North Korea (quite astutely) pointed out that if they did as they were told, like Libya, they'd end up like Libya. They don't want to end up like Libya.
As far as I know, most military strategists doubt the missiles can actually reach US mainland.
As for South Korea, they have always been close enough to suffer catastrophic damages by traditional non-nuclear action, so why are they willing to come to the table now?
Unless they are preemptively trying to avoid retaliation on their own soil because of a US - led strike on North Korea.
If a nuke goes into Hawaii, does that matter psychologically if it doesn't reach US Mainland?
All they need is a credible threat of force. That's why nukes are a separate category from conventional explosive tipped ballistic missiles or cruise missiles.
A dirty nuclear strike can render a place uninhabitable for the next 100 years. Imagine wiping Hawaii off the US vacation list for a century.
Yeah, and the last time we suffered an attack at Hawaii, we beat their door down. I'm 49 years old but I would re-enlist to help with that kind of revenge.
>As for South Korea, they have always been close enough to suffer catastrophic damages by traditional non-nuclear action, so why are they willing to come to the table now?
Just because that's been a risk they've lived with for 65 years doesn't mean they're happy or willing to suffer it. There's been multiple efforts over decades to try and resolve the relationship with the North and South, this isn't the first time or first attempt or anything. It's been a big issue in Korea for a long time.
>Unless they are preemptively trying to avoid retaliation on their own soil because of a US - led strike on North Korea.
Ideally. War is bad. It's bad for people. It's bad for economies. And look at it this way. If there was a problem in the U.S., does the U.S. want to solve their own problems or would they prefer China to step in and take care of it for them? Most countries want to solve their own problems and manage their own affairs if they can. National pride and such.
Yeah, if fighting broke out between North and South Korea, they'll take our help because winning is what matters. But if they can negotiate their own peace and own reconciliation that leave the U.S. on the bench, they'll be perfectly happy to do that.
I would imagine this is not a popular opinion here, but he had the entire world convinced he would use nuclear weapons against North Korea. That has to have some effect on the North Korean regime.
Let's please not turn this thread into /r/politics
It's like if I state that The Beatles have, in total, more musical merit than Katy Perry. Well, that seems totally obvious too and one would be hard-pressed to find any sane adult who would disagree. Nonetheless it's not a "fact".
Maybe I'm being a pedant but these little things annoy me. Words have meanings, those meanings are important. Anyway, I made my point too many times over already so I'll leave it :P
Conservatives saying exactly what they did (condemn Obama) when he offered essentially the same thing as Trump has (with regard to talking with North Korea sans preconditions).
Fact, not opinion.
Consult a dictionary if confusion persists.
Then you're the only one that can make an effort to solve the problem. Neat.
Maybe someone else besides Nixon could totally have done what he did diplomatically?
> If Obama had done this the Republicans would have thrown a total fit.
It's an interesting exercise to consider what specific hypotheses for which the conditional didn't evaluate true.
Horror/WW3 scenarios apart, it's most likely that USA-originated sanctions have absolutely nothing to do with this, as if Russia and China want to support the continuation of NK-regime, there is no way to force them to stop.
I'd say that pressure from Russia and China are pushing for the permanent resolution of this conflict. It's a tiny/annoying thorn in their sides, and sooner or later they will remove it.
South Koreans don't want to be in a constant state of war anymore and they don't want to be occupied by US troops. My feeling is that most South Koreans want a merge like West Germans wanted to merge with E Germans. Look at some of the policies and statements made by their new President Moon, whom was partly elected on a policy of reunification.
Is UK occupied by US forces? Germany? Eastern EU nations? Japan?
And let's not kid ourselves on why Moon was elected. He was in large part elected because of strong disgust (justified) people felt against the previous impeached president.
Moon was elected with 40% of the votes.
North Korea has nuclear weapons.
That is the difference. Some might suggest it's President Trump, but the reality is, he's only made it worse for the US. North Korea can negotiate without the US because of the weapons, and Trump's push against China and reckless and weak foreign policy (see the latest Russia sanctions going up in flames) makes him a non-actor. China will take this opportunity when the US is at it's weakest to help solidify its hold in Asia, and is already working to help the Koreas. With us backing out of the TPP and now signaling our intent to join back in, this puts us at a severe disadvantage in the region.
As for North Korea, they see a way to join the rest of the world with a major ally (China) who will in effect have the most influence in the region.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-tpp-expla...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/nafta-auto-negotiations-1.46...
USA has a steady Foreign Affairs strategy, that doesn't change every time the president changes. Some failed countries (e.g. Greece should learn about this continuation of Policy).
Trump is the twitter guy that acts like a teenager on Redbull. I do believe that Sweden, China, USA, Russia, and others, work really hard behind the scenes to make things happen. Games will of course be played (each country to serve its own agenda) but I don't believe there is any country on this planet that wants to press the Red Button (or Τurn the Κey or whatever)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear/u-s-re...
This is the downside to Mutually Assured Destruction: Everyone not currently a part of it wants nukes so they can be a part of it.
I wonder what role, if any China played in brokering this deal? This is only a report of what is expected to happen at the summit, so we will see if Kim Jong Un will follow through, since his military presence and proximity to South Korea and Seoul has been his best bartering chip.