Bringing North Korea into the World By Acknowledging Their Nuclear Weapons and Strike Capabilities

2LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:49:21 -0400

I recently read a great position article by Victor Cha from the Center for Strategic and International studies on how to play the China card in regards to handling the events we are seeing out of North Korea. For the most part, the general consensus to dealing with North Korea will be through their closest friend, China. To this point, I completely agree. It is likely that we will (and are) attempting to pressure China to, in turn, pressure North Korea. However, as Victor points out, this pressure is not likely to lead to our best envisioned end state of a regime change and diminished focus on weapons of mass destruction. Why? Multiple factors of competition, mistrust, history, regime collapse and more lead to a litany of variables that China just doesn’t want to be responsible for or tied to. As Victor argues, it’s time to consider a change in diplomacy; I argue that it also is a time to consider a change in end state expectations and how we get there. [1]

Multiple presidential administrations have attempted to curb North Korean weapons development and engage the hermit country in a way that would stabilize the peninsula and tone down the rhetoric. From the “preventive defense” attempts of the 1994 U.S.- North Korea Framework to curb nuclear power ambitions to the crippling sanctions of today, all attempts to change the regime’s trajectory towards nuclear weapons have been some sort of a failure.[2] However, I believe the actions themselves aren’t the failure, but the underlying assumptions with a focus on the stabilization of the country rather than the stabilization of the Kim Regime itself is the underlying issue.

Although I am by no means an expert on the Kim Jong-un regime or the Kim Dynasty as a whole, from the discussions I have had to the research I have conducted, I am thoroughly convinced every action conducted by the leader is for the security of his Regime, not the country. So, as initiatives have consistently worked to deter action and stabilize a country, I argue it is time we work to stabilize the regime and, in turn, help manage its actions. Now, before we talk about this, let’s acknowledge that working with a regime like this goes against our moralistic nature, as the regime of North Korea is brutish and just down right horrible to its population. However, to that point, its brutal practices are likely actions driven by a regime who consistently is working to secure itself and thereby, has the potential to diminish as the regime’s future is secured.

So, where would we begin to stabilize what seems to be a regime of non-rational actors? First, I believe we need to start by treating them as rational actors. Although their actions may not seem rational to us, as former Joint Chief of Staff General Dempsey once pointed out to a poor reporter, that doesn’t mean they aren’t rational actors. I do believe the regime has an envisioned future and understands where they want to sit in the world. What is that position? Likely, a mid-level country like their cousins to the South. A regime who holds an array of respect and positions in the international system. A position that can influence trade, maritime operations, or weigh in on regional and international issues. Essentially, a position that projects the regimes divinity and strength from within. What is important to remember is that we are talking about the regime, not the country, and thereby we have to acknowledge that this will look vastly different than the free and connected society in the south, but with all the basic tenants of holding a position in the world. This fundamental change in an underlying assumption and focus is a strong facet to seeing that the regime has the potential to stabilize as their envisioned future comes to fruition.

Operating off this assumption, I believe to bring a regime like Kim’s to that point of stability, we have to employ a preventative style of strategy that integrates North Korea into the world system. This would be very familiar to post-Cold War strategies for integrating a fledgling Russian federation back into the world. We’d utilize methods like inviting the Russians into peacekeeping operations in Bosnia-Kosovo, which developed communication frameworks and enabled Russia to find their prideful place in the world structure. Similar activities like investment and repurposing of military personnel in the Ukraine, post Soviet collapse, helped to secure the region and denuclearize a once heavily nuclear country. Many of these strategies of preventative defense, outlined by former Secretaries of Defense Carter and Perry in their book, “Preventative Defense” could yield positive results, as long as their strategies are employed with a focus on the Kim Jong-un regime, rather than the country itself.

To put these ideas into perspective a little more, let’s expand on a few things. To date, the regime is clearly not deterred from developing their weapons of mass destruction and I believe that is because the regime believes it is their most effective and most feasible entry to the international community. To support this, we have to understand that the hermit nation really has no place in modern society. They are not a world player in exports or imports. They do not possess advanced technology which they can offer to the world, and they do not carry any cultural or historic envy in the world. So, what do they have? What do they have to offer? From the regime’s eyes, I believe its only option is their military capability or threat. Basically, “a pay attention to us by force” motto.

