North Korea says ‘a nuclear war may break out any moment’

Washington Post ^ | October 16 at 7:26 PM | Edith M. Lederer

[SkyDancer]

In 0bama’s world it would have been ‘well okay’ but in Trump’s world: “Oh hey, you really don’t want to be going there”.

[Thomas Truxtun]

Rut Roh

BYE BYE

[E. Pluribus Unum]

[TigersEye]

If it does I predict that North Korea will never know the outcome of it.

[rdcbn]

The basic issue at play is that countries that continually threaten nuclear attacks on another country to reduce that country to ashes cannot be permitted to obtain nuclear weapons and their development must be prevented at any cost

North Korea and Iran are two notable examples

[Autonomous User]

Oh Noes Rocket Man.

[Jonny7797]

Yawn

[Terry Mross]

Trade California for NK?

[JPJones]

Just communists, democrats and media trying to distract Trump.

[rbg81]

Obama just wanted both Iran and NK to go nuclear after he left office. Beyond that, he could not have cared less.

[Jim Noble]

Well, a nuclear war with DPRK would be quite brief.

[Robert DeLong]

You are correct of course.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

I worry about just south of the DPRK.

[Caipirabob]

And their people will be able to tell the difference how? If it come down to just the difference between being on fire roasted alive and not, you have already lost the war and the rest to come.

[Jim Noble]

“I worry about just South of the DPRK”

Worry about your own country.

[SkyDancer]

The Norks have cleaner cities.

[jjsheridan5]

In 0bama’s world it would have been ‘well okay’ but in Trump’s world: “Oh hey, you really don’t want to be going there”.

Go where, exactly? I refuses to go behind a WP paywall, but the headline seems misleading and melodramatic. He is not saying that he would start a nuclear war, but rather that they wouldn't sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty. What do you think that Trump's reaction to that refusal would be? Given what has happened to countries that played ball (Libya, for example), wouldn't it make more sense for potential adversaries, such as NK, to not sign?

Basically, I don't how this moves the needle, much, if at all. His statement about nuclear war perhaps starting is not a statement of intent, but rather a segue into the point that NK needs to be able to defend itself (not an accurate deduction, but hardly the the-world-is-about-to-end connotation implied by the headline). In fact, while NK may be the most evil, hideous, and cruel government to exist in at least 1/2 a century (if not much more), it is hard to see what is wrong with NK's position on this one. Signing the NPT would be a disaster for them, with no upside. Is there something else in the article that is of importance?

[Davy Crocket]

The Norks have cleaner cities.

They have one city with no people in it!

[JudgemAll]

Basically Bush Sr, Clinton and Obama removed our leverage by denuking South Korea. Now Kim asks for US/International full disarmament ...

And you all think Russia and China do not stand behind this? It is for their benefits to put up America as some kind of bully which needs disarmed