So, what was that fuss about? Yes, I am talking about the “historic” summit in Sigapore. That day, 12 June, all the Japanese TV news programmes were occupied by the flood of “live coverage” (which in fact was just repetition of same things).
What was achieved by the summit? The editorial piece of the recent edition of the Economist magazine seems to sum it up. It says to the effect that Trump put “showmanship first” in order to push up his ratings and that the winner of the summit was definitely Kim Jong-un. The article concluded by saying;
Japanese people have been abducted by the North Korean agents and many of the victims are still there. We see even today quite a few North Korean boat people arriving the coast areas and stealing some electric appliances storaged in the fisherman’s huts. They are certainly not quite welcomed visitors here and I did find it rather unpleasant to see the young dictator flying victoriously back to his home country after the victorious event.
But did I see any articles or news programmes to discuss the role played by the media to drum up the insane excitement? I even had an unpleasant suspicion that all the excitements were played up by the media whose intention was to increase viewing rates and copy sales.
I have, however, a different kind of question to ask. Which is more dangerous to people in the entire world, Kim or Trump? Which poses more danger to the world? My own answer, with no doubt at all, would be the latter: Trump, that is. This particular US president is more dangerous to the world than the North Korean leader.
Mr Kim and his father and grandfather might have done terrible things to their own people for the past six or so decades but it is fundamentally their domestic problem. The current one might have made arrangement for his own brother to be killed by poison but again it is their problem for the justice to be done. Mr Kim has not attempted to kill Japanese prime minister. Have he or his predecessors ever dropped bombs on foreign countries including Japan? He has threatened many times he would very soon be able to shoot missiles to America. Has he actually done that? Was my beloved San Francisco bombed by Mr Kim?
Despite all the threatening words, Seoul has never been the “sea of blood”. No Japanese towns have yet been hit by Mr Kim’s missiles despite Shinzo Abe’s hysteric warnings. Is it not, in any event, reasonable to assume that Mr Kim is aware of what might happen to himself if he did hit other countries by his missiles?
What about Trump? Well, he has dropped bombs on Syria in April together with UK and France on the ground that the country’s leader had allegedly used chemical weapons on his own people.
He said on 14 April 2018;
But he had said five years before;
Is it not fair to assume that he attacked Syria because it would help “making America great again”, nothing to do with the welfare of the Syrians, meaning that the president is quite willing to drop bombs anytime/anywhere if He thinks it will help making his country great again.
I repeat my question: which is more dangerous to the entire world, Trump or Kim? For your information North Korea’s military spending in 2015 was $3.5 billion, about 23.3% of their GDP. What about Mr Trump’s country? They spent in 2014 $581 billion: more than 100 times as much as Mr Kim’s country. Yet, America’s spending was just 3.5% of GDP.
Don’t you think that Kim is idiotic to spend such a big share of GDP for the military spending rather than welfare for the people? But my question is not which is more idiotic but which is more dangerous to the world. For your information, Japan spent 0.9% of its GDP in the same year.
This is getting far too long. I must stop.