That was our first undeclared war, so that’s problematic already. And I agree that for most of its existence North Korea has been trouble. I just doubt that they have a suicidal tendency. As to running wars from the “comfort of Washington”, that’s what CIC’s do according to our constitution. And then I would also agree with you that we ought to as a matter of principal and integrity, disengage from our inclination towards gratuitous wars.
Unfortunately we have off shored so much of our manufacturing and technology to China it nay be more of an issue for us than them.
If the tweeter in chief sparks a war in North Korea, it’s going to involve Russia, and China for sure, both having a common border with North Korea. We need to avoid even an accidental conflict with them.
The tweeter in chief??
This was set in motion over the years.
Once we paid ransom for NK to limit their nuclear production, see how well the worked out don’t you,
Why didn’t Obama address the issue instead of ignoring it???
North Korea isn’t a threat to the US. The US has the biggest military in the world and could ultimately destroy them realitively quickly. North Korea is seeking nukes as a deterrent.
Yes, tweeter in chief. There’s nothing for Obama to have done, same for Bush and beyond. Unless North Korea wants to enter an agreement on the lines of the P5+1, they can’t be stopped from developing nukes, and as a matter of policy transcending administrations, the US doesn’t talk to North Korea.
I think you mean to say North Korea isn’t a threat to the US mainland right now. North Korea is absolutely a threat to our military forces stationed in the Pacific. North Korea is also a threat to some of our overseas territories, such as Guam. North Korea is most certainly a threat to our allies as demonstrated by them flying a nuclear missile over Japan.
I agree with you that their nuclear arsenal is a deterrent. However your broad sweeping statement that North Korea is not a threat to the United States is short-sighted.
I also agree that the US military could defeat the North Koreans. Don’t think for a second though that the North Koreans wouldn’t fire one off if they thought we were coming after them. This makes our ability to use a pre-emptive strike nearly impossible since North Korea keeps their nukes on the move constantly.
Most definitely that would!!!
Nope, I mean North Korea is no threat to the US. There’s missile defense in South Korea, Japan and Guam, which we lifted from the Spanish at the conclusion of our war with them. And North Korea isn’t suicidal, they’re not going to attempt to land a missile in Guam.
And North Korea didn’t fly a “nuclear” missile over Japan.
You are correct, Obama did nothing.
He did nothing with regard to North Korea, but then that can be said of all presidents regarding North Korea. Unless we’re willing to set at the table with North Korea as we did with Iran and negotiate with them, they will develope a nuclear capability, and there’s no assurances that they would even negotiate as Iran did.
You of course are correct… but then again, some people have better management skills than others and most broad stroke managers know that they are better leaving the shop work to the shop experts…Of course none of our engagements certainly since WWII have been an imperative and some might even say that our less than necessary involvement in WWI set up the dominoes for the rest of the century…But hey… when you have a lackluster economy what better than war to whip the population into shape…
Well, with respect to war, this is why the 41% of Americans that are registered independent, need to actually vote independent and make the democrats and republicans set one out. Nothing would get their attention more. We’ve essentially been in a war economy since WW2 and Eisenhower warned about the dangers of that. Defense contractors employ a huge number of Americans, and if we ever did disengage from our habitual gratuitous wars, we’d have a major unemployment problem.
As we did with Iran and that worked so well didn’t it.
Um, when has Iran attacked any one of their neighbors, let alone the US?
If their were a batch of independent candidates that actually acted serious about governance you might be right. I almost think that Trump would have run as independent if he thought that he could have had an effect race. Rand Paul would no doubt operate outside the Republican party if he thought he would have any voice at all (although he seems to have lost it during the last primary). It seems like libertarians have really only eyed the presidency with any real interest and just don’t seem to pay a lot of attention to organizing and running down ticket races… I always remember this picture from the last libertarian conference:
Between our worldwide Monroe doctrine of spreading democracy (whether they want it or not) and our real fear of socialism we have created our world. We certainly aren’t responsible for the actions of people like the Kim’s but then again, once invented could we ever have the reasonable expectation of keeping the nuclear genie in the bottle. My biggest fear is that Marx is going to win because the people of the US don’t recognize its danger… Communism will never be totally successful if their is one place in the world that it free of it and America just doesn’t understand that it is the grand prize…
I totally agree with you about Rand Paul, I don’t know what happened to him.
US interference in Latin America resulted in us overthrowing the democratically elected governments of 12 countries and replacing them with right wing dictators. More recently, we supported a coup in Ukraine that resulted in the overthrow of a democratically elected government, which prompted Russia to take swift action to protect their warm water port in Crimea. The US does not promote democracy, that’s a myth.
The libertarian party is kept out of the debates by an arbitrary number (15%) which is extra constitutional. And denied matching funding by another arbitrary number (5%).
Again, 26% of voters register republican, 32% democrat and 41% independent!!! We can keep doing the same think of alternately sending democrats and republicans to Washington hoping for something new, or we can think outside of the box!
Well as we can see with the total media assassination of Trump, getting any kind of decent coverage of independents is, at least up to now, all but impossible. Then if you do manage to get a little traction the democratic and republican party will pull their own fingernails out rather than let you into a televised debate. Thinking outside of the box isn’t the problem… getting out of the box is…
Not true, again, all the 41% of independents need to do is actually vote independent. The problem is that while most American voters are registered as independents, they keep voting for the R and D, shrug. Oh, and Trump kills himself, most times he opens his mouth or tweets.