The missile launch makes the WaPo think of President Trump. It makes me think of Bob Gallucci.
1. I had a course from him at Swarthmore College.
2. He negotiated the deal in 1994 that was hailed as stopping North Korea’s nuclear program. North Korea got some badly-needed oil shipments, and we got their promise to stop enriching uranium.
3. About a week ago, he co-authored a bipartisan letter to President Trump urging negotiations with North Korea.
A cynical view is that the chances of a U.S. attack are inversely proportional to President Trump’s perception of his popularity. In that case, if you want to minimize the chances of war, you should be telling President Trump that he is very secure in his position and the American people are very happy with him.
Ten years ago, the Capitol Steps came up with How do you solve a problem like Korea? I haven’t watched it. But I knew that if I Googled that title I would find something.
How about a different analysis of the “Problem?”
Analyze: “take apart” the elements that comprise the “problem.”
How many of them represent elements that ORIGINATE from China (e.g. mobile launchers, multi-stage booster engines, fuel formulations, etc.)?
Do any of the actions, by timing, extent, or from nature, correlate to distract attention from Chinese actions (political or military – including internal affairs)?
Is it not more likely that China (its Politburo) is actually using North Korea as a “Proxy Provocateur” and providing N K with both materials and support for those ends?
Suppose we were to begin looking on the actions of N K as acts ** by** China, using N K for purposes of “deniability,” would we develop different responses and “approaches” to that Politburo?
Are we looking at legerdemain – keep the “audience” focused on what the left hand or the assistant is doing whilst the right hand does its “magic?”
If we had Hillary in office she would be wittingly or unwittingly taking the bait. On the plus side we wouldn’t be antagonizing Russia.
The problem with neoconservatives is they can’t distinguish between the principles, the realpolitik, and the kayfabe, or they pretend not to.
In that case, if you want to minimize the chances of war, you should be telling President Trump that he is very secure in his position and the American people are very happy with him.
Yes, we must give Donald Trump his safe spaces for world peace!
Structure a bet. He is not the fragile ego you and Arnold are implying. We need a way that you might be convinced by him doing something that surprises you.
Well, he could surprise me as I suspect if he got a lot more quiet and did more behind the scenes work his approvals would go up to 55%. And if Melania hid his cell phone charger.
Of course he could have done this before January he might be 60%+. However, remember Michael Flynn is basically holed up with Robert Mueller right now.
They aren’t getting anything from Flynn.
And he had a chance to over-react in Syria already and he chose to thread the needle. He probably even called Putin to have all personnel vacate the air base
“We need a way that you might be convinced by him doing something that surprises you.”
Laugh at his own expense. Display humility.
Steve
I’ll bet anyone that Trump won’t wag the dog. However, if NK poses an actual threat it may be hard to tell the difference.
Test this for yourself: I believe a good predictor of Trump’s tangible actions (ad opposed to his kayfabe) is to ask “what is in it for America.”
Just like Osama Bin Laden, try taking him at his word.
I can’t tell if you mean Point 2 as a positive or a negative.