Posted on 11/30/2017 9:58:58 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Has North Korea achieved the nuclear weapons capability it thinks it needs to defend itself against the United States? Its latest and most advanced intercontinental ballistic missile test was undeniably hostile. Yet, paradoxically, it could signal a chance for a new diplomatic opening.
There are many reasons to be skeptical of the North and pessimistic about the prospects for solving the crisis over its nuclear program, given the ruthlessness of its leader, Kim Jong-un, President Trump’s bombast and the deep mistrust between the two countries. But with regional tensions and the risk of miscalculation so acute, the United States and others, including China, Russia, South Korea and Japan, need to exhaust all avenues in the search for ways to limit the North Korean program.
North Korea says its goal is a missile-delivered nuclear weapon capable of striking the United States. It considers itself a nuclear power, with an arsenal of 20 or more weapons, that its officials say is designed to keep the United States from invading and to force an end to sanctions.
Mr. Kim has greatly accelerated the nuclear program...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I added that last sentence containing the phrase "Mr. Kim" on purpose. The whole article is rife with polite nods to Dear Leader. Err, I mean "Mr. Kim".
Letting the Norks have nukes is like letting a room full of toddlers have flamethrowers. Adults simply will not allow such a thing to happen.
North Korea has not needed nukes to “defend itself” ford ades, somehow I tend to believe Lil Kimchee when he says he developed those hydrogen bombs to burn American cities.
But then I was smart enough not to pay someone to brainwash me in liberal “studies”.
To the New York Times, anything that can harm America is wonderful.
This is the accumulated intellect of the editorial board of the Slimes of NY? LOL. They should take their panties off their head because it appears they’re talking out of their collective @sses.
This sets the whole tone and makes me wonder whose side are these people on?
Can North Korea please strike NYC first?
“North Korea says its goal is a missile-delivered nuclear weapon capable of striking the United States. It considers itself a nuclear power, with an arsenal of 20 or more weapons, that its officials say is designed to keep the United States from invading and to force an end to sanctions.”
They are threatened with invasions and sanctions due to the arsenal. They have been recognized this way by a number of other countries to include Japan and China due to their arsenal. They have openly threatened to use the arsenal against countries they cannot scare or beat.
So having the arsenal as a tool to diplomacy while using it s a threat to killing millions of people is nothing more than terrorism and blackmail. So I guess the NY Times is backing them?
rwood
“defend itself against the United States?”
The NYT is salivating over those words, because they express what they believe: the USA is evil, especially with DJT at the top, and poor innocent little North Korea, headed by a kind, tolerant, lovable little fuzz ball, is threatened by the evil USA.
To what extent is the NYT involved with the darker, North Korea-oriented wing of the CIA?
I really don’t get N Korea’s end game. What are they going to do with those missiles and nukes? Firing them at the US or its allies is going to mean their destruction. So what is the point?
The rest of the world keep feeding them.
It’s all about keeping the regime in power.
All this nuclear posturing is temper tantrums to get the world to keep sending them food & goods.
I think the US sends them aid as well, no?
So they are hiring reporters straight out of high school now ?
When there’s a Rat administration certainly!
Always negotiate from a position of strength.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.