Beyond attention-seeking, let’s talk about the potential personal ambitions of Kim Jong-un and his Regime. Kim is a leader, a divinity to some, and one of the privileged few that gets to look beyond the gates of the Regime. Enter the mind of a man in that position, looking out and knowing his influence has significant limits and that those limits actually threaten the life span of his regime, and thereby, his influence. Wouldn’t that drive you to build a mechanism to gain more, or to at least secure your regime’s future both within the country and the international community? I believe it would. This goes back to the understanding that the regime’s survival is priority number one and, therefore, any and all mechanisms to strengthen it must be pursued, no matter the cost.

Moving on to the next piece of bringing North Korea into the world; allowing their sustained nuclear strike capability. Before we talk about nuclear weapons as a means of communication vs. a threat, let's first acknowledge a few other issues that are likely to come up with a reliable nuclear strike platform. With an increased capability like this, the conventional military threat could be emboldened as well, and the regional stability could be threatened. Additionally, we could see increased rhetoric and open threats as North Korean leaders learned how to negotiate and communicate on the world stage - threats would likely be their default response. Further, we could see an intrepid nuclear-capable regime backtrack or cheat on negotiated deals, which could deteriorate security worldwide. These, and many more, are all risks we must acknowledge and account for. We must be heavily involved in the management of regime actions as they move forward as a nuclear power.

Now, with all that we have outlined here - the changes in the assumptions and the changes in focus from country to the regime - we can talk about nuclear capability in North Korea as a potential conduit of communication rather than strictly a threat. Acknowledging their nuclear capability and immediately bringing them into established frameworks for nuclear capable countries could potentially open lines of communication that have not yet been achieved. With a strong deterrence in his pocket from “western interdiction”, Kim could possibly be more willing to establish norms and predictability in their military exercises and actions as they attempt to garner an image of a world player. To circle back to Victor Cha’s article, these lines of communication will likely never be directly with the U.S. or “West” due to the regime’s lack of trust, but would more likely be directed through China. However, the closer the regime gets to established frameworks, the closer those lines of communication can become.

Years of attempting to deter a nuclear North Korea have seem to have little effect, and the time for acknowledging their capability may be presenting itself. So, there are interesting questions that need to be asked. If Kim Jong-un has his desired nuclear program with strike capabilities around the world, could that actually be the missing piece that brings him within the international framework? Will it actually be the conduit that brings stability to the regime and, thereby, the entire region of North Korea? Or are we actually sitting at the brink of a mad-man ready to destroy the world? Either way, these are two extremely interesting and important questions.

What do you think?

-----
Luke Jenkins is an Active Duty Army officer and founder of OweYaa.com, a veteran service organization. He is a passionate student of strategy and matters relating to national defense strategy. This article reflects his personal analysis and thoughts and does not reflect an official stance of the U.S. Army, Department of Defense, or any organization related to national defense framework.

-----
[1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/right-way-play-china-card-north-korea
[2] https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/agreedframework
Photo by Roman Harak - https://www.flickr.com/photos/roman-harak/ [login to see]

The Right Way to Play the China Card on North Korea | Center for Strategic and International...

*This Korea Chair Platform first appeared as a Washington Post Opinions piece on July 5, 2017.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Sep 19 at 2017 10:52 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:52:49 -0400

Thank you for the interesting article and share.

Response by SGT Jim Arnold made Sep 19 at 2017 11:02 AM

SGT Jim Arnold — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 11:02:08 -0400

clearly there is no easy magic solution but to work with a regime to ensure they have access to potent and deadly mass weapons of death is insane to say the least. The US needs to make it painful to China to not crush N.K

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 19 at 2017 2:11 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:11:57 -0400

I don't imagine there would be a ton of political or international support for essentially legitimizing relations with nK, however that doesn't mean it wouldn't be better than our current situation

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Sep 19 at 2017 10:21 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 22:21:00 -0400

Hell NO! We paid a trillion dollars for that THAAD system. From what I'm seeing the people who sold us this POS don't think it will work. Crank that thingy up and shoot them down or give us our money back

Response by SSG Diane R. made Sep 19 at 2017 11:55 PM

SSG Diane R. — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 23:55:49 -0400

The North Korean regime has had one consistent demand for the last fifty years, a permanent peace treaty to end the Korean War. Why is that so hard to negotiate? That alone coupled with the withdrawal of most US forces from Korea would stabilize the regime, opening the door to Serious diplomacy.

