North Korea crisis: Who is interested in a war?

Sendungstext
herunterladen

PDF (.pdf)

Word (.docx)

22.08.2017 | www.kla.tv/10963

With irritation and concern, world public is currently looking at the war rhetoric between North Korea and the USA. After the recent missile and nuclear tests, US President Donald Trump warned North Korea not to further threaten the US. Otherwise, their threats would be met with "fire, fury and power the likes of which this world has never seen before," said Trump. Only a few hours later, North Korea explicitly threatened the United States with a missile attack on its air force bases in Guam. The planning for it has already begun. Guam is an island in the West Pacific Ocean and was conquered by US troops in the Spanish-American War on 21 June 1898. From the island of Guam, US combat aircraft were deployed over and over again for military maneuvers to the Korean peninsula. On August 11th, US President Trump stepped up and Twittered that "Military solutions are now fully in place… should North Korea act unwisely.". And he added, "Hopefully Kim Jong Un [North Korean leader] will find another path!" Even the European Union is reacting to the tensions between the US and North Korea and had a special meeting, which took place on Monday, August 14th. It is difficult to assess the extent to which the intergovernmental war rhetoric between the US and North Korea is merely a threat or a serious sign of war. Both Kim Jong-Un and US President Donald Trump are considered "unpredictable". But who could profit from a war? 1.North Korea? Even commentators in Western media agree that those who govern North Korea" act quite rationally". The Kim regime would continue with its missile and atomic program - because that is its only survival insurance. However, an attack on one of the most important US military bases would most likely mean the fall of the regime, commented Fredy Gsteiger, correspondent for Swiss radio and television SRF. The German correspondent Malte Kollenberg, who worked for various media in the South Korean capital Seoul, confirms Gsteiger's assessment: "The danger of North Korea is permanent. One may not forget that North Korea as a regime has no interest in escalating the whole issue. Because that would mean that the end to the regime." 2.What about South Korea and the other neighboring countries of North Korea? In this respect, too, commentators of established leading media agree: The "collateral damage" of a US attack on North Korea would be enormous. "Collateral damage" means "consequential damage" to the civilian population, not only in North Korea itself. Especially to the American Allies: South Korea, Japan or Taiwan. Even with a massive US attack, North Korea would still be able to fire innumerable missiles or artillery shells at its neighbors, where the US has stationed itsweaponry, and would cause a bloodbath there with the death of hundreds of thousands. Malte Kollenberg puts it in a nutshell: "In South Korea many big companies would suffer from it. If there was an attack on Seoul, an incredible number of people would be dead. So, South Korea would absolutely not benefit from it neither would North Korea. And it would ultimately destabilize the entire region." 3.Who else could be interested in a war and in the destabilization of the entire region? 
According to Malte Kollenberg, it is not very well received in South Korea that US President Trump threatens North Korea with a war. People got “used to” the war rhetoric from North Korea. "And now hearing the same from Washington, is not well received in South Korea."
 At this point, I would like to remind you of our educational film "Modern Wars: How do they work?" It shows how the so-called "attacker" manages to weaken whole countries and regions as a target object and plunge them into utter chaos. He then plays up as a savior and defeats all his greatest rivals. From the perspective that the "attacker" aims to defeat his rivals all together, a war with North Korea could very well be of profit to US-American global strategists. Their two biggest rivals, Russia and China, both border North Korea and would inevitably be involved in a war, whether directly or indirectly. The only power profiting from a total destabilization of the region would be the "US empire" which then can further expand its economic and military domination, as Klagemauer.TV presented in several broadcasts. According to the educational film I mentioned before, the big losers are all "who allowed this insidious agressor and warmonger to decieve and use them!"

from dd.

Sources/Links: SRF „Echo der Zeit“ vom 10.8.2017 «Kriegsrethorik aus Washington kommt in Südkorea nicht gut an» https://www.srf.ch/play/radio/popupaudioplayer?id=e530af0f-0726-4101-9849-d41840918638
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guam
http://www.srf.ch/news/international/rhetorischer-schlagabtausch-heizt-konflikt-weiter-an
http://www.srf.ch/news/international/trump-legt-nach-militaerische-loesungen-sind-einsatzbereit
http://www.srf.ch/news/international/und-nun-der-krieg
http://www.srf.ch/news/international/warum-kein-weg-aus-der-korea-krise-fuehrt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzAvsOEbn1g