Clearly, there's been a failure in foreign policy towards North Korea for letting them get this far. What would anyone attribute this failure to?

Exerting military power over or making specific military threats to NK doesn't bring the profits shamefully toppling regimes in countries like Iraq, Syria, and Libya does.

Having China as your next door neighbor also has its perks.

Sure, and that's a great combination of having no financial incentive to try and cower NK--the military's main purpose is to keep banks and corporations rich--and no reason to think doing so would be successful.

What would anyone attribute this failure to? — Posty McPostface

The fact that the Western powers are humane enough not to have reduced the nation to ash anytime in the last 40 years or so.

What would anyone attribute this failure to?
— Posty McPostface

The fact that the Western powers are humane enough not to have reduced the nation to ash anytime in the last 40 years or so.

The Western powers are far from humane. They joined with America to effectively destroy Iraq and kill millions of Iraqis, leaving the nation a disastrous training ground for ISIS. The United States alone have contributed to murderous coups in countries like Chile, where they--the CIA--oversaw Pinochet's death squads that murdered tens of thousands. They--and the CIA--contributed to murderous coups in Honduras and El Salvador as well. That doesn't even mention what they did to Vietnam and Cambodia and Laos with their carpet bombing and use of horrid weapons like napalm. And now Trump is continuing Obama's shameful bombing of Syria and Yemen.

That is far from humane activity.

I wish China could just take over North Korea and turn the country from a 3'rd world into the modern era. Or just make it a province of China. Problem solved?

The problem being that China has no reason to invade, as the costs outweigh the benefits. What does China get out of it besides a bunch of dead soldiers, expended resources, and potential international backlash? A wartorn undeveloped land with an extremely unpredictable population that does not want them? And that's not even including the nuclear threat.

And yet NK has nuclear capability in part due to financial support from China. Instead of feeding their people, they build ICBMs. Surely China has some influence.

Clearly, there's been a failure in foreign policy towards North Korea for letting them get this far. What would anyone attribute this failure to? — Posty McPostface

Actually there's no real failure on the part of the US. You hear of the line that "Well, they saw what happened to Ghaddafi", but that's not the real reason here.

North Korea is a brutal dictatorship ruled by one family that desperately needs the threat of impending attack from the US to give the reason for it's own existence and the militarized society that the country is. It's truly an Orwellian country.

Just think about it if there would be a peace agreement: assume that North Korea would sign a peace agreement with the US and South Korea, the US would withdraw it's forces from South Korea (something that likely Americans wouldn't oppose) and both Koreas would agree on drastic reductions on the size of their militaries and military arsenal. Ok, then what for the Hermit kingdom? After peace, what would think this police state that punishes children and relatives of an individual that are deemed "enemy of the state" would do?

Families that rule countries with violence have a real difficulty of carrying out true reform as and kind of reform effort puts their grip on to power in question. That the present leader has to kill people close to him just underlines how shaky their powerbase is. Just look at Syria and it's Western educated son of a dictator, who earlier wanted to bring reforms to his country. Now he is fighting a brutal civil war that has nearly reaches (if not reached) a genocidal level in deaths and ethnic (or religious) cleansing.

Basically the Korean conflict is this frozen conflict were everybody wants things to stay as they are because they fear of things getting even worse.

I never said China doesn't have interests in the region. I said that China has no reason to invade or somehow take control over North Korea. They have little reason at all, in fact, to get involved that much. China's only interest is that war does not break out and cause economic damage.

North Korea, as pointed to above, operates under strict military power, constantly in a heightened state of war. Honestly, I think Kim Jung Un wants a MAD scenario with the United States because it gives North Korea a lot more bargaining power and leeway. With threat of nuclear war, North Korean leadership gets both more international power through threats and further support internally as it looks like North Korea is rubbing shoulders with the big countries on equal terms.

China has been involved. It funds NK because it doesn't want a failed nuclear state on its border.

I think Kim is upset about that movie: The Interview. No, really.

China's only interest is that war does not break out and cause economic damage. — Chany

China can allways use the North Korea card:

Let's say that Trump gets angry at China for some reason and starts imposing something extremely annoying to the Chinese. The Chinese can wait that the tension on the Korean Peninsula gets really bad and when the US asks to China to use it's leverage over North Korea, then China can respond with "OK, but you have to get rid of this extremely annoying thing Trump did, then we help you".

Hence basically North Korea is a bargaining chip for China.

That's very interesting, but when exactly has China ever used its leverage to help out the US? They're one of our worst "allies" in both they're pirating and hacking of our computer/intellectual properties ands servers and their awful human rights record that is just as bad as North Korea's.

That's very interesting, but when exactly has China ever used its leverage to help out the US? They're one of our worst "allies" in both they're pirating and hacking of our computer/intellectual properties ands servers and their awful human rights record that is just as bad as North Korea's. — Thanatos Sand

Well, China didn't like the nuclear tests for one thing, even if the countries have been allies. Just to give one example, China has supported UN sanctions towards North Korea (Iike UN Security Council Resolution 1718). Just to refrain from using their veto is one way China can help the US and it can do more if it goes along with US initiatives. Of course the main thing is that North Korea is an bulwark against the US for China. Just think if the North Korean regime would fall and South Korea would swallow North Korea (just like East Germany was swallowed By West Germany). Then the Chinese would find US Troops and those Thaad-launchers on the Yalu-river. Not a nice scenario for the Chinese.

And really, you aren't an ally to China and China isn't your ally either. Even Vietnam is nowdays more of an "ally" to the US than China is.

And really, you aren't an ally to China and China isn't your ally either. — ssu

Who would our common enemy be? Aliens? Anyway, the US and China are joined at the hip economically. Kind of like Siamese twins... if one dies, the other is in big trouble.