Response by COL Mikel J. Burroughs made Sep 20 at 2017 2:55 PM

COL Mikel J. Burroughs — Wed, 20 Sep 2017 14:55:32 -0400

RallyPoint Members and Connections check out this great Command Post Article by our very own

2LT Private RallyPoint Member - Great Read - Your thoughts and Comments are welcome!

Click on this link: https://www.rallypoint.com/command-post/bringing-north-korea-into-the-world-by-acknowledging-their-nuclear-weapons-and-strike-capabilities

Bringing North Korea into the World By Acknowledging Their Nuclear Weapons and Strike...

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Sep 20 at 2017 5:29 PM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Wed, 20 Sep 2017 17:29:29 -0400

They can sit on top of their nukes and let them blow.

Response by LTC Jesse Edwards made Sep 20 at 2017 6:03 PM

LTC Jesse Edwards — Wed, 20 Sep 2017 18:03:10 -0400

A good CIA would destabilize the NKorea regime so that we can work with our puppet government.

Response by SPC Joe Davenport made Sep 21 at 2017 1:34 AM

SPC Joe Davenport — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 01:34:27 -0400

Well thought out piece sir. one MAJOR piece of the puzzle too few of us Americans know about is just what (leading the UN units) did to the north in a very short time. Pilots were out of targets! We dropped more bombs on them we did in the entire Pacific theatre in WW2. Also many of the leaders of the government set up in South Korea had been working WITH the occupying Japanese AND Rhee's military had tried several times to invade the north BEFORE the 1952 attack.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Sep 21 at 2017 2:03 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 02:03:41 -0400

We are actually sitting at the brink of a mad-man ready to destroy the world. The only solution is the military solution, as distasteful as that may be; our choice is either to take him on with his current conventional forces or wait until we must face him with his nuclear forces later.

We cannot afford to kick the can down the road any longer, IMHO.

Response by MAJ James Woods made Sep 21 at 2017 12:17 PM

MAJ James Woods — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 12:17:15 -0400

Excellent. Well done. I've argued the same point with peers and coworkers. The right of a nation to develop nuclear capability in order to compete on the international stage with other nuclear powered nations is a foreign policy strategy of a sovereign nation. Best to invite them to the table, encourage them to open their borders and to embrace the same rules, security, and regulations we put on other nuclear nations. If we can come to terms with N. Korea becoming nuclear, we can come to terms of Iran eventually becoming nuclear.
Again very good read.

Response by GySgt Charles O'Connell made Sep 21 at 2017 2:30 PM

GySgt Charles O'Connell — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:30:46 -0400

An interesting write up. The current Kim is in a "no win" situation. A conventional forces attack
on S. Korea, while promising at first, would see his forces defeated. This isn't 1950, the South
Koreans have a well trained, well armed military, there is no Soviet Union, or Maoist China willing
back his play. Also, I don't believe the N. Koreans are as brain-washed as we think, more a case of
If someone holds a gun to your head and says, cheer the dear leader, you cheer the dear leader.
Use of nukes...? Again folly in the extreme. Their capability does not match their showmanship.
I liken it to muskets vs. M16's. They'll get off a couple of shots, poorly aimed, and be met with
hundreds of shots, well aimed, in response.
His bargaining position is, to be charitable, weak. N. Korea doesn't have anything anyone wants.

Conventional, nuclear, EMP, or kimchi, N. Korea gains nothing in an aggressive act.
Possible scenarios are:
Under covert Chinese direction, rebels form in the mountain regions, later spreading to urban areas. Civil unrest, after decades of oppression, takes hold. A military coup topples Kim.

Under covert Chinese direction, the Kim regime is infiltrated. Following chubby's tragic, and
unexplained death, no doubt a heart attack during some sort of athletic contest, a military junta
takes over.

Do to a lack of proper safety protocols, a test goes horribly wrong, and a nuke is detonated in
Pyongyang. Oh no, how terrible, chubby and his cohorts are all gone. China and S. Korea step in
to help in the crisis.

N. Korea invades the south and is beaten back by the ROK forces. Under Chinese direction, civil
unrest erupts, and takes hold. A military coup topples Kim.

N. Korea actually launches a nuke against U.S., or an ally. Retaliatory strike, non-nuclear, is
overwhelming. Kim regime falls.

It's a no win.

Response by SGT John Jensen made Sep 21 at 2017 4:05 PM

SGT John Jensen — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 16:05:07 -0400

Great article. North Korea while a poor country does have resources. Bringing them in to the modern era will be tricky. They have a grip on the people so hard its not funny. How do you let 25 million people realize they have been lied to for their entire lives?

