Shall We Fight Them All?

Shall We Fight Them All?

By Patrick Buchanan
Information Clearing House
August 8, 2017

Kim Jong Un tested an ICBM of sufficient range to hit the U.S.
mainland.

He is now working on its accuracy, and a nuclear warhead small
enough to fit atop that missile that can survive re-entry.

Unless we believe Kim is a suicidal madman, his goal seems clear.

He wants what every nuclear power wants — the ability to strike
his enemy's homeland with horrific impact, in order to deter that
enemy.

Kim wants his regime recognized and respected, and the U.S.,
which carpet-bombed the North from 1950-1953, out of Korea.

Where does this leave us?

Says Cliff Kupchan of the Eurasia Group, "The U.S. is on the verge
of a binary choice: either accept North Korea into the nuclear club
or conduct a military strike that would entail enormous civilian
casualties."

A time for truth.

U.S. sanctions on North Korea, like those voted for by Congress
last week, are not going to stop Kim from acquiring ICBMs. He
is too close to the goal line.

And any pre-emptive strike on the North could trigger a
counterattack on Seoul by massed artillery on the DMZ,
leaving tens of thousands of South Koreans dead, alongside
U.S. soldiers and their dependents.

We could be in an all-out war to the finish with the North,
a war the American people do not want to fight.

Saturday, President Trump tweeted out his frustration over China's
failure to pull our chestnuts out of the fire: "They do NOTHING for
us with North Korea, just talk. We will no longer allow this to
continue. China could easily solve this problem."

Sunday, U.S. B-1B bombers flew over Korea and the Pacific air
commander Gen. Terrence J. O'Shaughnessy warned his units were
ready to hit North Korea with "rapid, lethal, and overwhelming
force."

Yet, also Sunday, Xi Jinping reviewed a huge parade of tanks,
planes, troops and missiles as Chinese officials mocked Trump
as a "greenhorn President" and "spoiled child" who is running
a bluff against North Korea.

Is he? We shall soon see.

According to Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Trump vowed
Monday he would take "all necessary measures" to protect U.S.
allies. And U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley bristled, "The time for
talk is over."

Are we headed for a military showdown and war with the North?
The markets, hitting records again Monday, don't seem to think so.

But North Korea is not the only potential adversary
with whom our relations are rapidly deteriorating.

After Congress voted overwhelmingly for new sanctions on Russia
last week and Trump agreed to sign the bill that strips him of
authority to lift the sanctions without Hill approval, Russia
abandoned its hopes for a rapprochement with Trump's America.

Sunday, Putin ordered U.S. embassy and consulate staff cut by
755 positions.

The Second Cold War, begun when we moved NATO to Russia's
borders and helped dump over a pro-Russian regime in Kiev, is
getting colder.

Expect Moscow to reciprocate Congress' hostility when we ask
for her assistance in Syria and with North Korea.

Last week's sanctions bill also hit Iran after it tested a rocket
to put a satellite in orbit, though the nuclear deal forbids only
the testing of ballistic missiles that can carry nuclear warheads.

Defiant, Iranians say their missile tests will continue.

Recent days have also seen U.S. warships and Iranian patrol boats in
close proximity, with the U.S. ships firing flares and warning shots.

Our planes and ships have also, with increasingly frequency, come
to close quarters with Russian and Chinese ships and planes in the
Baltic and South China seas.

While wary of a war with North Korea, Washington seems to be
salivating for a war with Iran.

Indeed, Trump's threat to declare Iran in violation of the nuclear
arms deal suggests a confrontation is coming.

One wonders: If Congress is hell-bent on confronting the evil that
is Iran, why does it not cancel Iran's purchases and options to buy
the 140 planes the mullahs have ordered from Boeing?

Why are we selling U.S. airliners to the "world's greatest
state sponsor of terror"?

Let Airbus take the blood money.

Apparently, U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen
and Somalia are insufficient to satiate our War Party.

Now it wants us to lead the Sunnis of the Middle East in taking
down the Shiites, who are dominant in Iran, Iraq, Syria and
South Lebanon, and are a majority in Bahrain and the oil-
producing regions of Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. military has its work cut out for it.

President Trump may need those transgender troops.

Among the reasons Trump routed his Republican rivals in 2016 is
that he seemed to share an American desire to look homeward.

Yet, today, our relations with China and Russia are as bad as they
have been in decades, while there is open talk of war with Iran and
North Korea.

Was this what America voted for, or is this what America voted
against?

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47557.htm