Hal Lindsey -> Kim Jong-un threatened to nuke the island of Guam
Hal Lindsey -> Kim Jong-un threatened to nuke the island of Guam
“Duck and cover” training in public schools, evacuation drills to nearby shelters, brisk gas mask and “nuke-pill” sales, and backyard bomb shelter construction. Sounds like the 60s, doesn’t it?
Well, it’s not the 60s, it’s August 2017 in Guam, South Korea, Japan, and even a few places in the United States.
And all in response to threats from a pudgy, third-generation dictator in the hermit kingdom of North Korea.
Kim Jong-un threatened to nuke the island of Guam (U.S. territory and site of a massive U.S. Air Force base). President Donald Trump responded with no ambiguity. He said that if Kim even attempted such an action, it “will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
The Left (and quite a few Republicans) scoffed and accused President Trump of false bravado and even reckless endangerment of America.
But the response apparently took Kim by surprise. (Plus the fact that China and Russia seemed to take it seriously.) No American President had ever spoken to Kim or his dad or his grandpa like that in recent memory.
A few days later, North Korea reconsidered and declared that they wouldn’t actually nuke Guam, they would just plop four missiles into the waters off Guam’s coast. Just to show they could do it.
Then U.S. Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis confirmed President Trump’s warning. He told the world that if Kim even flinched his trigger-finger, it was “game on!”
Kim and his generals apparently held a quick confab and decided to revise their previous position. North Korea then announced that it would go easy on the United States this time and scrap its plan to even lob the previously mentioned four missiles.
However, Kim warned the President that NK would be watching him closely and if he tried anything fishy, everything was back on the table and they’d reconsider their full range of options — including nuking Guam or even the United States itself. Please forgive me for allowing a little sarcasm to seep through. I find it interesting, though, how just a little bit of standing up to bullies seems to yield favorable, and quick, results. Something we’ve not seen from an American President for far too long.
There has been considerable debate as to whether the standoff with North Korea rose to the level of the 60s “Cuban Missile Crisis.” There are many differences. For one, with Cuba, the USSR was trying to establish a forward nuclear base within the Western Hemisphere — just 90 miles from the coast of the United States.
Secondly, the Cuban sites would have been under the direct control, operation, and supply of the Soviet Union — and we had a pretty good idea about the massive, and immediate, nuclear capabilities of the USSR.
On the other hand, North Korea is not in the Western Hemisphere and we remain uncertain as to the specific nuclear capabilities it possesses. Further, Kim is not under the overt tutelage of an enemy sponsor nation like China or Russia. In fact, just a few days before, both of them voted for the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sanctions on North Korea.
Which, incidentally, was a major (almost unbelievable) foreign policy achievement by the Trump Administration. But if you listen only to the mainstream media, you probably heard nothing or next-to-nothing about that aspect of the UNSC vote.
As I write this, the standoff with North Korea seems to have eased for the moment and everyone is breathing a sigh of relief.
Of course, the tragic terror attacks in and around Barcelona and, before that, the Leftist-engineered (I believe) crisis in Charlottesville pushed North Korea off the front page for now. But the world still must contend with a nutjob who controls up to sixty nuclear weapons and is trying desperately to develop (or buy) the technology to deliver them to the United States.
So things are not going to get easier anytime soon. Just as the Bible prophets predicted for these days.
But, as former Secretary of State and Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton once reminded a group at the European Union, we should “never waste a good crisis.”
So there are many on the Left side of the political spectrum who are using the North Korean standoff to attempt to restrict the President’s constitutional authority to act as Commander-in-Chief. Though they will not openly say so, their actions belie their motives. In their “concern” that President Trump may recklessly engage in nuclear warfare, they want to pass legislation to require him to get Congressional permission to order certain military options.
Of course, the President’s prerogatives in that area are granted by the U.S. Constitution, but I believe this move dovetails with others to reveal a general attack by the Left on the Presidency itself.
For example, recently the President tweeted, “The United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.”
Now that was just a tweet. No formal policy change has yet been announced. But already the Commandant of the Coast Guard has implied that he will be insubordinate and not obey any directive that changes the military’s policy on transgenders.
Admiral Paul F. Jukunft said that the Coast Guard will “not break faith” with transgender individuals. Even if he is ordered by his Commander-in-Chief to do so? It’s not like the military’s transgender acceptance policy is a longstanding military tradition (Oh yeah, taxpayers are also currently required to pay the exorbitant costs of making the service member’s sex change!). The rule has only been in place about a year!
Furthermore, one Commander-in-Chief arbitrarily decided to do it and it was okay. Another Commander-in-Chief decides to undo it and it’s not?
The net effect is that a ranking member of the U.S. Armed Services has openly implied he will defy the constitutionally-mandated civilian control of the military. Of course, he is now a superhero to the LGBTQs and Democrats.
The issue of civilian control of the military goes to the heart of our constitutional republic. This has the earmarks of another constitutional crisis in the making.
Finally, on this week’s show, I ask the question: “Why do human beings sin?”
The Apostle Paul indicates that there are two things at work within a non-believer to make him sin. The first is his sinful passions — sometimes called “the sin nature.”
The second thing that pushes us toward sin is, ironically, the Law itself. Rebellion against the Law produces what the Bible calls “sin.”
The Law shows us that we cannot measure up to God’s standards of right and wrong. We cannot justify ourselves.
That’s why all men need the redemption from the curse of the Law that Jesus purchased for us by His death on the cross.
There is no other way for man to enter heaven.
email: [email protected]