We Must Go to War With North Korea and Iran if Necessary

White House Dossier ^ | 4/19/17 | Keith Koffler

[LibWhacker]

We Must Go to War With North Korea and Iran if Necessary

Posted on April 19, 2017, 9:08 am by Keith Koffler • 28 Comments

I hate to share bad news. I’d love to pretend nothing was wrong. Dreadfully wrong.

I know many of you will disagree. But there are two existential threats to our country that President Trump must deal with. Militarily if necessary, and it will not be pretty if it comes to that.

Secretary of State Tillerson warned Congress that Trump may pull out of the Iran deal. Now that’s welcome news. But I’d milk this one along for a time, while not letting the goal of ending the deal get out of sight.

From the Washington Examiner:

Tillerson certified that Iran is in compliance with the nuclear deal negotiated by former President Barack Obama’s team in a letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan that was released late Tuesday night. But he hastened to add that Iran’s role as “a leading state sponsor of terror through many platforms and methods” has the Trump team debating whether to stick with the agreement.

I am not an interventionist. We should not be in Syria except to fight ISIS. Abandoning Mubarak, our longtime ally, was a dumb idea. I supported the overthrow of Qaddafi, but it was a mistake, we should have left him right where he was. I think I let myself get carried away by the fact that he killed so many Americans in the skies over Lockerbie. And the brutal reality that he was set to slaughter thousands of his own people. But that, unfortunately, is how these countries work.

But a nuclear Iran or a nuclear North Korea is simply, as a previous president put it without understanding the term, a red line. We cannot be in a position where the insane, terrorism-supporting rulers of either of the countries are in a position to destroy us with nuclear weapons. And once they have the capability, we may never be able to rid them of it.

In short, we must do everything short of war to end their hopes of a first-strike capability against the United States. But if everything short of war comes up short, then there must be war. Our survival, and perhaps that of the world, depends on it.

The reason I say to “milk it” with Iran is that North Korea already has nuclear weapons and is developing ICBMs with which to strike us. That is, North Korea must be dealt with first. And if we have to strike North Korea, it might just convince Iran to make a verifiable deal to end its nuclear weapons program, and it may even encourage those in Iran who want to overthrow a regime hell-bent on confronting the United States with nukes.

But I doubt it.

This country has big problems, both domestic and foreign, courtesy of the previous administration. People don’t want to hear that we can’t pay for entitlements and the government must be massively cut, wiping out service many people depend on, or think they depend on. Or that we have obligations to defend ourselves that will result in grievous violence and loss of life.

But those are the facts.

[RummyChick]

Has anyone explained why trump thought lil Kim’s father was a gentlemen who still runs north korea.

I chalk it up to him Being tired in that interview..surely he knows it is the son.

[Chainmail]

Where you and I differ is that I believe that we have passed the point where we should stand by and watch: North Korea first tested nukes while Bush I was in office and we didn't do anything about it. The first attempts were not particularly successful, so we laughed it off.

Then the nukes began to work - and they shared their technology with the Iranians to help them along - and we stood by and watched. "Nothing to worry about yet". Then both Iran and North Korea continued to develop and test long-range ballistic missiles which nobody seemed to relate to a big problem for us - until now.

I hope President Trump can get the Chinese to stop the North Koreans from "going final" but we don't have a lot of time left before they do have the capabilities to nail our cities. Then what?

The nasties of the world have a tendency to keep going even when we wish they won't and then the price gets much higher the longer we put off doing something about it..

[nathanbedford]

Let us consider the incentives of the parties to maybe get a clue about what is going on:

North Korea. Presumably North Korea wants to refine its nukes so they could be fitted to an ICBM which could deliver it to the United States to elevate itself to a big-league role player and to at least ensure its survival and the survival of its brutal autocracy.

Therefore, North Korea's incentivized to pretend to agree to take the heat off so that, after world attention has moved on, resume their research and development. They will pretend to concede.

China. China wants to sell its items to America in order to keep the economy going and prevent hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens from rioting in the streets. They want to do this through unfair trade practices. They want to be able to continue those practices in the future.

Therefore, China will act out the scenario one more time, pretend to bring North Korea to heel, North Korea will pretend to come to heel, and China will sell its goods to the United States. As and when the United States begins to move once again to curb China's aggressive mercantilism, China will arrange for North Korea to shoot off another missile.

