Trump's North Korea Options: Place Nukes In South Korea Or Kill Kim Jong-Un

With Syria down, it"s now North Korea"s turn. 

According to NBC News, the National Security Council has presented the suddenly ragingly bellicose President Trump with several options to respond to North Korea"s nuclear program: put American nukes in South Korea or kill dictator Kim Jong-un.

The scenarios were prepared in advance of Trump"s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping this week. The White House has expressed hopes the Chinese will do more to influence Pyongyang through diplomacy and enhanced sanctions, but if that fails, and North Korea continues its development of nuclear weapons, there are other options on the table that would significantly alter U.S. policy.

While Gen. John Hyten, the commander of U.S. Strategic Command, maintained on Wednesday that "any solution to the North Korea problem has to involve China" a senior intel official told NBC he doubted U.S. and China could find a diplomatic solution to the crisis. "We have 20 years of diplomacy and sanctions under our belt that has failed to stop the North Korean program," said the official involved in the review. "I"m not advocating pre-emptive war, nor do I think that the deployment of nuclear weapons buys more for us than it costs," but he stressed that the U.S. was dealing with a "war today" situation.

The "nuclear" option would mark the first overseas nuclear deployment since the end of the Cold War, a move that would promptly provoke global condemnation, not least of all by China. It was not immediately clear if South Korea"s regime - in turmoil recently following the recent impeachment and arrest of ex-president Park - had been consulted with the proposed strategy. The U.S. withdrew all
nuclear weapons from South Korea 25 years ago.

This "option" is also facing domestic pushback: "I don"t think that [deploying nuclear weapons] is a good idea. I think that it will only inflame the view from Pyongyang," retired Adm. James Stavridis and former NATO commander told NBC News. "I don"t see any upside to it because the idea that we would use a nuclear weapon even against North Korea is highly unlikely." 

South Korea"s sentiment aside, NBC notes that the US Air Force leadership doesn"t "necessarily" support putting nuclear weapons in South Korea. As an alternative, it"s been practicing sorties right out of the depths of the cold war: long-range strikes with strategic bombers — sending them to the region for exercises and deploying them in Guam and on the peninsula as a show of force.

* * *

The second, and just as controversial option, is to kill North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and other senior leaders in charge of the country"s nuclear

prgoram. The overt regime overthrow option has huge downsides, said Mark Lippert, the former U.S, ambassador to South Korea, who also served as an assistant defense secretary under President Barack Obama. "Discussions of regime change and decapitation...tend to cause the Chinese great pause of concern and tends to have them move in the opposite direction we would like them to move in terms of pressure," he said.

Quoted by NBC, Stavridis, said that "decapitation is always a tempting strategy when you"re faced with a highly unpredictable and highly dangerous leader", especially for a nation like the US he did not add.  "The question you have to ask yourself," he said, "is what happens the day after you decapitate? I think that in North Korea, it"s an enormous unknown."

In any case, the groundwork has already been laid: as reproted one month ago, elite US forces, including  Delta Force and SEAL Team 6 have been conducting drills on taking out Kim Jong-Un, as well as practicing tactical North Korea "infiltration." All they need is the green light.

* * *

A third, bonus option, is covert action, infiltrating U.S. and South Korean special forces into North Korea to sabotage or take out key infrastructure — for instance, blowing up bridges to block the movement of mobile missiles. The CIA, which would oversee such operations, told NBC News it could offer "no guidance" on this option. But Stavridis said that he felt it was the "best strategy" should the U.S. be forced to take military action. He described such action as: "some combination of special forces with South Korea and cyber."

One wonders if the CIA creating a "false flag" attack on South Korea (or China) using chemical weapons was one of the options under consideration.

* * *

Trump has already indicated he"s open to unilateral action if China fails to rein in its ally, telling the Financial Times last weekend, "If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will."

Until last night, his words were largely dismissed as more bluster; however having just demonstrated how quickly Trump is willing to launch offensive operations - having U-turned on his Syrian position in less than a week - suddenly the possibility of nuclear war with an irrational adversary does not look all that distant.

Is War Between U.S. And China Brewing In The South China Sea?

Authored by James Holbrooks via TheAntiMedia.org,

Adding fuel to an already highly combustible situation in Southeast Asia, Reuters reported Tuesday that China has “largely completed major construction of military infrastructure on artificial islands it has built in the South China Sea,” and that the Asian superpower “can now deploy combat planes and other military hardware there at any time.”