I am against another war but really don't see a way around it. If we bring them to the table. Invest in them and bring them up to a 2nd world country will it deter them? I do not know. Will it allow them to build more weapons? Yes, but it is a nation and it is allowed to do so.

The North Korea situation is like eating a bowl of crap or stuffing in the sock drawer for someone else to deal with later.

Response by CPO Charles Helms made Sep 21 at 2017 4:31 PM

CPO Charles Helms — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 16:31:26 -0400

I think it's time to send ROK Marines assassination squad to the north and take the little bastard out!! Better they do it than one of our SpecOp teams!!

Response by SPC Jeremy Gardner made Sep 21 at 2017 5:19 PM

SPC Jeremy Gardner — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 17:19:08 -0400

Looking at the article, I can see where they might have preplanned positions and goals that they wish to fulfill (North Korea), however, it also looks like all they want is for the destruction of the US and Japan. Whether it is rhetoric or something else, well we will just have to see I guess, but If you want to treat them as relevant actors and have them on a level playing field, I think the goals they are spouting as loud as they can are unacceptable. Stabilizing the regime would be acceptable, that that is only a possibility if the people in charge are of sane mind and body. Kim may be sane, but his actions speak otherwise.

The level of hate an animosity that the North has for its enemies is so strong, I think the ISIS group has a run for its money on hating us. Personally, I have very little hope that there will be peace between the North and anyone they consider an "enemy." If we leave the peninsula, they may see it as a win and try to not just expand into South Korea again, but other areas. Japan is definitely a target to them, if what we see in their news casts is accurate, and they would be a grease stain on the planet, if the North could do it without consequence. Stability in the peninsula would be a great thing, but I have very little hope of seeing it at this point in time.

Response by Sgt Martin Querin made Sep 21 at 2017 7:34 PM

Sgt Martin Querin — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 19:34:43 -0400

While I acknowledge Victor Cha's credentials to speak on the issue and recognize the points you have made Lieutenant, that is one big elephant sized pill to swallow. I am not sure that it will quell his ego and it will remove any pressure on his leadership. Essentially he will be able to say internally that his methods were right and that the only language that works on the international stage is military threat. He is a child playing with adult toys; when he doesn't get what he wants he will fall back on what has worked in the past.
I believe he is rational, or at least his behavior can be rationalized. I believe the characterizations of him are accurate, just the prediction of stabilization is not an accurate one. You named all the risks...they are not risks, they are predictable eventualities. Kim is not "crazy", he just doesn't think like we do and not every world-view is OK. His needs to be crushed. The sad truth is, it should have been done at birth, or shortly thereafter.
This is just history repeated. The Japanese had a similar mindset at the turn of the last Century and decided to act on it at the start of WWII. They suffered brutally because of a false belief that a demonstration of military strength would vault them to prominence on the world stage. The reason the Japanese are so anxious about this situation, besides being so close to NK, is they have seen this before, up close and personal. Hopefully we haven't waited too long and it's not too late. If China doesn't act and act aggressively to intervene, via whatever means necessary; I am afraid this will end the only way it can outside of that...and no one will like it.

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Sep 21 at 2017 8:49 PM

SPC Erich Guenther — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 20:49:10 -0400

I think it would be extremely dangerous and put tens of millions of lives at risk to recognize the regime and accept their Nuclear weapons. The facts are the Kim family wants the entire pinnesula of Korea not just the North and they have repeated that claim over the generations. They want to see the absolute removal of U.S. Troops from Korea only as a means to accomplish forceable reunification. We can argue all day if the North has the capability or not via the South Korean Armed Forces which is kind of a moot point when one side has Nukes and the other does not. For example how would the South strike back at a conventional provocation by the North when it does not have Nukes? Conventionally?

Also I would disagree with the point that China does not want to see regime change in North Korea. I believe they do. The Chinese viewpoint on the street wants to dump the Kim regime in the North, only a few remaining hardliners in the Chinese government want to protect the regime. So in my view we are at a tipping point with China in regard to having a joint position on North Korea with only a very few Chinese holding back. China would also like to see the North as a reformed trading partner that believes largely in a capitalist system and would like whatever regime that ends up there to be friendly to China. In China's view millions of war refugees is a population where anti-Chinese government sentiment could be stirred up and embarrass the regime on the world stage much like Tinnamen Square did. So I can see why they are fearful of that outcome especially if the local Chinese join in. I think North Korea, Japan and U.S. could mount a massive relief program to alleviate that from happening after a regime collapse.

