Sunday, August 13, 2017

Nuclear Threats in the Age of Trump

Hello all! Before I get into my current event post I wanted to take a minute and address your current event comments due on August 20th. I will only be posting 1 current event before the due date which means that you will be allowed to comment on a classmate's current event post and earn credit. I am doing this mostly because with such little time left before the start of school and August current event posts due (gulp), I don't want to steal current event topics from any of you. It has been a crazy couple of weeks in the world of American politics and those of you who have posted have done an excellent job covering much of it! Keep it up!

On to my current event post...

As I'm sure all of you have heard (and some of you have even posted about), the threat of nuclear war has seemingly been on the rise over the last couple of weeks. Most of this escalation of nuclear tensions can be blamed on 2 sources - 1 expected and 1 unexpected: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and President of the United States Donald Trump. By the way, I say that it is unexpected for Donald Trump to threaten nuclear war because he's the President of the United States and there are only rare moments when the president has open threatened to use our nuclear arsenal.

OK, before we get into how all of this could play out, let's take a second and see how we go here. Rather than rehashing the last 67 of US-North Korean relations (hint: the bad blood started with a little thing called the Korean War), let's just look at the last couple of weeks. m Below is a section of an article from The Week written by Kimberly Alters on August 10th that summarizes these recent events nicely: 
"Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un have been trading increasingly aggressive statements this week, after Trump on Tuesday pledged to rain "fire and fury" down on the Hermit Kingdom if its nuclear threats to the U.S. continued. The Washington Post reported earlier this week that the U.S. intelligence community has assessed that North Korea has successfully miniaturized a nuclear weapon, to the point where it could fit inside one of its missiles; recent North Korean missile tests have indicated the country may be able to soon strike the American mainland.
Trump was criticized for his "fire and fury" threat because of the implication that he was threatening Pyongyang with nuclear war, but when a reporter asked Thursday whether his rhetoric was too tough, Trump disagreed. "Maybe it wasn't tough enough," he said. The reporter then asked what would be tougher than "fire and fury," to which Trump replied, "We'll see." He also warned North Korea that they "better get their act together, or they are going to be in trouble like few nations have ever been in trouble."
Responding to Trump's threats earlier Thursday, North Korea called the president's comments "a load of nonsense" and said it was finalizing a plan to fire four missiles over Japan into waters around the tiny Pacific island of Guam, a U.S. territory with a military base."

So as you can see, President Trump chose to answer North Korea's technological advancements with a threat of nuclear war, and the political and military worlds have gone bananas ever since. However, before we go bananas too let's take a minute and look at a couple of important questions:
  1. What options does the U.S. have for dealing with North Korea?
  2. Are any of these options realistic or even good?
  3. Is the likely hood of a nuclear conflict on either a global or regional scale actually increasing (AKA how scared should we all be)?
  4. Does Trump have a plan for North Korea or is he simply aggressively improvising? 
Rather than me answering these questions in a long blog post (you're getting sick of those I'm sure), below are links to a couple of articles and a video that will provide some answers. Your job for this post will be to read these articles and then answer the questions I've posed above in your comment.

The Articles:
How to Deal With North Korea - from The Atlantic
We’re Edging Closer To Nuclear War - from FiveThirtyEight.com 
Donald Trump Is Giving North Korea Exactly What It Wants - from The New York Times
Trump Threats Are Wild Card in Showdown With North Korea - from The New York Times

16 comments:

