That would require some knowledge–or concern–about the subject.
It’s like he let his lawyer write it.
“What should I say about this?”
“No comment, don’t say anything about it.”
Imagine what press releases are going to be like when we’re in a shooting war and face any sort of setback.
We wont know about any wars anyway because troop deployments are now state secrets.
I selfishly hope not. I don’t imagine the average American can tell the difference between a Chinese and a Korean.
In fairness to Tillerson, look who he’s speaking for. How do you put out a comprehensible statement when you work for a bunch of idiots?
Good grief, I’d imagine we’d stop using these vague empty threats unless we follow through on them. Obama’s “red line” on Syria was a huge joke.
I think Obama’s Syria gaffe was more a matter of misjudging how seriously people would take an American threat, and then finding out the answer was, not very. There was some degree of understanding of the complexity of the issues, which I think led to some rather poor choices, but they were choices from a pool of other bad choices, and I do think Obama’s team understood something of the dilemma they were in.
Trump’s folks, though, this stuff is born of ignorance, willful and sustained.
There is no win here against NK. I don’t look forward to whatever action Trump takes, but I really don’t see where even a gifted politician could do anything that would meet all the objectives here without some huge issues.
Saber rattling is one thing. The instability of Kim Jong-un is quite another.
The only, only, path for equitable resolution lies through China. A skilled diplomatic team, using disciplined and clear actions, could lean on China to reign in NK, or to have them withdraw support from them should military action be needed. No guaruntee that would happen, but we’ve seen before that China is the key to the North Korean regime.
It’s like why we haven’t seen any action against Seoul in the last 50 years, it was clear and understood that any aggression there would lead to swift, and full, US response. Making any move against Pyongyang without at least tacit cooperation from China is going to incur far more trouble than Trump can handle.
You want to see full on Vietnam style revolts and left wing uprisings against the government? Get us into a shooting war with China through being an inept, thin skinned, ignoramus. Shit, a military coup wouldn’t be unthinkable then. Nobody with half a brain wants that.
One of the situations where both meanings of the reign/rein slip could be appropriate.
Glad you caught that. I do on occasion try to be clever :P
@CraigM is spot on, China has to be the fulcrum in any leverage brought against North Korea. For years the West has been able to pretty much laugh off NK’s sabre rattling, but now that they’re casually lobbing missiles at Japan and acting even more nutso than usual, it’s time to do something more than just point and laugh. There is no way to increase sanctions that are already at 100%, and direct military action, even with unmanned drones or cruise missiles, would be disastrous for all the reasons already listed.
The only realistic option is to deploy defensive measures to our allies in the region, sending anti-missile systems to South Korea and Japan while deploying troops in an advisory and protection capacity, and at the same time opening diplomatic channels with China on having them directly appeal to North Korea to tone it the fuck down a few notches or face sanctions from the only country in the world that still bothers to trade with them. If China can’t get NK to ease up, then China needs to be the one to deal with them militarily, and it will be up to China to decide how much the United States gets involved, if at all, other than acting as defense for South Korea, Japan and any other area under threat.
The focus thus far on the Trump Administration has been on domestic policies and the ties back to Russia. How they handle China will be the real legacy of this administration though. Right now, especially with Trump in charge, China has an unprecedented opportunity to cement itself as an equal to the United States in terms of world leadership. An adversarial relationship would be detrimental to both countries and pretty much the entire world. A unified front against aggression from places like North Korea, Russia, Syria and others could be a huge step in the direction of eventual world peace and prosperity. China has seen it’s global interests increase exponentially in the past decade, it’s now an economic superpower in addition to a military one, all that is left is to become a diplomatic superpower as well. World War III does not advance that agenda at all.
Of course, all of that is dependent upon Washington giving China a chance to step up and handling things diplomatically. Given the current crop of imbeciles in charge, I don’t have much faith in that happening.
I am in awe!
Can’t we send Dennis Rodman over there again to smooth things out?
My wife and kids are flying to Tokyo tomorrow AM for 10 days, to visit the grandparents. I know it’s a lot of posturing, but NK’s boldness and aggression lately is not exactly making me super happy about the timing of their trip.
I’ve been saying what you guys are saying for years, about China and North Korea; this is not a situation where you can solve it with Rambo, or even Chuck Norris. Or anything other than what’s outlined here–careful, sustained, difficult diplomacy with China with egos checked at the door and a commitment to actual results, not posturing.
But when an administration tries that, the critics on the other side of the aisle lambaste them for being weak, and far too many people actually believe such charges.
I know you, and others, have pointed that China is the key. I, obviously, couldn’t agree more. Sadly I also agree with that second bit. Not so much Democrats, I think many of us would welcome Republicans pursue that kind of soft power tactic, but certainly Republicans shriek about weakness when anything other than threats are used to cajole the Kim’s.
It’s very odd, too, considering the post-WWII GOP started out with people like Ike, who damn well understood how to deal with stuff like this, and who by dint of his actual experience in, you know, the largest war in history, had a healthy skepticism of off the cuff military responses. But then came Vietnam, and here the Dems have to shoulder a lot of the blame as well, via JFK and LBJ, though Nixon was perhaps the most mendacious of the bunch that got sucked into that tar pit.