Yes, this is a very serious and dangerous situation with millions of lives hanging in the balance.
I have some inside info over the years on these bad situations and know for a fact that when we went after Sadaam in Iraq and we got involved in other situations like 9-11, we had Nukes loaded on Planes, in the area, and we were ready to use them if needed.
But, we have this policy where we don't go Nuke unless the other guy goes Chemical, Biological or Nuke first. So there is that.
If we go after them, I believe it will be conventional weapons taking out his Nuke capabilities.
If he goes Nuke in response to that, God help them, we will make glass of that nation.
Sure is nice typing about it and not sitting in Washington with that responsibility hanging over me.
A new round of blustery threats emerged over North Korea on Tuesday, as President Trump warned that any military action by Pyongyang “will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,” and North Korea’s military signaled it was “carefully examining” a plan to attack Guam.
What could possibly go wrong?
Diplomats lately have been warning of a chain of events they fear could escalate into a deadly new Korean War.
Threats and bluster are part of a familiar and long-running game of brinkmanship between Washington and Pyongyang, but this time, it has been made more dangerous by two volatile new players: Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump.
Kim, the current incarnation of North Korea’s ruling dynasty, is in his early 30s — a callow youth and a less predictable character than his father, Kim Jong Il. In little more than five years in office, he has executed his uncle, ordered the assassination of his half brother and redoubled efforts to develop a nuclear weapon capable of reaching the United States.
Then, there is President Trump, often prone to impulse and almost always undiplomatic, only 12 weeks in office and, like other new presidents, still learning on the job. Through his tweets and his words, Trump has promised to stop North Korea’s progress toward becoming a nuclear power.
“North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States,” Trump told reporters in New Jersey on Tuesday. “They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
Trump’s order in April to launch airstrikes against Syria to punish President Bashar Assad’s government for a poison gas attack just 63 hours earlier signaled to supporters his decisiveness, to critics his impetuousness. The president’s penchant for action also was on display later that month when the U.S. dropped its largest conventional bomb (nicknamed the “mother of all bombs”) on an Islamic State cave complex in Afghanistan.
“The most unpredictable part of this story is Trump, not North Korea. North Korea is doing what it always does,” said Sue Mi Terry, a former CIA analyst who specializes in North Korea. She believes that Kim Jong Un, like his father, is essentially a rational player who will not launch a suicidal attack that would bring about the end of his government. “There is a lot of brinksmanship going on, but people can miscalculate,” she warned. “And things could go very, very wrong.”
What might North Korea do?
North Korea has recently been conducting tests of its intercontinental ballistic missiles, and U.S. officials now believe the secretive country has developed the capability of loading a miniaturized nuclear warhead onto its missiles.
North Korean official: We're ready for war if Trump wants it »
Another nuclear test could also be in the works. North Korea has conducted five nuclear tests since 2006, each of them followed by howls of indignation from the international community and fresh U.N. Security Council sanctions.
How would the U.S. respond?
The Trump administration has been signaling that this time it will respond forcefully to another North Korean nuclear test. Officials have disparaged the Obama administration’s policy toward North Korea, a strategy known as “strategic patience.” No one knows whether Trump would take military action. U.S. intelligence officials have in the past signaled they might be prepared to launch an airstrike with conventional weapons, mostly likely Tomahawk cruise missiles.
Exactly what the U.S. would strike is unclear. North Korea’s nuclear tests are conducted underground, and there is no obvious target that wouldn’t have the risk of nuclear fallout. Analysts say it would be possible to retaliate through other means, such as attacking North Korea’s submarine fleet off its east coast, something that could be accomplished more discreetly through sabotage than airstrikes.
“Trump needs to make sure he does something different from Obama in response to a nuclear test. They can’t just go through the motions at the U.N. Security Council, but they have to be sure they don’t pursue a unilateral response that backfires or fails,” said Scott Snyder of the Council on Foreign Relations.
How might North Korea respond if the U.S. takes military action?
