Talk Elections

I don’t think the talks are completely buried. However, seems like Kim Jong-Un is trying to push from a position of strength so as to get a watered down deal/keep the nukes. With this leadership in the White House; there is no political capital, no consistency, and no actual merit to threats bringing the  parties on the table as equals.

Also, how things stand, this belongs on the Int. discussion board.

At this point, North Korea can’t really survive without the sanctions but there really isn’t a way to ever get them to get rid of the weapons. Eventually, they are either going to have to be left alone or there will eventually be a confrontation.

 Kim Jong-Un played Trump like a fiddle.

Is it bad that I don't care?

I don't care that you don't care.

At this point, what does it matter? We all NK is always going to develop missiles, nukes, and other weapons. As long as they don't sell to terrorists, and if the country collapses someone responsible can swoop-in to prevent them from getting into the wrong hands, what concern is it of the US? Perhaps NK's militarization is the only thing that has prevented a very bloody war from erupting there over the last 15-20 years. Perhaps my disgust at the state of both US and world politics has just eaten away at me over the last few years. I don't know. I don't feel the energy or the reason to be outraged over this right now.

Why is it important to you?

Because the country is ruled by a bloodthirsty and inhumane despot.  The more weapons they have, the more they become a potential danger to the countries around them and a destabilizing influence to the rest of the world.  And the more it solidifies the NK government's security, the more it ensures that their own people will continue to suffer.

Yes, NK is probably in the "worst 5" countries list, possibly #1.

But do we think they'll act irrationally when they're surrounded by nuclear powers (and South Korea/Japan, which are very close allies of the US, with the US storing its nukes there)?

I don't want their government to be secure, I want them to change for the better, but would a total collapse of their government be in anyone's interest? They've already gotten to a certain point in militarization, and they're never going to take any meaningful steps backwards.

What do you think US policy towards North Korea should be? And how should we respond to this in particular?

That's the thing -- I don't have a huge amount of confidence that they'll act rationally.  If I did, I'd worry less about them.  It's possible that I may be underestimating their rationality.

The last question is a fair one and I don't have a specific answer.  I think an effective and long-lasting solution must involve all of China, Russia, and the U.S. acting together to provide a combination of pressure and incentives for NK to reduce their military threat and improve their human rights situation.

I used to be very doubtful of their rationality, with others saying I underestimated them and it's a strategy. Their response to Trump so far has given me confidence that they do have a strategy and are acting rationally.

I agree with your answer, though I would add that the Obama administration (and I think Clinton before him, and to some extent Bush) were doing exactly that, at least on the military angle (hard to convince China & Russia to put pressure on them on human rights). And it wasn't very successful, it was one of the few areas that Obama even admitted he didn't do a good job of wrapping-up in time for his successor.

Thanks for having a meaningful conversation with me, btw.

Oh, great -- the President's supposed good buddy still plays with bad-boy toys.

He's not going to give up his nukes. He's seen what happened to Saddam and Gaddafi when they gave up their WMDs.

We may debate whether intervention in Libya was justified or not, but it essentially wrecked all future efforts to convince various regimes to disarm.

I'm not a fan of nuclear weapons spreading everywhere, but I'm surprised at people who can't understand why countries are unwilling to give up their nuclear capabilities. It's not just about various unpleasant regimes. Ukraine had voluntarily gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for the Budapest Memorandum which proved absolutely useless. When "nuclear disarmament" is concerned, there's a great deal of hypocrisy. We have five "recognized" nuclear powers essentially enforcing their unfair advantage over the rest of the world by denying the nukes to everybody else. It's not about peace or stability, it's just about five or seven powers cementing their superiority.

In related news, North Korea says it is willing to continue the talks with the United States provided that Mike Pompeo is not involved/present:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korea-rejects-pompeo-nuclear-talks-wants-someone-more-careful-n995706

Accurate description.