gut;1866291 wrote:Yeah, typical foreign policy to kick the can down the road until someone gets stuck having to do something (as Bush had to do after 9/11 because Clinton failed to do much about Bin Laden).
Note that with the Iran nuclear agreement, Trump reversed his campaign rhetoric and said "I'm good with it". Kick the can down the road.
But now Trump cannot sit on his hands and let NK develop the capability to launch a nuclear strike on mainland US. It's a rather untenable situation, but the left is predictably going to criticize any choice he chooses, eventhough I would contend that career staffers always have and continue to be the driving force behind any decisions (see above re: Iran). No one, not even Trump, just ignores or dismisses the advice from staffers who have spent their 30-yr career studying NK and SE Asia.
However this all plays out, I think we eventually see a repeat at some point with Iran.
I'm with a large portion of that.
I would just add that we are living with a nuclear North Korea with an ICBM and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. They have advanced them too far to just give them up. Even Bob Gates has come to that conclusion in a recent WSJ piece.
I'll also agree that Trump has agreed so far to stay in the Iran deal, but jury is still out if he sticks to it as he has to certify every 90-180 days I believe. So, he could easily end the deal if he is ticked off one day.
I'll link the two in this way. If the U.S. pulls out of the Iran deal, which has international support, why would North Korea agree to any sort of agreement with the U.S. if they know Trump will just pull out of it at any moment?
