Image 01 Image 03

Nikki Haley: North Korea ‘is Begging for War’

Nikki Haley: North Korea ‘is Begging for War’

“We have kicked the can down the road long enough.”

US United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley told the Security Council that North Korea dictator Kim Jong-un “is begging for war” after the latest nuclear test in the hermit kingdom.

“Despite our efforts, the North Korea nuclear program is more advanced and more dangerous than ever,” she explained. “War is never something the United States wants. We don’t want it now. But our country’s patience is not unlimited.”

Here is her full speech:

Haley detailed that inaction over the past 24 years have allowed North Korea to become a nuclear armed nation.

She stressed to her colleagued that “enough is enough” and now “the time has come to exhaust all of our diplomatic means before it’s too late.” Haley continued:

“Only the strongest sanctions will enable us to resolve this problem through diplomacy. We have kicked the can down the road long enough. There is no more road left. This crisis goes well beyond the U.N. The United States will look at every country that does business with North Korea as a country and the United States will look at every country that does business with North Korea as a country that is giving aid to their reckless and dangerous nuclear intentions.”

South Korea’s Defense Ministry announced on Monday that North Korea has began preparations to launch another intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). The nuclear bomb the North Korea regime tested could be attached to an ICBM, which heightens the possibility of the bomb to reach America. From The Wall Street Journal:

South Korean Maj. Gen. Jang Kyung-soo, acting deputy minister for national defense policy, said Seoul had detected signs of activity that suggested North Korea, which conducted its first two ICBM test launches in July, was preparing to launch another ballistic missile.

Gen. Jang didn’t say what the signs of activity were, nor did he give a time frame for a possible launch. But many experts have been preparing for a weapons test around Sept. 9, when North Korea plans to mark the anniversary of its foundation in 1948.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Thane_Eichenauer | September 4, 2017 at 11:16 am

Impeach Nikki Haley.

Of course they are but thanks to the spineless leadership of barry “The Black Baby Jesus” these last 8 years we have exactly the situation that we have now.

Being the spineless twat Barry is he punted this down the road for someone else to have to deal with so now Trump is left with Barry’s mess to clean up!

    Obama could probably trademark the moniker “spineless twat”, it fits him nicely.

    However, this problem goes way back before he took office. It started under Bill Clinton, and George Bush also kicked the can down the road.

    The real problem is that, short of illegal preemptive military action, there is really almost nothing that can be done given the political situation with the United Nations. Russia and China will block resolutions if for no other reason than to thumb Uncle Sam in the eye.

    When he built Pakistan’s nuclear program, AQ Khan laid the road-map for future regimes to thwart inspections and extort money while build illicit nuclear programs. Once they get the bomb, then what? Iran and now N. Korea have followed his playbook and I expect there will be others.

      ConradCA in reply to Paul. | September 4, 2017 at 12:42 pm

      Preemptive military action isn’t illegal and is more than justified for North Korea.

        Preemptive military action can be legal, but the type of action that would prevent a country like Iran or North Korea from attaining nuclear status would never pass the UN Security Council, thus it would be illegal from that perspective.

        The problem is that they’ve learned how to game the system in terms of the UN. Early on, while they’re developing their nuclear program, they just have to play the “rope-a-dope” for a couple of decades. Perversely, during this phase they can extract economic concessions in exchange for promises not to pursue weapons technology. This money can then be used to fund the development of nuclear weapons technology. During this phase, the weak-kneed diplomats that populate the UN would never approve military action. And even if the western ones did, it would get the veto from Russia and/or China.

          Milhouse in reply to Paul. | September 5, 2017 at 2:31 am

          No, it would not be illegal from that perspective. There is no need to get Security Council permission before taking military action. Clinton didn’t before waging war on Serbia. It wouldn’t be illegal unless the Security Council were to pass a binding resolution forbidding it, and such a resolution can’t pass because the USA would veto it.

          Paul in reply to Paul. | September 5, 2017 at 12:45 pm

          That action was taken under Article 4 of the UN Charter… no Sec Council resolution required.

          The UN Charter prohibits the use of force with a couple of exceptions. Bombing some country because they have a nascent (purportedly energy-related) nuclear program most certainly would not be an acceptable use of force from the UN point of view.

          I’m not arguing whether bombing them is right or wrong or even the legality of it under US law. My point is that our participation in the UN hobbles us in these circumstances and that these “rogue nuclear” nations have figured out how to game the UN system in order to achieve nuclear weapons status.