United States. United States wants a pacific Korea and a fair trading partner in China. The problem is we have very few weapons to compel either. Working together, these two have much leverage against us. We will be loathe to risk a nuclear war with China or an exchange with Korea. They should know this even though Trump is doing his best to intimidate by saber rattling.

Therefore, a deal will probably be put together, the question is whether he will be long-lasting and real or a comb over.

[Chainmail]

A reasonably correct summary but as you put it, a "comb over". Absent a longer-term solution in the form of the destruction of North Korean R&D facilities and weapon storage North Korea will continue to build and refine their ability to attack us. And assist Iran to do the same.

Will we continue to allow China to determine our future? The stuff we buy from them pays for their increased ability to project their power against us and our allies. Do we continue to help them along this way?

Essentially, by continuing the path of ignoring the long-term goals of the Chinese, North Koreans and the Iranians, we are committing suicide in slow motion.

[JonPreston]

They must be stopped by any means necessary.

Can we start our zero tolerance position by first eradicating MS-13 and the waves of masked communists on and near our college campuses?

[nathanbedford]

As I observed in the previous post, we have very little leverage over China apart from cutting off their exports to us which raises a host of problems. First, consumers will be clobbered. Second, American importers will be clobbered. Third, American exporters of everything from oil, gas, coal to high-tech will be clobbered. Fourth, the American bond market might get clobbered. Fifth, interest rates could spike.

When I pointed these things out in the primary season, I was shouted down as a globalist but please note that Trump has already backed off on getting rid of NAFTA, he has already admitted that he has traded off more than just opposition to Chinese currency manipulation, all of this because trade reform is not exclusively a win-win game but also a win lose game. So, the argument of free traders is always been that "the economy wins more than it loses" but the argument of protectionists has always been, "look at those harmed and take action." So the question which should be an economics problem becomes a political question.

The politician does not consult the balance sheet but consults polling data. For example, a politician in Nebraska has an interest in protecting agricultural exports and does not want to sacrifice them to protect automobile jobs for the UAW in Detroit. High-tech billionaires want the global game to go on and he wants the music to keep playing. They have few votes but they do have mega campaign dollars.

At the end of the day, Donald Trump's options are much more limited than most of those on this thread understood during the campaign. His actions since inauguration have tended to confirm this reality. And the reality is, his options against China are limited or at least are really a two edge sword.

[Louis Foxwell]

The Art of the Deal includes walking away from the table when the other party refuses to offer real compromise. A world class deal maker is all too aware of his adversary’s desire to snooker him into a corner.
The US holds the trump ace, our markets. Without US markets China topples. Chinese central planning has built their entire economy on the US market. Vast development rages in China based on US debt. If we default, which we are perfectly capable of doing, China falls.
It is in China’s interest to get verifiable concessions from the NORKS.

[entropy12]

Why are we worried about Norks whose long range rockets keep blowing up? For last 20 years, Norks have played us with threats and each time we bribe them with more tax payer dollars. Are we that gullible?

Why start a war with Iran, who does not even have a nuke?
And Iran has much bigger military than any other middle-east country, besides having huge oil resources. Iran has no demonstrable ICBM capability as well.

Prioritize the threats before starting wars!

On the other hand Pakistan ALREADY has 100+ nukes, and ballistic Missile capability. Worse yet, it is the birthplace of religious extremist organizations such as Taliban and Al Qaeda leader Osama was given sanctuary and a big house next to their military academy building. Worst yet, Pakistan graduates more students from Madrassahs than any other Muslim country. Pakistan has more jihadists operating than any other country, and majority of Pakistani’s have favorable opinions of Osama Bin Laden.

[Chainmail]

Where you and I part company is that I refuse to believe that we should just "lie down and enjoy it". We have other choices, painful that they almost certainly will be.

China, at this point, is not ready for all-out war with us and they know it. They are at least tacitly supporting North Korea's intercontinental nuclear aims because they see them as a surrogate they can control.

The Soviets - I mean "Russians" are also using North Korea as a surrogate as well as Iran because they see them as a lever against our power and because they believe that they will not be victims of either of them.

We can and should elevate the issue to the United Nations, since every nonproliferation protocol has been violated several times over and to provide the final legal cover for intervention.

