [From Politico]
[Note that Trump has consistently garnered significantly less that the
47% of support since before even he was elected.]
In case, it's still not clear, the Deutsche Wellen question has this
for a definitive answer:
Of course, the ruling elites of the U.S. aren't going to walk back
on their New American Century dream.
It would help you to read Trump's national security advisor
Gen. McMaster's lips to know that with near certainty, a first-strike
at the North's military facilities will be fait d'accompli at the
minimum. And you need to know too that I won't be unhappy at all if
my prediction turns out to be wrong.
lo yeeOn
McMaster thinks North Korea can't be stopped from attacking the US or
allies By Alex Lockie
http://www.businessinsider.com/hr-mcmaster-north-korea-war-inevitable-deterrence-2017-8
President Donald Trump's national security adviser made a startling
statement to ABC's George Stephanopoulos on "This Week" on Sunday.
When asked whether the US could tolerate a fully nuclear-capable North
Korea, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster questioned how the military had dealt
with nuclear nations for decades.
"The classical deterrence theory, how does that apply to a regime like
the regime in North Korea?" McMaster said.
McMaster characterized North Korea as engaging in "unspeakable
brutality against its own people" and posing "a continuous threat to
its neighbors" - and now the US - with nuclear weapons. He also said
the country's leader, Kim Jong Un, would imprison and murder "anyone
who seems to oppose that regime, including members of his own family."
Trump's national security adviser fundamentally believing that North
Korea cannot be deterred could have massive policy implications.
Essentially, if the US's superior nuclear might couldn't cause North
Korea to back down, it would make sense to attack before it developed
full nuclear capability.
But McMaster's characterization of North Korea as a regime beyond the
pale of rationality also has some issues. To varying degrees, both the
Soviet Union and China engaged in similar brutality, threats, and
murder and oppression of dissidents.
In 1957, during the US and Soviet Union's heated arms race, the
Chinese leader Mao Zedong said: "I'm not afraid of nuclear war. There
are 2.7 billion people in the world; it doesn't matter if some are
killed. China has a population of 600 million; even if half of them
are killed, there are still 300 million people left. I'm not afraid of
anyone."
But nuclear war never broke out. Though the US sought to contain the
spread of communism during the Cold War, it never attacked China, even
as it built a nuclear arsenal.
Experts contacted by Business Insider have previously said Kim is
indeed a rational actor who can be expected to observe established
rules of deterrence.
The consensus among North Korea watchers is that Kim seeks nuclear
weapons for regime security, and while his newfound nuclear prowess
could strike a US city, the US's response would leave nothing left of
North Korea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"unspeakable brutality against its own people", it's a rallying call
to arms.
"...the US would need to find a politically feasible way to enter into
exploratory talks without preconditions. "
Who is really disagreeing?
Ah, my dear friend, you are not listening, are you?exploratory talks without preconditions. "
Who is really disagreeing?
Tons of relevant people have talked about denuclearization and
dismantling of the North's ballistic missile programs. You might
think that nothing has changed. But powerful people are goading Trump
ever more into a first strike, sparing Pyongyang - for now - if the
regime doesn't do anything foolish, meaning if its forces do not shoot
back.
And Joint Chiefs Chairman Dunford has just signed a document with his
Chinese counterpart that essentially is telling China not to do
anything foolish - which they euphemistically term "miscalculations" -
or they will be hurt too.
Finally, there is enough popular support for airstrikes of military
targets to convince Trump that this is his chance to render his due
to the neocons who want the deal done.
Voters aren't more galvanized behind military action, according to
the poll. Last month, half of voters said they backed airstrikes
against military targets and suspected nuclear sites in North
Korea. But that is down slightly, to 47 percent, in the new
poll. (Thirty-five percent of voters oppose airstrikes in the most
recent survey.) [From Politico]
[Note that Trump has consistently garnered significantly less that the
47% of support since before even he was elected.]
In case, it's still not clear, the Deutsche Wellen question has this
for a definitive answer:
Of course, the ruling elites of the U.S. aren't going to walk back
on their New American Century dream.