          Reagan is looking pretty darn smart for insisting on missile defense systems now, isn’t he?

smalltownoklahoman | September 4, 2017 at 11:41 am

I’m not too worried about the U.S. mainland being in much danger yet, especially the further from the West Coast you go. I’m far more concerned for Hawaii and our allies in that area of Asia, especially S. Korea if things go hot as their the ones most likely to face the brunt of N. Korea’s ire. I’m confident we could stomp NK pretty quick if we have to but my biggest concern is if they decide to go all out before we have a chance to mobilize our forces. Should they do that they could do a fair bit of damage before we get over there.

    North Korea could destroy the USA by exploding 1 nuclear weapon in outer space where the EMP would destroy our electrical grid and most electronics.

      Yep, our just-in-time logistics systems would be gone in a flash, and within a week or two we’d have people starving by the tens of millions.

      buckeyeminuteman in reply to ConradCA. | September 5, 2017 at 1:36 pm

      In order for EMP to be created, the nuke would have to be exploded in the atmosphere above the United States. Seeing as last week’s launch was a big deal because the missile flew over Japan, I’m doubting he could get one over the United States…yet. Reaching space and reaching orbit are two very different things.

Camp Walt on the Yalu? It time Gen Walt got some recognition.

Trump should announce that the next missile that leaves NK airspace will be considered an act of war against the US. He would then be obligated to seek Congress’ approval of a formal declaration.

That puts everyone on notice, including the US establishment.

    ConradCA in reply to Matt_SE. | September 4, 2017 at 12:45 pm

    Good idea. But a formal declaration of war isn’t required and isn’t realistic. We need to destroy North Korea quickly, before they have a chance to attack us.

      Matt_SE in reply to ConradCA. | September 4, 2017 at 1:09 pm

      I disagree. It is FAR MORE IMPORTANT to legitimize such a war, since it is highly likely Kim may kill millions of people on the way out. If Congress (which represents the PEOPLE) votes for it, it’s their responsibility, and therefore ours. If Trump doesn’t get their approval, he will be impeached no matter how it turns out.

      There is no need for speed unless NK launches at an ally or our forces, and that decision will be handled locally.

        4th armored div in reply to Matt_SE. | September 4, 2017 at 1:48 pm

        1 – congress establishment is spineless, otherwise we would already have dealt with the NORKs 20+ years ago.

        2 – Seoul needs to be evacuated (no small task) to prevent them continuing to be held hostage.

        3 – we need to pull out of UN and get them the hell out of the USA.

        4 – declare a no military zone from china to south china sea.

        5 – next violation by NORKs get MOAB response.

        easy to ask for for givness after the fact.

    iconotastic in reply to Matt_SE. | September 4, 2017 at 1:35 pm

    The USA remains at war with N. Korea. It was only a cease fire that ended the active shooting during the Korean war. Since then North Korea has committed multiple acts of war against S. Korea, Japan, and the USA.

    We have no need of a casus belli to justify any strike against N. Korea.

      tom swift in reply to iconotastic. | September 4, 2017 at 2:30 pm

      Actually, the US was never at war with North Korea. What we in the US call the Korean War was Truman sending support to the UN, as per the treaty which formed the UN in the first place. Since that treaty had been appropriately ratified by the Senate, Truman didn’t need further action by the Senate to fulfill America’s treaty obligations to the UN. And if the UN wanted to push the Norks back north of the 38th parallel, it was America’s job to support that, with armed forces if necessary.

      Unfortunately Truman called this fulfillment of treaty obligations a “police action” rather than a “war”, which was accurate enough, but has apparently been a major precedent for later undeclared non-wars, often masked by cute but meaningless NewSpeak like “kinetic action”.

The fat guy probably doesn’t want war, he wants money.

A couple of nukes which may or may not be usable with his piddling short-range missiles don’t make him a viable nuclear power. Even if what he claims to have is functional, he’s at least two orders of magnitude short of being able to hit the US with a knockout attack. And when it comes to strategic nukes, it’s M.A.D. or nothing—if he doesn’t knock his enemy out with the first punch, he’s literal toast. And his buddies the Chinese won’t be able to save him from the inevitable counterstrike.

He can attack the South with conventional forces … but he’s been able to do that for years. And he hasn’t done it.

So, conventional war with the South doesn’t seem to be in the cards, and despite all his noises he’s just not a contender for a real nuclear war. Ipso facto, he doesn’t want a war, he wants a bribe.

If so, he probably missed his chance. Obama would have had a planeload of gold on the way already.

