I believe the rhetoric is coming out to have us buy the American Thaad anti missile system.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/37278109/australia-must-prepare-for-nuclear-war-with-north-korea/

Australia has no choice but to prepare for a missile attack from North Korea, a former Pentagon nuclear weapons official warns.

The former Obama administration defence official also said that warships should be fitted with proper while pointing out that Australia’s radar defences were rather sparse.

"I don't think it's a large number of very expensive interceptors and radars deployed around the periphery of the Australian continent," he said.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/860194/North-Korea-Australia-attack-missile-Malcolm-Turnbull-World-War-3

Former Pentagon official Dr Brad Roberts warned that unhinged Kim Jong-un could follow through on threats to devastate Australia with his arsenal of missiles and nukes.

The idea that NK would attack Australia makes no sense.

Scenario, A country is being threatened by a group of countries with 1 (USA) being the leader and have a proven record of deceit the other countries are just like puppets, only a fool would waste any of the limited number of long range missiles and nukes on the puppets the lot will be unleashed on America, short range ones will go to Japan or Guam

Lets hope Turnbull does not blow the deficit out by Billions more in an arms race, especially after the debacles of the past with warships and the F35 lemon. Not to mention the submarine fiasco

Hey Philip S,
Not just to purchase thaad missile defence, but talk up war rhetoric / make sure allies are all on board.
The bottom line is that if the US in not prepared to accept the North Koreans nuclear status, (which I don't think it is) then it's going to have to pre-emptively strike a nuclear armed country.
All this talk of sanctions is a waste of my time, telling me what they think I want to hear.
The North Koreans don't care about the sanctions, they know only one thing.
That the US will seek to have them give up nuclear programs or chemical weapons so it can invade the country like it did in Iraq, Syria and everywhere else, on false pretexts and backed by false flags.
Personally I want no part of it, and on some level I now actually support the North Koreans in telling America where to go.
I supported Trump and I hoped the US would start acting less imperialistic in its liberal interventionist foreign policies but it has not.
He tried to drain the swamp, but he has instead become the swamp, he never had control over US forign policy and I do not support the US anymore.

It's all talk anyway, because I seriously doubt the effectiveness of thaad against MIRV's travelling at 15,000mph on re-entry anyway.
The best thing we could do is stop supporting US wars, their country is done now anyway.
It's China and India which are set for the next 100yrs of growth and the only thing the US exports is scrapmetal and GMO's.

F-35 ? Don't get me started with 'the flying turds'
The insulation in the fuel talks comes off causing the plane to blow up, onboard cannon doesn't work so they had to fit one under it's belly plus the helmets don't work + 270 odd other defects...
It's almost like microsoft releasing a new edition of windows and expecting consumers to fix all the bugs...
Submarines? How much did we pay 50bln?
India bought 6 Scorpene class diesel electrics from DCNS for 4.16bln?

Dear Philip,

«only a fool would waste any of the limited number of long range missiles and nukes on the puppets the lot will be unleashed on America»

Not according to mathematical game theory.

A rational strategy would include probability, so rather than just pressing a button, a better strategy could be:

"We've instructed a nuclear submarine to roll a dice under water, then sail to a destination accordingly.
In 21 days we will not know where it is, but it will go up somewhere and check online, then unless its order was rescinded by a special code known only to the submarine's captain and dear-leader, there's 5% it will hit New-York, 4% it will hit Washington, 3% it will hit Los-Angeles, 6% it will hit Japan, 2% it will hit Australia and 80% it will do nothing".

Yes, Australia should prepare, but more against short-range attacks by North-Korean submarines, especially as part of a retaliatory second-strike, than against direct missile attacks from North-Korea itself.

Dear Philip,

On the news this morning we were told that North Korea
has accepted to be involved with talks with the United States
mediated by China to discuss the future of North Korean
missile tests.

In my opinion, all North Korea wants is to show the world
that it is capable to be a major military force in its own
defence. It is American President Trump's aggravation of the
situation by trying to bait North Korea that is the cause of
the problems. If Trump were to be removed - the situation
would minimise. Once North Korea satisfied itself that their
experiments are successful.

Unless a military threat against Australia is proven we should
not waste finances on armaments - when there is a greater
need elsewhere - such as investments in energy, water and other
priorities. Australia is not a threat to North Korea.
But Trump is.

Dearest Foxy,

I don't think it's just a matter of either-or - both NK and US leaders are warmongers, upping each others' rhetoric and leaving no room for more sensible options. Like two big kids at the back of the playground.

Of course, war can't be allowed to occur -as the meat in the sandwich, South Korea would be obliterated in the first days. But of course, China would be immediately involved if the US was stupid enough to invade. Then it would be on. Goodbye, world economy.

Of course, it wouldn't stop at conventional warfare: within minutes, nuclear weapons would be activated, on both sides, and inevitably from China too.

So of course negotiations will have to occur, endless negotiations if necessary, and sweeteners will have to be put on the table.

Another thing: as was perceptively noted above, NK submarines can probably already bring nuclear-tipped missiles far closer to other countries, Australia and the US included. One of the NK's rocket launches looked like a double-ignited submarine-based weapon.

So as Churchill said, it's better to jaw-jaw than war-war, especially in this crucial situation. So what can be offered to NK as sweeteners, not as appeasement but to bring it in from the cold ?

Love,

Joe

Foxy,

I well remember Trump's warmongering that led to North Korea invading South Korea way back in 1950 and all the flying pigs since then.