Boston Herald

Blusterer-in chief

-

On the day President Trump made his initial “fire and fury” threat to North Korea, U.S. Sen. John McCain — no stranger to military action himself — warned, “The great leaders I’ve seen don’t threaten unless they’re ready to act, and I’m not sure that President Trump is ready to act.”

It was good advice. It went unheeded.

By Thursday Trump had doubled down on his threats, saying perhaps they weren’t “tough enough.” Then he responded to Kim Jong Un’s own rather specific threat that he was considerin­g a plan to test-fire four intermedia­te range missiles in internatio­nal waters off Guam — home to U.S. air and naval bases and, it should be noted, equipped with a Thaad anti-missile system.

“He’s not going to be saying those things, and he’s certainly not going to be doing those things,” Trump said. “He does something in Guam, it will be an event the likes of which nobody’s seen before, what will happen in North Korea.” he said.

“It’s not a dare. It’s a statement,” he added.

Even if Trump is immune to advice from McCain — or his own national security team — perhaps as a businessma­n he might have glanced at Wall Street’s reaction during those few days, beginning with the “fire and fury” comment and even more so after his Thursday round of bombast. Markets from New York to Japan and Hong Kong took a serious dip — the sharpest decline since May.

Still the president was undeterred as he tweeted Friday morning, “Military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely. Hopefully Kim Jong Un will find another path!”

The only hopeful news at week’s end was an Associated Press report that a back channel to North Korea, opened in June to secure the release of an American student, was still operating and could provide an avenue for future diplomacy.

Perhaps Trump was deluded by the surgical strike on Syria in retaliatio­n for Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons into thinking all such military responses can be bloodless and without consequenc­es. This one wouldn’t be — not by a longshot.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States