    Why wouldn’t he want a payoff from Trump? He’s gotten one from the last three US Presidents.

    iconotastic in reply to tom swift. | September 4, 2017 at 1:42 pm

    My thought is that first Whoa Fat has to neutralize the USA before trying to take over S. Korea. Our troops in S. Korea are mostly a tripwire for the USA; attack US troops and the USA will respond. If Fat can convincingly threaten, say, LA or Seattle then Fat might believe the USA would let our troops die and S. Korea fall before we risked a strike on our mainland. An EMP strike over the West Coast would probably be even more damaging too.

    wrt MAD response, Fat might also believe that a massive retaliatory nuclear attack on N Korea would be viewed as a direct threat by China, Russia, or both.

    So a conventional with the South might be in the cards but only if Fat can take the USA off the board.

      tom swift in reply to iconotastic. | September 4, 2017 at 2:41 pm

      That’d be putting a lot of unwarranted faith in EMP.

      The most dangerous thing about EMP seems to be that nobody (certainly not the Press) knows what it is, so it must be awful.

      The defense against EMP is just shielding, something midway between the shielding which keeps annoying noises out of your radio and that for protection from lightning strikes. It’s really just a conventional Faraday cage (basically a metal box) and a good solid ground connection.

      Military stuff is built with all that as a matter of routine. Non-military, well, maybe not. It all has shielding, but it’s nowhere near as heavy-duty as the military specification stuff.

        iconotastic in reply to tom swift. | September 4, 2017 at 3:38 pm

        wrt EMP I meant that the threat could be either EMP or direct strike. Also, the civilian infrastructure still remains quite vulnerable to EMP ( Maybe not to sci-fi novel proportions but bad none the less. Either attack is a credible threat were the USA to defend S. Korean (and our own troops) against a N. Korean attack.

        I do not mean to imply that Fat is certainly justified in how he views USA responses, only that if Fat believes he can cow the USA with a nuclear weapon then he might very well set a conventional war plan in place.

          tom swift in reply to iconotastic. | September 4, 2017 at 4:22 pm

          The EMP might well wreak havoc on commercial communications, but I don’t believe it would have any major effect on military ones, which should remain functional. That means that even a preemptive surprise attack by the Norks wouldn’t protect them from an automatic MAD response, one which they couldn’t possibly survive. And nothing China does afterward would help the Norks, either, as they’d already be burning. It is imperative for Fatso’s brinksmanship that he not trigger the essentially automatic American cold-war response.

          Now, Fatso might think that fear of the commercial damage from an EMP, while not militarily disabling, might be enough to deter the US from opposing a conventional Nork attack on the South. While I don’t think that would work, the important thing is whether Fatso has convinced himself that it would work.

        The problem is that we have already had an EMP event in the US. Look up Carrington Event, which proved rather conclusively how much damage will be inflicted by the electrical currents generated in power lines, pipelines, telephone lines, etc.

      tom swift in reply to iconotastic. | September 4, 2017 at 2:46 pm

      Fat might also believe that a massive retaliatory nuclear attack on N Korea would be viewed as a direct threat by China, Russia, or both.

      He could reasonably expect that would protect him from a large-scale first strike. Retaliatory, though, is another matter. And what might set off a retaliatory response? A missile fired near US territory? The US might not wait to see if it’s an attack on, say, the base at Guam, or just one of Fat’s unarmed “tests” aimed at the surrounding salt water. The wrong “test” could get him killed.

        iconotastic in reply to tom swift. | September 4, 2017 at 7:41 pm

        That’s an excellent point to consider when discussing how to justify a pre-emptive conventiional weapon attack on N. Korea. An ICBM capable missile fired in our general direction could be interpreted as an act of war and aggression justifying a full response.

conservative tarheel | September 4, 2017 at 2:53 pm

you can thank Jimmy C. and Bill Clinton for the NK mess.
Barry did what he does best …. kick the can down the road
and let someone else fix it …

Coming very soon to a theater near you.

Fire and Fury! Courtesy of the United States Armed Forces.

I cannot forget the widely spread pic of its time with Madeline Albright clinking champagne glasses with “Dear Leader”

North Korea had agreed to abandon its nuclear weapons program in exchange for US light water reactors. To quote Madeline Albright:

The Framework Agreement is one of the best things the [Clinton] Administration has done because it stopped a nuclear weapons program in North Korea.

FDR would not agree. As he said:

No realistic American can expect from a dictator’s peace international generosity ,,, or … world disarmament, -or even good business. Such a peace would bring no security for us or for our neighbors.