I read something today that intel analysts believed that Kim Jung Un planned something for Columbus Day. Trump said he met with his highest military people, and the last thing he reportedly said when asked what we would do about anything happening happening on Columbus Day, he said "you'll find out".
If North Korea attacks Japan more than 2 million die in the first strike.
Meanwhile, North Korea plans to test a long range missile capable of hitting the US West Coast.
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/10/06/537711/North-Korea-test-missile-USGot a link for that Columbus day threat? No? Shocking.
Well if you knew what my life has been like in the last week, you wouldn't even ask for a link, but since you want one, here is one. And since people are raggin' on the CIA I'll put that one up.
CIA Official Predicts North Korean Provocation on Columbus Day.
The things Kim Jong Un used to fear most about China and the U.S. are no longer a concern, the CIA Korea Mission Center’s Yong Suk Lee says.
A top CIA official for the Korean Peninsula warned Wednesday that the U.S. should be ready for a new provocation by North Korea on Columbus Day on Oct. 9, which coincides with the anniversary of the founding of the political party that governs in Pyongyang.
"Stand by your phones," Yong Suk Lee, deputy assistant director of the CIA's Korea Mission Center, said while speaking at a conference organized by the agency at The George Washington University.
He added, however, that the likelihood remains low of North Korea purposefully starting a war with the U.S. or its allies like South Korea.
"We are concerned...that risk exists at any time on the Korean Peninsula," said Yong Suk Lee, deputy assistant director of the CIA's Korea Mission Center, while speaking at a conference at the George Washington University in Washington, D.C. "I told my own staff, October 10 is the Korean Workers Party founding day. That's Tuesday in North Korea, but that's Monday -- Columbus Day holiday in the U.S. -- so stand by your phones."
"North Korea is a political organism that thrives on confrontation," Lee added.
North Korea has conducted nuclear tests and missile launches on important national holidays in the past, including its first ever nuclear test on October 9, 2006. A decade later, on September 9, 2016, North Korea conducted a nuclear test to mark its founding -- this was it's fifth nuclear test, it's conducted six in total.
Both South Korean and Japanese officials have also issued warnings about the potential for provocative acts from North Korea on or around October 10.
[Edited on 10/7/2017 by gina]
[Edited on 10/7/2017 by gina]
Mat Bai wrote a really funny article. Just for the people who do not comprehend, TRUMP DID NOT write this.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/dear-north-korea-president-trump-090051968.html
I read something today that intel analysts believed that Kim Jung Un planned something for Columbus Day. Trump said he met with his highest military people, and the last thing he reportedly said when asked what we would do about anything happening happening on Columbus Day, he said "you'll find out".
If North Korea attacks Japan more than 2 million die in the first strike.
Meanwhile, North Korea plans to test a long range missile capable of hitting the US West Coast.
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/10/06/537711/North-Korea-test-missile-USGot a link for that Columbus day threat? No? Shocking.
Well if you knew what my life has been like in the last week, you wouldn't even ask for a link, but since you want one, here is one. And since people are raggin' on the CIA I'll put that one up.
CIA Official Predicts North Korean Provocation on Columbus Day.
The things Kim Jong Un used to fear most about China and the U.S. are no longer a concern, the CIA Korea Mission Center’s Yong Suk Lee says.A top CIA official for the Korean Peninsula warned Wednesday that the U.S. should be ready for a new provocation by North Korea on Columbus Day on Oct. 9, which coincides with the anniversary of the founding of the political party that governs in Pyongyang.
"Stand by your phones," Yong Suk Lee, deputy assistant director of the CIA's Korea Mission Center, said while speaking at a conference organized by the agency at The George Washington University.
He added, however, that the likelihood remains low of North Korea purposefully starting a war with the U.S. or its allies like South Korea."We are concerned...that risk exists at any time on the Korean Peninsula," said Yong Suk Lee, deputy assistant director of the CIA's Korea Mission Center, while speaking at a conference at the George Washington University in Washington, D.C. "I told my own staff, October 10 is the Korean Workers Party founding day. That's Tuesday in North Korea, but that's Monday -- Columbus Day holiday in the U.S. -- so stand by your phones."
"North Korea is a political organism that thrives on confrontation," Lee added.
