Replies

If we wake up tomorrow morning and have to decide between nuclear annihilation and bankruptcy, of course the choice is obvious.

But there is no more immediacy in the Korea or Iran threats today than there has been for years and it is quite conceivable that the situation will continue as is for years to come. Meanwhile, the fiscal situation creeps ever closer to becoming irredeemable.

I believe that Trump is doing the right thing in trading off trade advantages for cooperation but I also think it is quite right to point out that China has played this game successfully against us several times before with the connivance of North Korea and there is reason to believe that they are doing it again. Trump probably has no choice but to play the game one more time but try to change the rules to get a different result this time and we for our part have no choice but to hope and believe that he knows what he is doing and will succeed.

I think it is quite legitimate to point out that in dealing with Korea through China we are perhaps working against ourselves concerning another vital interest. I think is also quite right to point out that if the situation in Korea is immediate, security must trump (pun shamelessly intended) the balance sheet.

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..

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.

But there is no more immediacy in the Korea or Iran threats today than there has been for years and it is quite conceivable that the situation will continue as is for years to come. Meanwhile, the fiscal situation creeps ever closer to becoming irredeemable.

I disagree. As soon as North Korea becomes capable of reliably delivering nuclear-aremd (or EMP-armed) missles to our homeland, the "immediacy" become profoundly increased, IMHO.

It seems eminently logical to me that the longer we wait to deal with an unstable North Korea—a Noerth Korea who is continuing to develop its nuclear arsenal and delivery systems—the risk will continue to incrementally ratchet upwards.

At what point such ratcheting suddenly becomes intolerable immediacy I can't say, but I'm increasingly getting the sense that delay could easily entail greater risk, versus trying to address the issue now.

My suspicion is that President Trump doesn't want this issue hanging over the head of the US, and indeed is probablyl of the opinion that this issue, like so many others which have been procrastinated about, should have been addressed long ago.

I tend to sympathize with that sentiment...