Just about all of the analysis of the situation that I have seen suggests that the North's priority is ensuring the continuity of the regime. That fundamentally changes the approach to handling them.
What are you, twelve years old?
Yes, because those are the only two possibilities
Yes, because those are the only two possibilities
Those talks amount to "you disarm and then we'll start talking" even though the purpose of the talks is to get the North to disarm. They're almost designed to fail.
Or they would spin it as "we got the Americans to back down" and use it to maintain continuity. After all, Pyongyang controls all the media and therefore control public perception.
That's what it amounts to. The North won't back down because they don't want to appear weak. The United States won't back down because they don't want to embolden Pyongyang. They're like a pair of twelve year-olds who seem destined to have a fight because neither will put their pride upon the shelf.
I'm thinking more in terms of the deal proposed by China and Russia. China and Russia suggested that the North ends their missile program and America suspend military drills. It could be a viable solution, but we'll never know because the Americans will not agree to it.
Please refresh my memory.
You make it sound like the answer to every international situation is to back down and run away with your tail between your legs. Chamberlin backed down from Hitler and 55 million people died. Kennedy didn't back down from Khruschev and millions of Americans didn't die in nuclear fire. This isn't a schoolyard fight like you seem to think it is. There is a homicidal maniac with nuclear weapons threatening to use them. There's no way of knowing what is going on in the little pea brain of his. He might even see backing down as weakness and fear and as a sign that he should attack because victory is destiny or some 🤬 like that.
One of them has had his family and former allies and friends killed. Any examples of murders committed by the other?
How many of them have used bombs to kill people?
So you're equating Trump acting as Commander in Chief to a petty little dictator that has had his family and friends murdered?
No but @TheCracker's post comparing the two leaders would have more to do with their positions as commanders with bombs at their disposal.
You'll have to be more specific. Our last 3 Presidents have all dropped bombs.
Doesn't really matter. All 3 dropped bombs just the same, unless you want to insinuate they were being dropped for ****s & giggles instead of an intended purpose.