  1. According to The Atlantic, four ways to deal with North Korea would have to do with prevention, a series of small attacks, decapitation, or acceptance. Prevention would cause the largest damage to North Korea by taking out their defense systems, leadership, and military in one large blow. America would not have to worry about the Kim dynasty again if all goes well. Another plan is that the Air Force and the Navy could provide a series of strikes to take out North Korea’s capabilities. These would have to be large enough to do some damage, but not strong enough to be considered a declaration of war. The end result of these strikes would hopefully leave Kim in power, but force him to quit his nuclear ambitions. With the decapitation method, assassins would attempt to take out Kim and his inner circle. After that, new leaders could govern North Korea and open it to relations with other countries. The last option, acceptance, would allow Kim to continue developing nuclear weapons, while the Americans still try to contain him. It would be a risky option because Kim would still be active in his attempts to create a missile to reach the United States. The United States would have to watch Kim advance and gain more powerful weapons, without acting to halt his nuclear weapons production.
    Overall, the first three options aren't realistic because they don’t consider Kim Jong Un’s reaction to being attacked. Kim has weapons pointed at Seoul, South Korea’s capital, and would obliterate our allies if we attempted to defeat him. Kim constantly flexes his military muscles with parades of soldiers and nuclear arsenals, and he wants the Americans to know that he won’t go down without a fight. The prevention plan would surely result in many American and Korean (North and South) deaths. It could possibly spark war if North Korea fights back and gets our South Korean allies involved. It could be considered a continuation of the Korean War which never officially ended. The plan with small attacks would not work because President Trump already talked up a nasty situation with his “fire and fury” comment. North Korea would surely take the small strikes as a declaration of war since there are already so many tensions with words. The decapitation plan would be hard to pull off since Kim is very protected, and an American would surely stick out in North Korea. The acceptance plan would be admitting defeat, however it is the most realistic option. If America tries to be peaceful with North Korea, then America’s chances of being attacked would decrease, putting the people in Guam and Los Angeles at ease. However, if Kim is still provoked by what Trump previously said, then America may already be in for an attack. In that case, the prevention plan may be the way to go. In the meantime, America should hold off and not come off as aggressors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to Fivethirtyeight, experts on nuclear weapons say that a nuclear attack on civilians could happen in one of two ways: “tensions between two nuclear states rise to the point where a single miscommunication or technical failure could trigger a launch; or, a terrorist organization could acquire nuclear weapons capabilities.” The experts also said that the chance of a strike against civilians has gone up since a few years ago. I think that Trump and Kim are getting close to the first reason. Ever since Trump released his “fire and fury” comment, Kim has planned to target Guam with a missile. Kim also recently developed a nuclear warhead small enough to fit into a missile that could possibly hit the U.S. mainland. Kim is armed and ready to strike the United States, and Trump’s confident threats aren't helping to hold him back. In North Korea, children are raised to be Anti- American, and even attend a bloody museum in the summer about war crimes pinned on the United States. North Korean children's books depict Americans as porcupines that hurt the innocent North Korean tigers. Trump’s recent comments help justify the Anti-American propaganda in North Korea and give Kim a reason to use nuclear weapons to protect his people. Tensions are escalating between North Korea and the United States, and both countries are equipped with destructive nuclear weapons.
      Although plans have been released on how to handle North Korea, I don’t believe any of them are realistic enough to successfully combat Kim Jong Un’s regime. Trump’s “Fire and Fury” comment sparked a chain of threats that provoked North Korea to talk of a strike. The United States has always had a strong and powerful army, however they are not as overt about it as North Korea. Kim Jong Un is constantly on television with his nuclear weapons parading down the streets with his military marching in perfect synchronization. Trump notices that, and is trying to talk a good game about the United States although we are more modest here about our military. While I do not agree with the words he uses to describe our military, I see why Trump is trying to make us look like a serious force to be reckoned with. It seems to me like Trump’s current tactic is to threaten with words and hope that North Korea will feel intimidated. Now that there may be a problem on our hands, I hope that the White House is forming more plans in the event that Kim attacks.

