The North Korea Problem

[Ten oz]

34 minutes ago, MigL said:

But if the US had wanted to 'nuke' North Korea, they could have easily done so for about 55 yrs, since 1953, before NK gained any nuclear weapons.
( albeit with a lot of SK casualties, and delicate diplomacy with China )

Nuking NK would violate a number if international treaties and turn many allies and neutral countries against the U.S. while simultaneously elevating hostilities from Russia and China. The idea the U.S. could indiscriminately use nuclear weapons on NK is naive. 

39 minutes ago, MigL said:

So who exactly, is the NK nuclear arsenal a deterrent to ?

Would POTUS have sat down face to face with Kim if NK didn't have a Nuclear Program? 

 

40 minutes ago, MigL said:

And if not a deterrent, are they a first strike weapon, or simply a means of extortion ?

Extortion and it has been wildly successful. 

[Ten oz]

While the rhetoric surrounding North Korea has changed the situation on the ground doesn't appear to have at all. Can simply pretending all is well actually manifest into things being as pretended? 

Quote

 

HANOI — In the eight months since President Trump declared North Korea “no longer a nuclear threat,” the reclusive state has advanced both its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs and failed to provide an accounting of its deadly arsenal, according to multiple U.S. intelligence assessments.

And intelligence officials tell NBC News they have grown increasingly doubtful that Kim intends to dismantle the nuclear program at the center of Trump’s diplomatic gamble with Pyongyang. Link

 

 

[iNow]

Here’s the summary: POTUS flew around the world on the taxpayer dime to have dinner with a dictator and got literally nothing in return. 

[Ten oz]

4 hours ago, iNow said:

Here’s the summary: POTUS flew around the world on the taxpayer dime to have dinner with a dictator and got literally nothing in return. 

I have to disagree. Trump has gotten what he wants out of this. Polling shows people are less concerned about North Korea than they use to be. That is a narrative win for Trump. Perception is more important to Trump than tangible things. 

Quote

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- As President Donald Trump meets with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, far fewer Americans today, 14%, see North Korea as the United States' greatest enemy than the 51% who did a year ago. Despite this decline, the vast majority of Americans still view North Korea unfavorably, and nearly eight in 10 see the country's development of nuclear weapons as a critical threat to U.S. security. Link

 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

I have to disagree. Trump has gotten what he wants out of this. Polling shows people are less concerned about North Korea than they use to be. That is a narrative win for Trump. Perception is more important to Trump than tangible things. 

 

Did that change as a result of THIS summit, or the last one? I was commenting on their meeting this week.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Did that change as a result of THIS summit, or the last one? I was commenting on their meeting this week.

The data was collected in the 10th of this month. It is recent. The second meeting had been known of and discussed. Perhaps something will change post the meeting. 

It seems to me North Korea is a big win for Trump. Polling has shown that. North Korea is one of the few areas where Trump's approval is comfortably above 50%. The con appears to be working. 

I think another factor is that even among Republicans there is unease about Trump's competence, demeanor, and general suitability for the office. No one wants to see a new war and especially no one wants to see a war under Trump. So the bar has been sit real low. Provided Trump isn't threatening military action against North Korea twitter most people satisfied.