North Korea

[2ndRateMind]

So, North Korea is on the verge of uniting a thermo-nuclear warhead with an inter-continental ballistic missile system. When it does this, it will be entirely capable of levelling any given American city, and maybe several of them.

And North Korea is not a friend of America.

When it is so capable, it is likely to act. Not with an initial pre-emptive strike, but at the very least with nuclear blackmail: 'Remove your troops from South Korea, or Dallas gets it!' 'Remove your troops from Japan, or New York gets it!'

Of course, America has anti-missile missiles, but it would be foolish to rely on a 100% rate of effectiveness. And it would only take 1 missile to get through to devastate a city, which would mean a death toll in the millions, a huge disruption of the economy, and incalculable damage to the environment.

It seems that the time for action has arrived. But what should that action be? What would Jesus do?

Best wishes, 2RM.

[2ndRateMind]

There are no such constraints on Kim Jong Un, a man who simply murders any possible opposition in his own country, and has even organised the assassination of his own brother. Do not think he has any respect for anyone or anything beyond his own interests, or that he will hesitate for one moment to use nukes, or trade them with other unsavoury and/or terrorist regimes, or blackmail with them, once he has them, if he decides that would be to his own advantage.

So once again, I have to ask, "Is fear of what we think someone might do justification for attacking them?"

OK, now I'll answer this question.

Any leader, any politician, must have it as his or her most basic imperative the defense of the people, and the country. That inevitably means protecting them from clear and present dangers, and obvious and imminent threats.

I would hope that, in the case of North Korea, this could be accomplished without violence and the loss of innocent lives. It was in this spirit that I asked in the OP 'It seems that the time for action has arrived. But what should that action be? What would Jesus do?'

But in the absence of any suggestions as to a decisive alternative, and given the callous nature of the Kim dictatorship, his obvious disdain for such civilised concepts as human rights and the sanctity of human life, I must regard the acquisition of nuclear weaponry by this regime as just such a danger, and not only to America, but to the peace and stability of the whole world. I am prepared to be persuaded otherwise, but at this point in time I would tend, should the US decide on this, to support limited, conventional military action with the following primary objectives:

1) The eradication of the DPRK's inter-continental missile capabilities.
2) The eradication of the DPRK's nuclear capabilities.
3) The dismantling of the DPRK command and control structures, including the Kim dynastic regime.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Furrowed Brow]

North Korea is a dreadful regime. However they are not mad and their actions to this point have been rational. Their pursuit of nuclear weapons comes along with watching what has been done or attempted upon Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria. North Korea has not been attacked due to their strengths not their weaknesses. There are also old hurts that go back to the Korean war and likely its own internal power plays mean Kim Jong Un feels it is necessary to project power.

And North Korea is not a friend of America.

When it is so capable, it is likely to act.

America is not a friend to North Korea. When it is capable it will act.

And the question is why should North Korea expect America to leave them unmolested if they stop their nuclear missile program. I can see there are two. A non nuclear bombardment of South Korea, and China's reaction to any attempted American military intervention. But if North Korea fear bombarding Seoul is insufficient deterrent and that American is willing to risk China's reaction then logic says North Korea is bound to raise the stakes.

It is key to leave North Korea room to change their mind and not back them into a corner that leaves them only one course of action which right now without a reliable nuclear weapon will mean a standard but massive bombardment of Seoul.

It seems that the time for action has arrived. But what should that action be? What would Jesus do?

There are three ways out of this without risking WWIII and without Seoul being destroyed - that I can see - and that is China take things in hand (which to this point at least publicly they have shown little inclination). Minimally they exert sufficient pressure on North Korea for them to reign in their program. They could invite Kin Jung un to China for a state visit and then arrest him. Maximally it is down to China to intervene militarily. Bombing Seoul makes no sense on that eventuality. If China annex North Korea their border are not threatened. So the strategy is place a huge amount of pressure on China to get their backyard in order.

Another way out is the more likely. Behind close doors and not in public America resort to the carrot and provide a host of concessions to North Korea. Things like food aid, no more military exercise right up to their border and so forth.

A third way out is to instigate a coup in the North Korean power elite.

It is possible to follow all three strategies at the same time.

An American attack on North Korea will demand a military response from China. This outcome poses a far greater risk to the American people that the North Korean missile program.

What would Jesus do?

Jesus would make a personal visit unarmed and without guards and sit down to break bread with Kim Jong Un.

[JP Cusick]

So, North Korea is on the verge of uniting a thermo-nuclear warhead with an inter-continental ballistic missile system. When it does this, it will be entirely capable of levelling any given American city, and maybe several of them.

And North Korea is not a friend of America.