      Delete
  2. After all of the threats made by North Korea, the United States must come up with strategies to handle the possible outcomes of Kim Jong Un’s dangerous regime. According to The Atlantic, there are 4 ways the US could combat North Korea. First, the US could deliver a massive strike to North Korea and destroy all of their nuclear weapons, their military, and Kim Jong Un’s tyrannic rule. This would obliterate the conflict between North Korea and the United States. “When you’re discussing nuclear issues and the potential of a nuclear attack, even a 1 percent chance of failure has potentially catastrophically high costs,” Abe Denmark, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia under Barack Obama. This plan would only work if the Koreans were completely unaware of it, and it would have to occur quickly so they wouldn't have time to execute a counter-attack. Second, the US could conduct a series of minimal attacks that would keep Kim Jong Un in power, but force him to abandon his nuclear weapons. In order to accomplish this kind of attack, the US must use their military assets in the air and on the ground. The goal of these attacks would be to damage North Korea's power while not instigating a larger attack. Third, the US could send special troops to go into North Korea to assassinate Kim Jong Un and his inner circle. The goal of this attack would be to replace Kim’s regime with a more welcoming regime that would be willing to open North Korea to the rest of the world. Lastly, we could let Kim develop all of the nuclear weapons he wants and avoid being the first to attack. Personally, I feel that the first three options are not realistic or good because if any one of them was to backfire, it wouldn't take long for Korea to launch their missiles to South Korea and the United States. There is a lot of risk that goes along with these strategies, therefore the fourth option is the best even though nothing is getting accomplished for the US. Unfortunately, the likelihood of a nuclear attack on a global scale is increasing. The Korean War has never officially ended, so North Korea is still facing the US and their ally South Korea. A peace treaty was never signed and nuclear weapons are North Korea’s main strategy, therefore we should be concerned.
    On Wednesday, The UN Security Council voted for stricter measures to be put on North Korea for their numerous missile tests. According to CNN these sanctions “include:
    •A binding cap to cut North Korea’s coal exports by 62% or at least $700m each year.
    •Banning the export of statues, from which the country earns tens of millions of dollars each year.
    •Banning the export of non-ferrous metals including copper, nickel, silver and zinc, worth $100m each year.
    •Luxury items were added to the banned list including rugs and tapestries worth more than $500 and tableware and china above $100.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These cuts are expected to take 800 million dollars of Korea’s revenue. The rationale behind these sanctions are that the lack of money will slow down the manufacturing of nuclear weapons. This decision is definitely a move in the right direction for the US, however it does have its risks. The last time the US put sanctions on Japan for oil and other natural resources, they bombed Pearl Harbor and thousands of people died. What’s to say that North Korea won't launch their missiles after we sabotage their earnings. This could be the last straw for the Korean’s, and America could be in serious trouble-- we should be scared. Lastly, I feel that Trump’s main plan is enforcing these sanctions. However, if Kim Jong Un makes another threat, I think Trump’s team will be forced to use one of the first 3 plans mentioned in the beginning of my response. An official plan has not been released, however I believe that one is being formulated. He says he wants to be “unpredictable” and his outlandish comments to North Korea definitely prove that. Richard Nixon followed this same philosophy saying, “The only way you convince them is by convincing them while on the field of battle.” I think he is trying to intimidate Korea by bolstering our military. Trump should stop tweeting/ voicing his opinion and focus on establishing a concrete plan with his national security team before the idea of a strike becomes a reality.

      Delete
  3. Current the US has few options to deal with North Korea. the first of which is an all out military strike to take out all of North Korea's leaders and military. Secondly we have the option of using precise strikes to take out key targets to cripple Kim Jong Un’s power. Thirdly we could remove Kim and his higher ups from the picture. And lastly we could just allow him to continue developing weapons of mass destruction, while we continue the current actions against him. All these forms of action can be taken but i feel that a smart leader would not do most of these. None of these on the cover are good plans but if done right and successfully they could potentially work. I don't think that nuclear conflict will happen, although tensions have increased. We should not be scared because of our current missile defense system we have in place. I don't think trump is just improvising, i feel as though he is currently developing action plans with his advisers with what should be done, while providing rhetoric to make it seem as though he is unsure on what to do and to not give away any plans.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The United States currently has a variety of options in order of dealing with North Korea. According to 'The Atlantic', there are four different plans. The first one is prevention. While "the U.S. and South Korea are fully capable of defeating its [North Korea] military forces and toppling the Kim dynasty," it is too much too soon. The U.S. should hold off, but the question is for how long? Kim Jong-un has the potential to be very threatening and dangerous to many countries. Should we stop him in his tracks now, before it's too late?

    The second way this conflict could perhaps be solved is by creating a series of attacks against North Korea. The U.S. could aim "to punish Pyongyang without provoking a full-on war." How would this solve anything? This would just anger Kim Jong-un even greater and could bring greater hatred to Americans and our country. While to U.S. hopes that this won't lead to a heated war, you never know what North Korea could add. It is not worth the risk at this point.

