U.S. Ambassador to U.N. says time for China to act, Japan PM Abe speaks with Trump

[webfact]

U.S. Ambassador to U.N. says time for China to act, Japan PM Abe speaks with Trump

By Elaine Lies and Takaya Yamaguchi

 

Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) Hwasong-14 is pictured during its second test-fire in this undated picture provided by KCNA in Pyongyang on July 29, 2017. KCNA via Reuters/Files

 

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe spoke with U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday and agreed on the need for further action on North Korea just hours after the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations said the United States is "done talking about North Korea".

 

Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, said in a statement that China must decide if it is willing to back imposing stronger U.N. sanctions on North Korea over Friday night's long-range missile test, the second this month.

 

Any new U.N. Security Council resolution "that does not significantly increase the international pressure on North Korea is of no value," Haley said, adding that Japan and South Korea also needed to do more.

 

Abe told reporters following his conversation with Trump that repeated efforts by the international community to find a peaceful solution to the North Korean issue had yet to bear fruit in the face of Pyongyang's unilateral "escalation" of the situation.

 

"International society, including Russia and China, need to take this seriously and increase pressure," Abe said, adding that the two nations would take steps towards concrete action but did not give details.

 

Abe and Trump did not discuss military action against North Korea, nor what would constitute the crossing of a "red line" by Pyongyang, Deputy Chief Cabinet spokesman Koichi Hagiuda told reporters.

 

North Korea said on Saturday it had conducted another successful test of an intercontinental ballistic missile that proved its ability to strike the U.S. mainland, drawing a sharp warning from Trump and a rebuke from China.

 

Trump later wrote on Twitter that he was "very disappointed" in China and that Beijing had done "nothing" for the United States in regards to North Korea, something he would not allow to continue.

 

China has yet to officially respond to Trump's tweet, but State-run Chinese tabloid the Global Times said in a Monday editorial that Trump's "wrong tweet" was of no help to resolving the situation, and that he did not understand the issues.

 

"Pyongyang is determined to develop its nuclear and missile programme and does not care about military threats from the U.S. and South Korea. How could Chinese sanctions change the situation?" the paper, published by the ruling Communist Party's official People's Daily, added.

 

South Korean President Moon Jae-in, who is on vacation, planned to have a phone call with Trump soon, a senior official at the Presentital Blue House said.

 

"If the two heads of state talk, they will likely discuss their respective stances on North Korea, the U.S.-(South Korea's) alliance's standpoint on North Korea and other things including how to impose heavy sanctions."

 

The United States flew two supersonic B-1B bombers over the Korean peninsula in a show of force on Sunday in response to the missile test and the July 3 launch of the "Hwasong-14" rocket, the Pentagon said. The bombers took off from a U.S. air base in Guam, and were joined by Japanese and South Korean fighter jets during the exercise.

 

"North Korea remains the most urgent threat to regional stability," Pacific Air Forces commander General Terrence J. O'Shaughnessy said in a statement.

 

"If called upon, we are ready to respond with rapid, lethal, and overwhelming force at a time and place of our choosing."

 

(Additional reporting by Chang-ran Kim in TOKYO, Ben Blanchard in BEIJING and Christine Kim in SEOUL; Editing by Lincoln Feast)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-07-31

[Grouse]

Maybe, just maybe, now is the time for limited direct action. Inform NK in advance and state the strike is a one off limited punishment. Then totally destroy the facility that produces and/or launches the missiles. ANY response from NK would result in annihilation of Pyongyang. 

 

Time's up folks. Sanctions won't work. 200 cruise missiles might make the point.

[baboon]

18 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Maybe, just maybe, now is the time for limited direct action. Inform NK in advance and state the strike is a one off limited punishment. Then totally destroy the facility that produces and/or launches the missiles. ANY response from NK would result in annihilation of Pyongyang. 

 

Time's up folks. Sanctions won't work. 200 cruise missiles might make the point.

Why? They aren't breaking any laws. Who are we to tell other countries what weapons they can or can't have?

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, baboon said:

Why? They aren't breaking any laws. Who are we to tell other countries what weapons they can or can't have?

Why does NK need nuclear weapons?  They're protected by China.  Why do they need to threaten the US? 

