We all mostly suspected Drumpf was insane, but his bombastic, ignorant rhetoric yesterday proved it beyond a doubt and showed why this screwball needs to be put into a straitjacket asap. His blabbering about raining "fire and fury ...the likes of which have never been seen before" emulated Kim Jong Un himself. As one commentator put it "it was as if Trump looked at himself in the mirror and saw Kim Jong Un"" The problem is that this game is deadly serious and even had former Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, saying that he's frightened - given our commander-in -chief has no sense, and basically controls the nuclear codes.
That this cockeyed numskull already (yesterday morning) leaked classified satellite information (to do with spotting N. Korean patrol boats) in a retweet on 'Fox 'n Friends' was bad enough. It confirmed his unreliability as a leader as well as his lack of judgment and instability. He is, basically, not a man to be trusted and certainly not in a major crisis such as we are facing now. Indeed, 61 percent in a recent poll expressed unease in "Dump's" ability to deal with North Korea. In most other nations such a vote of no confidence would see him replaced.
Sadly, not even his new "minder"- Gen. Kelly - was able to stop this crazy fool from engaging his Twitter account and - as noted on 'Morning Joe' - jeopardizing U.S. assets and methods.
Then, ensconced at his vacation getaway club at Bedminster, NJ Trump told journalists
“North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States, They will be met with fire and the fury like the world has never seen.”
In other words, this certifiable maniac is vowing nuclear retribution against the North Koreans merely for making threats. Try to process that, and the level of mental derangement and lack of judgment to make such a remark, broadcast worldwide. In the wake of this monkey's performance John McCain told an Arizona radio station:
"I don’t know what he’s saying and I’ve long ago given up trying to interpret what he says. That kind of rhetoric, I’m not sure how it helps.”
Well, that's the point! It doesn't help, only further fuels the crisis and ramps up the temperature.
As I posted earlier, this hotheaded maggot doesn't possess the skill, background historical knowledge or intelligence to steer clear of a conflagration with a nuclear state that would unleash a pitiless assault not on the U.S. (which is currently too far away to strike with a functioning ICBM) but on its South Korean ally. Specifically, the 25 million citizens of Seoul, the "most densely populated city on Earth."
When asked in an MSNBC interview back in April if Trump would actually attack North Korea, former CIA North Korea specialist Sue Mi Terry responded:
“I can’t see him following through on this and that is the problem with the brinksmanship policy. Because you’re putting yourself in a bind. You will either have to back down and lose credibility or you are stuck on a ledge with a military option which is very, very risky.
North Korea is not Syria. It’s not Afghanistan. It’s going to have very devastating consequences. North Korea will retaliate to any kind of military option. They will retaliate against South Korea given seventy percent of its ground forces are deployed within 100 kilometers (60 miles) of the DMZ. And there’s twenty thousand U.S. military in South Korea and twenty million people in Seoul”
Other experts on North Korea have also warned that this aggressive rhetoric could backfire on Trump, convincing Kim Jong-Un that his regime is in imminent jeopardy and triggering what he sees as a pre-emptive attack. This is the biggest danger. Given the North is all about survival, anything perceived as an imminent threat to that survival would unleash all their weapons in a last ditch preemptive attack. If the U.S. then responded with a full scale nuclear response to obliterate the totalitarian state it could also draw in the Chinese and even the Russians. At the end we could be looking at a full, all- out thermonuclear war with more than 9,500 hydrogen weapons exchanged.
Daryl Kimball, the head of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said - in response to Trump's reckless rhetoric:
“It is dangerous and reckless and counterproductive for Donald Trump to threaten the annihilation of North Korea. What we need is a dialogue to reduce tension and avoid catastrophic miscalculation. We are currently on the road to a conflict and we have to get to the off-ramp.”
The North Korean regime quickly responded, matching Trump’s bellicosity by saying it was “carefully examining” a plan for a missile strike on the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam. In a separate statement, a military official was quoted as saying Pyongyang could carry out a "pre-emptive operation if the US showed signs of provocation”.
And there we have the linchpin to massive nuclear war, if one side misjudges the intentions of the other.
National security advisor H.R. McMaster has said that the administration is weighing all options, including a “preventative war”.
East Asia nuclear non-proliferation expert Jeffrey Lewis argues it is already too late for that, quoted in the UK Guardian as saying:
“The pre- in preventative means ‘before’,If you start the preventative war after they have the nuclear ICBM’s, it’s just a regular old nuclear war.”
Lest people not take this seriously, the Pentagon - as reported last night - is already trying to prepare military options for Trump. All of this is under the rubric of "preventative war" Three days ago in the WSJ John Bolton actually presented these "options". It is as if the military is prepared to back Trump at the expense of the 25 million in Seoul and environs. Presumably they will be "collateral damage" if the lunatic gets his way. Where is the sanity? Let's recall also that last year the same military minds were appalled when Trump asked: "If we have nuclear weapons why can't we use them?" Gen. Michael Hayden actually responded that the current U.S. nuclear response system is no longer constructed for deliberation but "rapid and effective" action. In other words, once a decision to launch is made, it's all over.
The last time we came this close to nuclear catastrophe was in October, 1962 with the Cuban Missile Crisis. On October 27, 1962 U2 pilot Rudolph Andersen Jr. conducted a reconnaissance flight over Cuba when he was targeted and shot down by two Soviet SA2 surface to air missiles. The Cubans and Russians had fired the first shot in the drawn out Missile crisis (now in its 12th day) and the Joint Chiefs pressured JFK to strike back - with air strikes. Kennedy, however, correctly suspected that Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had not authorized the downing of unarmed reconnaissance planes, and he didn’t want to abandon diplomacy. He resisted the Joint Chiefs - especially Gen. Curtis Lemay (who actually had the temerity to compare him to Neville Chamberlain) which is why we can discuss the events today.
It is not at all clear that Trump possesses anywhere near the sobriety and sense of JFK. Which also means it is not at all evident that he can avoid getting us into a nuclear war. Maybe in this case, one of Trump's generals (Kelly?) will pull the nuclear football out of his hands before he can do final disastrous damage.
Or at least we can hope