North Korea has conducted nuclear tests and missile launches on important national holidays in the past, including its first ever nuclear test on October 9, 2006. A decade later, on September 9, 2016, North Korea conducted a nuclear test to mark its founding -- this was it's fifth nuclear test, it's conducted six in total.
Both South Korean and Japanese officials have also issued warnings about the potential for provocative acts from North Korea on or around October 10.
[Edited on 10/7/2017 by gina]
[Edited on 10/7/2017 by gina]
And what happened?
This coming Monday, the US will be practicing more war games in South Korea, and North Korea has said they will respond by putting missiles into the water near Guam, like they have done with Japan.
SAT 10-14-17
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2017/10/14/538557/N-Korea-highly-likely-to-test-missile-ahead-of-drill
The US and South Korea are set to hold a joint navy drill on October 16-26 in the Sea of Japan and the Yellow Sea, in a fresh show of force against North Korea amid escalating tensions over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
Remarks: So since we are holding war drills over there, North Korea may fire missiles into the waters off Guam, much as they did with Japan.
USS Michigan submarine just arrived in South Korea. Are they there for the war games from 10/16 - 10/26?
Please just let WW3 wipe us out now before we have to read another Gina post. This is torture.
Well, it might not be a nuke that wipes us out. I had not even heard of this before.
An EMP could wipe out 90 per cent of the population of the US.
http://www.businessinsider.com/north-korea-emp-us-what-would-happen-2017-10
“The U.S. can sustain a population of 320 million people only because of modern technology,” said Pry. “An EMP that blacks-out the electric grid for a year would [decimate] the critical infrastructure necessary to support such a large population.”
In three days, the food supply in local grocery stores would be consumed and the 30-day national food supply in regional warehouses would begin to spoil, says Pry. In one year, he contends that up to 90% of the population could perish from starvation, disease and societal collapse.
Pry says electro-mechanical systems which regulate the flow of gas through pipelines would spark; causing the gas to ignite and result in massive firestorms in cities and large forest fires.
There would be no water; no communications; and mass transportation would be paralyzed, says Pry. In seven days, he contends that reactors in U.S.’ nuclear power plants would essentially melt down, spreading radioactivity across most of the nation.
Now if you think this is all just fear mongering, think again, the Dept of Homeland Security is doing a "grid down" preparedness exercise November 4th. A What if exercise on what they would do if indeed the grid did go down.
By the way FEMA also did a study of what a bad solar storm could mean for us and in their report they said it could be four to ten years without electricity. The time to learn how to live if these things happen is now, so that you are ready if the lights go out.
By the way FEMA also did a study of what a bad solar storm could mean for us and in their report they said it could be four to ten years without electricity. The time to learn how to live if these things happen is now, so that you are ready if the lights go out.
From the link:
A perfect solar storm similar to one that slammed into Earth in 1859 would knock out the United States electric grid for four to 10 years if it hit today, an unpublished report from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) indicates.
Unpublished. So it technically does not exist.
They did not allow it to be published because to do so would have caused mass hysteria.
For sure, the threat from EMP is real, and old news, millions of folks are aware of it. It would cheap and simple to shield the grid. Common knowledge, no mass hysteria.
They did not allow it to be published because to do so would have caused mass hysteria.
The only thing that seems to cause mass hysteria in the US is football players not standing for the national anthem. Important life changing things like banks and other financial institutions being able to wipe out your life savings or steal your identity without fear of being held accountable get passed through congress unnoticed. Americans get so distracted by a shiny object that nothing truly important would cause mass hysteria.
They did not allow it to be published because to do so would have caused mass hysteria.
The only thing that seems to cause mass hysteria in the US is football players not standing for the national anthem. Important life changing things like banks and other financial institutions being able to wipe out your life savings or steal your identity without fear of being held accountable get passed through congress unnoticed. Americans get so distracted by a shiny object that nothing truly important would cause mass hysteria.
They are being programmed not to care unless it directly effects them. They prefer to feel safe and enjoy their creature comforts remaining unknowing about what is going on. The media brainwashes them and hey believe what they are told rather than looking at other sources within the media who actually investigate and report the truth.
They did not allow it to be published because to do so would have caused mass hysteria.
The only thing that seems to cause mass hysteria in the US is football players not standing for the national anthem. Important life changing things like banks and other financial institutions being able to wipe out your life savings or steal your identity without fear of being held accountable get passed through congress unnoticed. Americans get so distracted by a shiny object that nothing truly important would cause mass hysteria.