    A third option is to take down Kim Jong-un himself, in hopes of overthrowing the dynasty. This plan is extremely risky and can lead to severe punishment if the United States is not successful. Even though he is only one man, Kim Jong-un is very powerful and can cause major destruction if need be. Now is not the time to attack him. We must first be able to prevent nuclear attacks from reaching the U.S., in order to protect the homeland for the future.

    The last method is just to accept the fact that Kim Jong-un is building ICBMs and has nuclear power and capabilities. 'The Atlantic' believes that "as frightening as it is to contemplate a Kim regime that can successfully strike the United States, accepting such a scenario means living with things only slightly worse than they are right now." Why would we just sit around and let them continue to devise a plan to harm us? The longer we let Kim Jong-un and Pyongyang do want they want, the closer they are going to get to developing nuclear weapons that can target and destruct the United States.

    Overall, none of these plans seem strong enough to act out. The President, along with military forces must sit down and devise a plan that would be successful, while still providing safety and security to the United States and our allies. The nuclear conflict is real and threatening to us, along with Guam, South Korea, Japan, and our military troops stationed near North Korea. The U.S. needs to be careful with their actions, because the lives of millions of people are in their hands. One wrong move could cause danger for many.

    As for President Trump, he did the right thing by fighting back with "fire and fury". He is showing Kim Jong-un and North Korea, along with the rest of the world, that the U.S. will do anything needed to protect the homeland and its people. He is showing resilience and strength in our country. In the end, in order for the U.S. to be successful, the country must come together in unity, instead of constantly being divided.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Currently, North Korea is posing as a huge threat to the United States. The idea of Nuclear War now seems possible, with all the new technologies that have been developed in the last couple of years. If conflict is inevitable, the United States must figure out what options are available for dealing with North Korea. The Atlantic states that there are four main ways to solve the North Korea problem. One option is “Prevention.” Although the United States is fully capable of attacking and going to war with North Korea, holding off and waiting might be a better idea. Attacking now might be too much in such a short time. However, if Kim Jong Un starts to threaten or harm other countries, than a permanent decision might have to be made. A second option could be to create and complete a series of attacks against North Korea. These small attacks could go both ways, but most likely they will anger Kim Jong Un even more and make the situation worse. This plan is currently not worth the risk of provoking a full out nuclear war. Another option is to go straight for Kim Jong Un. Although this plan poses some serious risks, he is an extremely powerful man and if taken down, his whole dynasty might collapse with him. This could put an end to the whole conflict, or if it fails, it will most definitely start nuclear war. The final option is a risk although it involves no action at all. Acceptance might ultimately keep our country safe in the end. If we just leave North Korea alone, we might save ourselves from a war which could destroy us and many other parts of the world. Even though this plan seems like taking the safe path, no action could be even worse than attacking. If we continue to leave North Korea alone, they might finally develop nuclear devices and missiles that are capable of doing serious damage to the United States mainland. Full out war might already be too late to stop, even if we give North Korea space and mind our own business. Right now, none of these four strategies seem to stand out above all the others. They are just ideas and none of these options will result in a positive outcome. All of them will most likely lead to the same result, a war with North Korea. The threat of Nuclear war is an extremely real and serious issue and it should not be seen as impossible. Both North Korea and our technology have advanced to the level where this type of war is one-hundred percent, possible. Trump needs to be very cautious with his actions and words. Anymore threats at Kim Jong Un from Trump could spark a conflict that is more than just words. Threats lead to actions and Trump needs to be aware of this. His job is to keep the people of the United States safe, not add fuel to the fire. One wrong move could be the mistake that plunges our country into terrible war. In order to effectively solve our problems with North Korea, the people of the United States and our President need to be on the same page, rather than on opposite sides. We have to come together, to ensure that war never happens and we stay safe.