 

The US is still reeling from the WTC attacks.  And Mr. Kim of NK isn't exactly a stable individual.  He's counterfeiting US dollars, selling nuclear technology to other countries, hacking into various countries computers, etc, etc, etc.

 

Where do you draw the line?

[baboon]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Why does NK need nuclear weapons?  They're protected by China.  Why do they need to threaten the US? 

 

The US is still reeling from the WTC attacks.  And Mr. Kim of NK isn't exactly a stable individual.  He's counterfeiting US dollars, selling nuclear technology to other countries, hacking into various countries computers, etc, etc, etc.

 

Where do you draw the line?

What does it matter why the DPRK need nuclear weapons? They want them and are entitled to have them, end of.

Why are the US threatening them, a far smaller, poorer and weaker nation?

[craigt3365]

It matters because they've said they'll use them against the US.  Japan and SK are also not happy.  The US could eliminate NK in a minute.  No threats are needed.  But when you threaten another country like NK has, you need to be ready for the fallout.

 

Be a good citizen of the world.  Which NK clearly is not.

 

Worth a read.  The people of NK deserve a better leader.  Impossible to argue that Mr. Kim is a good leader.  Impossible.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/18/how-does-north-korea-get-money-to-build-nuclear-weapons.html

[baboon]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

It matters because they've said they'll use them against the US.  Japan and SK are also not happy.  The US could eliminate NK in a minute.  No threats are needed.  But when you threaten another country like NK has, you need to be ready for the fallout.

 

Be a good citizen of the world.  Which NK clearly is not.

 

Worth a read.  The people of NK deserve a better leader.  Impossible to argue that Mr. Kim is a good leader.  Impossible.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/18/how-does-north-korea-get-money-to-build-nuclear-weapons.html

They have said they will use them on the US IN RETALIATION. Why would they want to wipe their county off the map by launching a first strike?

[craigt3365]

31 minutes ago, baboon said:

They have said they will use them on the US IN RETALIATION. Why would they want to wipe their county off the map by launching a first strike?

So if they are afraid of being wiped out after a first strike, why have them in the first place?  How about providing food for your people instead?  Stop counterfeiting money, drugs, etc.  Selling weapons to rogue African nations.  Not exactly a good citizen of the world.

 

And showing that movie with NYC being nuked wasn't exactly a smart thing to do. LOL  But then again, nobody's said their leader is smart.  He's far from it.

 

Why do you defend them so strongly?  At least admit they aren't perfect.  Just like the US isn't perfect.

[baboon]

9 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

So if they are afraid of being wiped out after a first strike, why have them in the first place?  How about providing food for your people instead?  Stop counterfeiting money, drugs, etc.  Selling weapons to rogue African nations.  Not exactly a good citizen of the world.

 

And showing that movie with NYC being nuked wasn't exactly a smart thing to do. LOL  But then again, nobody's said their leader is smart.  He's far from it.

 

Why do you defend them so strongly?  At least admit they aren't perfect.  Just like the US isn't perfect.

Why have them? They saw what happened to Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddafi, thought 'No thanks', and with good reason.

That aside, with nuclear weapons they are headline news all over the world. Without them they are another Chad or Angola, to be ignored.

Edited July 31, 2017 by baboon

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, baboon said:

Why have them? They saw what happened to Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gaddafi, thought 'No thanks', and with good reason.

That aside, with nuclear weapons they are headline news all over the world. Without them they are another Chad or Angola, to be ignored.

You're defending 2 horrible and insane dictators?  Seriously?  They made their own fate.  Time more dictators like this were gotten rid of.  The world would be a better place.

 

You seem to gravitate to countries with nut job dictators.  Chad and Angola?  NK is right at the same level with these guys. Sadly.

 

[baboon]

20 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

You're defending 2 horrible and insane dictators?  Seriously?  They made their own fate.  Time more dictators like this were gotten rid of.  The world would be a better place.

 

You seem to gravitate to countries with nut job dictators.  Chad and Angola?  NK is right at the same level with these guys. Sadly.

 

So let's turn this around - Why are you defending the military industrial complex, the war profiteers and a country who routinely invades / interferes in the affairs of other sovereign nations? It's a two way street...