They are being programmed not to care unless it directly effects them. They prefer to feel safe and enjoy their creature comforts remaining unknowing about what is going on. The media brainwashes them and hey believe what they are told rather than looking at other sources within the media who actually investigate and report the truth.
You have a really low opinion of your fellow citizens. That is pathetic coming from someone who buys into every conspiracy theory and is always proven wrong.
Look in the mirror.
Trump new stance towards North Korea - his goal is the same, but he is being softer in speech and manner.
http://nypost.com/2017/11/07/trump-to-north-korea-lets-make-a-deal/
“I really believe that it makes sense for North Korea to come to the table and to make a deal that’s good for the people of North Korea and the people of the world,” the president said in a speech in Seoul, South Korea, where he’s on the second leg of a trip to five Asian nations.
“I think we’re making a lot of progress. I think we’re showing great strength. I think they understand we have unparalleled strength. There has never been strength like it,” he said during a joint news conference with South Korea’s President Moon Jae In.
“We call on every responsible nation, including China and Russia, to demand that the North Korean regime end its nuclear weapons and its missile programs, and live in peace. As the South Korean people know so well, it’s time to act with urgency and with great determination,” he said in Seoul, which is less than 40 miles from the demilitarized zone marking the border between the two countries.
Remarks: He says "live in peace", good idea!
Do you think the new sanctions with China joining in are enough?
Nuclear missile capabilities are the most important thing for the North Koreans, they will never give them up willingly.
More sanctions won't work.
The closer China and the US can work on this the better. But how do you trust China really? Things they say they are going to do might sound good, but what is actually happening is another matter.
Nuclear missile capabilities are the most important thing for the North Koreans, they will never give them up willingly.
More sanctions won't work.
The closer China and the US can work on this the better. But how do you trust China really? Things they say they are going to do might sound good, but what is actually happening is another matter.
Sure would be cool to recover one of those missiles outta the Sea of Japan and see if any of the components are Chinese...
Kim Jung Un apparently has threatened to DETONATE a nuke over the Pacific Ocean to damage the atmosphere, and the fallout will also contaminate any fish in the ocean as well as circle around the globe and hurt people and other things.
Other things like the effect of an EMP - take down the power grid. If he takes down our grid, how the eff can we launch anything back at him and carry out a war?
The question is how far do we let him go, before we have to respond with assured destruction of his country?
http://www.businessinsider.com/north-korea-icbm-test-and-atmospheric-test-2017-11
They did not allow it to be published because to do so would have caused mass hysteria.
The only thing that seems to cause mass hysteria in the US is football players not standing for the national anthem. Important life changing things like banks and other financial institutions being able to wipe out your life savings or steal your identity without fear of being held accountable get passed through congress unnoticed. Americans get so distracted by a shiny object that nothing truly important would cause mass hysteria.
So true....Trump's constant distractions from the screw job con he's playing on the very people who voted for him is truly depressing. Sadly, many of the Trump supporters I know still seem oblivious to the giant penis in their rectum and think he actually gives a sh*t about the middle class.
They did not allow it to be published because to do so would have caused mass hysteria.
The only thing that seems to cause mass hysteria in the US is football players not standing for the national anthem. Important life changing things like banks and other financial institutions being able to wipe out your life savings or steal your identity without fear of being held accountable get passed through congress unnoticed. Americans get so distracted by a shiny object that nothing truly important would cause mass hysteria.
So true....Trump's constant distractions from the screw job con he's playing on the very people who voted for him is truly depressing. Sadly, many of the Trump supporters I know still seem oblivious to the giant penis in their rectum and think he actually gives a sh*t about the middle class.
What exactly does your liberal loser hate post have to do with North Korea?
President Trump is standing tall and strong against the North Korean dictator and Little Kim is quite well aware of what will happen to him should he make a bad decision.
President Trump is also the first U.S. President to get China to active engage.
While the left-wing keeps up their failed "negotiate" rant President Trump is taking the only action that will deter the North Korean dictator.
Nuclear missile capabilities are the most important thing for the North Koreans, they will never give them up willingly.
More sanctions won't work.
The closer China and the US can work on this the better. But how do you trust China really? Things they say they are going to do might sound good, but what is actually happening is another matter.
