Tillerson : US 'not seeking' regime change in Pyongyang , "We're not your enemy"

So the administration has finally come to learn that the stick doesn't work in regard to North Korea and now look to be softening the tone in a new statement by current secretary of state Rex Tillerson , the bluster has blown up in their face and now the inevitable has come to pass ... the only way forward in engagement.

"We do not seek a regime change, we do not seek a collapse of the regime, we do not seek an accelerated reunification of the peninsula, we do not seek an excuse to send our military north of the 38th parallel," said Mr Tillerson.
"We're not your enemy, we're not your threat but you're presenting an unacceptable threat to us and we have to respond."
www.bbc.co.uk...

Now we await the response , I think it's a sensible move by Mr Tillerson to try and difuse the tension but will Mr Kim accept the olive branch and engage in talks or just ignore the imperialist fools and carry on regardless....time will tell.

a reply to: gortex

Good, not seeking a new regime. Nation building in the 1960's and 1970's sure hurt in the 1990's.

Quite how you can blame this administration for the utter mess of NK is beyond me, OP.
Still, something needs to be done to work out a way to alleviate the pressure - carrot AND stick seems to be the right approach.

NK have to know they have a way out as well as know that if they don't take it then a military option is on the table.

Appeasement and weakness for 20 years has put the world on the brink of NK having the capacity to destroy the world in a few minutes. You can thank Clinton, Bush and Obama for that.

Worryingly, Lindsay Graham has just revealed to the world his discussion with Trump about going to war with NK and the 'thousands that will die' over there. Crazy that he would announce this in a media interview.

Can't wait to hear a response...

a reply to: gortex

North Korea's end game is nuclear war with the US, and I bet Lil Kim is willing to die fulfilling his countries (and his own) destiny.

The Irony of all the US dick waving is that there are places in the US of Awesome that make Pyongyang look like luxury, Detroit for that matter.. Maybe there needs to be a regime change??.


I wonder if Europe "would up the doors" To the countless NK refugees??, somehow I doubt it as they would not come with the idea of f#cking up any place they lived in..


Lots to think about, off to eat Veggie samosa.....



RA

Perhaps, Little Kim should look up and pray for the Rod of God is on the way. Maybe is not coming from space, it could be hanging from the hard point of a F-22? Who can say? I feel his days are numbered and it's his own damn fault. Repeatedly, Poke a large animal with a sharp stick and you get clawed.

a reply to: UKTruth

Quite how you can blame this administration for the utter mess of NK is beyond me, OP.

I can blame this administration for they way they've dealt with it so far , Trump thought he could send a carrier fleet over there and Mr Kim would be so scared he'd stop his activities , once again he shows his naivety.

Still, something needs to be done to work out a way to alleviate the pressure - carrot AND stick seems to be the right approach.

A smart person would use the carrot first , Mr Trump chose the stick because he's a bully.

NK have to know they have a way out as well as know that if they don't take it then a military option is on the table.

I think North Korea know the military option isn't on the table , regardless of what people would have you believe China will not accept an attack on the North unless it's retaliatory.

Appeasement and weakness for 20 years has put the world on the brink of NK having the capacity to destroy the world in a few minutes. You can thank Clinton, Bush and Obama for that.

They understood the realities of the situation , like it or not North Korea hold all the aces.

Ok, the article pretty much says, we're not your enemy, but you'll doing things thats unacceptable and it WILL require a response.

I don't see how the "stick" is ineffective, it is still a real possibility for engagement and one that President Trump will continue to engage in should he, his advisors and the American people, deem it a threat.

They understood the realities of the situation , like it or not North Korea hold all the aces.

No, they don't. In fact, a military option WAS being considered, some ACE. Once again, the article cites a more relax posture, but at the same time, WE WILL RESPOND.

a reply to: gortex

The problem when dealing with someone who is completely insane is you have no idea how they will respond. Sometimes an evil, yet predictable dictator is better than having to deal with a crazy one.

a reply to: gortex

That is a reasonable and sane statement to make by Tillerson.
Although I think the USA and its ally's military technological advantage would win in a war with North Korea, it wouldn't be like a mop up operation like the Gulf War was. Just because of the sheer numbers of troops they could push over the South Korean border and artillery fire they could rain down on them.
The only way to stop something like that would be to launch such a massive overwhelming first strike of bombers and cruise missiles the likes of which has never been seen in modern warfare.
It would get ugly, most likely with large numbers of casualties on both sides.
A war on that scale would probably plunge the stock markets around the world as well.
They need to get it figured out without any shots fired, but I am not sure how they would do it with the way Little Kim is.

a reply to: Arnie123

No, they don't. In fact, a military option WAS being considered, some ACE.

Every country has plans for military action against countries they consider hostile that doesn't mean those plans will be put into action.

the article cites a more relax posture, but at the same time, WE WILL RESPOND.

Which automatically means respond militarily ?
I don't think so.

a reply to: gortex

Nk dont really hold all the aces. If i was president id be willing to sacrifice Sk over this since its not really americans at risk there. Id pull out all our citizens then strike NK during a parade to decap the leadership.

the world needs to stop being so pithy with north korea.
it's kinda funny watching britain's government demanding more trident missiles and trumps promise to expand the military then cry like a child whenever anyone else arms up.

a reply to: Metallicus

The problem when dealing with someone who is completely insane is you have no idea how they will respond.

You mean President Trump ?
I've seen reports of psychiatrists warning of his mental state but no such reports about Mr Kim.

Why so you think Kim is crazy ?

a reply to: yuppa

If i was president id be willing to sacrifice Sk over this since its not really americans at risk there.

I'm stunned , what a terrible thing to say.

originally posted by: Arnie123

They understood the realities of the situation , like it or not North Korea hold all the aces.

No, they don't. In fact, a military option WAS being considered, some ACE. Once again, the article cites a more relax posture, but at the same time, WE WILL RESPOND.

I don't think the response given will be what everyone thinks it is. No general in their right mind would recommend a military response to the NK situation...UNLESS the whereabouts of all of it's nukes are known and neutralized. And I seem to recall that NK has a sub capable of launching nukes deployed somewhere....

The best response to a schoolyard bully and braggart isn't to start the fight...not when there are nukes at play. I think Tillerson has the tone right...let's step it down a notch and move forward, not backward.

An important rule in life:

"Everything before the BUT is BS"

Tillerson basically just said you've painted yourself into a corner and now we have to respond.

Seriously, how long did anyone think threatening another country with nuclear war while testing missiles was going to be allowed?

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Arnie123

No, they don't. In fact, a military option WAS being considered, some ACE.

Every country has plans for military action against countries they consider hostile that doesn't mean those plans will be put into action.

the article cites a more relax posture, but at the same time, WE WILL RESPOND.

Which automatically means respond militarily ?
I don't think so.

Thats an after thought, however times change and so does battle planning. We have to adjust accordingly.

Yes, automatically respond militarily, our other responses with sanctions and more sanctions, quite literally pleading with the CCP to do something is failing hard and does nothing.