Home | About | Donate

Should Limiting North Korea’s Nuclear Ambitions Be the Responsibility of the U.S. Government?


#1

Should Limiting North Korea’s Nuclear Ambitions Be the Responsibility of the U.S. Government?

Lawrence Wittner

Threatening North Korea with destruction is remarkably counter-productive.

To leave the world’s future in the hands of nationalist blowhards or even prudent practitioners of traditional national statecraft will simply continue the drift toward catastrophe.

#2

#3

The USA has exactly as much right to limit North Korea’s nuclear ambitions as North Korea has to limit the USA’s nuclear ambitions. That is, none whatsoever.

The responsibility of the U.S. government is not to act as
keeper of the world, but instead to start cleaning up its own increasingly violent society by demonstrating to the world that it is a truly peaceful nation.


#4

Yes, We the People must Give Peace A Chance.

The Military must be brought home. There is much work here to be done.

The World will manage without our Agression.


#5

The US has been ignoring the rule of international law for some time - to its extreme detriment.

From our Middle East actions in particular, the negative consequences, some dire, have been beyond assessment…

We and so many others would now be so much better off had we respected and complied with international law. Lawless rule by the biggest guy on the block just doesn’t work well.


#6

This article says the threat to North Korea is “Trump’s policy.”

It fails to point out that Trump’s policy was the policy of Harry S. Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Herbert Walker Bush, Bill Clinton, George Walker Bush, and Barak Obama.

It has always been the policy of the United States to destroy entirely the nation of North Korea if it is aggressive. Truman actually did that. The rest threatened to do it.

The difference with Trump is that he is a blunt and obtuse spokesman as he spells out the U.S. policy while the previous presidents have either kept silent or explained it with finesse.


#7

Professor Wittner is right of course. The United Nations needs the full support of all its member states. The original purpose of the United Nations was to prevent another World War, after two horrific wars in less than 30 years. Unfortunately, it has been derided and sabotaged from the beginning, primarily by “Conservatives”, mostly in the U.S.!


#8

The best responsibility the U.S. can do with regards to nuclear weapons is to stop overthrowing governments that willingly give up their nuclear and chemical weapons and sign a deal like the one that was passing along in the U.N. that was against nuclear weapons. Until that happens no other country in the world with nuclear ambitions have any incentive to give up such weapons. But no that would require the U.S. to address one of its hypocrisies, which the “exceptional nation” just can’t do.


#9

Counterproductive… if you want peace, but not if you want a total world war with China and Russia… be careful : there is a bunch of psychopaths behind Trump.


#10

They all don’t want destroy “agressive” nation, they all want destroy COMMUNIST nation, like Cuba. They never thaught defensive, but offensive, and “government change” is not possible (like cuba and more than 600 assassination attempted or assisted by the CIA against Fidel Castro.