re: #226 Jim in Virginia

Morning all. I’ve seen serious speculation that L’il Kim’s stroke has led to dementia, hence his recent aggressive stance. (Interesting argument: is Kim any crazier now than in the past fifteen years?) What if he decides to twist the tiger’s tail, and launches an ICBM with a nuke which hits somewhere in the Aleutians?
There are casualties, but far fewer than on, for example, 9-11; there is “grave damage to a fragile ecosystem” (I can hear the CNN reporters now.)
What does Bambi do? Do we go to war over a few dead Aleuts and whales?
If Kim gets away with it, it’s masterful marketing.

Or, what if his ICBM has a slightly longer range and decent targeting, and he hits Valdez?

If he wanted to do any tail twisting, he need look no further than Seoul. The US is bound by mutual aid treaties to respond if it’s troops there are attacked. Similar provisions are in place if Japan is attacked; we’re obligated to respond. There’s no need to dick around with an ICBM program if conflict is what Kimmy wants.

This is just the latest repeat of the game he’s been playing for the last several decades: rant, demand aid in return for empty promises, receive aid, repeat.

Best reponse: get rid of the “receive aid” part of the cycle.