Given all its rhetoric, North Korea would feel hard-pressed not to retaliate against a U.S. strike. “Our revolutionary strong army is keenly watching every move by enemy elements with our nuclear sight focused on the U.S. invasionary bases not only in South Korea and the Pacific operation theater but also in the U.S. mainland,” North Korea’s official Rodong Sinmun newspaper warned Tuesday.
Boasting aside, it is unclear whether North Korea could target the U.S. mainland, but 28,000 U.S. troops in South Korea and 50,000 in Japan are within striking distance. The most exposed are those stationed near the demilitarized zone separating North and South Korea. The South Korean capital of Seoul lies only 30 miles away, making it vulnerable to conventional artillery dug into the mountainsides near the DMZ.
“There would be a great temptation for the North Koreans to throw a few artillery shells into Seoul. They might not be able to flatten the place, but they could do a lot of damage,” said Carl Baker, a retired Air Force officer who was stationed in South Korea, now with the Pacific Forum CSIS in Honolulu.
Military analysts have no doubt that combined U.S. and South Korean forces could beat North Korea. But a wounded North Korean government could punish its adversaries with what strategists sometimes refer to as the last lash of the dragon’s tail.
During a showdown with North Korea in 1994, the Clinton administration weighed airstrikes to prevent North Korea from reprocessing fuel rods from its Yongbyon nuclear complex. The plan was scuttled after computer simulations showed that up to 1 million people could be killed by North Korean retaliation. The casualties could be even larger today because of new real estate developments in the northern suburbs of Seoul, Baker said.
“The Trump administration now is relearning the same lessons that we learned in 1994. Trump needs to understand that all options are not on the table,” Baker said. “We hope that he will make good, rational decisions based on input from policy advisors.”
How would Asian neighbors react if the U.S. struck North Korea?
China would vociferously protest any U.S. airstrikes against North Korea, its traditional communist ally, with the same type of language that Russia used in complaining about the American attack against its ally, the Syrian government. Analysts do not believe that China would directly step into the conflict today as it did during the 1950-1953 Korean War, when Mao Tse-tung sent troops across the Yalu River to fight for North Korea. But Chinese leaders almost certainly would position themselves in a more confrontational position. “I would expect they would move forces toward the border to prevent North Koreans from fleeing into China and to prevent the Americans from becoming more adventurous,” Baker said.
How would military action against North Korea be received in South Korea and Japan?
The U.S. allies of South Korea and Japan might be angrier than China if the United States took unilateral action because they stand to bear the brunt of North Korean retaliation.
Trump’s strong stance toward North Korea could alienate South Koreans. “The safety of South Korea is as important as that of the United States. There should never be a preemptive strike without South Korean consent,” South Korean President Moon Jae-in said in a Facebook post before his election in May. Moon also has said he would try to solve the problem by heading to Pyongyang, not Washington.
Robert Gallucci, a professor at Georgetown University who was with the Clinton administration in 1994 when it considered striking North Korea, said the U.S. would have to spend months preparing its allies to defend themselves and their civilian populations before taking what in military parlance is called “kinetic action.”
The question, he said at a Council on Foreign Relations discussion last month in New York, boils down to this: “Are we ready to go to war? And if we’re not, what the hell are we talking about?”
If we don’t want to go to war, what other options are there?
Trump has said he offered Chinese President Xi Jinping better terms on trade if China would do more to rein in North Korea. Almost all of North Korea’s fuel oil, hard currency, construction material and imported food passes through the 850-mile border between the two countries. The United States also could apply pressure on China with so-called secondary sanctions, which would target Chinese companies and banks that deal with North Korea.
And then, the Trump administration could consider direct negotiations with the North Koreans. During the campaign, Trump offhandedly raised the idea of inviting Kim over for a hamburger. A North Korean delegation was supposed to come to New York last month for back-channel talks, but after the assassination of Kim’s half brother, Kim Jong Nam, in Malaysia, the visa for the head of the delegation was abruptly canceled.
If there ever was a hamburger, it was taken off the table.
