What should US do about North Korea

That's what the UN is for to handle global issue the US is not the world police.

 

I don't think Kim Jung Un is mentally unstable or acting irrationally. His actions are often incredibly cruel, brutal & immoral, but they do seem to be rational & done with the aim of improving his odds of survival in mind (killing his uncle with close ties with China, killing his brother, nuclear tests, ballistic missile tests, purges, etc)

 

Step up and become part of the global community in a meaningful way outside of economic interests.

China does not want to see their region ( yes their region as they are the most powerful player in it now) destabilized and have an even larger presence of US military if we take military action against NK.

Russia has it's only remaining naval facility outside the former USSR in Syria and it's a major purchaser of Russian military hardware. Russia and Iran aren't natural allies, but their interests in keeping America out of their region unites them.

I thought Tillerson is in the "action must be taken now" approach as of this week. I could be wrong.

 

And without some kind of force, the UN is mostly about diplomacy. China and Russia won't even vote on economic sanctions against Syria, Iran, and NK.

 

Russia & China did vote in favor of various UN sanctions against Iran & North Korea.

 

Exactly what can anyone do with NK????

Regime change? Because we want to fight a war against a six million man advancing army marching into Seoul against a maniac who will probably try to use his nukes in one last desperate grasp?

Sanctions? How many more sanctions can we put on him?

What exactly can anyone do. Nothing. He knows it. Everyone knows it.

 

You're right, I had it mixed up.

 

One well placed tweet from Trump should solve this little dilemma.

 

I'll tell you what NOT to do - what Obama did. Analysis paralysis until OOPS North Korea has nukes!

 

So that first test in 2006 was in anticipation of Obama's presidency.

Good to know.

 

Only Trump can solve this problem. It's handled.

 

After our sham attack on syria I actually feel nervous. I don't think our military weapons are up to par.

 

The various countries want to better contain Kim & North Korea, but I don't think anybody actually want to get rid of the Kim dynasty.

South Korea: They are not all that interested in reunification because the lead up to reunification will be extremely risky & the actual process of trying to reintegrate North Korea will cost them a fortune that far surpass the GDR reintegration costs.
United States: A reunified Korea will most likely mean the end of the US military bases. It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the Chinese army will enter into North Korea if they think the regime is collapsing. It's extremely unlikely for China to try to prop up the North Korea regime again, but they do have very strong & probably justified incentives to send in their army to try to stabilize the border regions, rapidly secure the North Korea nuclear arsenal & nuclear reactors before the warheads & nuclear materials end up missing, secure the North Korea chemical & biological stockpile, secure the vast North Korea conventional arsenal etc. Once they are in North Korea, they are not going to leave unless we pack up our bases as well.
Japan: China have already surpassed Japan as the preeminent Asian power about a decade ago, and they are definitely not looking forward to the prospect of an unified Korea that can potentially rival Japan as an equal .
China: After witnessing the Syrian refugee crisis, they are definitely not looking forward to the prospect of an even larger # of even more desperate & potentially armed people flooding across the boarder. They are probably not thrilled at the prospect of rogue nukes right next to their border as either.

 

He knows he is trolling

 

I thought they both did even so the UN needs to grow a backbone each country sends has troops that are assigned to the UN they should us them.

 

Far better reasons to be nervous than this, we have more than enough weapons and technology. Application of said weapon technology in a ham-fisted, brain-dead way is more of a concern, IMHO.

 

To clarify, has it been effective in stopping genocide in the central Africa over the last two decades? It hasn't been effective in the Middle East or SE Asia over the last several decades. The blue helmets are their peacekeeping force and are lightly armed with very strict self defense rules. Either NATO or some sort of new security force born from the G20 needs to play the role of not only keeping the peace, but removing the Sadams, Assads, Kim Jong Uns of the world and staying for the transition period.

 

I fully agree something does need to be done but not just by having the US do it each time.