On North Korea, Trump should take Teddy Roosevelt’s advice

On North Korea, Trump should take Teddy Roosevelt's advice

On North Korea, Trump should take Teddy Roosevelt’s advice

Americans tend to think that all problems have a solution – if only the right policy is applied. However, North Korea, the “ultimate problem of hell,” defied the efforts of the five US presidents – George W. Bush W. Donald Trump – for 25 years, with no end in sight.

The current hysterical alarmism following the test of a deliberately scheduled North Korean intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) no longer enjoys Pyongyang leader Kim Jong Un.

It feeds on the attention that reinforces its internal position, and the saber shoes of the United States, more is played in the narrative of the North Korean threat, victim and unnecessarily increases the tension.
But apparently, no one told the president of Trump. His ridiculous tweets and his repeated threats that will take the action “serious” and that “will use force if necessary” are extremely careless or empty lanterns.

Remember your tweet in January that the intercontinental ballistic missile test “will not happen”. In both cases, Trump has to discover his inner Teddy Roosevelt – for the time being, he speaks out loud and carries a wet noodle. He must know when to close and in silence apply pressure.
As horrible threat that North Korea armed with a nuclear weapon that could hit the United States, will be necessary, we must all reflect on the current reality. First, this is not surprising: North Korea withdrew from its missile and nuclear weapons for 30 years.

The best estimate is that they have at least 8 to 10 nuclear weapons and probably a miniaturized nuclear warhead that could incorporate one of more than 100 deployed Dong Dong missiles, which could hit US military bases in South Korea in Japan .

So, in fact, we have been living for some time a nuclear threat from North Korea. Despite the successful test, Pyongyang is still several years away from an operational ICBM that could hit the mainland of the United States. They also showed that they can land a re-entry vehicle and give it to a target, much less one with a nuclear weapon.

The uncomfortable truth is that deterrence has worked on the Korean peninsula since 1953. We are now in a state of mutual dissuasion. But unlike the Cold War mutually assured destruction (MAD), it is now the AD – which can damage the United States, but which can destroy North Korea.

Even with an ICBM, Kim knows that if they use this WMD, there would be a quick and forceful response from America. The only feature of the North Korea redemption is imperative for their survival, they are not suicidal.

Kim is dangerous, but crazy or unbalanced. After seeing Gaddafi’s fate in Libya and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Pyongyang sees nuclear weapons as a maximum insurance policy against a United States and / or regime change.

But Kim’s revolutionary efforts toward a sophisticated range of missile and multi-level nuclear (land and sea) dyads pose the question of why? Would not the four or five nuclear weapons be a sufficient deterrent? Is it believed that it can threaten or win a limited nuclear war against the United States?

Despite all the diatribes about preemptive attacks, it is a very questionable option. First of all, we do not have accurate information on what mountains and tunnels your missiles – they are stored in – some mobiles.

We do not know exactly how many nuclear weapons they have or where they are. We do not know how many there are highly enriched uranium production facilities or location. So how do preventive strikes, which would put in a Pyongyang nuclear situation “of which they use or lose,” solve the problem?