Trump using that language doesn't help. As McCain said, it is a threat that once it is used he needs to now ask himself if he is prepared to actually follow it up. Basically, where do you go now once that threat is made?
A war in NK would be horrific. Seoul would be on the immediate firing line as would Japan. Those are HUGE populations. Missiles raining into Seoul or Tokyo would cause unimaginable death and damage. Others are saying it could also be a direct threat to Australia. Everybody says "oh, the US and SK would win within months". Well, would we? I mean...we didn't win against Vietnam and we are still fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. The NKs know that terrain far better than us, they have prepared themselves for decades...they are so well dug in it would be an absolute disaster for that region and beyond.
I am left wondering if this is Trump's way to divert the national media to discuss something else rather than his low approval rating and the Russian meddling.
Ya ... trumps the wild card here and its his fault ...
The situation he finds himself in regarding N. Korea most certainly isn't his fault. How he handles the situation on the other hand is most certainly his responsibility.
Other presidents have tried about everything short of attacking N. Korea with zero results, so I'm not going to lambaste him for sabre rattling.
I don't think people should make assumptions about what may or may not happen based on his statement. But they will.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
As opposed to the UN horrifick wars .... ... i bet Syrians are really enjoying there war ...
So what's your solution ... strategic patience like your boys ... that worked so well ... bet SK. Japan, Australia and pretty much the rest of the world are real happy about that now ..
We just got the hashest sanctions against NK approved through the UN ... maybe you missed that because of your hate for anything and everything Trump does ... hes trying ...
This was going to come to a head ... were there now ... THANKS oBUMa ... once again ... GREAT JOB ...
Once again you refuse to blame the other presidents who kicked this can down the road. While it's true that Obama did the same as the others, why do you only mention him and not mention GWB?
Your tactics are very telling.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I have to say NK is going to get lit up if they don't back off. Don't really want to see it, but they are escalating and making threats. I actually respect Trump's response here, I just don't think he will ever strike them unless they strike or attempt to strike us first.
Trump taking a page out of fatboy's playbook... awesome.
"Fire and Fury like the world has never seen"... he sounds like the dear leader...
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
Once again you refuse to blame the other presidents who kicked this can down the road. While it's true that Obama did the same as the others, why do you only mention him and not mention GWB?
Your tactics are very telling.
I mentioned Bush earlier and said it went back further than that ... i didn't know i was required to go through the ENTIRE HISTORY everytime ....
my tactics? ... Look in the mirror Pit ...
PS. When did this maniac take over? ... do u even know? ... now go google it ... *LOL* .... and hes kicked the can at an accelerated pace ... but that means nothing right Pit? ... the others ran their mouths but didn't have the capabilities he does now ...
When u can't back up your talk .. its just talk ... well now he can back up his talk ACCORDING to pretty much everyone ... why u think Russia and China both approved the HARSHEST SANCTIONS EVER ... that may be their first yes vote ever to any form of sanctions on NK ...
The stakes have changed .. and weather u want to admit it or not .. it changed while oBUMa was in office ... the others get blame also ... no doubt ....
And before u start talking about my tactics ... please tell me what I said that is not true ..
North Korea's military says President Donald Trump's warning of "fire and fury" if it threatens the U.S. is a "load of nonsense."
The North is responding to Trump's threat in a statement from its military carried by state-run news agency KCNA. The statement says that "only absolute force" can work on someone as "bereft of reason" as Trump.
The North Korean statement also says the military action its army "is about to take" will be effective for restraining America's "frantic moves" in and near the southern part of the Korean Peninsula.It says North Korea will complete a plan by mid-August for the "historic enveloping fire at Guam," convey it to the commander in chief of its nuclear force and then "wait for his order." North Korea says it will "keep closely watching the speech and behavior of the U.S."
President Trump boasted on Wednesday that he had made U.S. nuclear weapons more powerful.
In a pair of tweets sent out the day after he threatened North Korea over its nuclear weapons program, the president claimed that the U.S. arsenal is "far stronger and more powerful" than ever before.
