Anything short of using nuclear arms. They say remove sanctions or we nuke LA, what then? The passive route delays the problem w/o solving.
-
Let me put it another way. Nuclear weapons didn't make Stalin think he could invade Western Europe, did they?
They didn't make Mao think he could invade Taiwan, did they?
-
-
There are ways to communicate, "if you do this, real war will start." Like, say, keeping US troops in South Korea.
-
Nuclear blackmail works both ways. We can't say, "disarm or we'll nuke you," because they'll know that is a bluff. Ditto in reverse.
-
Articulating real, solid, "red lines" is difficult but clearly possible.
-
If we could deter Stalin and Mao, we can deter KJU. DPRK is small, weak, poor, low-pop. No chance of survival in real war. They know this.
-
I don't think the situations are equatable. DPRK isn't even a self-sustaining state. The line where they have as much to lose but more to
-
Gain by serious action isn't the same as Mao/Stalin exercising expansionist attitudes. KJU is volatile in a different way.
-
Disagree. If you think KJU is worse than Mao, go re-read on the Cultural Revolution. PRC in '64 was million times crazier than current DPRK.
-
Anyway, point still stands: you believe that KJU is somehow historically undeterrable. I see no reason to believe this, many reasons not to.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.