Sign in to follow this  
Jaydee

North Korea willing to talk?

Recommended Posts

Thank you President Trump for trying to bring about peace in the world. All that was needed was someone who wasn't a push over to stand up to the bully.

Let's hope this works out. Certainly a change from the Obama era of deflect and hide.

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/top-diplomat-says-north-korea-willing-to-meet-with-trump-administration-if-the-conditions-are-set

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It won't be long before the progressive sjw's start to claim the tentative meeting is part of an unfolding anti Obama / Hilary conspiracy Jaydee. We'll know when Deicer posts a new batch of fake news stories confirming the plot.

  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for continuing to attack the messenger and not the message.  Just shows that the facts can't be overturned, and that 'Fake News' has become more believable to some than the truth.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deicer

Your comment doesn't make sense?

You are a regular poster of anti-Trump material. As such you apparently would have us 'believe' the material being promoted is legitimate. As unfortunate as it may be, virtually every accusation that's been advanced by the Left and advocated by you over the past year, or so has proven to be baseless.

Perhaps it's time to reconsider your perspective Deicer?

And still there's been no answer to the very legitimate questions I've posed to Mitch regarding his rather aggressive pov?

 

  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, DEFCON said:

Deicer

Your comment doesn't make sense?

You are a regular poster of anti-Trump material. As such you apparently would have us 'believe' the material being promoted is legitimate. As unfortunate as it may be, virtually every accusation that's been advanced by the Left and advocated by you over the past year, or so has proven to be baseless.

Perhaps it's time to reconsider your perspective Deicer?

And still there's been no answer to the very legitimate questions I've posed to Mitch regarding his rather aggressive pov?

 

  

 

 

Defcon, re agressive POV, there are lots of folks on this forum, including you, who could be considered to have a rather aggressive POV.  And as history shows: http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com/2011/09/07/8-famous-debaters-every-law-student-should-study-2/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing wrong with an aggressive pov Malcolm, but the facts supporting the assertion should be provable, not the other way around.

I don't understand the point of your link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DEFCON said:

There's nothing wrong with an aggressive pov Malcolm, but the facts supporting the assertion should be provable, not the other way around.

I don't understand the point of your link?

just some examples of some who could be accused of having an aggressive POV>  But likely none of us on this forum could fill their shoes. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about aggressive.....  Let us hope this is just talk, otherwise the fuse will be lit.  Senator McCain may be right but his public comment might just be the encouragement North Korea needs to go ahead with an attack.

North Korea says considering missile strike near Guam

  • 5 minutes ago
  • From the section Image copyright Reuters
Image caption The Pacific island of Guam is home to the US Air Force's Andersen air base

North Korea says it is considering missile strikes near the US territory of Guam, just hours after President Donald Trump threatened Pyongyang with "fire and fury".

The North's official news agency said it was mulling a plan to fire medium-to-long-range rockets around Guam, where US strategic bombers are based.

The statement marks a sharp rise in rhetoric between the two countries.

The UN recently approved further economic sanctions against the country.

President Trump's comments followed a media report that claimed the North had made a nuclear warhead small enough to fit inside its missiles.

 

The Washington Post report, which cited US intelligence officials, suggests North Korea is developing nuclear weapons capable of hitting the US at a much faster rate than expected.

The North's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said its military was "carefully examining the operational plan for making an enveloping fire at the areas around Guam with medium-to-long-range strategic ballistic rocket Hwasong-12".

It said the plan would be reported to the Supreme Command after "full examination and completion" and put into practice at the order of leader Kim Jong-un, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported.

The heated rhetoric between the US and North Korea intensified after Pyongyang tested two intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) in July, claiming it now had the ability to hit the US.

Mr Trump told reporters on Tuesday: "North Korea best not make any more threats to the US. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen."

Veteran US Senator John McCain was sceptical about Mr Trump's statement.

"The great leaders that I have seen they don't threaten unless they are ready to act and I'm not sure that President Trump is ready to act." said Senator McCain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does McCain stay with the Republicans?  Surely he would be happier as a Democrat.

His constituency may not r e-elect him as a Democrat, but then he does not have another term left in his body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only hope the "experts" are right, if not......

North Korea-US tensions: How worried should you be?

President Trump threatened a response "like the world has never seen"

The US president has vowed to respond to North Korean threats "with fire and fury like the world has never seen".

North Korea, meanwhile, has threatened to fire off missiles at the US island territory of Guam - home to 163,000 people.

And all this comes amid reports that Pyongyang may have finally succeeded in miniaturising a nuclear weapon that could fit on an inter-continental missile - a prospect long-dreaded by the US and its Asian allies.

Is this a precursor to military conflict?

Experts say you should not panic - just yet. This is why:

 

1. Nobody wants war

This is one of the most important things to keep in mind. A war on the Korean peninsula serves no-one's interests.

The North Korean regime's main goal is survival - and a war with the US seriously jeopardise it. As BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Marcus notes, any North Korean attack against the US or its allies in the current context could quickly spiral into a wider war - and we have to assume the Kim Jong-un regime is not suicidal.