Then, if I were the man in charge, I would use nonnuclear precision attacks to nullify NK and Iranian nuclear facilities and ballistic missile R&D and storage locations. I would also make sure that those facilities were unwarned and populated during the moment of those attacks.

We have needed to make it plain that rogue nations will not have nuclear capabilities, period. The risks of a nuclear attack by those terrorist regimes is too severe to sit and wait for.

I was a Nuclear Weapons Employment Officer and was involved in several live nuclear tests, so I know what the issues really are - so it's much more than worrying about risking your IRA.

[EarlT357]

“Thus far, they haven’t been able to assemble a working delivery system.”

You’re joking, right?

All they need is a used shipping container on a leaky, rusted Nigerian-registered container ship to deliver a nuke underneath the Golden Gate or Long Beach docks or Seattle’s waterfront.

Oh wait! Maybe that’s not such a bad idea.....

[nathanbedford]

I was a Nuclear Weapons Employment Officer and was involved in several live nuclear tests, so I know what the issues really are - so it's much more than worrying about risking your IRA.

No argument from me on this score. And I have never said in an either-or situation that we do nothing. However, I do not share your view that we should bomb North Korea except in the very last extreme, the risks are simply too high. Bombing Iran, however, is another matter because the risks are lower and the ultimate danger is higher.

I have long complained that the price of the Iraq war was the loss of the ability (read the political will) to do anything about Iran where the real danger has always lain.

[Chainmail]

Unfortunately for all of us, we have had a series of weak Presidents and they have allowed things to get much worse. If we wait much more, the results will be much, much worse than 9/11.

I hope President Trump will be resolute enough to either get the rogues to back off and allow real inspection/restriction to take place or give Jim Mattis the reach to end the threats - starting with decapitating The NK and Iranian regimes..

[nathanbedford]

Essentially, by continuing the path of ignoring the long-term goals of the Chinese, North Koreans and the Iranians, we are committing suicide in slow motion.

I think I take your meaning from the above sentence better than I understood it before. I do not recommend that we continue on the path and do nothing respecting either Iran or North Korea but I think we have to realistically understand that our military options in both places, especially in North Korea, are limited. It is a scary thought to wage war against an atomic power, no matter how weak the bombs or how short range the rockets of the enemy.

Nevertheless, in both instances we might well be forced into "continuing along the path" which means that we will be facing generations long war with aggressive Islam led by Iran and a continuing struggle against China which takes a far longer view of history then do we. Under these circumstances my admonition about not bankrupting ourselves becomes a matter of survival not a matter of a credit card. We need to have our fiscal house in order if we are to defend ourselves over the generations. Indeed, it might well prove out that the greatest existential threat to America is not what we see before us today but our debt.

[Chainmail]

Every day that goes by, China, North Korea, and Iran grow more capable. Putting things off until some later date guarantees a much higher price will be paid by us and our children.

Hitting North Korea's and Iran's nuclear research facilities, storage sites, and testing facilities will send the message of US resolve to keep the genie in the bottle and a parallel signal to the Chinese that we are willing to pay the price to keep the peace and are not a "paper tiger".

If not, then start learning Mandarin and hope you survive long enough to use it.

[justa-hairyape]

Yep. Have noticed that. But NK has not tested a big one yet. Just little tiny ones. And they cannot hit the US mainland right now. So this is the window to strike. It will close soon.

[justa-hairyape]

True. Genie is out. We are doomed. But the question now is how big will the genie get, how soon will it kill most of us and how many will survive to continue the species. That is what is at stake now. Would you like to die tomorrow or today ?

[justa-hairyape]

Saddam was a creation of the US. He was our monster. We had to take him out and we successfully did. The vast majority of deaths occurred during the occupation and insurgency. An insurgency btw supported by the unholy alliance. Assad is Russias monster. They have pledged he will be replaced soon. North Korea is China’s monster. Our Libya, Yemen, Egypt, Ukraine and Syria endeavors were definitely mistakes by the US.

[justa-hairyape]

Not quite right. There is an actual imnediate need to decrease the number of nuclear isotopes in the atmosphere. We cannot continue to increase their density. Could explain why, but it would take too much typing.

[353FMG]

>Iran and North Korea cannot be allowed to get nukes.<

NK already exploded a nuclear device.

Whether it is missile-deliverable is another question.

[sauropod]

Read