President Xi Jiping wants to work on a peaceful solution to NK

[Landon]

North Korea is in poor condition. Suppression by their leader. Starvation. Even camps that take away the person's basic human rights, degrading their own health with most of the people in these camps dying.

Trump doesn't like said condition and said that he would do something with NK whether China wanted to help or not. Well, it turns out - China wants to come up with a peaceful solution with the US to North Korea's issues. Trump said that President Jiping and him had a very good call last night concerning the menace of North Korea.

What do you think about the situation?

Snippet of article:

Chinese President Xi Jinping told President Trump in a phone call Wednesday that Beijing is willing to work with Washington on ending North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, but wants to do so through peaceful means.

"Had a very good call last night with the President of China concerning the menace of North Korea," Trump tweeted Wednesday morning.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Had a very good call last night with the President of China concerning the menace of North Korea.

Xi told Trump that China insists on peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula in the wake of the deployment of the USS Carl Vinson to the area and the conducting of the biggest-ever U.S.-South Korea military drills.

"China insists on realizing the denuclearization of the peninsula ... and is willing to maintain communication and coordination with the American side over the issue on the peninsula," Xi was quoted as saying by state media.

[Neversoft]

Peace and stability would be preferable, but North Korea — or at least Kim Jong-un — is a loose canon. What many young people these days don't know is that, thirty years ago, South Korea was also under a dictatorship. It took years of struggle, but the people eventually led a successfull democracy movement. This is almost unthinkable in North Korea because the citizens lives are so closely monitored and controlled that revolution probably doesn't even cross their minds. Kim Jong-un is a mad man and I can't imagine any situation with North Korea ever being resolved peacefully.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I am unsure on the Korean situation. In one way, it does overtly threaten Great Powers but again backs this up by no action - but for how long? It is a difficult one. Ultimately though, I would not like to see Britain dragged into a conflict on the Korean peninsula because it's not in our sphere of influence, never has been and isn't in our interests.

The great powers in the region - China and Japan - must be the ones to take any(?) action. This is why Japan ought to be allowed to re-build her Imperial Navy and armed forces to levels of a great power rather than relying on the United States. The same applies to South Korea which has done less than it needs to for the situation it finds itself in because of the US umbrella.

The Trump foreign policy is quickly turning into the total opposite of what he promised whilst campaigning though, my opinion of him is sinking with every passing day. What happened to America first? Think of and focus on the factory workers in the rust belt states ho voted you into office to put them first instead of conflicts in the Levant and Korea. Can't we have some realism in foreign policy than this endless utopianism that never works?

[Landon]

The Trump foreign policy is quickly turning into the total opposite of what he promised whilst campaigning though, my opinion of him is sinking with every passing day. What happened to America first? Think of and focus on the factory workers in the rust belt states ho voted you into office to put them first instead of conflicts in the Levant and Korea. Can't we have some realism in foreign policy than this endless utopianism that never works?

I don't think the US should be offensive with NK unless we have been attacked. Then we need to play defense. Hopefully China and the US can figure something out together though.

Regardless of all of this, we can't afford to sit back and take a beating by another country. So I don't know. I'm with you on this, I can't make up my mind for sure.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't think the US should be offensive with NK unless we have been attacked. Then we need to play defense. Hopefully China and the US can figure something out together though.

Regardless of all of this, we can't afford to sit back and take a beating by another country. So I don't know. I'm with you on this, I can't make up my mind for sure.

But that's the point. North Korea isn't attacking and can't actually attack America apart from ships (which it has not done). It dares not to because it knows if it does then it'll be the last thing it ever does. So why is the administration getting itself involved in the area? He's dragging China into it and China for sure does not want the regime in the north to collapse due to the impending flood of refugees that would come sweeping across the Yellow River. It makes absolutely no sense just as it strikes on Syria made no sense.

If Trump wants to play Mr World Hero like George W Bush, Blair and Obama he should have stated that in his campaign and told Americans that he was willing to risk American boys for the sake of Syrian and Korean lives. But he didn't and that's pissing me off big time because if we'd have wanted two new wars then we might aswell have voted Hillary Clinton into office.

[Landon]

But that's the point. North Korea isn't attacking and can't actually attack America apart from ships (which it has not done). It dares not to because it knows if it does then it'll be the last thing it ever does. So why is the administration getting itself involved in the area? He's dragging China into it and China for sure does not want the regime in the north to collapse due to the impending flood of refugees that would come sweeping across the Yellow River. It makes absolutely no sense just as it strikes on Syria made no sense.

If Trump wants to play Mr World Hero like George W Bush, Blair and Obama he should have stated that in his campaign and told Americans that he was willing to risk American boys for the sake of Syrian and Korean lives. But he didn't and that's pissing me off big time because if we'd have wanted two new wars then we might aswell have voted Hillary Clinton into office.

What do you think about the nuke talks that NK is giving?

[scottish]

Wait, you mean politicians lie to get votes?

Unheard of.

[-:Undertaker:-]

What do you think about the nuke talks that NK is giving?

North Korea always does this with various threats, statements and botched missile launches but like I say the moment it ever dared would be the last thing it ever did. I am not a pacifist - I believe in the defensive policy of a Scorpion, defensive and quiet but a piercing and deadly sting if attacked/provoked. If Spain were to attack Gibraltar I would have no problem pressing the button to rain hellfire down on Madrid, or on Bueanos Aires in the case of the Falklands. But actually looking for conflict? It's absurd.

By all means develop missile shields and build up armed forces (this should be priority of Japan and South Korea) but don't kick it off. Wait. If an attack comes, respond so hard and heavily that they'll wish they never in the first place. Reasonable, I think.

[Landon]

North Korea always does this with various threats, statements and botched missile launches but like I say the moment it ever dared would be the last thing it ever did. I am not a pacifist - I believe in the defensive policy of a Scorpion, defensive and quiet but a piercing and deadly sting if attacked/provoked. If Spain were to attack Gibraltar I would have no problem pressing the button to rain hellfire down on Madrid, or on Bueanos Aires in the case of the Falklands. But actually looking for conflict? It's absurd.

By all means develop missile shields and build up armed forces (this should be priority of Japan and South Korea) but don't kick it off. Wait. If an attack comes, respond so hard and heavily that they'll wish they never in the first place. Reasonable, I think.

Sounds reasonable to me. The only argument that one could use against all of this in NK is that there are people suffering, and the government shouldn't be letting the citizens suffer, so another one should intervene and overthrow it?

[-:Undertaker:-]

Sounds reasonable to me. The only argument that one could use against all of this in NK is that there are people suffering, and the government shouldn't be letting the citizens suffer, so another one should intervene and overthrow it?

Well that's an argument, a interventionalist/utopian view of foreign policy. It's an argument that George W Bush, Tony Blair, Barack Obama, David Cameron and Francois Hollande all deployed in the cases of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria which have all worked out so well - and is it as simple as that? The last time I checked, President Trump is President of the United States and not of Korea. More to the point he was elected on a platform which specifically said no more ridiculous wars that we've seen under those before him.

It's like Syria. The Assad regime is horrible, sure. But the alternative is worse. That's the choice in realpolitik terms. There's no cute Trudeau-type liberal character there waiting in the wings to become President and walk down Damascus with a LGBT rainbow flag preaching for everyone to love eachother. Ain't gonna happen. Likewise in starting a war in Korea, yes North Korea is horrible but if a war happens you face having rockets raining down on Seoul. Why is it the US/UK call to make?