When it is so capable, it is likely to act. Not with an initial pre-emptive strike, but at the very least with nuclear blackmail: 'Remove your troops from South Korea, or Dallas gets it!' 'Remove your troops from Japan, or New York gets it!'

Of course, America has anti-missile missiles, but it would be foolish to rely on a 100% rate of effectiveness. And it would only take 1 missile to get through to devastate a city, which would mean a death toll in the millions, a huge disruption of the economy, and incalculable damage to the environment.

It seems that the time for action has arrived. But what should that action be? What would Jesus do?

Best wishes, 2RM.

In 1950 China attacked American troops in Korea during the Korean war, and we can expect China to defend Korea again against American aggression.

Plus we can expect Russia to side with China and with Korea against the warmonger Americans.

The USA had no right nor business invading Korea in 1950, and we have no right now to be threatening Korea today.

The USA has an illegal and hostile occupation of south Korea and that is the biggest problem and source of hostilities.

Also there was an armistice treaty in 1953 which ended the American war in Korea, and the USA broke that armistice by deploying nuclear weapons into south Korea in 1958, so the USA is in the wrong again now in 2017 as we were in the beginning.

What would be righteous or a Christian thing to do = the USA needs to make peace, and we could start by leaving south Korea, and give all of Korea its rightful freedom and united independence, and remove our American weapons away from that area.

There is no justification for Korea to ever back down from our violent threats, and yet we can expect that our American warmongering will end in complete failure.

[Furrowed Brow]

In 1950 China attacked American troops in Korea during the Korean war, and we can expect China to defend Korea again against American aggression.

Plus we can expect Russia to side with China and with Korea against the warmonger Americans.

The USA had no right nor business invading Korea in 1950, and we have no right now to be threatening Korea today.

The USA has an illegal and hostile occupation of south Korea and that is the biggest problem and source of hostilities.

Also there was an armistice treaty in 1953 which ended the American war in Korea, and the USA broke that armistice by deploying nuclear weapons into south Korea in 1958, so the USA is in the wrong again now in 2017 as we were in the beginning.

What would be righteous or a Christian thing to do = the USA needs to make peace, and we could start by leaving south Korea, and give all of Korea its rightful freedom and united independence, and remove our American weapons away from that area.

There is no justification for Korea to ever back down from our violent threats, and yet we can expect that our American warmongering will end in complete failure.

Well yes ...but the problem is that if America just upped sticks from South Korea the rest of the US empire would steadily unwind. Across Asia all the other countries America have courted and dominated would either switch allegiances to the new emerging Chinese empire or at least hedge their bets by distancing themselves from America influence. South America would be further emboldened to shed themselves of American influence and so too the African nations.

America could kiss goodbye to the dollar as the reserve currency. As countries began to trade in other currencies the Chinese yuan would be positioned as the next reserve currency. As countries and corporations began the process of offloading trillions of dollars they hold as reserves America will feel a long term decline in the value of the dollar, inflation due to more expensive imports and a considerable fall in standard of living.

There would likely follow a long period of instability and potential for conflict across the globe before the power vacuum is filled. This could be very dangerous for everyone.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of this I think America will never back down until they are forced by military defeat or economic collapse.

[Bust Nak]

The USA had no right nor business invading Korea in 1950, and we have no right now to be threatening Korea today.

What this about USA invading Korea?! The US was defending an invasion.

The USA has an illegal and hostile occupation of south Korea and that is the biggest problem and source of hostilities.

South Korea is not under occupation and is governed by Koreans.

Also there was an armistice treaty in 1953 which ended the American war in Korea, and the USA broke that armistice by deploying nuclear weapons into south Korea in 1958...

Okay, that did happen.

What would be righteous or a Christian thing to do = the USA needs to make peace, and we could start by leaving south Korea, and give all of Korea its rightful freedom and united independence, and remove our American weapons away from that area.

Except the very opposite would happen should US leave the country, there will be less freedom.

There is no justification for Korea to ever back down from our violent threats, and yet we can expect that our American warmongering will end in complete failure.

Do you want North Korea to take over South Korea?

[JP Cusick]

Well yes ...but the problem is that if America just upped sticks from South Korea the rest of the US empire would steadily unwind. Across Asia all the other countries America have courted and dominated would either switch allegiances to the new emerging Chinese empire or at least hedge their bets by distancing themselves from America influence. South America would be further emboldened to shed themselves of American influence and so too the African nations.

America could kiss goodbye to the dollar as the reserve currency. As countries began to trade in other currencies the Chinese yuan would be positioned as the next reserve currency. As countries and corporations began the process of offloading trillions of dollars they hold as reserves America will feel a long term decline in the value of the dollar, inflation due to more expensive imports and a considerable fall in standard of living.

