Unless Kim wants the "Libya solution" that professional idiot John Bolton offered NK, he's gonna hold onto the nukes.
Again, I should point out that Libya disarmed long before the upheaval and the threat of nukes would have likely done little to stop the upheaval (other than possibly discouraging outsiders from provoking it)
Well yeah, just keeping outside nations from getting involved at all is a pretty major consideration.
Zeus posted...
streamofthesky posted...
Even if that's true, why would he give them up? Smarter to just act like he's being peaceful now, but insist on keeping the stockpile. He just won't do any testing now in return for some trade/relief. Then at least other countries can't be sure they don't work and he keeps the lie alive. Makes others think twice about taking military action against him.
If we can convince him to discontinue further activity, that's a huge net win.
Definitely, it is. But actually giving up his nukes completely and/or admitting they're unusable anymore would be pretty dumb on Kim's part. I'm fine w/ turning NK into another "mutually assured destruction" sort of peace situation. Not as good as no nuclear threat at all, but better than remaining hostile.
If it does happen b/c NK ran into such issues w/ their nuclear program, then it came about as a fluke and nothing more. I'm fine w/ that. But don't you dare go claiming Trump is to thank for the peace deal if so.
We do have to thank him for not screwing up something that was handed to him on a silver platter. ---