Comments:Interview: University of Guam's Ron McNinch on North Korea's nuclear threats

"Once a nation uses nuclear weapons, they lose the value of the weapon. It is the threat the weapon holds that expresses power, not using it." Does this statement only refer to specific conditions such as led up to the current threat, what about US deployment against Japan in WWII? "if North Korea wanted to attack the United States, there are far higher priority targets than Guam." Suppose the current leader, that assumed office just a bit over a year ago at age 28 does not want to wage an all-out attack, but just demonstrate power and resolve? Would not then Guam and the risk of escalation have been staked over a policy guess? "this rhetoric will likely ratchet down once China tells them to back off. This is a common pattern in the past. This bad behavior affects China more than the United States." Let us allow the dead past to bury itself. Should the US be relying on an other nation to deflect a direct threat of nuclear attack to itself? Is this not a most timely opportunity for US President Barack Obama to visit North Korea in person and, as Martin Luther King Jr, demonstrate a fearless commitment to non-violence and global peace? It is probable the "stare-down" military preparative tactics of the US are felt necessary to prevent development and escalation of a perceived similar threat from Iran, but is it really worth waiting to find out? Should not all channels of diplomacy be thoroughly exhausted now?