If a North Korean nuclear attack happened

[Dill]

(08-10-2017, 09:54 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Wait I'm a little confused here Dill. You're saying NK had no reason to trust our diplomacy, but what reason did we have to trust them? I may be mistaken, but wasn't it North Korea that crossed the 38th parallel and initiated what would become known as the Korean War? Wasn't it North Korea that attempted a reunification of the Korea's by force? I don't understand this "imperial aggressor" stance that North Korea has when they're the ones who decided to invade South Korea because they had Russia and China behind them.

Yes, I am saying NK had no reason to trust our diplomacy.  Not sure any country can at this point, with Trump as president and a Republican Congress.

Certainly NK invaded the South--over 60 years ago.  In their view, the South was occupied by the US and Rhee was a puppet leader. In the North's view, the Koreans would have settled their own affairs just fine if the US had not intervened.

50 years later, the regime that Clinton dealt with was not identical to the one that invaded back then. Nor was the US the same. Clinton cut a deal with Kim Jong Il in 1994 to shut down reactors capable of producing weapons grade plutonium in return for the building of two light water reactors 500,000 tons of fuel oil to tide the country over until the reactors were completed. SK and Japan would help with funding, the IAEA would inspect--very similar to the current Iran deal. http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/19/world/clinton-approves-a-plan-to-give-aid-to-north-koreans.html?pagewanted=all

But Republicans won the midterm elections; Gingrich became speaker.  Lacking funding, reactor construction stalled. Then Bush was elected, and he stopped the fuel shipments in 2002 and invaded Iraq the next year. NK said "Hell with this" and in two years had nuclear bombs. So after signing all the papers and getting four other countries committed, the US essentially backed out. I would not be surprised if some heads rolled in NK after that. Those who claimed the US could not be trusted were further empowered within the regime.

(08-10-2017, 09:54 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I'm not sure how diplomacy will solve anything in all honesty. When North Korea invaded South Korea they clearly showed what their main goal is, and that is the reunification of Korea. That will never happen under diplomacy. What the North wants out of "diplomacy" is for the US to pack their bags and get out of South Korea so that they can finish their reunification process. It's the reason they hate us. It's not because we're "imperialists". It's because we stopped them from successfully taking over South Korea and reunifying the nation.

It's my personal belief that North Korea's goals of modernizing their nuclear capabilities has very little to do with "US aggression" and more to do with North Korea wanting to attempt another reunifying campaign against the South. I don't see diplomacy working as long as the Kim family is still the leadership of the country.

Here's how diplomacy can solve everything.

NK can neither feed nor power itself.  It depends on China and Russia for resources.

Get these countries, and the rest of the world, to impose sanctions on critical imports.

Cut off the food and power, and the regime either collapses or rolls back its nuclear capability.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/05/asia/north-korea-un-sanctions/index.html

In the meantime, don't say crazy things or create misperceptions that NK might act on.