Quote (thesnipa @ Apr 26 2018 06:28pm)
I agree with everything up to there. not because that's not my wish but because it's fairly impossible. The kims have killed too many people in too horrific of ways to stay in power forever. I don't think its the goal of the Trump administration to remove the regime, that's a very dicey move. But i think the actual peace on the peninsula requires that. the only feasible plan is to carve out a kingdom for Kim and his regime in the form of a high profile cushy prison for them to live out their days in while ceding the control to the south. that's a hard sell for any negotiator but we're closer to that with Un than we ever could have been with Il.
as sad as it makes me i'm convinced this is all an act by kim to stave off invasion chances. even tho that is a low chance Trump is more likely (in his mind) than obama-Clinton-bush ever were. SK is a more important partner now than ever, and China is in the mix. shit's getting stickier year by year just based on the overlying politics of the region, then toss in Russia and it gets really sticky at times.
Kim is going to "denuclearize" and just hold his nukes, stop tests, get cash, oil, and supplies, then resume the status quo for the rest of the Trump presidency.
The situation is getting stickier indeed, players in the area are trying to gain more power in one way or another. And the US, is trying to not see their power being reduced in the area. The argument for the Kim regime needed to be toppled to reach the "peace" you mention is a reason for the impossible state to need the nukes. And indeed they will not dismantle them all. Or they will and at the same time make a few of the improved versions to stock them up. The term "denuclearize" is the newly achieved negotiation position, from where "benefits" are given to NK. Yet a better representation is: it will be used to lift the harsh sanctions. (Probably somewhat similar to the Iran deal). Where Iran is still being held in a somewhat cushy prison within the deal, that would be a bit different in NK. They'd have to move forwards into allowing checks on their facilities. And I don't see that happening easily. Yet I do see progress possible with Un in office, although I saw that with Il as well. It has not always him breaking made deals. Bush did the same.
The thing is though, if we are setting in a path of de-escalation, then I'd be for giving some of the economy back, I'm expecting that to save quite a few lives in NK.
This post was edited by Knoppie on Apr 26 2018 02:18pm