It would help you to read Trump's national security advisor
Gen. McMaster's lips to know that with near certainty, a first-strike
at the North's military facilities will be fait d'accompli at the
minimum. And you need to know too that I won't be unhappy at all if
my prediction turns out to be wrong.
lo yeeOn
McMaster thinks North Korea can't be stopped from attacking the US or
allies By Alex Lockie
http://www.businessinsider.com/hr-mcmaster-north-korea-war-inevitable-deterrence-2017-8
President Donald Trump's national security adviser made a startling
statement to ABC's George Stephanopoulos on "This Week" on Sunday.
When asked whether the US could tolerate a fully nuclear-capable North
Korea, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster questioned how the military had dealt
with nuclear nations for decades.
"The classical deterrence theory, how does that apply to a regime like
the regime in North Korea?" McMaster said.
McMaster characterized North Korea as engaging in "unspeakable
brutality against its own people" and posing "a continuous threat to
its neighbors" - and now the US - with nuclear weapons. He also said
the country's leader, Kim Jong Un, would imprison and murder "anyone
who seems to oppose that regime, including members of his own family."
Trump's national security adviser fundamentally believing that North
Korea cannot be deterred could have massive policy implications.
Essentially, if the US's superior nuclear might couldn't cause North
Korea to back down, it would make sense to attack before it developed
full nuclear capability.
But McMaster's characterization of North Korea as a regime beyond the
pale of rationality also has some issues. To varying degrees, both the
Soviet Union and China engaged in similar brutality, threats, and
murder and oppression of dissidents.
In 1957, during the US and Soviet Union's heated arms race, the
Chinese leader Mao Zedong said: "I'm not afraid of nuclear war. There
are 2.7 billion people in the world; it doesn't matter if some are
killed. China has a population of 600 million; even if half of them
are killed, there are still 300 million people left. I'm not afraid of
anyone."
But nuclear war never broke out. Though the US sought to contain the
spread of communism during the Cold War, it never attacked China, even
as it built a nuclear arsenal.
Experts contacted by Business Insider have previously said Kim is
indeed a rational actor who can be expected to observe established
rules of deterrence.
The consensus among North Korea watchers is that Kim seeks nuclear
weapons for regime security, and while his newfound nuclear prowess
could strike a US city, the US's response would leave nothing left of
North Korea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dw.com/en/does-the-us-have-to-accept-north-korea-as-a-nuclear-power/a-40045737
""The United States has 'accepted' that China, Russia, India and
Pakistan are nuclear states," said Baker, adding that in some ways the
US military already considers North Korea to be a "nuclear power."
"Militarily, the US could manage a nuclear North Korea through
traditional deterrence, rather than military action," added Baker. "But
from a political perspective, it is not clear whether the US will
'accept' North Korea's membership in the nuclear club."
...
"Dialogue is really the only way that is going to get us out of this
escalatory cycle," said Town from 38 North. "Sanctions play their role
and as North Korea demonstrates new capabilities, bolstering deterrence
capabilities is necessary. But pressure and isolation alone is not going
to change North Korea's belief that it needs a deterrence capability."
Up to now, the US has said that it is open to dialogue only if North
Korea is willing to abandon its nuclear program, an offer North Korea
rejects outright. To begin dialogue, expectations must be changed.
Town said that ideally the US would need to find a politically feasible
way to enter into exploratory talks without preconditions. "Only from
there will we really understand what is achievable and be able to design
a way forward." "
""The United States has 'accepted' that China, Russia, India and
Pakistan are nuclear states," said Baker, adding that in some ways the
US military already considers North Korea to be a "nuclear power."
"Militarily, the US could manage a nuclear North Korea through
traditional deterrence, rather than military action," added Baker. "But
from a political perspective, it is not clear whether the US will
'accept' North Korea's membership in the nuclear club."
...
"Dialogue is really the only way that is going to get us out of this
escalatory cycle," said Town from 38 North. "Sanctions play their role
and as North Korea demonstrates new capabilities, bolstering deterrence
capabilities is necessary. But pressure and isolation alone is not going
to change North Korea's belief that it needs a deterrence capability."
Up to now, the US has said that it is open to dialogue only if North
Korea is willing to abandon its nuclear program, an offer North Korea
rejects outright. To begin dialogue, expectations must be changed.
Town said that ideally the US would need to find a politically feasible
way to enter into exploratory talks without preconditions. "Only from
there will we really understand what is achievable and be able to design
a way forward." "