This is an opportune time in history where we can free yet another country from a family dynasty that has cost tens of millions of lives locally and shows no sign of interest in reform. I think as leader of the free world and as a country that is tired of overseas military commitments that never end we should leap at this chance not run from it. If we run from it, what does it say about extending our military forces in South Korea almost indefinitely as far as the eye can see. If we build up the North economically we likewise will need to build our military forces in the South until we can reach a position of mutual trust the North will not attempt forceful reunification. As a taxpayer I say noway to that option. Lets continue to work with China and fix this and when we are done with the Koreas and peace returns to the pennisula. Lets try to fix the China-Taiwan dispute to reduce the paranoia there among everyone.

Let us try to achieve a position with China where we trust each other militarily so much we both can go back to a position of reducing our military budgets again. Our interests are not that different from one another and China is living in a fantasy land if it can't see it's moment in the regional power category will not last all that long given declining population projections. I think we should sit down with China after this is all over and everyone is happy again and decide on what is reasonable and unreasonable for China in the South Pacific in regards to the neighboring countries and the United States.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2017 11:01 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 23:01:16 -0400

The deterance of getting NK to back down from a nuclear capable entity has failed mostly because of our past democrat policy of rolling over and taking it in the [explicative]. I personally couldn't give a rats hindquarters on what happens to NK. NK needs to be stopped. We have the power, so how many more threats will it take; or do we have to suffer first before we kick their butts?

Response by GySgt Charles O'Connell made Sep 22 at 2017 8:50 AM

GySgt Charles O'Connell — Fri, 22 Sep 2017 08:50:18 -0400

Good book on N. Korea, "Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader", by Bradley K. Martin

Response by 1stSgt Mack Housman made Sep 22 at 2017 9:30 AM

1stSgt Mack Housman — Fri, 22 Sep 2017 09:30:26 -0400

Thanks for passing this on COL. Lt Jenkins seems well versed in this issue. However, I'm still 100% for making South Korea an island.

Response by MSgt Billy Zuber made Sep 22 at 2017 10:32 AM

MSgt Billy Zuber — Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:32:33 -0400

The entire concept written in this article is delusional, and totally without merit. Peace through appeasement is insanity. It is tantamount to capitulation and surrender. It is the equivalent of saying, "I would rather live on my knees, than die on my feet". It would also say to the world, that we are weak, and can be easily be intimidated by threats.
I guess the author thinks that Hitler, and Nazi Germany were just misunderstood, and could have been dealt with more effectively by acknowledging their regime, and accepting them into the community of Nations.
None of the arguments put forth in this article are valid.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Sep 22 at 2017 10:38 AM

SSG Edward Tilton — Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:38:18 -0400

Neither Russia or China must believe our anti missile systems work. China wouldn't care about us putting them in Japan but won't want them in the ROK. Russia would be the opposite. I'm beginning to doubt that it works at all.

Response by CSM Thomas McGarry made Sep 22 at 2017 3:11 PM

CSM Thomas McGarry — Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:11:54 -0400

I'm sure most if not all would not like to see us NOT go to war with NK, however in many ways the ball is figuratively speaking, in their court. If I recall past POTUS had tried economic aid to hopes of eventually working towards normalized relation. I believe Pres Clinton gave NK almost 1 billion US dollars in economic aid with their agreement to curtail their nuclear program and most of that aid went to their military and look where we are now. I am not pretending there are any easy answers to this but how do you work with a dictator who cares very little if his subjects live or starve to death??

Response by SSgt Bruce Probert made Sep 22 at 2017 9:01 PM

SSgt Bruce Probert — Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:01:27 -0400

Kim Jong Un is a Malignant, Narcissistic, sociopath. We should have aborted him by killing his grandfather years ago. We have let these Miscreants get away with murder for years with little penalty. The artillery that threatens Seoul is emplaced and simply multiple targets. Maybe we should take out Pyongyang, The best thing we could do for NKPRK is eliminate Kim Jong Un. The second best would be to force him to abdicate. China could offer him asylum. To negotiate with this monster is not in our interest and to let this malignant idiot have nukes is not acceptable any more than letting those Jihadi Mullahs in Iran have nukes.