I would expect this too:

And all of that would represent justice and truth and righteousness - which are long over due.

There would likely follow a long period of instability and potential for conflict across the globe before the power vacuum is filled. This could be very dangerous for everyone.

Whatever the rights or wrongs of this I think America will never back down until they are forced by military defeat or economic collapse.

I too doubt that the USA will back down without being forced, and I believe that force (economic and military) has long been ready and able to strike at its will, and only God stops it from happening - so far.

I personally trust China and Russia far more than the USA to act appropriately and in ethically right ways.



------------------------------------------------

The USA had no right nor business invading Korea in 1950, and we have no right now to be threatening Korea today.

What this about USA invading Korea?! The US was defending an invasion.

No - it really was not that way.

The empire of Japan had occupied Korea and when Japan was defeated in WW2 then the Korean people rose up and fought to take back their own Country.

The USA entered Korea to stop the Koreans from getting their own independence, and now southern Korea is occupied with our nuclear weapons.

My understanding is that the USA at that time, 1950, figured that since we defeated Japan then we the USA gets to rule over Korea too as part of our conquest - and it was a huge injustice against the people of Korea.

[Bust Nak]

No - it really was not that way...

And you know this how?

My understanding is that...

How about going with what the history books says instead of going with your understanding?

Which country, North or South Korea, treat the Korean people better, which government works for the people and not the other way round? Would Koreans be better off if the North is in charged?

[2ndRateMind]

I personally trust China and Russia far more than the USA to act appropriately and in ethically right ways.

I find that seriously sad. Neither China nor Russia have demonstrated their allegiance to truth, or human rights, or the freedom of the individual, in the way that America consistently has. I do not think America perfect, by any means. But I do regard it, on the whole and in the round, as a force for good in the world. I cannot say the same of China, or Russia.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[Furrowed Brow]

I find that seriously sad. Neither China nor Russia have demonstrated their allegiance to truth,

True. Both are pretty awful

Neither China nor Russia have demonstrated their allegiance to truth, or human rights, or the freedom of the individual, in the way that America consistently has.

America's record is dismal. We can start with the obvious genocide of the native Americans, then there is slavery and the de facto apartheid that followed. We could then look at the America empire which gets started in the last quarter of the 19th century. Dear God then there is the 20th century. I'd point you toward the works of Howard Zinn, Jonathan Pilger, Oliver Stone, Chris Hedges, Alfred Mccoy, Chalmers Johnson and many more historians and documenters that have exposed the nasty underbelly of American history. There are so many examples of death, injustice and terror wrougth by America in the pursuit of its own interest trampling over human rights, laws and democracy it is difficult to know where to start. But how about this...

[center][youtube][/youtube][/center]
..just one small horrific example on the American 20th century historical tapestry.

America has only ever done one thing consistently and that is pursue the economic interests of its plutocrratic class.

I do not think America perfect, by any means.

Phew. Don't get me wrong I'm not singling out America for bashing the UK has a dreadful history too. But for the last 70 years America has been in the driving seat. And the result is not a lot of good with a bit of bad it is a one truly dreadful event and policy after another with occasional good outcomes. As another example let's take the invasion of Iraq and maybe a million dead on the basis of WMD that never existed, or how about America manoeuvring to bring Pinochet to power in Chile or or Suharto in Indonesia, or how about Saudi Arabia, the list goes on and on. Or how about the CIA and the drug trade as detailed by Alfred McCoy.

But I do regard it, on the whole and in the round, as a force for good in the world.

That is truly sad and I can only think it is poorly informed.

I cannot say the same of China, or Russia.

Both have dreadful histories.

And here is where I may bring myself to agree with you. Not that America has a better history. But both Russia and China are more authoritarian than America. If America wains we may see the rise of even more unpalatable empires. This is the position of historian Alfred McCoy. On this analysis America has done consistently terrible things but is still a better bet than Russia or China. I guess America as the incumbent world power are the devil we know.

[JP Cusick]

Which country, North or South Korea, treat the Korean people better, which government works for the people and not the other way round? Would Koreans be better off if the North is in charged?

What you are doing here is judging things as "good or bad" which is the poisoned knowledge as told in the Bible and it is always the wrong way to judge anything.

Viewing North Korea as the bad guys or the bad side, while the USA occupied south Korea is the good guys or the good side - is just untrue nonsense.

The Korean people have their own rights whether God given rights or human rights to their own self determination and independence, and the USA is the one who violates those rights by the brute force of the American military.

Whether Korea would be better off or worse off is none of our business, and the Korean people had the right to make their own choices and the USA violated that, and we still continue to violate the people of Korea.

The USA needs to stop acting as if we are the Big-Daddy of the world, especially when our own Country is not a wholesome example for others to follow.