    ReplyDelete
  6. With the situation between the US and North Korea, there are not many options that are both safe and realistic. With nuclear war hanging over our heads and a unpredictable leader such as Kim Jong Un, it is hard to say whether he may fire off the nukes just because we try to stop him.From my opinion I believe there is no way Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to start nuclear war, which would result in his own country being destroyed. Instead he only wants to strike fear in the minds of America. I feel that if the US just bans US travel to North Korea and ignore there scare tactics then we wouldn't have to worry about the North Koreans(unless the do nuke someone). In the tension with Guam, the US was most likely prepared if North Korea tried anything, so they backed off. I believe the Korean tactic is to waist the US's time and effort and scare us, while convincing us to take him seriously while Americans freak out over nuclear war. As leader of the nation Trump is voicing the public opinion and being some what aggressive against Kim Jong Un, but if the US had a change of view and saw the scheme of the Koreans, Trump would no longer go after the leader, making him seem silly as the threatens the world he will nuke everyone, and no one would care. If what i think is true then after a while we will all see he is too chicken and no war will take place

    ReplyDelete
  7. After receiving threats about nuclear war from North Korea, the United States has a few options to respond with. According to The Atlantic, there are four ways the United States can respond: prevention, military attacks, assassination, and acceptance. Prevention involves destroying all of North Korea’s weapons and military, along with the Kim dynasty. Although this would completely eliminate the threat of nuclear war with North Korea (at least for a little bit), there is no guarantee that everything would be destroyed. Say the United States missed some places where there are still weapons and nuclear bombs, then North Korea will have more of a reason to attack the United States since we would have initiated the war first. Second, the United States could stunt North Korea’s progress by attacking during a nuclear bomb test or something similar. The attack would have to be strong enough to send a message, but not too strong as to where it create a war. The option of assassination is exactly what it sounds like: targeting and killing Kim Jong Un. This would be a very difficult operation, and would have to include someone who is within the North Korean government, since reaching Kim Jong Un himself is very hard to do. If an aerial attack were to be used, this would also require someone within North Korean government, because they would need to know of his whereabouts. Lastly, the United States can accept that North Korea is building nuclear weapons. Many are worried about the threat of nuclear war, but The Atlantic points out that the United States could have easily been destroyed by Russia at any point in the past few decades. North Korea is not close enough to destroy all of the United States, and a missile could easily be intercepted within the time it takes to get here. Although many people do not want such a dangerous leader to have access to nuclear weapons, it may be the risk we have to take in order to prevent a war.
    I think that the first three methods of responding to North Korea’s threats are technically realistic, but are not good options. The first three involve some sort of attack either on North Korea’s artillery or on Kim Jong Un, which could easily spark a war if any of them go wrong. Although sitting back and watching North Korea build up their nuclear weaponry is risky, it is better to not initiate the attack ourselves. If we knew for a fact that we were destroying all of North Korea’s nuclear weapons then maybe that would be an option. However, this would still anger Kim Jong Un and would give him more evidence to support his story of the United States being an enemy. If Donald Trump really wants to keep his “America First” policy, then I am sure it is in his best interest to not get involved unless it is completely necessary; but then again he did threaten North Korea with “fire and fury”.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The threat of nuclear war is a very scary thing, since it would kill a tremendous amount of people. It is very reasonable to be scared of such a thing; however some are taking it to the extremes. In the article by The Atlantic, it states that even if North Korea did send a missile towards the west end of the United States, it would more than likely be intercepted. Also, in a poll done by FiveThirtyEight experts gave the chances of a nuclear bomb being dropped on a civilian target at about 25% or less. Therefore, while it is scary to think about nuclear war, it is a slim possibility.
      It seems that Trump is simply bluffing and trying to seem powerful, and that he does not have an actual plan when it comes to dealing with North Korea. If Trump knew as much about the situation as he claims he does, he would know threatening Kim Jong Un with “fire and fury” is only going to make the situation more dangerous. It gives Kim Jong Un yet another reason to paint the United States as an enemy. Also, Trump’s statement was awfully vague; when asked what “fire and fury” meant, he simply responded with we’ll see”. Trump has been criticized for this in the past; he claims it is because he wants to keep his plans secret. However, not giving the American people even the slightest idea of what is going on leads us to assume that he is not sure what is going on either.