[craigt3365]

Just now, baboon said:

So let's turn this around - Why are you defending the military industrial complex, the war profiteers and a country who routinely invades / interferes in the affairs of other sovereign nations? It's a two way street...

I'll answer that when you answer my queries.

[baboon]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

I'll answer that when you answer my queries.

I thought they were rhetorical questions. What do you want to know?

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, baboon said:

I thought they were rhetorical questions. What do you want to know?

Why do you defend them so strongly?

[baboon]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Why do you defend them so strongly?

Fair question... Because I think they are frequently misrepresented and have a point at times.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, baboon said:

Fair question... Because I think they are frequently misrepresented and have a point at times.

But these are some of the worst nations on earth.  They treat their citizens terribly.  The atrocities these 3 leaders have committed is well documented.  You are aware of them right?

 

P.S. I'm against the military industrial complex.  Though I think it's also misrepresented.  Congress holds the power to go to war, not private companies.  Some think they've got power that they don't really have. 

 

I'm also against invading other countries.  Iraq 1 was justified.  Iraq 2 wasn't.  Afghanistan is a quagmire, they did help Bin Laden.  I use to work in the WTC, so feel quite strongly about that.

[Golgota]

5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Why do you defend them so strongly?

The problem here is shared by both sides : North Korea is a crazy dictatorship for sure...however the US and mostly the US is pressuring Little Kim...but they won't go at war (for now) because Seoul is close from the border, the Japan is not so far, China will be super uspet, South Korea economy would fall if there was some kind of reunification...

The ONLY reason why North Korea was not attacked so far is because of the damage it can do...

In a way you may understand the Kim as you witmess how US tend to represent itself as the  World police..even if we witness that this world police creates much more mess after its wars...
Look at Syria, Libya, Irak...and tell me it is safer now than when it was under Saddam for exemple...Saddam and Ghaddaffi were dictators for sure...but the life of the majority of the population was much safer than it is now...byou can also ask yourself why the US and friends only bring wars in countries with Oil....why the oil companies are already in those countries...

So if I were Kim I would do the same cause the only thing which prevent a US intervention so far is the threat that South Korea and Japan, and now the US may be targetted...

[baboon]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

But these are some of the worst nations on earth.  They treat their citizens terribly.  The atrocities these 3 leaders have committed is well documented.  You are aware of them right?

 

P.S. I'm against the military industrial complex.  Though I think it's also misrepresented.  Congress holds the power to go to war, not private companies.  Some think they've got power that they don't really have. 

 

I'm also against invading other countries.  Iraq 1 was justified.  Iraq 2 wasn't.  Afghanistan is a quagmire, they did help Bin Laden.  I use to work in the WTC, so feel quite strongly about that.

You mention 3 leaders. I take it you mean the DPRK, Chad and Angola? The latter two were just countries which popped into my head to use as examples - I know nothing about them or their leaders. Don't read anything into it.

[Golgota]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

But these are some of the worst nations on earth.  They treat their citizens terribly.  The atrocities these 3 leaders have committed is well documented.  You are aware of them right?

 

P.S. I'm against the military industrial complex.  Though I think it's also misrepresented.  Congress holds the power to go to war, not private companies.  Some think they've got power that they don't really have. 

 

I'm also against invading other countries.  Iraq 1 was justified.  Iraq 2 wasn't.  Afghanistan is a quagmire, they did help Bin Laden.  I use to work in the WTC, so feel quite strongly about that.

Wrong : Liby and Sirya and Iraq were NOT the worst nations on earth

WTC was orchestrated by Saudi, I am surprised you don't feel more about the fact that every government still lick Saudi <deleted> and why The Trump made a ban which DID NOT include any nation involved in 9/11

I can tell you there are worst countries, North Korea is one of them, we are sure of this, and I went to Iran a couple of time last year, the government is harsh yes and it is no democracy but the people still do not understand why their country and themselves are seen as terrorists and why we still see the US as freedom fighters when they only look at their own interest...that's also why they didn't care about NOrth Korea, until the ICBM  can reach their territories

[craigt3365]

11 minutes ago, baboon said:

You mention 3 leaders. I take it you mean the DPRK, Chad and Angola? The latter two were just countries which popped into my head to use as examples - I know nothing about them or their leaders. Don't read anything into it.