"My first order as President was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal," he wrote. "It is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before. Hopefully we will never have to use this power, but there will never be a time that we are not the most powerful nation in the world!"
But nuclear weapons experts said that the President's claims are spurious on several levels.
Kingston Reif, director of disarmament and threat reduction policy at the Arms Control Association, said that it's true that Trump authorized a review of nuclear strategy and capability after taking office, but the review likely won't be complete until the end of the year or even later.
“Nothing has changed in the capability or power of the nuclear arsenal since President Trump took the Oval Office,” he said. The order, which was also not the first Trump signed, is also typical for most new presidents at the beginning of their terms, Reif said.
Any recent upgrades to the arsenal are the result of Obama-era initiatives that authorized $1 trillion in nuclear spending over the next 30 years. And even those plans, added Reif, “are still in their infancy.”
Furthermore, experts say it’s almost impossible that any initiative of the Trump Administration could already be having noticeable impact on the arsenal.
“These are things that take a lot of time,” said Ariane Tabatabai, a senior associate with the Proliferation Prevention Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Nuclear initiatives require extensive approval and can be very costly and slow moving. “You don’t just initiate a modernization plan,” she said.
While Reif says that the United States currently possesses a nuclear arsenal that’s more than adequate for defense needs—boasting some 4,000 nuclear warheads, close to half of which are currently deployed at various bases—it’s also not true that the arsenal is “stronger and more powerful than ever before.” In fact, the arsenal has significantly shrunk since the height of the Cold War.
“I think this reflects that the President is not well-informed about the capacity of the US nuclear arsenal and its capabilities,” said Reif, who called the tweets “reckless posturing.” “That’s concerning, in my view.”
We have never attacked a nation with nuclear capability. I believe China doesn't think that's going to change.
I think they are beginning to understand we will. I mean, turn it around, would China like it if India as an example started talking to them like Pugsly is talking to us?
I think they are starting to understand our position and they have a crazy man in N. Korea, and possibly one crazy enough in this country to end up with a confrontation on their border.
I say possibly in this country. I also agree it time to put this punk in his place if he keeps acting up. China now knows we aren't going to put up much longer. I support President Trumps position.
I think a lot of the Presidents comments are aimed at China that it is time for them to start acting like a friendly. They are friendly enough when it comes to trade and such. Now they have a neighbor talking about lobbing nukes on us.
Time to find out just how friendly they are because China could end this in 3 weeks.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
Where is John Kelly as Trump warns of 'fire and fury?'
By Kevin Liptak and Sara Murray, CNN Updated 3:18 PM ET, Wed August 9, 2017 link
Bridgewater, New Jersey (CNN)As President Donald Trump, his arms crossed and his expression dour, warned North Korea on Tuesday of US "fire and fury," his new chief of staff sat across the table stone-faced.
John Kelly, sworn into his role a week ago Monday, once carried with him the hopes of a Washington establishment who believed his long career in the military could help apply rigor to both a quarrelsome West Wing and an erratic commander in chief.
On the first count, Kelly has seen initial success, according to half a dozen sources close to and within the White House. There are "fewer daggers" being lobbed internally, one source said.
Even close Trump confidants -- including family members like Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, and longtime aides like Hope Hicks and Keith Schiller -- have been subject to scrutiny from the new chief of staff.
But, as Trump's bombastic remarks on Tuesday demonstrated, there are few signs that his presence around Trump has tempered a mercurial and uncensored commander in chief.
Over the course of Kelly's first week in the White House, some viewed a milder Trump Twitter persona as an indication of his new chief of staff's sway. Kelly, according to a person familiar with his first week, spoke with Trump about his use of Twitter, which Trump has fiercely defended amid attempts by other confidants to moderate his voice.
A tweet-storm Monday ended hopes on the social media front, as Trump -- stuck indoors as rain pounded his golf course -- unleashed a string of tweets hammering the media, Democrats writ-large and, specifically, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, who had appeared earlier on CNN.
