Old 24th Aug 2018, 15:54
  #2454 (permalink)  
ethicalconundrum
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 90
In the strategic-global-politic sense, what has it cost the US? Basically - nothing. NK has for now stopped lobbing missiles into the sea of Japan, they haven't tested any nukes(that I'm aware of), and there is some modest cross-border cooperation going on with the South Korean brothers. All we've done is deferred our training with SK, and we did that voluntarily. There has been no quid-pro-quo, and anyone that's bellyaching about the lack of advancement in the de-nuclear talks is pie in the sky thinking it would be light turning off a light bulb switch.

I knew, and most people with any sense of global-politic knew that diplomacy and changing of the ways in the hermit kingdom were going to be slow, and fractious. Maybe the MSM thought that one visit by Trump, and a reduction in our aggressive military policy with the south was going to be all it took to change 70 years of belligerence. I just googled it, and the 'tear down this wall' speech was June of 87. The wall didn't come down until Nov 89. Almost two and a half years. It was another 2 years, in the Bush term before Glasnost got a hold, and the Soviet system started to crumble.

Lets just all step back for a few months. Let the dips do their job. It's not costing us much more than plane fuel and some travel expenses right now. Trump didn't offer any money, lessening of trade restrictions, overt support, or any type of economic support for NK because I'm pretty sure he KNEW that to do any of those things would show weakness. Nothing has changed in our policy over there except our deferring of the training. We can start that back up again in a matter of days, should NK decide to go back to being asshats.
ethicalconundrum is offline