Sunday, December 31, 2017

Trump Is Bluffing About Attacking North Korea

I don't know if Donald Trump is going to be making any New Year's resolutions for 2018, but here's a thought: How about not threatening to start a nuclear war with North Korea? It seems likely that Trump officials are, in fact, talking about a military strike in which the United States would target a symbolic location in North Korea to retaliate for a missile test, much as the administration targeted an airfield in Syria following a chemical weapons use. Still, I think the Trumpkins are bluffing. They are, to borrow a Soviet phrase, just trying to "rattle the pots and pans," hoping to frighten North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and China's Xi Jinping. Of course, they may still get us all killed.

More

Nobody around Trump -- not John Kelly, not H.R. McMaster, nobody -- has the slightest idea how to fix the problem of North Korea. But they do know what the boss likes to hear. And he doesn't want to see them on Fox & Friends admitting that there isn't anything to be done about North Korea. Steve Bannon already did that, telling the American Prospect, "There's no military solution here. They got us." Trump fired him shortly thereafter.

Comments

Worth repeating!

#1 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2017-12-29 12:04 PM

There is no good solution nor an easy solution to lil' Kim's threats and bluffs. Any type of U.S. military action will likely cause the Norks to directly target the U.S. or U.S. allies in the region. A former Navy acquaintance said we would easily sink almost anything in their inventory that puts to sea, but that would be considered an act of war. And any such decision will likely bring the Chinese directly into the conflict, something neither of us want (but the Norks might not mind at all).

Killing lil' Kim directly is illegal, but if possible would probably make the Norks a bit more pliable from an international standpoint. That I'm advocating for that, just mentioning the possibility.

#2 | Posted by AKat at 2017-12-29 02:29 PM

Has he drawn a red line?

#3 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2017-12-29 03:32 PM

The Dotard did draw a red line, around North Dakota.

Obama recognized the intractable problem presented by NK and his response was a modified version of containment of the threat. Most on the right sneered at this strategy but now see it as much better than the loud mouthed bluster of The Dotard, whose strategy doesn't work on Li'l Kim and Red China. Kim appears to not have an issue vaporizing San Francisco/Dallas/DC and Xi Jinping, by not repudiating Kim is seen as supporting NK.

So -- what to do? The strategy may now be to talk the Demander in Chief from military action while hoping that someone along the line will refuse to act when Trump wants launch nukes. That's a lot to hope for...

#4 | Posted by catdog at 2017-12-31 10:31 PM

Trump can't see past his ego which is attached to his penis. Play acting Commander-in-Chief and killing a bunch of people might give him that hard on he hasn't had for years.

Sooner or later those cocaine highs aren't going to be enough.

#5 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-01-02 08:02 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Oxfam: World's Richest 1% Hoard 82% of the Wealth (162 comments)

Man Arrested in Threat Against CNN Employees (150 comments)

Senate Votes to End Shut Down (75 comments)

Russian Bots Blame Schumer For Shutdown (45 comments)

Blue States Are the Engine Driving Job Gains (38 comments)

China Winning in Scientific Productivity (32 comments)

Senators Used Talking Stick During Bipartisan Budget Talks (24 comments)

Doctor Living in U.S. Since Age 5 Faces Deportation (23 comments)