Lawmakers slam Trump's 'fire and fury' comments Speaking to Fox News this week, Kelly acknowledged that his advice would not always go heeded by the President he now serves.
"Remember, telling the unvarnished truth to power doesn't mean you always get your way," Kelly said in the interview, his first since assuming his position. "The principal ultimately decides and it is our way that so long as that decision is legal, moral and ethical, one salutes and executes."
"Sometimes you win," Kelly said, "and sometimes you don't."
Tuesday's threat was a reminder Trump can change the course of the country with a few sentences in front of a camera.
"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States," Trump said from a modified conference room in the clubhouse of Bedminster golf resort. "They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. He has been very threatening beyond a normal state and as I said they will be met with fire and fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before."
Trump's credibility crisis goes nuclear
Trump's bellicose statement was improvised in the moment, three people familiar with the situation said, though they reflected the same rhetoric that Trump has employed in private to discuss the rouge nation.
Kelly was "aware Trump would take a strong tone on North Korea," one official told CNN. He "certainly was not surprised or caught off guard," the official said.
Nonetheless, the moment alarmed establishment figures, Republican and Democrat alike. Sen. John McCain, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee, told Phoenix radio station KTAR that he prefers to see what Trump's national security team says, rather than the President.
"I don't pay much attention anymore to what the President says because there's no point in it," McCain said. "What I do pay attention to is what he does, and I can tell you that he has surrounded himself with an outstanding national security team. Gen. Kelly, (Defense Secretary James) Mattis, (National Security Adviser H.R.) McMaster. These are all really good people, and they're doing some of the right things."
McMaster and Mattis appealed to their fellow general to take the chief of staff job, according to people who know all three men. Both hoped Kelly could provide support to their national security advice, which Trump has at times discarded as overly similar to the approaches taken by the previous administration.
Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who worked with Kelly during his tenure at the Pentagon, said he hoped Kelly will provide amplification to recommendations from the generals who comprise Trump's national security team.
"Kelly is not going to undercut others who are responsible for national security issues. It's just not what he does," Panetta said. "The relationship between Mattis, McMaster and Kelly should prove to add a lot of weight to what the national security team recommends to the President."
Sen. Al Franken, D-Minnesota, also urged Kelly to guide Trump. "I would call on the new chief of staff, who I think is aware of the consequences -- the potential consequences of something like this -- I would call on him to tell the President not to do that kind of thing again," Franken told WCCO Tuesday.
Managing the staff or managing the President?
People who have spoken with Kelly, both before he took the chief of staff role and after, say his top priority has remained bringing a fractious West Wing together.
Among his first steps has been to conduct interviews with White House staffers to glean information about their job and assess their effectiveness in advancing the President's agenda -- all with the goal of reorganizing the building to better serve Trump.
Kelly also delivered a speech to some 200 White House staffers last Friday in the large open foyer of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington.
Administration officials ranging from Kushner to lower ranking assistants heard a patriotic rallying call from Kelly, who warned that dividing the staff into establishment-versus-campaign operatives was damaging to Trump's goals.
Kelly has taken a stricter style in managing the flow of traffic in the Oval Office and aims to be present on most all policy-related calls. One of his top initiatives has been to cull the flow of information to the President, so Trump is largely receiving information critical to making a final decision on whatever matter is at hand, a source said.
Kelly traveled with Trump aboard Air Force One on Friday to Bedminster, and spent the weekend ensconced in the private club where Trump is spending the next two weeks. On Monday morning he updated the President on developments on the Korean peninsula, with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson piped in on the phone.
A President resistant to change
But there are some Trumpisms that are unlikely to fade. He spitballs ideas with anyone within earshot, is prone to instantaneous decision making and prizes his ability to tweet straight to his base of supporters.
Kelly had hoped to moderate Trump's approach to the medium, according to a person familiar with the new chief of staff's approach. But he did not expect to completely reform a President who views his Twitter page as an unfiltered channel to the millions of supporters who thrust him into the White House.
