North Korea

[David]

[stui magpie]

Diplomacy has worked a treat so far. They didn't suddenly develop these weapons this year, this all happened on Obama's watch, now Trump has to deal with it when shit is real, not just maybe.

You can't negotiate when there are only winner/loser scenarios. You have to work out what the other party actually values and be prepared to give stuff up that are less critical to you than what you gain.

Kim wants Nukes, we don't want them top have them. Stalemate.

Work out what underpins their need and you might have a chance at diplomacy.

[David]

[stui magpie]

Trumps threats could be construed to be an ambit part of negotiation.

Kim etc had Obama figured out, they're wary of Trump .

In other words, he's been constructive IMO

[Pies4shaw]

The evidence that Trump's been constructive is missiles being fired over Japan and into the sea on the other side, is it?

[stui magpie]

^

No, that's evidence that Kim is pushing, trying to figure out where the boundary is.

[Pi]

North Korea has Nukes and is not about to give them up, ever! the rest of the world may as well decide to ignore another worthless treaty...... The nuclear proliferation treaty can go into the same garbage bin as , ...... Treaty of Versailles, 1919, Munich Conference, 1938.......

In fact since 1500 BC to now , there have been over eight thousand peace treaties (imagine Jack Thomson saying 'Thousand' really loudly) each lasting on average about 3 years.... And not one of them has actually worked...

Mutually assured destruction is the only non treaty that has been effective over any length of time in preventing a catastrophe for any regime hoping to survive..... It's a sad out look for the human race... but that is the pragmatic reality of the world we live in. One night of Kumbaya round the camp fire doesn't change 5000 years of human history.....we are who we are...

[swoop42]

Diplomacy has worked a treat so far. They didn't suddenly develop these weapons this year, this all happened on Obama's watch, now Trump has to deal with it when shit is real, not just maybe.

You can't negotiate when there are only winner/loser scenarios. You have to work out what the other party actually values and be prepared to give stuff up that are less critical to you than what you gain.

Kim wants Nukes, we don't want them top have them. Stalemate.

Work out what underpins their need and you might have a chance at diplomacy.

Incorrect.

They'd been working towards being a nuclear power for decades prior to Obama being President.

There first nuclear bomb test was in 2006 when Bush was President.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_ ... ar_program

[swoop42]

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=19278

The US has to accept North Korea as a nuclear power
Alon Ben-Meir

[...]

To prevent further escalation of the conflict, the US needs to eventually accept the new reality of a nuclear North Korea just as it had come to terms with both India and Pakistan as nuclear powers, which created mutual deterrence and brought an end to the conventional wars between the two countries.

Indeed, the real threat to the US and its allies does not emanate from North Korea's possession of a nuclear arsenal, but from the development and deployment of ICBMs mounted with miniaturized nuclear warheads that could reach not only US allies, but the US mainland itself. To remove this threat, the US should negotiate directly with North Korea and reach an agreement that would freeze further development of such technology, which China would certainly support.

North Korea may well accede through negotiations to this demand, as they can still claim to be a nuclear power and receive the recognition and respect of the international community which they desperately crave.

In return, North Korea will require the US to end its belligerent policy that has been in place since the end of the Korean war; that the US commits not to seek regime change, which was and still is the main motivator behind their pursuit of a nuclear shield; and that the US end its war games with South Korea and gradually remove the sanctions.

The lifting of the sanctions is extraordinarily important to mitigate the humanitarian crisis that has been inflicted on 25 million North Koreans, especially women and children, for nearly seven decades. Although humanitarian aid is exempt from diplomatic sanctions, more than 10 million citizens are undernourished and suffer from chronic food insecurity, which is tragically ignored or forgotten by the rest of the international community.

Based on the above terms, North Korea will have to fully comply to every provision of the accord, rejoin the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and adhere to the rules and requirements of the International Atomic Energy Agency, especially on the stationing of monitors and stringent inspections to ensure full compliance.

Given the experience of previous successive American administrations with North Korea, which have tried every conceivable approach to end the North Korean nuclear program including sanctions, negotiations, military threats, and isolation, none have worked because Pyongyang was determined not to surrender its nuclear weapons and be vulnerable to regime change.

We must now accept the fact that North Korea is a nuclear power, and rely on nuclear deterrence while normalizing relations in the process. Anything else is wishful thinking, and Kim Jong Un knows that only too well.

The quicker the United States realizes the game is lost and the only card it has left to play is high level diplomacy the better.

Apparently they and North Korea aren't currently engaged or have anyone in place to conduct these high level talks according to some media commentary I heard the other day.

They will have to swallow some pride and compromise on conditions North Korea will seek in return for halting it's ICBM program and ceasing of nuclear weapons testing but it's a better option than war and mass casualties.

Like the article states North Korea wont be giving up it's current nuclear arsenal so either we accept that and work towards an agreement that will lower tensions within the region or we allow it to escalate like present and watch millions potentially die.

[David]

Trumps threats could be construed to be an ambit part of negotiation.

Kim etc had Obama figured out, they're wary of Trump .

In other words, he's been constructive IMO

What evidence do you have for these assertions? Escalating their program doesn't exactly scream wariness to me. It sounds more like they're calling his bluff.

[Jezza]

Apparently they and North Korea aren't currently engaged or have anyone in place to conduct these high level talks according to some media commentary I heard the other day.

Dennis Rodman is always an option if all else fails?

[HAL]

I think [quote]
Dennis Rodman is much more than that.

[David]

[swoop42]

From what I've heard the former missile fired "over" Japan was done at such a high altitude that's it's not considered the air space of that nation.

When it splashed down I assume it was in Japanese waters.

[Wokko]

It was a blockade that led to the attack on Pearl Harbour.