I’m sure that previous presidents have had talks with China about exactly this sort of thing: If North Korea does this, and we do this in response, what will your response be, and how far is too far from your point of view, and what will your response to North Korea be, and so on. That way, if North Korea does do something stupid, nobody’s surprised by anyone’s response. It’s part of that whole “reducing uncertainty” thing that RickJay was talking about.
Does anyone want to lay odds on whether Trump has ever had such a talk with the Chinese leadership?
It’s the difference between an angry five year old boy burning ants with a magnifying glass on a sunny day, and an angry 45th President of the United States with his fingers on the nuclear football.
Here is the relevant part of the Secretary’s statement:
“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.”
He’s right. If any country attacked the United States with nuclear weapons, it WOULD end the regime and the destruction of (a lot of) its people. Under any President.
That’s not what you were arguing. You said “attacked”.
That statement isn’t altogether clear on where the US is drawing the line on nuclear policy, but I’m pretty sure they mean to cease development—like right now.
Let’s just hope they do, but I’m not holding my breath.
It’s not as if the war would remain nuclear; North Korea would invade South Korea and the land would be soaked in blood. Millions would die. Seoul would soon be in ruins.
Allow me, for a rare treat, to try to be fair to Donald Trump: he is quite unfortunate in that he’s the guy in charge when the Norks developed, or are close to developing, an honest-to-God ICBM. It’s not his fault he drew the short straw on that accident of history. But he is the least qualified President of all time to deal with it.
Interesting, about 4 hours ago BBC had a headline that said something like “Tillerson negotiating with North Korea” so I’m a bit surprised to now see this article.
Hillary (Or anyone really, but you insist on a name).
And the policy should be the same as it always has been: Push for sanctions (Which Trump did, I’ll give him credit for that) and NOT engage the crazy man with Napoleon Syndrome in his rhetorical banter.
