Alexa when was Easter Easter Sunday was last Sunday April 21st? Alexa what's today? Today is Wednesday April 24th. So Easter is a 21st. I'm recording this the 24th And you probably won't see it till the 25th or 26th I can squeak it out. Can I squeak it out boys? Can I please just squeak this one out? Okay? I'm gonna squeak it out. Welcome back to today's video I am gonna do a pack in place.  So I shouldn't make that content either way Let's start it out. These are the trash ones. This is a tier one egg.  That's a tier four egg We still pulled 99 Damarino, but I thought that was a tier one egg again. We got a 99 overall Basically all 99 stats 64 speed though. Hopefully we get something else I'm just gonna like keep opening these because this is going well I got a team of the weak hero. Yo, I don't know what PTTD is Pete it says 88 to 94 PTTD, but it's an 88 to 94 and we got a 94 I'll take a 94 d tackle. This is a team builder player 92 Cooper cup Our pack like it's really good right now. We're like starting out weirdly. Well, it's kind of freaking me out Actually, give me a 94 here. Let's let's simmer down Okay, thank you. All right, tier three egg a 94 to 96 PTTD still don't know what that means But I will totally take it half back We got a half back quarterback wide receiver game over boys 97 color. Okay, so this is a guarantee 97. Give me somebody good ever Who I want. All right, so this is the 85 plus such as this is where I got deacon Jones last time This one's gonna give me a UL Steve at water bet two times 80 plus team builder pack cat Sorry, I'm getting antsy 87 and a left guard Back that I wasn't supposed to open But I'll totally take Ocho Cinco Ocho Cinco starting wide receiver Dan Marino at QB 94 to 95 95 Squaw We're gonna have that full team. Yo, I just I just got a right tackle, but all right Rick Wagner I'm sorry. You're getting demoted. Come on. Come on. Come on some news. I'm spicy user-middle linebacker with 88 speed Let's go. All right back to an 85 plus legend pack That's a real 85. Yeah. Yeah, now we're getting somewhere. All right, Ronnie lot. No, you got a free safety I'm fine with that 84 plus draft it could be What look right now my D lines gonna be insane, I guess Yo, can I get some lineback? Is there something or a corner? I kind of need that too Is this a UL? Like I so we got Cooper cup Sammy Watkins Ocho Cinco. That's pretty good. This is a 97 color smash I want the corner. There's a 97 corner. I don't remember who Well, we got a pretty good Bengals duo at wide receiver. All right, 98 PTTD. I don't know what that means Okay, it's the draft ones. Oh Tackle, you know how many 97 overall MVP players Oh boy, this is a very important Linebacker yes, yo, I got a middle linebacker two outside linebackers. Hell. Yeah, but I want this is bread What do you got? What do you got? What do you got? What do you got? All right, I'm gonna put in random golds at center and right guard cuz we didn't get those got not a single tight end Oh, actually, okay. I'm sorry. I kind of cheated. I didn't mean to I didn't think I was gonna do a pack of place I opened one pack. I got Eric Ebron. No lie. I know you're all gonna think I'm lying But I really did cuz look if I go to newest he'll be the top left or wait, okay It's showing all the okay, he's right there. Yo Hands down best pack and play we've done this team is nuts and we got Dan Marino That's so clutched to get that so early. All right, yo, we know what to do Let's go hop into a game. See how we do opponent's team as Michael Vick. Of course it does. I don't care, dude I got Dan Marino Play action All right, second and 19 definitely gonna pass. Okay All right, I'm gonna send some blitzes here just so he doesn't have forever to like make a read Dude two sacks in the TFL. Let's just try and like a rifle a touchdown in first play Cuz we're gonna throw a perfect pass, right? Is that how it works? Perfect pass Eric Ebron. Can you make that throw Marino? Oh I thought he was gonna come down with that third and one Marino you want to use those wheels yours, you know, that's a