Response by SPC Dawn Appelberg (Johnson) made Sep 23 at 2017 3:51 PM

SPC Dawn Appelberg (Johnson) — Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:51:01 -0400

Wipe Kim Jong and his family off the face of the earth, free N. Koreans and set them up as capitalists and you will see as huge power shift.

Response by SGM Joseph Joyner made Sep 25 at 2017 11:45 PM

SGM Joseph Joyner — Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:45:13 -0400

That would be like having BLM kill cops and demand to given a seat at the POTUS' table. They had every opportunity that the south had to normalize relations with the world but they chose to rattle their sabers and receive free handout from the rest of the world for decades. While the north was saber rattling the rest of the world was turning a blind eye to the problem and looking the other way out of the good eye. Kim's forefathers always thought small for small amounts of money and supplies but the later kims were thinking big and started the nuclear program for bigger extortion payments. What would keep other rogue nations from starting a nuclear program to get a mid level seat at the world table If we give a mid level seat to NK? Their diplomats must send so much money back to regime every year so many diplomats, their staffs and families must get employment where they can and send the money back to kim and hooligans.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Sep 26 at 2017 9:47 AM

SGM Bill Frazer — Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:47:39 -0400

It sounded nice but reflect on this- 1. We only have a truce with NK, technically we are still at war with them. 2. Ever since the truce talks, NK has sent infiltrators, assassins, etc. thru the DMZ into South Korea (SK). NK has funded elements in SK to riot and demonstrate in SK politics. NK does not recognize SK as a true government and demands re-unification only on their (NK) terms. 3. Each succeeding NK leader appears more delusional, than his predecessor. NK civilian population is forced to starve, while the NK regime and its military eat. NK has one of the largest armies in the area and the capital of SK lays will within artillery range. NK has threatened to exterminate and force re-unification of the Koreas by force constantly since 1952. Also are you thinking that the regime leader alone has the button to start a nuclear exchange, what if and probably a member of his Rocket Forces, decides that the regime is too soft and pushes the button himself? Please remember that the world has misjudged nut leaders before- Who thought that Hitler would execute 7 million folks, or that Stalin would kill millions, or that the Pathet Laos forces would kill almost 1/3 of their own people. We could go on and on. Nuts are nuts how can you rationalize with people who aren't?

Response by SGT John Meredith made Sep 27 at 2017 11:28 PM

SGT John Meredith — Wed, 27 Sep 2017 23:28:26 -0400

You want to work with a unstable dictator who starves his own people while swallowing lobster and stakes?He's working on dropping a nuke over the Pacific Ocean.Everyday the North Korean people are told how horrible the US is and that we all must cease to exist.Personally I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

Response by Capt Christian D. Orr made Oct 3 at 2017 9:05 PM

Capt Christian D. Orr — Tue, 03 Oct 2017 21:05:20 -0400

This is a vile, reprehensible, and despotic communist regime that should've been wiped off the face of the Earth back in 1950, if only Harry Truman had had the balls to finish the job.

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Oct 4 at 2017 7:05 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 19:05:16 -0400

2LT Private RallyPoint Member Though you bring up some points...I disagree. If Kim were a leader who cared about his people... I may have agreed with a lot of your points.......or, at least taken them into consideration.......however, Kim is an OPPRESSOR....His people/country are scared to death of him...He has the largest number of Political Prisoners in the world....He is a TRYANT...He is just down right mean/EVIL.......Giving someone like this the ....the power of Nuclear weapons/warheads/missiles....... is like taking a gun and putting it to all of our heads and pulling the trigger. He has no compassion........... he is power hungry. To send missiles over Japan and make threats to Guam and other places...is uncalled for and not necessary....it is Kim pounding on his chest like the leader of a GORILLA group in the JUNGLE telling the rest of the WORLD...look at me! I am it! I am the BOMB...I am the leader....and I'm going to one day be everyone's leader...just wait and see.... Give him an inch and he'll take 10 miles... By treating the Regime like "RATIONAL Actors?" Yeah, I don't see this happening. They are not rational and never will be. Take out Kim and we would deal with their military...which may be even worse than dealing with KIM. BRUTISH to it's people is an understatement. ..Look what they did to that poor kid who was there visiting with his fellow student from his university. What they did to this poor boy just because it took a poster off of the wall at the airport is beyond inhumane...it's down right BARBARIC. No way ever should we or any other country give NK a chance to be treated equally...and he's not doing this for his country or his people...he is doing this because he's just like HILTER.....Give him a chance....or Opportunity and He'll try to conquer and take over the whole world because he's just that crazy.
We gave his father $4 million dollars... after they agreed to the Nonproliferation Treaty ...which they ended up breaking nearly as quickly as it was signed back in 1985...then NK straighten up....and then they broke the treaty again....THEY CANNOT EVER BE TRUSTED.... He is the DEVIL...EL DIABLO.... He had his OWN BROTHER KILLED...or wait...was that his Uncle???. MURDERED him with a nerve agent...in COLD BLOOD...this is not a man we can reason with.
Just my two cents.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT Mia Mason Capt Seid Waddell SGT Jim Arnold SPC Joe Davenport SFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]] GySgt Charles O'Connell