Sure would be cool to recover one of those missiles outta the Sea of Japan and see if any of the components are Chinese...
Yup, we both know what they will find.
If China wants a war in their backyard they are getting closer and closer to getting one.
The United Nations Security Council voted unanimously to impose more sanctions on North Korea. No it is not a good thing.
The US-drafted resolution includes measures to reduce the nation's petrol imports by up to 90%.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42459670
REMARKS: It is wintertime. What effect will stopping 90 per cent of oil imports have on the country? Where will they get fuel for heating the homes of the people? Taking actions that causes people to freeze to death in winter, and for trucks to not be able to drive to get food to markets etc. seems like a cruelty to the people. I remember Osama still complaining in 2002 about how US sanctions resulted in the deaths of millions of Lebanese children in the 1980's.
What actions can North Korea initiate in response? Do you understand the words bang zoom?
That is the thing with sanctions, the leaders of the country are never hurt by them directly, it is always the general population that suffers. So what else to do? Not offer any form of globally sanctioned punishment? Give in to their bribes and threats? Go to war? A whole bunch of bad options.
The oil ship that South Korea stopped, was sent to North Korea from China. Do we now sanction China for sending North Korea an oil shipment?
These sanctions are just cruel and inhumane to the people. They are the ones who will freeze. If the US wants to punish North Korea, the US by itself should just not do trade deals with North Korea. We need to leave the rest of the world out of it, and nobody should force common peoples of another country to freeze or starve to death. That in and of itself is a human rights violation, isn't it?
What to do? Sit down and have a Skype session with Kim Jung Un, lay it out plainly, 'if you launch a missile and hit us or any of our allies, we will respond and blow you to hell. Any questions?'
Real simple, straight to the point. If they want to play and tease sending things into various bodies of water, fine, but make it clear, hit one piece of land and it is over.
China is denying that they sent any boat with oil to North Korea
http://dailymailnews.com/2017/12/30/china-says-reports-of-chinese-ships-sending-oil-to-dprk-untrue/
Hua said that China had immediately investigated the relevant ship and found that it has not docked in any Chinese ports and had no entry and departure records of Chinese ports since August.
So whose boat is it that South Korea has snatched?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/south-korea-seizes-ship-suspected-of-transferring-oil-to-north-korea/
[Edited on 12/30/2017 by gina]
Trump could talk directly with Kim Jong Un?
Not sure if that makes me more nervous or not!
I'm fearful of what a strike against North Korea could mean. Also not a fan of this kind of reporting being out in the public where NK gets a look inside the inner thinking. Just wish there was a way to get that Kim Jong Un out of there. Doubt we'd be so lucky on such a preemptive strike. Anyway, here is the latest:
Trump advisers clash over 'bloody nose' strike on North Korea
By Zachary Cohen, Nicole Gaouette, Barbara Starr and Kevin Liptak, CNN
Updated 6:20 PM ET, Thu February 1, 2018
North Korea: Failed Test, 'Bloody Nose' DebateWashington (CNN)The tabled nomination of a widely-respected diplomat is bringing renewed focus to divisions inside the Trump administration over how tough the US should be in positioning against North Korea with nuclear tests expected to resume after the upcoming Olympics.
The nomination of the long-rumored candidate to be US ambassador to South Korea, Victor Cha, was pulled last weekend after he warned the White House that a so-called "bloody nose" strike against Pyongyang would risk pulling the US into a disastrous war that would endanger hundreds of thousands of lives.
That's largely in line with the caution that's being urged by Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
But others in the administration, including President Donald Trump's national security adviser H.R. McMaster, have insisted that a military strike be considered as a serious option as a way to exact maximum pressure on Pyongyang.
And it's that tension that was on display when Cha's nomination was pulled.
"It seems that there are divisions within the administration," Bruce Klingner, a former CIA officer and a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told CNN's Brooke Baldwin Wednesday.
"As the SecDef has stated there are a wide range of military options available to the President but it is important to note that this is still a diplomatically led effort," Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Chris Logan told CNN. "As far as specifics go we will not discuss operational details or potential military options."
State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said, "Our policy is maximum pressure with the goal of bringing North Korea to the negotiating table, as POTUS said in the State of the Union. We have been clear that it is our intention to resolve this issue peacefully through dialogue. We have also been clear that denuclearization is the only acceptable outcome, that the entire international community is united on this point, and that it will be achieved, one way or another."