In fact, this is why North Korea has been trying so hard to become a nuclear-armed power. Having this capability, it reasons, would protect the regime by raising the costs of toppling it. Kim Jong-un does not want to go the way of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi or Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

Andrei Lankov of Kookmin University in Seoul told the UK's Guardian newspaper there was "a very little probability of conflict", but North Koreans were equally "not interested in diplomacy" at this point.

"They want to get the ability to wipe out Chicago from the map first, and then they will be interested in diplomatic solutions," Mr Lankov said.

What about a pre-emptive US strike?

The US knows that a strike on North Korea would force the regime to retaliate against US allies South Korea and Japan.

This would result in a massive loss of life, including the deaths of thousands of Americans - troops and civilians.

Additionally, Washington does not want to risk any nuclear-tipped missiles being fired off towards the US mainland.

Finally, China - Pyongyang's only ally - has helped to prop up the regime precisely because its collapse is deemed to be a strategically worse outcome. US and South Korean troops just across the Chinese border is a prospect that Beijing does not want to have to face - and that's what war would bring.

2. What you are seeing are words, not actions

President Trump might have threatened North Korea with language uncommon for a US president, but this does not mean the US is actively moving on to a war footing.

As one anonymous US military official told Reuters news agency: "Just because the rhetoric goes up, doesn't mean our posture changes."

New York Times columnist Max Fisher agrees: "These are the sorts of signals, not a leader's offhand comments, that matter most in international relations."

What's more, after two North Korean inter-continental ballistic missile tests in July, the US reverted to a tried and true tactic - squeezing Pyongyang through UN Security Council sanctions.

And its diplomats are still speaking hopefully of returning to the negotiating table - pointing to support from China and Russia.

These send conflicting signals to Pyongyang, but also moderate the tough rhetoric coming from President Trump.

Still, some analysts say a misinterpreted move in the current tense environment could lead to an accidental war.

"There could be a power outage in North Korea that they mistake as a part of a pre-emptive attack. The United States might make a mistake on the [Demilitarised Zone]," Daryl Kimball, of US think tank Arms Control Association, told the BBC. "So there are various ways in which each side can miscalculate and the situation escalates out of control".

3. We have been here before

As former US Assistant Secretary of State PJ Crowley points out, the US and North Korea came close to armed conflict in 1994, when Pyongyang refused to allow international inspectors into its nuclear facilities. Diplomacy won out.

Over the years, North Korea has regularly made incendiary threats against the US, Japan and South Korea, several times threatening to turn Seoul into a "sea of fire".

And Mr Trump's rhetoric - in content, if not style - is also not exactly unprecedented from a US president.

"In many different forms, albeit not as colourful, the US has always said that if North Korea ever attacks, the regime will cease to exist," Mr Crowley writes.

PJ Crowley: Where to now after 'fire and fury'?

The difference this time, he added, was that the US president appeared to suggest he would take pre-emptive action (though Secretary of State Rex Tillerson later played this down.)

This kind of unpredictable, bellicose rhetoric coming from the White House is unusual and does have people worried, analysts say.

Still, South Korea - the US ally with the most to lose from a confrontation with the North - does not appear to be too concerned.

A senior official from the presidential Blue House told reporters on 9 August that the situation had not reached a crisis level, and that it was highly likely it could be resolved peacefully.

This is cause for optimism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion:

If Trump is as crazy as the lefties would have us believe then North Korea would be a smoking mass of twisted steel already.

Trump could unleash thousands of cruise  missiles and make North Korea a smoking mass of twisted steel at anytime.

North Korea needs to be shutdown and Dennis Rodman is not the guy yo do it.

This cannot be another Neville Chamberlain moment.

USA needs to tell China and Russia the hellfire is coming to North Korea so stay out of the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" On Wednesday, Defense Secretary James Mattis issued a warning to the North Korean regime that made President

Trump’s “the fire and the fury” rant seem downright staid by comparison. According to Mattis:

" The United States and our allies have the demonstrated capabilities and unquestionable commitment to defend ourselves from an attack. Kim Jong Un should take heed of the United Nations Security Council’s unified voice, and statements from governments the world over, who agree the DPRK [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] poses a threat to global security and stability. The DPRK must choose to stop isolating itself and stand down its pursuit of nuclear weapons. The DPRK should cease any consideration of actions that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people. "

 

 

 

 

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19544/no-bluff-mad-dog-mattis-says-north-korea-must-back-ben-shapiro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the article posted a couple above ...

"This is one of the most important things to keep in mind. A war on the Korean peninsula serves no-one's interests."

That's the same cowardly Chamberlain style thinking that allowed NOKO to achieve its current standing. While it may be a bit messy, if handled 'properly', war on the peninsula would ultimately serve everyone, but the current NOKO leader's interest.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, it seems that China may just step back and watch if North Korea uses their missiles against Guam.

China warns North Korea: You’re on your own if you go after the U.S.

