Trump should insist on Libya-style denuclearization for N.Korea: Bolton

"We should insist that if this meeting is going to take place, it will be similar to discussions we had with Libya 13 or 14 years ago: how to pack up their nuclear weapons program and take it to Oak Ridge, Tennessee,"

Ask Gaddafi how well that worked. Nothing new or inventive here.

All politics is theatre. It's a reality show. Except it isn't. Mr. Bolton does indeed have the credentials, I will grant you that. He has been Secretary to the UN, an organization for which he has no respect.

Not to worry, people, when the president starts a war with NK, it is the children of the 30% red hats that will go first, while the rich ones with bone spurs stay home.

The world has worked this way for centuries.

Ok, so when talks collapse, what's Plan B? Sanction Russia and China for undermining our sanctions on NK?

Now Pentagon planners don’t need to worry about a two front war and all of America’s military resources can be directed at Israel’s sworn enemy.

Iran.

All of which detracts from America's real enemy - Russia.

Very encouraged by Bolton’s comments on NK. He has completely the right attitude. If NK wastes time with these talks or doesn’t agree to lose all their nukes, they are done.

Enough is enough

Very encouraged by Bolton’s comments on NK. He has completely the right attitude. If NK wastes time with these talks or doesn’t agree to lose all their nukes, they are done.

And so are the rest of us - a nuclear war ruins the world.

War will never be the answer. Offensive action is never justified, only defensive action.

dcog9065Today  10:00 am JST

Very encouraged by Bolton’s comments on NK. He has completely the right attitude. If NK wastes time with these talks or doesn’t agree to lose all their nukes, they are done.

Enough is enough

more like putting up means putting up. good luck get NK give up their icbms and nukes through talks without paying some substantial benefits to Kim ( I doubt there is such thing at all, what the US could bring to table that he already doesn't have? )

Now the pressure needs to be put on the denuclearization of America.

If the USA wastes time with these talks or doesn’t agree to lose all their nukes, they are done.

Enough is enough.

We should insist that if this meeting is going to take place, it will be similar to discussions we had with Libya

But hopefully not the same. Any talks based on what happened in Libya would have to include agreement on measures to ensure that Kim did not end up like Gaddafi.

And frankly, neither Trump not Bolton have the reputation for honesty and fair-dealing that would make any such agreement even nominally credible.

I think we're heading down a very slippery path.

And frankly, neither Trump not Bolton have the reputation for honesty and fair-dealing that would make any such agreement even nominally credible.

Not sure how you can say that about Trump and Bolton seeing how It was Hillary and Obama that destroyed Libya, creating more chaos and the flood of refugees to Europe as well, why, because Libya abondoned their nuclear program. US policy yes. Trump and Bolton, no.

"we came, we saw, he died" Hillary Clinton.

It is absurd to say, "it is all right for OUR country to have nuclear weapons, bu it is NOT all right for YOUR country to have them."

John Bolton is a hardliner but maybe that will put even more pressure on our adversaries to make a deal favorable to the US since they may come to realize that the US actually means all options are on the table. As Churchill stated “You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth!”

Not sure how you can say that about Trump and Bolton seeing how It was Hillary and Obama that destroyed Libya

It doesn't matter who did what to Libya in the past, the US does not historically have a good record of looking after countries it has trashed in war (Japan might be the exception, different times)

Trump as an individual does not have a good record when it comes to being honest/upright/reliable when doing deals.

Bolton is a rabid hawk who has openly expressed the opinion that North Korea should be attacked swiftly and decisively.

None of that encourages Kim to come over all meek and trusting.

What's wrong with Kim Jing In ending up like Ghaddafi? Best thing that could happen to NK and it's people.

And yea, Bolton is a bit of a frothing at the mouth hawk. But anyone that NK called "human scum" can't be all bad...lol

Interesting discussion.

No nation that acquired nuclear power and weapons have abandoned them. For N Korea, that is what got the attention they wanted and this opportunity. One could not expect N Korea to abandon them, even with Trump's meeting. Any deal such as with Iran would probaby not work or even hold, as history has proven for both Iran and N Korea. So better not to even think about it.

The important part is "whose side" N korea will "align" itself with; China, Russia, USA or some other country.

That will change the entire "balance" of power in Asia.

Trump need to have N Korea "align" with the USA. For all we know, S Korea as with Philippines "may not" be really "aligned" with the USA with China playing such a big role in their economic and political survival. But a "joint" N and S Korea with nuclear N Korea backed by USA may make a difference.

What's wrong with Kim Jing In (sic) ending up like Ghaddafi? Best thing that could happen to NK and it's people.

Problem is, Kim wouldn't agree with you, and he's the one making the decisions.

We did not have to go to war with Libya. And they denuclearized. And the Libyan people became free of Ghaddafi. So...what's wrong with that? South Korea has been pushing for dialogue, and now has the US willing to talk to NK directly within next month. If denuclearization can be achieved with no war, what's wrong with that? And who cares what happens to Kim? I think some of you simply just like to argue without thinking it out.

And who cares what happens to Kim? I think some of you simply just like to argue without thinking it out.

I don't believe that anyone "cares" what happens to the DPRK leadership. It's the voices that call for the destruction of North Korea that I imagine the problem lies with.

I don't believe that anyone "cares" what happens to the DPRK leadership.

Other than the DPRK leadership! But yeah, the rest of us couldn't care less if bad things happen to the leadership.

It's the voices that call for the destruction of North Korea that I imagine the problem lies with.

And even that's not such a bad thing. It's the damage to the planet that forcing that destruction would cause, that many/most of us are worried about.

Some people seem to think that they can attack NK, and there will be no retaliation, and no response by NK. These people like to go on about how NK needs to be taken down because of their nuclear arsenal, then pretend like they won't respond by using it.

Toasted HereticToday 08:01 am JST

And who cares what happens to Kim? I think some of you simply just like to argue without thinking it out.

I don't believe that anyone "cares" what happens to the DPRK leadership. It's the voices that call for the destruction of North Korea that I imagine the problem lies with.

I disagree, People have a problem actually reading the article and understanding what Bolton said:

the proposed summit with Kim Jong Un should be similar to those that led to components of Libya's nuclear program being shipped to the United States in 2004.

He didn't call for war.