BREAKING... Re NK.. per Reuters Blog

[nadinbrzezinski]

Make a commentShareOptionsLive Updating

WASHINGTON, April 3 (Reuters) - The United States sees a "real and clear" danger from North Korea, given its nuclear and missile capabilities and bellicose rhetoric, U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said on Wednesday.

"We take those threats seriously," Hagel said, addressing an audience at the National Defense University in Washington.

"We are doing everything we can, working with the Chinese, others, to defuse that situation on the peninsula."

(Reporting by Phil Stewart)
by anthony.derosa 10:54 AMComment

10:50 AMcnbc @CNBC
ALERT: U.S. to send missile defense to Guam; Korean threat prompts defensive deployment.


Reuters: U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL CITES "REAL AND CLEAR" DANGER FROM NORTH KOREA, U.S. WORKING WITH CHINA, OTHERS TO DEFUSE TENSIONS
by anthony.derosa 10:50 AMComment

http://live.reuters.com/Event/North_Korea

I was waiting for that to go through the blog, after hearing the top of the news on the Ed Show.

[Floyd_Gondolli]

1. Prediction: Nothing happens (nt)

[Aristus]

2. Working with the Chinese is a smart thing to do.

For all the fun people have calling China a 'communist' state, they are far more of a free-market capitalistic economy than we are. A war of any magnitude will disrupt their markets, not to mention their manufacturing, and flow of raw materials. It is hugely in China's interest that NK stays on a leash.

I can see this episode ending with China making a single phone call to Kim: "Calm down or we're calling in our loans!"

[get the red out]

3. Exactly

Not to mention that I'm sure the Chinese have no interest in absorbing radioactive fall-out from some mushroom cloud created by that idiot in N. Korea.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Or perhaps Kim, stand down, or the PRC will find a new boss

Yup...

They cannot afford a war on their end. Also they are still obligated by treaty to intervene on the side of the DPRK (noise has been happening of them canceling that, and an editor was suspended for going there)... and we have treaty obligations to help the ROK.

I am sure Beijing is all but thrilled of a guns of august scenario, let alone, worst case nukes go off and reactors are blown sky high... they are down wind of that crap.

[Aristus]

7. Whatever the terms of the treaty they have with NK, there are undoubtedly enough practitioners

in China of RealPolitik to assume that they won't necessarily abide by those terms. Maybe they're only obligated to intervene on NK's side if NK is attacked by an aggressor. Or maybe, as I stated above, China is more concerned with the economic health of its trade partners, including the U.S. & the ROK. The ominous Nixon-Era tag 'ComIntern' has almost no meaning anymore, so China's affinity for NK is likely nominal at best.

[southernyankeebelle]

5. Whats the old saying? There is no fool like a old fool. In this case there's no young fool

like a young fool. He doesn't care what happens to his starving people. That is obvious. He has no problems eating for him and his family.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. I smell peace treaty negotiations nt

[Brother Buzz]

8. Punxsutawney Phil says:

Sixty more years of the same old, same old.

But then again, he has only been correct approximately 39% of the time.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. It truly depends on a spoiled brat

to be honest.