Response by LCpl Donald Faucett made Oct 4 at 2017 8:48 PM

LCpl Donald Faucett — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 20:48:50 -0400

I would show a force. Issue a proclamation, then execute the use of force just like with a swift kick in the butt.

Response by CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana made Oct 11 at 2017 10:11 AM

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana — Wed, 11 Oct 2017 10:11:32 -0400

The Kim dynasty in North Korea has a skewed and screwed history. Let's accept this fact, first.

Kim Il Sung is the Father of the DPRK and he agreed to the Korean Armistice and Six-Party Talks. His main agenda was to unite Korea under the Communist ideology; a red state aligned to the USSR and China. At the time of the Armistice, Kim Il Sung chose his Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission (NNSC) members from the former Soviet Union. He agreed to India serving as the Neutral Nations Repatriation Commission (NNRC). This Kim built tunnels across the DMZ to spy and attack US and allied forces in the ROK, with intent to force the allies out of Korea. He violated the Return of Remains provision in the Armistice, initially, using this Clause as a bargaining chip with the West; a barter using a Western coin, so to speak. However, he was professional in his ways.

Kim Il Sung was followed by Kim Jung Il, his son. He floated the idea of two Koreas with an Umbrella Command run by the DPRK leadership. The intent was to tax the South to feed the North, but not visa versa. It was Kim Jung Il that suggested that the Western allies leave Korea to sort their own differences, but the ROK declined this proposal. He tried to claim the UN Command in Korea was a puppet of the US and the NNSC was defunct, because after the fall of the Soviet Union the Czech Republic split into many fragments and Poland disengaged from Russia and so, the DPRK lacked any neutral nation to represent it. This Kim was well-known for his wild and ambitious side. He threatened the ROK at intervals using his famed Koksan Guns (170mms) that can launch nuke tipped bombs on Seoul and destroy it in seconds. Nuclear weapons programs were advanced under this Kim and at a pace second to none, yet. However, testing was not done openly; arsenal was kept under wraps in underground bunkers.

Then; Kim Jung Un ascended the dynastic throne. He got rid of his family that can succeed him. He grew the Nuclear weapons programs and tested them openly too. This Kim is not shy of threatening the West or of taking covert action to extort funds he needs, but doesn't have in his coffers. He is much more evil than his father, just as his father was in comparison to his grandfather.

It is vital to understand the dynasty politics before indulgence in any legitimacy of a rogue state or its leaders.

Thanks for listening.

Response by PO3 Donald Murphy made Oct 12 at 2017 4:44 PM

PO3 Donald Murphy — Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:44:26 -0400

There are several sad issues which I alluded to months ago when this same issue came up. My reasonings and answers are the same and unchanged. We cannot do anything - ANYTHING - without Russian and Chinese cooperation. It is highly possible/likely that the Chinese are using North Korea as a stooge to destabilize the area with or without Russian collusion. Look at China's current position in Asia and her perceived position in Asia. What does she stand to gain - or lose - by having a peaceful North Korea? While *OUR* feelings and thoughts are grand we sadly need to look outside our borders. I know this is tough for most of the nation, but the answer to the problem lies in one of those answers. Who stands to gain or lose the most? If China were angling to be the big money market in Asia, the LAST thing they would want is a unified Korea. China is in line to build/rebuild most of Russia's Eastern rail infrastructure, so dollars to donuts, Moscow's "stance" on North Korea is whatever-China-wants-it-to-be. So from a China-as-leader viewpoint, it is in their best interests to have a volatile North Korea that only they can control. "Well Don, what if you're wrong?" Yeah...there's a possibility I could be. And there's an easy way to know. Bring China and Russia to the table and let them know that

"a nuclear armed North Korea is a threat to ourselves and our allies and we are demanding that they be disarmed by force. Therefore, it is in everyone's best interests that they be disarmed by China, Russia and USA all at once so that there is no defcon confusion and so that the world knows that the three largest nuclear powers are capable of enforcing the law."