 
‎Today, ‎August ‎11, ‎2017, ‏‎35 minutes ago | Washington Post

By Simon Denyer

BEIJING – China won’t come to North Korea’s help if it launches missiles threatening U.S. soil and there is retaliation, a state-owned newspaper warned on Friday, but it would intervene if Washington strikes first.

The Global Times newspaper is not an official mouthpiece of the Communist Party, but in this case its editorial probably does reflect government policy and can be considered “semi-official,” experts said.north_korea_what_pyongyang_wants.jpg?w=6

 

China has already warned both Washington and Pyongyang not to do anything that raises tensions or causes instability on the Korean Peninsula.

In an editorial, The Global Times said China should make it clear to both sides: “when their actions jeopardize China’s interests, China will respond with a firm hand.”

“China should also make clear that if North Korea launches missiles that threaten U.S. soil first and the U.S. retaliates, China will stay neutral,” it added. “If the U.S. and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so.”

The Global Times warning comes at the end of a week of threat and counter-threat between Washington and Pyongyang, and as the United States weighs up its options to deal with the threat of North Korea’s nuclear and missile program.

The Global Times said both sides were engaging in a “reckless game” that runs the risk of descending into a real war.afp_rg894.jpg?w=640&h=397

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump threatened to respond to further threats from North Korea by unleashing “fire and fury like the world has never seen.” Pyongyang in turn threatened to strike the U.S. territory of Guam in the Western Pacific with ballistic missiles.

The Global Times also cited reports that the Pentagon has prepared plans for B-1B strategic bombers to make preemptive strikes on North Korea’s missile sites, and a strongly worded ultimatum from Secretary of Defense James Mattis that North Korea should not consider “actions that would lead to the end of its regime and destruction of its people.”

The paper’s comments also reflect the 1961 Sino-North Korean Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance, which obliges China to intervene if North Korea is subject to unprovoked aggression- but not necessarily if Pyongyang starts a war.

“The key point is in the first half of the sentence; China opposes North Korea testing missiles in the waters around Guam,” said Cheng Xiaohe, a North Korea expert at Renmin University of China in Beijing.

With the situation on the Korea Peninsula sliding dangerously towards the point of no return, Chinese media are starting to declare their positions on any potential war, he said. “Secondly, in a half-official way, China is starting to review and clarify the 1961 treaty.”

China has become deeply frustrated with the regime in Pyongyang, and genuinely wants to see a denuclearized Korean Peninsula. But it has always refused to do anything that might destabilize or topple a regime which has long been both ally and buffer state.

That’s because Beijing does not want to see a unified Korean state allied to the United States right up against its border: indeed, hundreds of thousands of Chinese soldiers died during the 1950-53 Korean war to prevent that happening.

So for now, the current uneasy status quo for China still seems better than the alternatives.

That is doubly true ahead of an important Communist Party Congress in the fall, at which President Xi Jinping wants to project an aura of stability and control as he aims to consolidate his power at the start of a second five-year term

Nevertheless, experts said debate is underway behind the scenes in China about its support for the North Korean regime.

In an article on the Financial Times China website in May, for example, Tong Zhiwei, a law professor at the East China University of Political Science and Law in Shanghai, argued that China should make terminating the 1961 treaty a near-term dipomatic goal, because North Korea, also known as the DPRK, had used it as cover to develop its nuclear program and avoid punishment.

That, he wrote, was not in China’s interests.

“In the past 57 years, the treaty has strongly protected the security of the DPRK and peace on the Korean Peninsula, but it has also been used by the North Korean authorities to protect their international wrongful acts from punishment,” he wrote.

Meanwhile, China has reacted strongly to the United States sending a warship close to an island it controls in the South China Sea.

The U.S. Navy destroyer, USS John S. McCain, traveled close to Mischief Reef in the disputed Spratly Islands on Thursday, in the third “freedom of navigation” exercise in the area conducted under the Trump administration, Reuters reported.

China’s Defense Ministry said two Chinese warships “jumped into action” and warned the U.S. ship to leave, labeling the move a “provocation” that seriously harms mutual trust.

China’s Foreign Ministry said the operation had violated international and Chinese law and seriously harmed Beijing’s sovereignty and security.

“The Chinese side is strongly dissatisfied with this and will lodge solemn representations to the U.S. side,” the ministry said in a statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's going to happen, I'm going to put my money on an August 15th NOKO missile launch date. What happens from the moment the first rocket exhaust plume is detected is anyone's guess.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were me, unlike 45, I would keep my mouth shut and when the first bit of North Korean hardware touches American soil or a protectorate, I would flatten every last location of North Korean government and military real estate.  Then offer a hand up to the North Korean people, if they want it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, deicer said:

Then offer a hand up to the North Korean people, if they want it.

South Korea too as much of Seoul would be flattened by NK artillery within hours of a US attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone considered the possibility that little kim may have a decidedly terminal health condition which is propelling his / NOKO's insane behaviour?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this