      Delete
  8. In my personal opinion I do not believe we should attack North Korea, only because starting a war that is preventable will cause unnecessary chaos and conflict to uprise. We have options on what to do about this situation, but some of them aren't the best. In the article I read from The Atlantic, it explains some of our options. The first option is prevention. What will happen if we choose prevention is, we will send out a huge U.S. military strike on North Korea and it will take out Pyongyang's arsenals, defeat the Kim Dynasty, destruct North Korea's leadership and military, and lastly end the conflict between North Korea, South Korea and America. This wouldn't be the best option, because if North Korea found out that we were planning an attack on them, they could attack us first. The second option is "turning the screws." If we choose this option what would happen is, we would send a military attack on North Korea and Kim Jong Un would stay in power but he has to give up his nuclear ICBMs. This is not the best option either, because they could counter attack us. The third option is decapitation. If this was the option we chose, we would assassinate Kim Jong and his "inner circle" or his top administration, after that we would replace his regime with a more moderate one, and we would open North Korea to the rest of the world. This would be a bad option as well, because it's very difficult to assassinate not just one but many people. The last option is acceptance, with this we would let Kim Jong Un "contain his ambition" and the United States would back down from North Korea. This is the best option, because if we back down and they realize that we aren't attacking them, they will most likely back down too and it prevents a nuclear war. Also the likelihood of a nuclear conflict on a global or regional scale is actually decreasing. Lastly President Trump does not technically have a plan and he's aggressively improvising. All in all we should back down from North Korea so we can avoid chaos and conflict.

    ReplyDelete
  9. After reading the articles provided, I believe that all of the options available are potentially able to succeed but are dangerous to do so. According to the Atlantic, four ways to deal with Kim Jong Un's Regime is to
    1. Prevent it - The US and South Korean forces can conduct an all out attack against North Korea.
    2. "Turn the screws" - Respond to North Korea's missile launches and show enough force to get their attention.
    3. Assassination - We can get someone from the inside of Kim's circle to plan and kill.
    4. Acceptance - We can deal with North Korea (for now) and accept that they eventually will build ICBMs.
    In my opinion, none of these options are good, but the best ones are a full out attack or a planned assassination. A full out attack will allow US troops to demolish the regime before North Korea develops the capability of reaching a nuclear warhead to the United States. One downside of this is that this will be the most massive military attack since the Korean War, which means that many troops and resources will be required and there will probably be many deaths. Assassinating Kim Jong Un will be difficult but possible. By cutting out the leader, The North Korean people may see what is really happening behind all the government propaganda. But, there is no guarantee that a better leader will replace him. I think we should be scared. North Korea may have missiles capable of reaching the US in the next couple of years. But What will Trump do when this happens? I think that the Trump administration is working rapidly on a solution to this problem. I think Trump should act smarter since he is our leader and not make rash decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As outlined by the video in the article by The Atlantic, the United States has four terrible options for dealing with North Korea and its threats to use nuclear force against its enemies. These possibilities, which have been in place long before the Trump presidency, include prevention, "turning the screws," decapitation, and acceptance. Prevention would entail a complete attack on NK by the USA. This ultimately means eliminating NK as we know it--destroying its arsenal of weapons, overthrowing its leadership, and disbanding its military. A resulting "failed state" would exist, which would require oversight from the US to ensure the creation of a region that satisfies our interests. Not only would this plan lead to an innumerable amount of casualties, it would uphold the United States' reputation in the region as an "imperialist aggressor." Instability on the Korean Peninsula could not only give way to the cruelty of imperialism over a foreign population, but may allow a vengeful regime with the same intentions as the current one to rise in the future.
    Another approach to dealing with this conflict is called "Turning the Screws." This method entails using strategic attacks deployed with the intention of severely damaging NK’s nuclear capabilities. A good outcome of selectively striking certain regions to demilitarize the regime of nuclear weapons would be the backing down of Kim Jong Un. However, a bad outcome could be much worse. It is very likely that NK could interpret this move as the first step in a nuclear war and retaliate with full force, putting much of the world in danger. Similarly, using the decapitation method (which is exactly what it sounds like--assassinating Kim Jong Un and his inner circle) could cause the North Korean military to strike back unpredictably.
    Lastly, the most favorable method, in my opinion, is to simply accept the state of the world and attempt to solve problems with diplomatic relations. As mentioned in the video by The Atlantic, the US and its allies dealt with a similar situation for almost forty years during the Cold War. In this case, the aggressor (USSR) was much stronger and posed a much greater threat towards US democracy. At the beginning of this conflict, panic ensued around the US resulting in nuclear attack drills and bomb bunkers being built. However, the country watched the conflict deescalate to nothing simply by accepting the nature of its enemies. The USA often has a difficult time recognizing the interest of other countries and the intentions behind their actions (especially under the Trump Administration.) As a result of our misconceptions about our enemies, it would be foolish to engage in Nuclear War. Instead, diplomacy and civil punishment, like sanctions, should be plan A for Donald Trump and his military advisers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question of whether we will need to use any of these methods is one that has been debated fiercely recently. Both Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un has made verbal threats against one another. When NK has expressed its hatred towards the US or threatened to attack Guam, we have retaliated by warning against feeling our “fire and fury.” Yes, these exchanges are harsh and scary to the average American or North Korean. However, I believe the fight we’re witnessing is one between two insecure men obsessed with protecting their reputation. While there may be some seriousness to the tension between Trump and Kim, I feel that many of the threats made are empty ones. Both Kim Jong Un (who only took power in 2012) and Donald Trump are (who is almost completely oblivious to the history of the US-DPRK conflict) are inexperienced in relations between the two countries. We have recently seen North Korean missile tests fail. Actually, they fail 88% of the time, likely due to sabotage. Also, NK has withdrawn its threats on Guam and decided to hold off. Meanwhile, Trump has made claims that have been unfounded and refuses to give detailed plans for dealing with the conflict. So, I believe that a real nuclear war is highly unlikely due to the lack of experience among Trump and Kim and the lack of knowledge of what may happen in the event of a strike to actually happen.