That's very interesting, but when exactly has China ever used its leverage to help out the US? They're one of our worst "allies" in both they're pirating and hacking of our computer/intellectual properties ands servers and their awful human rights record that is just as bad as North Korea's.
— Thanatos Sand
Well, China didn't like the nuclear tests for one thing, even if the countries have been allies. Just to give one example, China has supported UN sanctions towards North Korea (Iike UN Security Council Resolution 1718). Just to refrain from using their veto is one way China can help the US and it can do more if it goes along with US initiatives. Of course the main thing is that North Korea is an bulwark against the US for China. Just think if the North Korean regime would fall and South Korea would swallow North Korea (just like East Germany was swallowed By West Germany). Then the Chinese would find US Troops and those Thaad-launchers on the Yalu-river. Not a nice scenario for the Chinese.

But all these things were to China's benefit, not just to ours. So, my point still stands that China has never really done anything for our benefit as an ally, as some of our actual allies have. I'm aware no ally does something solely out of altruism, but many--like England, Germany, or Canada--have come to our aid with the awareness of their benefit from both our benefit and our alliance. China has never shown itself to think in those terms, as they continue to wage piracy/hacking warfare against at us and laugh at our pathetic attempts to make them adhere to some semblance of a human rights standard.

And I agree with Mongrel that we're joined at the hip, but more like Siamese cat twins joined at the hip, constantly hissing at each other and working to be the strongest one in the "joining."

And I agree with Mongrel that we're joined at the hip, but more like Siamese cat twins — Thanatos Sand

Sounds like we need a surgeon. :D

:)

I can just imagine the conversation:

'Jim, we don't we nuke him? Pumped up little prick, doesn't he know who he's messing with? Yes....I know the Chinese will freak out, but fuck them....nobody can make threats like that to us and get away with it. I want to nuke 'em, that will wipe the smile of that idiot's face....'

But all these things were to China's benefit, not just to ours. So, my point still stands that China has never really done anything for our benefit as an ally, as some of our actual allies have. I'm aware no ally does something solely out of altruism, but many--like England, Germany, or Canada--have come to our aid with the awareness of their benefit from both our benefit and our alliance. — Thanatos Sand

China being onboard with UN resolutions that the US has pushed for is clearly to the benefit of the US. Because I'm not convinced that North Korea poses any threat to China in any way (other than some misguided missile test hitting their countryside).

Besides, more proper term for China and the US would be that they are rivals. And rivals can have mutual agendas that benefit both of them. Rival countries don't have to enemies. Furthermore, that you have strong economic ties basically means that the relationship isn't seen only through the prism of national security and defence policy.

its also to the great benefit of China, so you're not even reading my posts. And they are a significant threat to China, both because of nukes and erratic leader and their being much more Communist than China.

And your second paragraph neither counters nor addresses my post.

Does game theory have anything to say about possible options? If we assume both sides are rational, it seems to rule out war.

2013 article: http://www.newyorker.com/news/evan-osnos/north-koreas-nuclear-game-theory

Thanatos Sand, North Korea is not a threat to China. China has it's own nuclear deterrence and the North Korean nukes aren't there against them. These two countries have good relations. They have been allies. It's the US that is the possible threat for both countries.

Is the UK a threat to the US? Or France? Both have nuclear weapons. Yet if they would be quarreling with Russia and using similar rhetoric against Russia (as North Korea has against the US), the US likely would be pissed off. But they themselves are not a threat to the US. And neither is North Korea to China.

An article in The Diplomat puts it well:

in essence, the bilateral ties between China and North Korea are not challenged by any major, hard-to-bridge differences, especially ideological differences, such as those China has with the United States, South Korea, and Japan. Relations between the two countries are only beset by North Korea’s nuclear development – a multilateral dispute.

China and North Korea will not turn away from each other over North Korea’s nuclear programs. In fact, the political and pragmatic logic behind China-North Korean relations remain unchanged.

See whole article here

Furthermore, it's important to look at the crisis from the viewpoint of China:

To begin with, China sees the U.S. and South Korea as the main instigators of the conflict, not the North, so it is up to us to lower our guns before we can expect Pyongyang to do the same. More important, for China, the main security risk posed by North Korea is the potential collapse of the Kim regime, not the development of ICBMs. Accordingly, while China could theoretically strangle the North Korean economy with a total blockade, it has no desire to do so, as it fears this would precipitate that collapse.

See here

If Trump wants to be tough, then just should up and do an underground nuclear test. After all, the US hasn't ratified (even if it has signed) the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Then just watch how terrified people would be.

After that it would be great to sit down with the North Koreans.

I've read that the NK plan to fire 4 missiles towards Guam. They study the US well enough to know that the US will react, but not by starting a war, but perhaps by trying to shoot down the 4 missiles. NK's taunt seems to be directed at US's highly taunted Thaad system. US military claims great success with the system, I think we may have a chance to see if it does as well in real action, not as a carefully set up test. Of course there is a question if NK can even launch 4 missiles successful.

The NK is good at embarrassing the US. It captured the Pueblo way back in the 60's and we negotiated the release of the crew who were tortured. It took a year of negotiation and NK kept the boat as a trophy. In 1969 NK shot down EC-121 over the sea of Japan killing all 31 aboard. Nixon staged a show of strength but he did not more than that.

If NK shoots any missiles toward Guam and US (or its surrogate Japan) do not make an effort to disrupt the test, I think they will consider that they have demonstrated our impotence, not just to them self but also to China & Russia.

SSU, of course NK is a threat to China since NK can't be expected to be rationally intimidated by MAD and has less prosperity to lose. They also have much less invested in secondary countries than China.

And England is a terrible parallel, since they have proven themselves legitimate allies.

Do you think Trump will attack if Kim Jong Un threatens again?