While we're distracted by the memo brouhaha...

The so-called “bloody nose” strategy, referring to a limited preventive strike against North Korea, has gone public following the withdrawal of Victor Cha’s nomination as US Ambassador to South Korea. The bloody nose is one of the Donald Trump administration’s military options: a small-scale, limited surgical strike against North Korean nuclear sites or other nuclear facilities that ostensibly would not provoke a response from North Korea.

There’s no way to know how seriously this strategy has been discussed at the White House.

  Hankyoreh

I think I can guess at least as far as one participant is concerned.

To begin with the idea that North Korea “wouldn’t dare” strike back against the US is both sad and dangerous. It’s based on a US-centered mindset that equates a North Korean counter-strike with the end of the Pyongyang regime. But with Trump administration hardliners describing Kim Jong-un as “irrational and unpredictable,” it’s not clear how they are predicting he would reach the same military conclusion as them.

[...]

The people advocating the bloody nose approach are either hardliners with military backgrounds or laypeople in terms of military and security issues. In most cases, their understanding of the Korean Peninsula or North Korea is close to zero. These people seem to possess authority that far outstrips their abilities. They’re also arrogant and rash.

That's the whole damned Trump administration.

According to Cha’s Washington Post piece, some ultra-hardliners have argued that the risk of endangering the lives of the 230,000 Americans living in South Korea if the bloody nose strategy escalates is worth taking in terms of “long-term interests” and the “safety of Americans living in the continental US.” The fates of 50 million South Koreans don’t even warrant a mention.

Both of these points are mind-boggling, but not, I think, unusual for US military discussions.

The reason hardline voices have gotten so much louder in the White House lately has much to do with the discussions occurring between South and North Korea for the Pyeongchang Olympics. It appears to be an attempt to stop a climate of reconciliation from forming on the peninsula.

[...]

Depending on how the mid-term elections in November turn out, [Trump] could find himself a lame duck. This raises the troubling question of whether he might consider a strike against North Korea as a way out of his domestic political crisis.

We might consider ourselves lucky if we make it to the midterms.

Indeed, White House National Security Council senior director for Asian affairs Matthew Pottinger reportedly said in a recent closed-door meeting with US experts on Korean Peninsula issues that a limited strike on the North might help in the midterm elections.

See what I mean?

This coupled with the news that Trump ordered a six-month readiness for nuclear testing and the development of a new type of nuclear weapon for a "limited nuclear war," is actually quite alarming.  But we're busy with the idiot memo.