      Delete
  11. Tensions between the United States and North Korea have been rising as of late because of the recent missle tests done by them that have succeeded. There are many who are wondering what options does the U.S have to prevent an all out nuclear war with North Korea. The options are Prevention, a military strike that would crush the North Korean army and end the Kim dynasty. Another option would be Turning the screws, which would be a series of attacks whether it be naval or aerial. Probably the most the difficult option to achieve would be decapitation, which would be to take out Kim Yong Un and take out their leadership, however if this were to succeed, there is no telling who will come in to power and whether or no they have the same goal as Kim Yong Un. Also, this would only be possible by assassination, which could only be done by someone on the inside. Lastly, the final option is simply accept North Korea as a nuclear power and continue to deal with them. None of these options are reasonable as the first two options would result in many deaths for innocent people and many deaths for American Soldiers. An assasination is also very unlikely as it would be hard to pull off and the results can either be bad or good. Accepting that North Korea is a nuclear is probably the best option although this would allow them to grow in strength and military power, so this option is only postponing a conflict. I think that the U.S should be scared because we never know when North Korea will strike or where they strike and 30 minutes is a very small time frame in which the U.S could react. The possibility of a nuclear conflict is high because of the fact that North Korea has ballistic missles that could reach the U.S. I believe that Trump is doing something about this conflict however I do feel that he is being over aggressive and is not thinking about what is best. He should carefully consider his options, before doing something that might make the situation worse.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Visibly, the likelihood of a nuclear conflict does not seem like it is actually increasing. However, if you really think about it, a war could be easily started in many ways but it would be hard to pull off. The process seems to be going slowly but surely. It could even be as easy as "a weapon [being] assembled in a garage and smuggled in a standard box truck."(We're Edging Closer to Nuclear War) Luckily a key part to a nuclear conflict is hard to get which is fissile material, since the dozens of acres it can be created at are very noticeable. Personally, I would say we shouldn't be that scared unless the president somehow makes the probability of the conflict increase at a faster rate. Then the country should start thinking about taking precautions and/or fight back.

    ReplyDelete