man cover Ocho sicko. All right, Aaron Jones left side There's a big hole right there to run play good call Dan Marino wheels wheels wheels I didn't bumble. This is ballsy, but I'm gonna do it. I'm going the inside zone here Good block No, but we definitely got that first down first and goal. Let's see if we can power this in I don't feel great about it to be honest, but we do have a pretty good offensive line There it is great. Oh, I usually always choke on the goal line, but that's a good start definitely gonna do the fake here He's there can we playmaker it maybe maybe That's why I need big Ben at the kicker so that I can yeah, that's all right All right, I'm sending a weird blitz here and he runs. Wow. That's bold.  Here's the pass. I've got them both locked 97 overalls got it. Let's take this somewhere. He's on his feet Let's run this ball. Yeah, that's that's gonna be there Nope that black shed that's gonna be there That's why oh great throw for Marino. We got a spin. We got another one and a juke All right, Aaron Jones on the wheel. Is it there? I'm gonna throw it. I don't care if it's there. Okay. I got a miss I think there's a fib third and four I got two clock on so that I can And then get the ball back without him scoring it's gonna work great. Let's get something to go here There's why wide open Aaron Jones. Yeah, I feel like I'm playing like Madden 11 I'm throwing the underneath route on vert on four verts get him thinking past thinking past thinking past And then we just go right up the middle Third and two boom And Aaron Jones is gonna carry three guys for us six yards today broke Don't fix it. Let's stay on the ground Great hole right there. I love a good hole. Wait a minute. Something ain't right And what's okay, there's so much open and I missed like all I'm throwing these so many things wide open.  Why would I do that? All right? I don't know why he would be doing this unless he's chewing the clock to all right second and 12 Similar that's play action play action play action somebody get to him. Let's go. Let's see what he's gonna try and hit. I Got a QB spy on him Got the time out I'll see if I tell it Blitz is like too much for him. All right. Yo, rage quick rage quick Pack of play squad is unstoppable Ladies and gentlemen, that's it for this pack and play I Would play a few more games, but I want to make sure I get this video out to you in time to the point where like It's at least relatively close to Easter and when I was doing the pack open doing the egg opening So I'm sorry I suck, but that's how it be. That's it. I'll see you guys in the next episode I'll make sure that if I do more pack of plays in future. They are as fire as this one Peace out boys. Thanks for watching. See you later


They will be one of the most experienced and obviously well-trained police officers as a result of coming through this centre. Men and women who go out there and protect the community and put their own safety at risk in doing that, stay safe themselves and have the best possible equipment and training to enable them to do that work. And this place is truly world-class and gives them the best start in their careers that they could possibly have.


Nature decilicates are a unique type of material composed of silicon nitride and oxygen atoms. They have been used for decades as structural materials due to their high strength and hardness, but recently they have also been found to be useful for luminescence. Rare earth elements can be added to these compounds to create a new family of luminescent materials. These materials have been shown to emit light when excited by ultraviolet or visible light, making them ideal candidates for white LEDs. The luminescence of these materials is characterized by a red shifted excitation spectrum, small stokes shift, low thermal quenching, and high conversion efficiency. These characteristics make them excellent candidates for use in white LEDs with tunable color temperature and high color rendering index. This article was authored by Rong Jun-sia, Naoto Hirasaki, Yuan Xiangli, and others.