Then...stand back and pop the popcorn and watch how Moscow and Peking react. Anything other than a "hell-yeah?" They're in bed with Kim. In that case, cut off China's debt and cut their walmart imports by 1/3rd. (Sad that we rely on that shit so densely, but I digress...). See how it goes from there. Then sadly, in a monster case of "better-the-devil-you-know" we need to contemplate what removing Kim will leave us.

Response by SPC Sheila Lewis made Oct 13 at 2017 1:42 PM

SPC Sheila Lewis — Fri, 13 Oct 2017 13:42:25 -0400

This is one busy article.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Oct 13 at 2017 3:03 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Fri, 13 Oct 2017 15:03:10 -0400

Great Read, I would point out that previous "Chamberlain Like appeasement" attempts have failed as the North Koreans have shown that we will do nothing, as they hold the key cards. They may not win, but they know we don't do much as their big brothers (China & Russia) will protect them. China should not be man handled, but enticed into getting Kim back in line.

The question is what does China want in return, and will the rest of the Pacific rim want to pay the fee? War on the Korean peninsula does not work out well for China either. A war between the Koreas can and will most likely end up with some sort of an embargo on Chinese goods by the current administration, should the Chinese back Kim's hand.. Would a retaliation by dumping US debt on the global markets ensue? This reminds of the classic crane and the bull frog meme With the crane having partially eaten the bullfrog, and the frog's hands wrapped around the Cranes neck with the caption reading "Hold on Baby!" Neither sides wins in this confrontation.

As both may be economically damaged for years to come. While China's current capacity to project its blue water capability is limited, its development of defenses to limit US Naval projections are growing. How well they work is something I would prefer we didn't find out.

Recently I read a report that a retired Navy SEAL came out with the idea of dropping a few million I-Phones and give them free access to the Western World would help bring North Korea in to the modern age. From the perspective of brining Kim to the table that isn't a half bad idea, and far cheaper to all sides except Kim's.

Response by SPC Alvin Cantrell made Oct 16 at 2017 6:42 PM

SPC Alvin Cantrell — Mon, 16 Oct 2017 18:42:52 -0400

as far as china goes, we owe them money and we are one if not the largest consumer of their goods. so their are not going to jeopardize that.

as far as nk, i say we should use creative tactical measures to neutralize the electrical equipment and infrastructure followed by personal attention of violent and speedy nature.

that crazy rocket man needs to check out of the gene pool.

Response by Emerald S made Oct 17 at 2017 9:49 AM

Emerald S — Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:49:05 -0400

sorry but angles of approach to nk seem long winded , same with the thought that using or going through talks including aid of a friend of a country is possibly hoping that to is of help... ,, i just hope kim doesn't have an accident with his nuke stuff , and i hope the world leaders do reacquaint them selves with what happen to earth + atmospheric high altitudes that can last many decades space to~. other nearby countries may wish to do their own chats with their concern , already are nuke specific power concerns needing repairs ,those are worldly power plants + debris sunken to oceans floors from past. since it seems kim like to dominate placement over his apparent people , there is something about that .

Response by LTC Peter Hartman made Oct 28 at 2017 7:42 PM

LTC Peter Hartman — Sat, 28 Oct 2017 19:42:52 -0400

I think you are correct that the leadership of North Korea is a rational actor. They have determined that nuclear weapons are their "ticket" to avoid regime change. Their policies over the last few years work towards that goal. I would expect they won't go the extra step and actually attack the US with nuclear weapons, but it is not my job to make that assessment and I am not in the IC.

Response by SSG Jessica Bautista made Dec 29 at 2017 10:01 AM

SSG Jessica Bautista — Fri, 29 Dec 2017 10:01:14 -0500

It's an unpopular course of action, but takes more than emotion into account. Armchair strategists underestimate the importance of culture and how it affects rationale.

Response by 2LT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2018 9:05 AM

2LT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 09:05:07 -0400

What is everyone’s take about bring the DPRK in to the fold with today’s developments? Do you believe the point that he is trying legitimize his power on a international stage is still valid?