26-Sep-17 World View -- US adopts strategic response to North Korea's threats to shoot down US warplanes

[John]

26-Sep-17 World View -- US adopts strategic response to North Korea's threats to shoot down US warplanes

Is there a strategic explanation for Trump's statements and tweets?

** 26-Sep-17 World View -- US adopts strategic response to North Korea's threats to shoot down US warplanes
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e170926



Contents:
North Korea threatens to shoot down US warplanes
Is there a strategic explanation for Trump's statements and tweets?


Keys:
Generational Dynamics, North Korea, Kim Jong-un, Ri Yong-ho,
Dana White, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Russia, Vladimir Putin,
China, South Korea, Guam, Japan, Cheonan, Yeonpyeong Island

[Guest]

Your analysis is sound to me. I have never viewed President Trump as a madman. I respect President Trump and trust him (yes, I trust him) to protect my country. I believe his core voters do support him. The snowflakes, the SJWs, don't matter. They have no future in any case.

I hate the liberal media for its unfair and grossly unprofessional attacks upon him. I also think the liberal media (and I include the global press across the world) has done a gross disservice to everyone who reads or views their reports. Hopefully the 'legacy media' will go bankrupt in the near future.

So this is it? Okay. I'm good. Part of me wants to survive. Part of me just hopes I die in blinding flash. But I do know that I don't want to live with North Korean blackmail.

[Brendan]

I'm finding China's conditional support suspect. I really have had a hard time figuring out how much NK PRC are in coordination. It sounds like this conditional support is just another ploy for time (that we have seen time and time again). It shifts the initiative for NK to start the conflict (and they can control and influence that) if U.S. takes the initiative China wouldn't have control over when that would occur. The thought that China actually honors this statement in patently absurd. They would just find an excuse at a later point to come NK's defense. This also buys time for NK so that when they do strike first it is more catastrophic (nuclear). Funny how when a threat to china gets elected (Trump) NK's nuclear program makes years of progress seemingly overnight. I smell a discontinuity.

[zzazz]

go on, beat those war drums. big man.

[Coordinated fires]

go on, beat those war drums. big man.

Not to speak for John. But I believe he is somewhat of a realist. He's simply making observations about reality, not making a value statement as to whether or not a specific action should be taken.

Why are people so quick to jump on others and ascribe to them the worst possible motives? No wonder everyone loathes each other so much these days.

[Coordinated fires]

I'm finding China's conditional support suspect. I really have had a hard time figuring out how much NK PRC are in coordination. It sounds like this conditional support is just another ploy for time (that we have seen time and time again). It shifts the initiative for NK to start the conflict (and they can control and influence that) if U.S. takes the initiative China wouldn't have control over when that would occur. The thought that China actually honors this statement in patently absurd. They would just find an excuse at a later point to come NK's defense. This also buys time for NK so that when they do strike first it is more catastrophic (nuclear). Funny how when a threat to china gets elected (Trump) NK's nuclear program makes years of progress seemingly overnight. I smell a discontinuity.

I would tend to agree. I think the fatal flaw in this strategy may be that it seems to take China at its word. As has been pointed out on GD many times, we have absolutely no reason to believe that the Chinese will hold up their side of the deal.

In addition , would this strategy not require yielding the initiative to NK? This would seem plausible if the initial NK act was limited to a couple of lone Migs jumping a SIGINT plane over the Sea of Japan or something of that nature, but as you alluded to, what if they decide to open with a massive cyber/terrorist/kinetic attack on the South, would this not be yielding a significant amount of tactical advantage to the North. I can't see the pentagon being thrilled about that.

To go a step further, what if the Chinese plan a double cross, and coordinate an all out NK assault on the peninsula as cover for striking one of their neighbors, perhaps even go for the full nine-dash-line scenario?

Experts seem to agree they're perhaps not ready to move now, but who knows, they may miscalculate and decide to roll the dice, or calculate correctly in believing we won't be able to effectively respond to both north Korea and a Chinese land grab simultaneously. Given recent events with regards to our readiness in the region, it seems to me this wouldn't be an entirely uninformed gamble. John has pointed out time and again that the Chinese are waiting for a time of their choosing to attack us, what better time?

Funny how when a threat to china gets elected (Trump) NK's nuclear program makes years of progress seemingly overnight.

Damn! Dis man is woke!

[BBQ]

"I believe that Trump's actions, including his tweets, are all part of a strategy. This is my opinion as to what that strategy is."

This opinion is idiotic, but currently extremely common.

He has no strategy and he is not trustworthy. You will sorely regret your opinion. You came to false conclusions due to bias and a lack of realism.