Citing satellite imagery analyzed by the Asian Maritime Transparency Initiative, part of Washington, D.C.’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, the news agency writes that “work on Fiery Cross, Subi and Mischief Reefs in the Spratly Islands included naval, air, radar and defensive facilities.”

Sticking to the mainstream narrative that China is an aggressor in claiming sovereign rights to the majority of the South China Sea, Pentagon spokesman Commander Gary Ross says the new images confirm what the U.S. military already knows.

“China’s continued construction in the South China Sea is part of a growing body of evidence that they continue to take unilateral actions which are increasing tensions in the region and are counterproductive to the peaceful resolution of disputes,” he told Reuters.

China, as it has repeatedly, downplayed this notion and stuck to the position that it’s simply erecting defensive infrastructure within its own borders, as would any nation.

“As for China deploying or not deploying necessary territorial defensive facilities on its own territory, this is a matter that is within the scope of Chinese sovereignty,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said at a press briefing Tuesday.

Despite comments such as these — and the very real fact that China hasn’t actually invaded anyone — the corporate media jumped on the news of the new images.

Forbes, for instance, ran a piece that essentially listed all the reasons why China is a really bad actor in the region, and CNN talked to analysts who explained how the military buildup on the artificial islands will be gradual as China continues to exert its authoritarian influence over neighboring countries.

That’s the narrative. Believe as you will.

But the reality of the situation in the South China Sea - all geopolitical analysis aside - is that there’s about to be a hell of a lot of military hardware in those waters.

As Anti-Media has been reporting, U.S. forces are already in the region, taking part in joint drills with ally South Korea that will last until the end of April. Then, at the beginning of May, Japan — another U.S. ally — will sail its navy’s most powerful warship through the South China Sea on a three-month tour.

That means that just as the joint drills with South Korea end — which, incidentally, units from Delta Force, the Navy SEALS and Army Rangers are taking part in — Japan will shove off a warship aimed at waters claimed by China.

If that timing seems a little curious, also consider that the U.S. just deployed its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system in South Korea, which both China and Russia cared none too much for.

With China showing no signs of backing away from its stance in the South China Sea — both ideologically and physically —  and with the corporate media willing and eager to push the “evil China” narrative that the U.S. military appears hell-bent on capitalizing on, it appears the long-dreaded collision course with China may, indeed, be not far off on the horizon.

Melania And Barron Trump To Stay In New York, Won't Move To White House With Donald

Following President-Elect Trump"s inauguration in January, NYPost reports that future First Lady Melania Trump and their 10-year-old son Barron will not be moving to the White House. “The campaign has been difficult for Barron, and she is really hoping to keep disruption to a minimum," according to Trump"s transition team and while she "is fully on board of doing everything that’s needed as first lady," they will remain in the so-called "White House of New York."

The president-elect’s 46-year-old wife and their 10-year-old son are staying put at the family’s glitzy Trump Tower penthouse so that Barron can continue attending his Upper West Side private school, sources told The Post.

On a Sunday call with reporters, Donald Trump"s communications adviser, Jason Miller, said there is “sensitivity to pulling their 10-year-old out of school in the middle of the school year.”

“Melania is extremely close to Barron, and they have become closer during the campaign,” said a source close to Trump’s transition team. “The campaign has been difficult for Barron, and she is really hoping to keep disruption to a minimum.”

Another source said Melania Trump will travel to the White House as needed, but that her primary focus is on Barron.

“Melania is very supportive of her husband and is fully on board of doing everything that’s needed as first lady,” said the second source familiar with the Trump transition.

That source said also that there is a possibility that Melania and Barron may move to the White House at the end of the school year, but no plans are in place.

“She is really devoted to Barron,” said a source close to the family, adding that Melania has not relied on nannies to raise the child and is frequently seen picking the fourth-grader up from his prep school, where tuition is north of $40,000.

As The Post notes however, the decision to remain in their Midtown home will increase the security presence around Trump Tower — an effort that will involve both Secret Service and the NYPD, an expert familiar with high-level security told The Post.

“That building is going to become the White House of New York,” said Jim Reese, a former Delta Force commander and president of TigerSwan, a global security company based in North Carolina.

Barron and Melania will each have an unknown number of Secret Service agents assigned to them in addition to a driver and armored vehicle to take Barron to school, Reese said. An advance team of agents will swoop down on the school each morning to make sure it’s safe, he added.