The National Security Council did not respond to CNN's request for comment.
Months after the administration began the proceedings leading up to a nomination, Cha was asked by NSC officials whether he felt prepared to manage diplomatic efforts that would surround such a strike, including the potential evacuation of American civilians from Seoul, a source familiar with the dynamic told CNN.
Cha expressed concerns about such a strike, which he laid out in a Washington Post op-ed on Tuesday.
Under that strategy, the aim is for the US to initiate a military strike significant enough to force North Korea to question its nuclear ambitions but limited in scale as to avoid retaliation.After the exchange with Cha, the White House went mostly silent, even as the South Koreans were in the process of approving his nomination in the process known as agrément.
Ultimately, some White House officials feared that nominating someone opposed to such a strike could undermine that military option in the eyes of members of Congress and administration officials, according to the source familiar with the debate.
They feared Cha would become a pawn in the intra-administration debate over the "bloody nose" strike, both during his confirmation hearings and when installed at the embassy in Seoul, the source said.
A senior State Department official said, "Dr. Cha's policy views have never been a factor in this process."
McMaster has emerged as a leading administration voice in preparing for such action and has been backed up by the NSC's top Asia official, Matt Pottinger, according to the source.Another source acknowledged an internal discrepancy on the "bloody nose strategy" between the hawkish NSC and several top administration officials -- including Mattis and Tillerson -- who have advocated a more cautious approach.
But the continued push to legitimize a limited preemptive strike option is raising questions, even outside the administration.
"The idea of a 'bloody nose' strike against North Korea makes little sense because it has the potential for escalating response and strategic miscalculation, while gaining little concrete advantage," said Jamil N. Jaffer, founder of GMU's National Security Institute and former Chief Counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
"A more sensible approach to further North Korean aggression would be a significant change to our military posture in the region," said Jaffer, who also served in the Bush White House and is currently a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution.
North Korea analyst Gordon Chang says the decision to pull Cha is "ominous."
"It means that people are seriously considering a strike on North Korea," Chang said. "This is an indication that we are headed to war. And there are so many - there are so many other options that the United States can pursue and we are not having meaningful discussions, including sanctions on North Korea's backers and more sanctions in general."
In discussions about any military option, including a "limited strike," Mattis and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford would present Trump with all options and risks, including the worst case scenario on casualties.
Their outline would include the risks involved with hitting the target, missing the target, Kim Jong Un's reaction, the prospect of not getting South Korean support for a strike, and the risk of financial and economic fallout across Asia and beyond.
They would engage the President in a discussion of the strategy of a strike and the end game: What does the US actually hope to achieve with a military strike on North Korea and what is the risk if they try a strike and fail.
Trump used his first State of the Union address on Tuesday to slam the "depraved character of the North Korean regime" in an effort to rally the nation around a common threat, but new indications that his top national security advisers disagree over the best path forward have raised concerns that the President is actively considering a limited first strike option to send a message to Pyongyang.
While often eager to confront North Korean leader Kim Jong Un both verbally and via Twitter, his threats of "fire and fury" have largely been tempered by assurances from top advisers -- like Mattis and Tillerson -- who insist the US remains committed to prioritizing a peaceful resolution to tensions with Pyongyang.
Most of Trump's top national security advisers have said that military options should be reserved pending an imminent threat to the US or allies, but McMaster has repeatedly suggested otherwise -- even hinting that war is a real possibility and one that could come soon.The US would likely win a military conflict with North Korea should tensions devolve into war, but would face a very difficult fight that would likely yield significant casualties on both sides, according to Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Robert Neller.
War with North Korea "will be a very, very kinetic, physical, violent fight over some really, really tough ground and everybody is going to have to be mentally prepared," he recently said.
CIA Director Mike Pompeo has warned "North Korea is ever closer to being able to hold America at risk."
Pompeo said it could be just a " handful of months" before North Korea might be able to demonstrate the capability to put a warhead on a missile that could reach the US."Their testing capacity has improved and the frequency with which they have tests which are materially successful has also improved."
