Is President Trump a greater threat to world peace than Kim Jong Un?
According to the implications coming from progressives in the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, the answer is clearly “yes.”
Even as Un “outlined detailed plans for a missile strike near the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam,” the left has been busy downplaying the possibility of the U.S. being struck by Kim’s missiles.
Yet, Americans, according to them, should be very concerned about a volatile commander-in-chief.
Perhaps the clearest example of this comes, of course, from CNN, where Alisyn Camerota suggested that North Korea firing missiles at the U.S. shouldn’t be worrisome if those missiles happened to not hit their targets and should be dismissed as just another jab at Trump:
“Are they [the North Koreans] just baiting the president? If these missiles, if they do this, and if these go into the waters off Guam, they don’t hit Guam, then isn’t this just another sort of provocation and a missile test? Does it have to be responded to with force?”
Her guest, lawyer-writer Gordon Chang, remarkably attempted to give this line of inquiry some credence, arguing that missile attack “certainly doesn’t have to be responded with force” and that the U.S. should respond by enforcing laws against money laundering.
The exchange can be seen here:
In an op-ed for the New York Times, Susan Rice, former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State for the Obama administration, continued the narrative that it is Trump, not Kim, who should be the cause of alarm.
Although she acknowledged the North Korean threat, she argues that “we can, if we must, tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea.”
She adds however, “to avoid blundering into a costly war, the United States needs to immediately halt the reckless rhetoric. John Kelly, Mr. Trump’s chief of staff, must assert control over the White House, including his boss, and curb the Trump surrogates whipping up Cuban missile crisis fears.”
Criticism of Trump’s “reckless rhetoric” is an ongoing talking point by the Democrats. Senator Schumer used the exact phrase just yesterday, while many of his DNC Party mates (including Senator John McCain) piled on by criticizing Trump for “bombastic,” “unhinged” and “belligerent” comments.
This is all in response to President Trump’s statement, “North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
Interestingly, as pointed out by Breitbart, there was no such tsk-tsk from the Democrats when President Clinton warned North Korea that, should it use a nuclear weapon, “it would mean the end of their country as they know it.”
Democrats calling for appeasing North Korea should be mindful that they are a nation increasingly allied with another rogue nation pursuing nuclear weapons: Iran.
Do they want a Democrat in the White House so badly that they are willing to live in a world with both North Korea and Iran pointing nukes at the U.S.?