Some Trump associates view Kelly's hands-off approach to Twitter with relief -- because it's not a battle he can win. "I'm glad he doesn't try to take away the power of the President to tweet," a source said, in part because Kelly surely would've come up short and suffered a blow to his credibility early in his tenure.
Trump's longstanding habits have his friends questioning that he'll ever back away from the bombastic -- and sometimes seemingly erratic -- style that served him well in business and then later on the campaign trail.
In discussing Trump's fiery comments toward North Korea Tuesday, one source pointed out that Trump has a habit of using a "filter of billions" to speak to an audience of one, which could be the case with the President's barbed rhetoric toward Pyongyang.
"People who don't know him and don't understand that think it's harmful and scary," the source said.
But, the person added, "that's how he operates."
If the Chief of Staff is not willing to do his job 24/7..there is no sense in Trump having a Chief of Staff.
Just because Trump is on vacation doesn't mean Gen Kelly should be on vacation, leaving Trump to twitter the USA into a potential nuclear war with N.Korea.
Being a CoS for Trump is a 24/7 thankless job with no vacation time..that is what Gen Kelly signed up for when he took the job.
Maybe Kelly agrees we need to start pushing back. As I also said in another post. Maybe those words were aimed at China's ears as well. I don't think China wants fire and fury on their doorstep.
How do you think China would react if NK was saying they were going to nuke a city in China?
We have tried to speak softly but carry a big stick. It hasn't seemed to work.
This is a problem that should have been dealt with 3-4 years ago, but I also understand that President Obama hoped dipolmacy would somehow work, so in that regard, I don't blame him. He really didn't have a good choice. That leaves us here today, where there really is no good choice. The difference is NK now has the missles to go along with their bombs. That changes everything IMO.
I guess we could just ignore it and hope the problem goes away, but I am sure that most of us have tried that in our own lives and know that usually doesn't work.
Tough decisions. None easy and none ideal.
War with NK is the next to last thing I want to see. The last thing I want to see is Pugsley lob a nuke over Seattle.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
He goes on middle school rants all the time Diam. Maybe it's time you quit making excuses for everything he does.
Yes he does go on rants all the time ... this ain't one of them .... i don't make excuses for everything he does ...
maybe u oughta quit talking about my "tactics" or telling me i make excuses for everything he does ... yesterday i said i was not pleased with multiple things he's done ... did u miss it or u just choose to ignore it ....
maybe its time u stop hating almost everything he does .. your lib buds rip him no matter what he says .. u only rip him 96% of the time .. *L*
I happen to put MSNBC on today and the panel there all but blamed Trump for the NK crisis and not the insane murderous leader KIM JONG UN and I just thought these American liberals are crazier than I ever imagined smh
I happen to put MSNBC on today and the panel there all but blamed Trump for the NK crisis and not the insane murderous leader KIM JONG UN and I just thought these American liberals are crazier than I ever imagined smh
No matter what he did they'd rip him ...
If he tried strategic patience like their hero .. trump would be an idiot for trying that ...
This is about one thing ... destroying trump and his presidency at any and all cost .. COUNTRY BE DAMMED!!
I don't hate him, but I do pity my country for being made look to be fools to the rest of the world.
Your boy oBUMa is out of office now .. u should be happy ...
Sad u think a president that puts America first is a bad thing but a president that put America in the bottom half of his top 10 was a good president ...
We have a president now that won't bend over and take it up the poop shoot and be the worlds doormat anymore ... and your not happy with it ... says a lot about who U are Pit ...
If you think some wannabe bully that just spouts out the first thing that comes into his head is good for our nation, you've got it. He can't stand the fact that everyone around him doesn't bow down to him. Anyone who questions anything he does or says is attacked without mercy by him. It's funny and sad to watch all at the same time. He's used to business where he can get what he wants, when he wants. He calls it fake news while whining and complaining about leaks. Now if they are actual leaks, how can they be fake? Yet he has his supporters eating out of his hand because they can't do the math on that one.
Now all of that has changed and his temper tantrums show it.
He is what some of us knew he was. P.T. Barnum, the carnival barker.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
.. 