No, the 3 leaders were Kim, Hussein and Qaddafi. All nut jobs the world would be better of without.  Sames true with Chad and Angola.

 

What do these 5 countries share in common?  They're in a terrible state due to their leaders.  Their civilians are suffering.  If you like NK so much, why don't you move there! LOL  Nothing stopping you...

[craigt3365]

20 minutes ago, Golgota said:

The problem here is shared by both sides : North Korea is a crazy dictatorship for sure...however the US and mostly the US is pressuring Little Kim...but they won't go at war (for now) because Seoul is close from the border, the Japan is not so far, China will be super uspet, South Korea economy would fall if there was some kind of reunification...

The ONLY reason why North Korea was not attacked so far is because of the damage it can do...

In a way you may understand the Kim as you witmess how US tend to represent itself as the  World police..even if we witness that this world police creates much more mess after its wars...
Look at Syria, Libya, Irak...and tell me it is safer now than when it was under Saddam for exemple...Saddam and Ghaddaffi were dictators for sure...but the life of the majority of the population was much safer than it is now...byou can also ask yourself why the US and friends only bring wars in countries with Oil....why the oil companies are already in those countries...

So if I were Kim I would do the same cause the only thing which prevent a US intervention so far is the threat that South Korea and Japan, and now the US may be targetted...

What started this?  NK's refusal to abide by the UN's nuclear nonproliferation treaty.  Which has been signed by many countries.  Why won't they sign it like everybody else?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons#Non-signatories

 

Guess who's not signed it?  Mainly rogue nations.  Iran, Syria, NK, etc. Lovely countries.

Edited July 31, 2017 by craigt3365

[ilostmypassword]

31 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

No, the 3 leaders were Kim, Hussein and Qaddafi. All nut jobs the world would be better of without.  Sames true with Chad and Angola.

 

What do these 5 countries share in common?  They're in a terrible state due to their leaders.  Their civilians are suffering.  If you like NK so much, why don't you move there! LOL  Nothing stopping you...

It seems to be a truism now that Kim Jong Un is insane. Here an article with a different point of view. One which makes a lot more sense.

Kim Jong Un Is a Survivor, Not a Madman

...As a guide for understanding North Korea, this analysis [Kim being irrational] is just plain wrong. As a guide for crafting policy toward Pyongyang, it may be catastrophic. North Korea’s system might look bizarre to us from the outside, but the Kims are the ultimate political survivors, hard-edged rationalists whose actions have always had a clear purpose: keeping the family in power. 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/26/kim-jong-un-is-a-survivor-not-a-madman/

 

[quadperfect]

Interesting words,  Lethal and overwhelming  so in other words shock and awe .

[TKDfella]

59 minutes ago, baboon said:

So let's turn this around - Why are you defending the military industrial complex, the war profiteers and a country who routinely invades / interferes in the affairs of other sovereign nations? It's a two way street...

Whoa there baboon and craig. Nk wants reunification with the seat of control in NK. And don't forget the current situation is really no more than an elaborate 'cease fire'. Kim is not an idiot BUT neither are other world leaders. At the moment nuclear arms present the most powerful form of (explosive) mass destruction and therefore considered a 'high valued card' in the game. However, this deterrent is not likely to remain at the top of the arms list for that much longer (historically speaking, that is) and I would think that Kim knows that so has become perhaps (I emphasize, perhaps) a bit desperate to complete the nuclear program so that he can make a bid for reunification before time runs out.

[craigt3365]

18 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It seems to be a truism now that Kim Jong Un is insane. Here an article with a different point of view. One which makes a lot more sense.

