Would Germany contribute 100,000 soldiers for a battle for North Korea? If NATO is to mean anything it needs to mean Germany will send 100,000 soldiers to fight with Americans to change the North Korean regime unifying the country.
Europeans invade Russia; not vice versa. NATO and their symps in the U.S. government want to lever Russia into the power of the most rich globalists. Russia has the most resoures as Neocons believed Iraq had the best oil supply when that commodity was tight. Republicans just put up new sanctions on Russia. They only attack states that are weak or not interested in offense.
Europeans invade Russia; not vice versa. NATO and their symps in the U.S. government want to lever Russia into the power of the most rich globalists. Russia has the most resoures as Neocons believed Iraq had the best oil supply when that commodity was tight. Republicans just put up new sanctions on Russia. They only attack states that are weak or not interested in offense.
North Korea is closing on on developing a hydrogen bomb and ICBM to hit a red state city, a blue state city, maybe Hawaii or Anchorage (or both) and possibly a European target such as Berlin. The difference between Kim Jong Un and Saddam Hussein is that the former isn't bluffing. And there are probably a lot of people willing to provide technical assistance to the NOrth Korean hydrogen bomb program gratis.
Previous U.S. administrations have avoided any sort of military pre-emptive strike on North Korean nuclear development sites because of pusillanimity and fear. Probably 'diplomacy' will prevail again and North Korea will go ahead and develop its weapons program though perhaps more quietly with Chinese encouragement. The value of letting someone nuke a large American and European city is obvious. It would realign the world economy favorably to Asia.
Prior administrations did not shirk facing up to the reality of weapons in the possession of enemies as have all U.S. administrations since the end of the cold war. One cannot be certain about what course to take, yet the administration probably should set a date a priori to quit diplomacy and vaporize whatever nuclear facilities and research sites they can.
In some respects the nuclear umbrella of the U.S.A. is seeming sorta ratty to nations in the orient like Japan that may not like to let. Korea eventually have several nuclear weapons pointed its way on intermediate range missiles. U.S. administrations seem o.k. with tolerating that and letting a few ICBMs be pointed in the general direction of the nation as well.
In the North Korean dictatorship just one guyfor whatever reason can decide to launch a nuclear attack regardless of the consequences. THe dictator is not a commune or politborough with a little more tendency to consult. U.S. leaders should not be too contentedly confident that Kim Un is another Leonid Breshnev or Mikhail Gorbachev.
In some respects the nuclear umbrella of the U.S.A. is seeming sorta ratty to nations in the orient like Japan that may not like to let. Korea eventually have several nuclear weapons pointed its way on intermediate range missiles. U.S. administrations seem o.k. with tolerating that and letting a few ICBMs be pointed in the general direction of the nation as well.
In the North Korean dictatorship just one guyfor whatever reason can decide to launch a nuclear attack regardless of the consequences. THe dictator is not a commune or politborough with a little more tendency to consult. U.S. leaders should not be too contentedly confident that Kim Un is another Leonid Breshnev or Mikhail Gorbachev.