CNN's Elise Labott contributed to this report
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/01/politics/north-korea-trump-bloody-nose-dispute/index.html
Good read from the aforementioned Victor Cha
Victor Cha: Giving North Korea a ‘bloody nose’ carries a huge risk to Americans
North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. (AFP/Getty Images)
By Victor Cha January 30Victor Cha is a professor at Georgetown University and senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
North Korea, if not stopped, will build an arsenal with multiple nuclear missiles meant to threaten the U.S. homeland and blackmail us into abandoning our allies in Asia. North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un will sell these weapons to state and nonstate actors, and he will inspire other rogue actors who want to undermine the U.S.-backed postwar order. These are real and unprecedented threats. But the answer is not, as some Trump administration officials have suggested, a preventive military strike. Instead, there is a forceful military option available that can address the threat without escalating into a war that would likely kill tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Americans.
When I was under consideration for a position in this administration, I shared some of these views.
Some may argue that U.S. casualties and even a wider war on the Korean Peninsula are risks worth taking, given what is at stake. But a strike (even a large one) would only delay North Korea’s missile-building and nuclear programs, which are buried in deep, unknown places impenetrable to bunker-busting bombs. A strike also would not stem the threat of proliferation but rather exacerbate it, turning what might be a North Korean moneymaking endeavor into a vengeful effort intended to equip other bad actors against us.
I empathize with the hope, espoused by some Trump officials, that a military strike would shock Pyongyang into appreciating U.S. strength, after years of inaction, and force the regime to the denuclearization negotiating table. I also hope that if North Korea did retaliate militarily, the United States could control the escalation ladder to minimize collateral damage and prevent a collapse of financial markets. In either event, the rationale is that a strike that demonstrates U.S. resolve to pursue “all options” is necessary to give the mercurial Kim a “bloody nose.” Otherwise he will remain undeterred in his nuclear ambitions.
Yet, there is a point at which hope must give in to logic. If we believe that Kim is undeterrable without such a strike, how can we also believe that a strike will deter him from responding in kind? And if Kim is unpredictable, impulsive and bordering on irrational, how can we control the escalation ladder, which is premised on an adversary’s rational understanding of signals and deterrence?
Some have argued the risks are still worth taking because it’s better that people die “over there” than “over here.” On any given day, there are 230,000 Americans in South Korea and 90,000 or so in Japan. Given that an evacuation of so many citizens would be virtually impossible under a rain of North Korean artillery and missiles (potentially laced with biochemical weapons), these Americans would most likely have to hunker down until the war was over.
While our population in Japan might be protected by U.S. missile defenses, the U.S. population in South Korea, let alone millions of South Koreans, has no similar active defenses against a barrage of North Korean artillery (aside from counterfire artillery). To be clear: The president would be putting at risk an American population the size of a medium-size U.S. city — Pittsburgh, say, or Cincinnati — on the assumption that a crazy and undeterrable dictator will be rationally cowed by a demonstration of U.S. kinetic power.
An alternative coercive strategy involves enhanced and sustained U.S., regional and global pressure on Pyongyang to denuclearize. This strategy is likely to deliver the same potential benefits as a limited strike, along with other advantages, without the self-destructive costs. There are four elements to this coercive strategy.
First, the Trump administration must continue to strengthen the coalition of U.N. member states it has mustered in its thus far highly successful sanctions campaign.
Second, the United States must significantly up-gun its alliances with Japan and South Korea with integrated missile defense, intelligence-sharing and anti-submarine warfare and strike capabilities to convey to North Korea that an attack on one is an attack on all.
Third, the United States must build a maritime coalition around North Korea involving rings of South Korean, Japanese and broader U.S. assets to intercept any nuclear missiles or technologies leaving the country. China and Russia should be prepared to face the consequences if they allow North Korean proliferation across their borders.
Lastly, the United States must continue to prepare military options. Force will be necessary to deal with North Korea if it attacks first, but not through a preventive strike that could start a nuclear war.
In the land of lousy options, no strategy is perfect, but some are better than others. This strategy gets us out of crisis-management mode. It constitutes decisive action, not previously attempted, by President Trump. And it demonstrates resolve to other bad actors that threats to the United States will be countered. Such a strategy would assuredly deplete Pyongyang’s hard currency, deter it from rash action, strengthen our alliances in Asia for the next generation and increase the costs to those who continue to subsidize Pyongyang.
A sustained and long-term competitive strategy such as this plays to U.S. strengths, exploits our adversary’s weaknesses and does not risk hundreds of thousands of American lives.
