General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat should US policy with respect to North Korea be at this point?
I ask this a lot around here and I don't think there is a good consensus. I'm always curious to get insights into how people think the US ought to deal with NK. Personally, I don't feel like I have a good understanding of what the Democratic Party approach would be, if there is one. Do folks feel that Obama was effective? If so, what, in particular, were his most effective tactics? What should our goal be? Can we live with NK having nukes? Should we talk to the Dear Leader or is that just giving them a win? Is there anything we can do to decrease tensions without looking like we are caving? Are we comfortable with allowing the Dear Leader to rule over the country the way that he has been if the nuclear threat is dissipated? Is there anything he could do that would justify a military response from the US? To what extent are we responsible for protecting S Korea? How do we best going about ensuring their safety?
Love to get insights into any of these questions from the good and smart people of DU.
LuvNewcastle
(16,864 posts)Let NK and SK come to an agreement on their own. It would be nigh impossible to get NK to give up the nukes they have now. I think that we should honor our agreements with Japan and NK if Kim does them harm. If our military or CIA see an opening for them to depose Kim, they should do it, but I don't think Kim is stupid enough to give them the opportunity.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Blue_true
(31,261 posts)If President Obama had sent John Kerry or Hillary to shake hands with Kim, republicans would have lost their fucking minds. Trump has now crossed that threshold, democrats can now send skilled diplomats to move the needle to where it should be.
As far as Kim? I gut is that he wants a safe exit from North Korea for him, his sister, their families and maybe a few top aides. And he wants them to live in relative luxury and safety from being charged with crimes after they leave. I honestly think that he can be bought with the right amount of money and safe harbor for him and his sister and their families in a country like France or Spain, even the west coast of the US. I think democrats should pursue that route and work with South Korea so that what is left of North Korean leadership get roles, but with modern judicial rules on their conduct toward their people, there would be a transition administered by South Korea, then full unification aka Germany. Germany is a perfect model, the Germans did not go out of their way to punish former East German officials and military people, I think that made reunification go smoother.
Squinch
(51,075 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)http://www.france24.com/en/20091021-sanctions-until-pyongyang-takes-irreversible-steps-disarm-clinton-says
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)As a start, it is long past time for the Korea's and the US to end the formal war.
This will be more difficult than it sounds, in that it will require a deconstruction of the demilitarized zone in a way which would allow the US army to "stand down" in some real sense. Basically, NK is going to have to accept a vastly more "porous" border where it is more difficult to prevent escape from their country.
And no, I don't see any administration achieving this real soon, especially THIS administration. Truth is, it won't happen until China wants it.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Is that something the world needs to accept and come to terms with?
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)While it can be a goal of our foreign policy, it cannot be an imperative. Casual observation will indicate that a country with nuclear weapons suddenly seems to understand the power AND responsibility. We used them to END a war. Everyone has pretty much figured out that it is a pointless way or reason to START a war.
Response to oberliner (Original post)
marble falls This message was self-deleted by its author.