Slashdot Mirror
North Korea's Leader Kim Jong-un Says He'll Give Up Weapons if US Promises Not to Invade (nytimes.com)
Several readers have shared a report: North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, told President Moon Jae-in of South Korea when they met that he would abandon his nuclear weapons if the United States would agree to formally end the Korean War and promise that it would not invade his country, a South Korean government spokesman said Sunday. In a faith-building gesture ahead of a summit meeting with President Trump, Mr. Kim also said he would invite experts and journalists from South Korea and the United States to watch the shutdown next month of his country's only known underground nuclear test site.
The comments by Mr. Kim were made on Friday when the leaders of the two Koreas met at Panmunjom, a village on their shared border, the spokesman, Yoon Young-chan, said on Sunday, providing additional details of the meeting. "I know the Americans are inherently disposed against us, but when they talk with us, they will see that I am not the kind of person who would shoot nuclear weapons to the south, over the Pacific or at the United States," Mr. Kim told Mr. Moon, according to Mr. Yoon's account of the meeting. It was another dramatically conciliatory statement by Mr. Kim, whose country threatened to do exactly those things during the height of nuclear tensions last year.
The comments by Mr. Kim were made on Friday when the leaders of the two Koreas met at Panmunjom, a village on their shared border, the spokesman, Yoon Young-chan, said on Sunday, providing additional details of the meeting. "I know the Americans are inherently disposed against us, but when they talk with us, they will see that I am not the kind of person who would shoot nuclear weapons to the south, over the Pacific or at the United States," Mr. Kim told Mr. Moon, according to Mr. Yoon's account of the meeting. It was another dramatically conciliatory statement by Mr. Kim, whose country threatened to do exactly those things during the height of nuclear tensions last year.
I am not familiar with the details beyond the occasional headline, but it sure looks like one or both of these things has happened:
1) Kim Jong-un did not inherit his father's insanity; he was merely raised within it's influence. Now that he has been on his own for a while, he is actually sane enough to listen to some reasonable advisers and shake off the nonsense his father imposed. He is grasping the big picture; including the nature of the global economy and how his country desperately needs to get on board if it is going to have a future (which requires playing nice).
2) Something, possibly Trump, possibly waning support from China, has him scared shitless.
Or 3) It's a trap!
Just how badly *did* they screw up their nuclear test site? I mean - this about face is looking a bit too desperate. These guys need to bluff a little better (or did they also keep all their newly minted nuclear weapons at the same site and lost them too?)
Do you know anything about WWII?
With Japan the choice was not "Use Nukes" vs. "Everyone lives in Peace". The alternative was a landed invasion of Japan, with an expected body count far in excess of anything the nukes did. The nukes gave the Japanese leadership a face-saving reason for surrender, saving many lives. Claiming that the U.S. leadership using nukes was "insane" in the context of the Pacific war is ridiculous.
It was just a tunnel that collapsed, it isn't something that sets the program back in a country with a government that has absolute power.
The tunnel is where they make the things go "boom," it isn't where they build any of the things, and it isn't where the people who design or build the things work.
We don't know what happened in the meeting between DPRK and PRC, but we do know that afterwards they made a joint public statement; North Korea had agreed to give up their weapons program, and China had agreed to remain allies with North Korea. That's not a subtle statement IMO, and it isn't really the same thing as not knowing what happened unless it was a ruse. We might have the answer in just a couple months, too.
People can blather about "Trump," but he already made it clear he doesn't understand the military and lets the generals make most of the decisions about war stuff. To the extent that China has become concerned about US military action, the US military has been clear for decades that if the North Koreans actually build an ICBM that can reach the US, that will result in war. The main part that Trump has been involved in so far is that he's sitting in the chair that the media talks about when they talk about the subject. This exact conflict has been building to happen right now, for decades. This is the exact moment where peace is most likely to be achieved, because failure to achieve it means almost instant war. Not because of the personalities sitting in their respective chairs today, but because past leaders have left the conflict to come to a head at this time.
You only need study H. Clinton's history during her time as Secretary of State. She's more of a globalist-enabler than a liberal. She and her clients were just itching for her to come to power so she could escalate the conflict in Syria. And it was NEVER about human rights or the plight of the Syrians. It has always been about the natural gas pipeline they want to string over Syrian territory to get said gas to market at a profit.
All of the US nuclear weapons were withdrawn from South Korea in 1991 .
Nuclear deterrent is provided by submarines and forces stationed on US territories in the Pacific.
I like to deal in facts, not wishes....
There have been 30 “defensive” Democratic war years, for about 15% of the total.
There have been 25 “defensive” Republican war years, for about 12.5% of the total.
There have been 64 “offensive” Democratic war years, for about 32% of the total.
There have been 81 “offensive” Republican war years, for about 40.5% of the total.
From a warmongering perspective, Republicans are king.
Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
North Korea has been a master of this game for years. They are expert at ramping up rhetoric to get attention and concessions. Trump is a paper tiger. All bluster but he usually folds.
North Korea knows that it would lose badly in any real war so they calibrate their rhetoric to a fever pitch but they are wise enough to know when to pull back. Can't say the same about Trump. He usually folds but there is enough erratic behavior and stupidity to tip things the wrong way.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Exactly, and nothing was discussed in the meeting between North Korea and China before this turn of events.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Trumps isolationism and nationalistic tantrums to do and China doesn't at all see a great opportunity to get US thrown out from the region by having North Korea play nice.
I think it's plausible.
Kim was educated in Switzerland. That's a thriving, educated, wealthy country, and it has access to everything the world has to offer. Going from there back to North Korea must have really been eye-opening. Sure, Kim gets what he wants because his family sucks the wealth out of the country, but other than the rest of the aristocracy, nobody really has anything. It's a poor, poor country, where famine can kill hundreds of thousands in a given year. Anywhere he goes outside of his curated estate he sees abject poverty.
I wouldn't be surprised if one factor is that he realizes that making everyone in North Korea 2x as wealthy will make him 100x as wealthy. That making life better for the peasants will make him more of a god than he already is. It only makes sense - the cult of personality is well established. Make life better for people, and you cement a legitimate place in history as a great leader.
If China said "not supporting any of your crazy military plans", I think Plan B is enrich the country, so those at the top can benefit even more. Yes, probably needed to consolidate power before doing that. He's now got power, a bargaining chip in a robust nuclear and missile program, and it's time to both become richer and more beloved. It's a solid plan.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Simple: We have security obligations to Japan. When we took over and occupied their country following WW2; we took it upon ourselves to write their new constitution for them. Said constitution placed severe restrictions on the size and composition of any future military they'd rebuild. And the missions they're allowed to undertake are similarly restricted. In return, we took upon ourselves the obligation to assure their security. North Korea is just across the sea from Japan, of course. And they've launched missiles into Japanese airspace of late. So I think it's safe to say that NK is a belligerent toward Japan. China has maintained belligerency towards Japan for about as long as I can remember, as well. Just a couple of years ago, they started intercepting and threatening Japanese airliners in International airspace... until the Air Force sent a few B-52s through those same air lanes to show what's up. And China has been trying to muscle in on the Senkaku islands, like they are the Spratlys, for many years as well. Russia, for that matter, is actually still *occupying* some of Japan's northern islands. So yeah, there's a quite legitimate obligation and need for a US presence at least in and around Japan.
A few decades later, President Carter signed into law the Taiwan Relations Act; which requires less comprehensive, but still binding, commitment to the defense of that nation as well. And I don't think rapacity and ambitions towards Taiwan need a reminder.
Imagine all the people...