Amen you set it straight right there.With all of these rogue countries running wild and the UN sitting on there thumbs.
UN doesn't just sit on their thumbs. UN gives them a voice. So many awful regimes being legitimized by the UN.
What is the UN supposed to do exactly with no military power? If the UN didn't give them a "voice", then what? The situation would be exactly the same minus a global dialgoue. No one wants to "reward" the NK regime, but no one wants an all out war with NK where hundreds of thousands could potentially be killed.
I would like them to not give Iran and other terrorist countries a forum. It legitimizes them. I made this response to the poster arguing we need to give 'let NK join the world'. I don't think bringing such an evil government 'into the world' so to speak is the right approach at all. I would leave them maligned just as I would Iran and other archaic governments.
The current arrangement where the U.S. cleans up 95% of U.N. backed resolutions is the best possible way in light of China and Russia holding permanent vetoes. The rot in NATO doesn't inspire confidence with smaller regional alliances either, but it beats overt arms escalation with an eye towards war
Wouldn't say best, just the only way right now. In the 21st century, we will need Russia and China especially to step up. Are we willingly to commit ground troops to NK under China's very watchful eyes? I think that would be a disaster.
don't agree. Unless they are elected democratically then i (and many others) do not consider them representative of the people and therefore illegitimate. Having them speak for their country in front of the world in a platform like the UN gives the appearance they are.
Screw that. Secretly sell our slightly out dated weapons to exhiled North Korean dissidents currently living in South Korea and have our special forces train them and coordinate an attack on North Koreans coast line.
I personally think there's close to 0% chance that the Kim dynasty will stop their nuclear program. After witnessing what happened to Saddam, Qaddafi & what's happening to Assad, Kim is convinced that nukes are absolutely essential for his own survival. Preemptive military strikes are not realistic either, even with our military power we are not capable of stopping the inevitable massive artillery & rocket retaliation against Seoul & we can't stop their ballistic missile threat either ( it's extremely difficult to identify & target road capable solid fueled ballistic missiles. In the 1st Gulf War, our military launched over 2000 missions for the "Great Scud Hunt", but it ended in complete utter failure). Since the world currently have doubts regarding this nuclear capability (ability to miniaturize a nuke to fit on top of a ballistic missile & an reliable ICBM) To maximize his nuke's deterrent value, I think Kim will continue his ballistic & nuclear tests until he's demonstrated to the world these 2 capabilities.
Politics aside, while it is easy to blame former President's for not taking action, issues such as Syria and North Korea are complicated and not black and white. The last thing anyone wants is another full scale war with Russia or China or Iran. In some cases, the USA has far more to lose than their opposition. For example, the Russian people would be able to handle a ground war or long term war far better than the USA.
Frankly, does it really matter whether or not you and like minded people see them as legitimate? It seems that's just for your peace of mind, nothing actually tangible. They are legitimate in the sense that they have power of rule over a country, that's pretty tangible. I just don't find that to be productive to actually produce anything tangible.
There's nothing "we" can do other than what we've been doing for ~50 years. It's ultimately up to China, they're the only thing keeping the North afloat.
I for once would like to see a regime change. I'm sick and tired of standing by to see the little fatty b*stard with the fukked up haircut, continually brutalized his own people. I saw a clip of a nice looking North Korean girl who escaped to China and recounted her horrors, one of her lines that struck me the most as I am a musician was " In North Korea, little fatty b*stard executes people for listening to music or just watching a movie". That is totally fukked up man!
Step up to what? Everyone has their opinion of what constitutes as too far. It took several years to come up with the Iran Deal no one really liked but swallowed because of what was in play in Iran. NK is even scarier to punt. I think the current approach headed by Tillerson is more textbook and pragmatic than what was being said months before such as arming SK and Japan with nukes. No one wants to rock that boat so everyone is waiting for the next guy to die.
Yeah I think its important to note that if NK could have Nukes they probably would have already had them. Transporting a nuke on a warhead that can be launched from that far away, and his Seattle when they sometimes struggle to get test missiles 50 miles off of their coast is telling about how far they still likely have to go. How many Presidents have we had that were tested in the early days of their Presidency by NK? Sometimes a non-reaction is the best reaction. My thinking is that yes they are getting to the point where their threats are much more serious of course (and the mental stability of Kim Jung is always a threat) but a public display of taking them too serous is an issue too and could make Trump look trigger happy and will play into their local propaganda and drive away any potential allies we need in the Asia Pacific. I do agree though that Kim is unlikely to take a deal like the Iran deal to shut down his Nuclear development. I just thought it would be a total Trump-Ironic type of move if they ended up with an NK Nuclear Deal that ended up being ironically similar to the Iran deal while that deal was eternally blasted by Trump for years.
