The Department of State II: Electric Boogaloo

[Terry the Fat Shark]

I have to say, I am getting very worried by the lack of comment by the White House on the North Korea issue. We have 13 nuclear missiles here, which means the fate of the world is at stake. This is above and beyond "non-intervention", this is about the lives of not only those in Asia, but if we see those nuclear missles heading here, ourselves. I have a couple of possible solutions that I would've loved to present to the NSC, but since it's abolition, I would enjoy presenting them to yourself and the President at the nearest hour, if accepted.

I look forward to a peaceful resolution to the matter.

That is fine, but regardless as stated in the GM report my official and security based stance is "not getting involved", although if you want to pick another side and create another inevitable crisis you can be my guest.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Prime Minister Truman, I am not going to choose a side in the conflict. Secretary of State TedBessell and I are contacting China and South Korea to make sure we continue to be in communication, but we aren't going to escalate tensions on the Korean Peninsula or make an even worse enemy if we choose the wrong side, that would be the worst possible option.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Of course, my philosophy is that we should only go to war if we or our allies are attacked. If North Korea has the audacity to attack South Korea, Japan, or US, we will have all options on the table to strike back.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

DFW, I consider myself a non-interventionist, but there's no way you can actually think this is the best idea, is there? I strongly encourage you to reconsider this decision.

I'm not sure what you mean here, there is no reason for us to act in a substantial way (IE non-diplomatically) unless we are attacked or we have evidence that an attack is coming that can be seriously backed up. Non-interventionists aren't actually non-interventionists unless they carry out their belief.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Non-interventionism literally means that you still diplomatically deal with things but that you do not intervene in wars and such, we still have alliances which are vital and thus we will defend the alliances if needed. What I am saying to be clear (and not sure people need me to keep repeating the same thing over and over to understand this) is that we will continue to speak with China and South Korea to stay on the same page while monitoring the situation in North Korea. We will not send troops into North Korea and we will not bomb North Korea et al. As I said before, if North Korea attacks or there is evidence we are about to attack, then we will get involved.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Just read Reply #25 and you will see what the plan is.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Just read Reply #25 and you will see what the plan is.

Not really, no. I understand that the administration is communicating with China and South Korea; it is not clear to me if we are attempting to resolve the crisis, or simply watching and waiting. I apologize if I'm badgering you, I just find the whole situation interesting and I'm curious.

Ah ok, at the moment we are monitoring and waiting to see how the situation evolves before taking any possible actions, I prefer to leave it to China and South Korea (along with other potential members on the world state, including Russia) to see what they would like to do as they are much closer than we are and thus much more at risk of a possible attack.