At Time former editor Norman Pearlstine calls for an end to the temporizing and capitulate to the North Koreans as quickly as possible:
Those arguments notwithstanding, it is hard to argue against increasing our diplomatic efforts with North Korea. While U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis may be right in saying we would win a war with North Korea, he is also right in saying that any war would be “catastrophic†— to our allies and most probably to ourselves.
President Trump has made contradictory statements about North Korea. Along with his increasingly belligerent threats, Trump, while campaigning for the Presidency and in an interview with Bloomberg News in May, said that he would be willing to meet with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, “under the right circumstances.†Those circumstances weren’t defined.
Don Gregg is right in thinking talks should begin without preconditions. Now is the time to do so.
We have nothing to negotiate with the North Koreans. They won’t relinquish their nuclear weapons and missiles. We would be insane to insist on anything less. Should the North Koreans agree to what we want, they would be lying. Under the circumstances any negotiation with the North Koreans would be a capitulation.
There is an alternative other than war or negotiations and it’s the one I’ve advised in the past: do nothing. Put your trust in God, my boys, and keep your powder dry.
Keep your powder dry is not the same as doing nothing?
If Kim eventually fires a rocket into American EEZ which I think is his goal — I’d expect the US would at the very least fire a rocket into their EEZ.
It means to maintain a state of watchful preparedness. Less kinetic than bombing or invading.
In the past I’ve written that if I were commander-in-chief I’d issue a standing order for the Navy to shoot down every missile that NK launches that leaves its territorial waters.
What I wouldn’t do are bomb Pyongyang, mobilize an invasion, or open negotiations.
Those would be different circumstances. I don’t think we should get ahead of ourselves. Preventive war is never moral and rarely prudent.
Not advocating for preventive war. I’m saying at some point the US will have to give a warning shot if North Korea keeps escalating.
I very much doubt the US can tolerate repeated rocket launches into its own EEZ like Japan has.
No, I agree with you. I was responding to the commentators who’ve said that we should immediately bomb NK’s nuclear and missile development sites.
Accepting North Korea’s nuclear deterent and engaging in normal trade and diplomatic relations is a rational response to the problem.
If you really don’t want them to have a nuclear deterent, buy their missiles and nukes and their manufacturing plants and staff from them. Thr price would undoubtedly be guarantees for the continued existence of the regime (backed by Russia and China) and some sort of Marshall Plan for the North, and I mean a trillion or so dollars.
When Mattis and other ranking officials say the US would win a war with the North they are taciting assuming that China and Russia will stand idly by. They won’t. Neither country can tolerate a US ally on the Yalu, and they will intervene to prevent it. China, North Korea and Russia together have absolute military superiority in the region, and, in the event of Korean War II, they will drive us out of East Asia back to Guam.
What makes North Korea’s different is they are trying to blackmail other countries and the US by testing their nukes and even worse, firing rockets into the airspace of other countries.
No country can ever be seen as submitting to blackmail due to threat of nuclear weapons.
That said, the only deal that is possible is North Korea stops development of ballistic missiles, stops any proliferation and goes under UN inspection, and the US gives its binding word that as long as North Korea keeps its word, the US will not use military force against North Korea. There’s no deal possible that involves resuming trade, money, of any sort on ballistic missiles — that’s only for de-nuclearization. I’m personally okay with saying out loud we can talk along these lines; and that its a take it or forget it deal.
Previous topic: Lew Rockwell.com. blog
“In the past I’ve written that if I were commander-in-chief I’d issue a standing order for the Navy to shoot down every missile that NK launches that leaves its territorial waters.”
We don’t have the ability to do that currently. There is no boost-phase intercept system and the midcourse and terminal defense systems require assets located near the flight path in a cone near the ballistic missile impact zone (The only two midcourse sites are in Alaska and California).
The North Koreans could simply shoot their missiles south into the Philippine Sea or even west into the Yellow Sea assuming we stationed ships in the Sea of Japan (where most of the DPRK tests occur). So we’d need to know where the missile was going to land ahead of time and station a ship there and hope for the best. Additionally, the AEGIS system can’t currently intercept ICBM class missiles because they operate too high (in the exoatmosphere).