Why is President Trump not in a hurry to attack North Korea

There are not many days that have circulated fierce discussions about America's plans to respond to increased nuclear threats from North Korea, driven in part by its sixth nuclear test that occurred Sunday.

Defence Secretary James Mattis responded to this test by saying that “any threats to the United States or its territories, including Guam or our allies, will be answered by the mass army, which will be both effective and uncomputed.” President Trump recently threatened North Korea with “fire and severity as the world has never seen. ”

But despite all, what is known is that the Trump administration will not wage war against North Korea. Period.

Of course, it will be forgiven you if you think otherwise. What seems to be involving a great concern is the use of the word “threat” on Mattis's side. What exactly does she say? If North Korea makes verbal threats that seem inevitable... will America attack? Will Washington and its allies attack if North Korea tests another nuclear missile, which reportedly could happen before Saturday?

Some understood Mattis's statement as if Washington could launch an attack at any moment, for any reason. This is a frightening thought, especially considering that genus constantly threatens to destroy America with nuclear weapons. Indeed, they have made such threats for years, and as such, they should be ignored as tired propaganda.

But here's the truth: If we look at America's military options, especially when it comes to eliminating the North Korean nuclear program, it is very bad in this regard.

For those who don't know, you'll have to collect a much larger amount of military power in the Asia and the Pacific region to ensure that you have the assets needed to hit such a goal. This means more bombers, aircraft carriers, offensive submarines, and missile defense. The problem is that all of this would be exposed, which would allow Kim Jong Un to hit them first, possibly nuclear weapons, knowing he's in a “situation or lose them”.

Suppose Kim doesn't attack first and America manages to build and successfully launch a massive air and sea attack in North Korea, with nuclear weapons and the ability to produce such platforms, then what would happen?

For such an attack to be effective, it needs 100 percent precision. If only one or two of the atom bombs fail, Kim will have the open way to use his major targets in what he started. This will mean millions of dead people in Seoul, Tokyo, or Los Angeles.

From here, it's all wasted. Even if Washington and his allies were to take any possible nuclear weapons from Kim's arsenal, Pyongyang has many other ways of killing hundreds of thousands of people in Peninsula and Northeast Asia. We know that Pyongyang has dangerous chemical missiles, such as VX, and that Kim could clean up South Korea and Japan with such weapons.

And then there's the proverbial weapon placed in the capital of South Korea: 10,000 artillery tubes and long-range missiles that could kill record numbers of people. Imagine the Lotte Tower going down in Seoul, which is over 500 feet long, resulting in terrible loss of life. Remembering thousands of burning shells would only be the act of brutal war.

So for now, the military option is not the best when it comes to North Korea, instead, will have to find ways to control the threat. Our best hope for this is to get Pyongyang off this planet.

President Trump would have to sanction any state, company or individual doing illegal business or money laundering for Kim. Remember, North Korea's economy is one third of Ethiopia's size, so if all the money that goes to that country was to be cut off, we could significantly reduce the amount of resources Kim has for more weapons and nuclear missiles.

And if China hadn't strengthened the sanctions, or kept using its banks to keep the course of Kimí, then its financial entities would have to be sanctioned, or completely cut off from the financial system of the United States.

America also has to increase the level of missile defence in Asia and in its home country, while on the other hand developing new systems just as North Korea on the other side advances its military power.

Unfortunately, none of the aforementioned measures will save the world from North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes. Only one terrible war such as this planet has not seen since the last Korean war. This is a danger we just can't take.

Says: Harry J. Kazianis, as Periscope crossed and adapted