Kim Jong Un Is a Survivor, Not a Madman

...As a guide for understanding North Korea, this analysis [Kim being irrational] is just plain wrong. As a guide for crafting policy toward Pyongyang, it may be catastrophic. North Korea’s system might look bizarre to us from the outside, but the Kims are the ultimate political survivors, hard-edged rationalists whose actions have always had a clear purpose: keeping the family in power. 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/26/kim-jong-un-is-a-survivor-not-a-madman/

 

Too funny.  An opinion piece from a Russian about a nut job leader in NK.  Lovely! LOL

 

From that article.  Nuff said.  He's a madman:

Quote

It threatens to consume the United States in nuclear fire on a semi-weekly basis, its leader brutally executes his own generals and had his brother murdered, and it wastes huge amount of money on nuclear weapons while sticking to a failed economic model.

 

Impossible to defend his actions.  NK is a failed state.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, Golgota said:

Wrong : Liby and Sirya and Iraq were NOT the worst nations on earth

WTC was orchestrated by Saudi, I am surprised you don't feel more about the fact that every government still lick Saudi <deleted> and why The Trump made a ban which DID NOT include any nation involved in 9/11

I can tell you there are worst countries, North Korea is one of them, we are sure of this, and I went to Iran a couple of time last year, the government is harsh yes and it is no democracy but the people still do not understand why their country and themselves are seen as terrorists and why we still see the US as freedom fighters when they only look at their own interest...that's also why they didn't care about NOrth Korea, until the ICBM  can reach their territories

I said "SOME" of the worst nations on earth.  Not "THE" worst.  No arguing with that.

 

I know about the WTC attack very well.  I know all about Saudi involvement.  I'm not a supporter and firmly feel they, along with Iran, are the 2 biggest problems in the ME.  And yes, what Trump did with SA was terrible.  Horrible.

 

I'd love to visit Iran.  My friend is just back and loved it there.  He's been to NK twice and loved it...well...as much as you can considering how they control visitors.  As with most of these crazy countries, the people are generally fantastic.  The government sucks.

 

The people there don't have access to a free and fair press.  So they've got no idea what's really going on in the world.  Censorship is a terrible thing.  Unless you're a maniacal dictator trying to control your population for your own benefit. LOL

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

Too funny.  An opinion piece from a Russian about a nut job leader in NK.  Lovely! LOL

 

From that article.  Nuff said.  He's a madman:

 

Impossible to defend his actions.  NK is a failed state.

What's really too funny is the kind if bigotry you use to impeach an author's thesis. Since you don't seem to have the wherewithal in reason or evidence to attack his argument, you resort to attack him on the basis of his nationality.  Do you think all Russian academics are Putin mini-me's? The guy is a professor at Kookmin University in Seoul South Korea, not Moscow University.  And he's not writing for Izvestia, he's writing for Foreign Policy magazine which is the epitome of a US establishment journal. They do allow for a range of opinions. but they are not the leftwing or pro-Russian equivalent of Breitbart.

 

And no, North Korea is not a failed state. The hallmark of failed states is that they lack order.  Whatever else, North Korea lacks, it isn't that. Rather the reverse. There is a brutally efficient and well functioning system in place to keep order. And no matter how badly NK performs by all sorts of economic and human rights measurements, it hasn't failed the Kims, who live in luxury and still exercise despotic and dynastic control. And that, as the author's thesis runs, is what the Kim dynasty has been fighting to maintain.

 

 

[baboon]

29 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Too funny.  An opinion piece from a Russian about a nut job leader in NK.  Lovely! LOL

 

From that article.  Nuff said.  He's a madman:

 

Impossible to defend his actions.  NK is a failed state.

That Russian you are talking about is an expert on the subject. Deriding anything he writes is frankly silly.

[Fore Man]

2 hours ago, baboon said:

Fair question... Because I think they are frequently misrepresented and have a point at times.

Why would you use a likeness of the rogue thugdom's flag as your avatar?  Your poor choice speaks volumes to me.  Perhaps there is more to your purpose than meets the eye...

[baboon]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

No, the 3 leaders were Kim, Hussein and Qaddafi. All nut jobs the world would be better of without.  Sames true with Chad and Angola.

 

What do these 5 countries share in common?  They're in a terrible state due to their leaders.  Their civilians are suffering.  If you like NK so much, why don't you move there! LOL  Nothing stopping you...

You know the conversation has reached the end of the road when your interlocutor trundles out sentences like "If you like NK so much, why don't you move there! LOL". It's the same as 'If you don't like it, leave' on the Thailand news forum. Pity...