Welcome back to corporate governance and we are moving forward with the leadership aspect of corporate governance. Today, we are going to do an exercise and this exercise is basically called leaders view. We are going to make this interactive, so therefore I would like to request all of you to please take out a piece of page and have a pencil or a pen which is going to be ready and based upon that we will be moving forward with this particular exercise which would be giving a perspective towards leadership especially in the context of a student of corporate governance. Now, when we are talking about leaders then leaders differ in how they view human nature and the tactics they use to get things done to others. This exercise is intended to encourage students to reflect carefully on their current views on leadership. So, we have leadership dilemmas, we see that leaders have different styles, we see that leaders take different decisions, we see that their perspective is different, we look at the bigger picture and many a times they are looking at the long term rather than the short term and therefore it could be that the leaders decision might even be in contradiction of a followers perspective. Nelson Mandela, one of the top leaders of the 20th century, he basically mentioned once that leaders have to take difficult decisions and a leader is not a leader if they cannot take those difficult decisions which would not be popular. So, we see that in Nelson Mandela's leadership Nelson Mandela would take those decisions which everyone thought at the moment would be wrong but in the long term they always emerged to benefit the nation and that is what a leader should do. So, let us look at this exercise ladies and gentlemen, you will be thinking about each point that I am talking about and either agree or disagreeing with it and then at the end you will have a complete score and you can share the score with me later on through some communication. So, the first perspective is overall it is better to be humble and honest than to be successful and dishonest. So, the first point is overall it is better to be humble and honest than to be successful and dishonest. So, usually when we are looking at this particular point the answer is always going to be humble and honest but unfortunately what is being practiced is something else. We see this at the global level, we see this at the national level and we see it at the institutional level but again it is a matter of perspective to see that is success more important or is honesty more important and sometimes when you want to be successful then you are thinking of doing different shortcuts of doing things by maybe undertaking different corrupt practices and sometimes being non-married based and therefore there could be many compromises. The second point is if you trust someone completely you are asking for trouble. So, is it that we have to trust people 100% or 50% but then there is another very famous saying that either there is 100% trust or there is no trust at all because even in 99% trust it basically means that you do not trust the person. So, again it is how you look at leaders can we trust leaders there is something which has been going on in Pakistan for many years which is called the trust deficit and that trust deficit is basically with the leadership do the words and actions work in symphony and harmony or is there a divide between the words and actions of any leader that is very important. A leader should take action only when it is morally right. So, again many people talk about this that leaders should always take morally right questions and therefore one should be very careful of how things are being done. Now, when we are looking at leadership again another question which emerges is a good way to handle people is to tell them what they like to have. So, again is it that leadership is being about being a populist is it about only talking what people want to hear or maybe sometime sharing what they do not want to hear but would be for their betterment. There is no excuse for telling a white lie to someone and again that is very important that can leaders speak lies should leaders speak lies and what is the extent to lying that can be accepted by the public. So, that is very modern it makes sense to flatter important people. So, there is this thing that buttering or flattering or praising people unnecessarily that tends to get the work done should leaders indulge in that most people who get ahead as leaders have led very moral lives. So, again this is something that we do see but on the other hand we also see that there are many leaders who have basically reached the pinnacle of life or of their careers through immoral activity. So, that is extremely important and you have to decide what do you think is correct or incorrect and you will then reach a final score. Well, another question is is it better not to tell people the real reason you did something unless it benefits you to do so. So, yeah this is a perspective that you can look at that do we keep secrets do we share secrets what are professional secrets what are institutional secrets we have the official secrecy act as a law in Pakistan should that be applicable in the corporate sector should not be applicable in the corporate sector all of these questions are basically coming to our mind and you can again see that do you agree or disagree with them. The majority of people are brave good and kind. So, is it that humans are fundamentally good and kind and brave or is it something which is opposite to that please take a decision is it hard to get to the top without cutting corners. So, usually many people think that without cutting corners you cannot reach the top. So, unless you know how to cut them only then can you reach the top. So, this is another question. So, ladies and gentlemen based upon these different questions what I want you to do is is write that you think it is correct or incorrect or it is true or false and then you count how many corrects you have and how many incorrects you have and see which is the larger number. So, again the statements themselves are a learning process, but more so it would be a reflection of your understanding of leadership of ethical behavior and of doing things molly correct. So, do we want to do them or do we not want to do them that basically differs from person to person. Thank you so much.


So there's been a couple of Cloudflare outages in the last week. On July 2nd, yesterday, 2019, Cloudflare Outage was caused by bad software deploy. There is a good post mortem on this. And it's not long because there's not much to talk about. They basically had made a mistake in a firewall rule that caused a high application usage inside of their web application firewall devices. And this broke them. It caused the CPU to spike 100% on the machines worldwide and 100% spike caused errors. This is just a bad software update. What is way more interesting is how Verizon and a BGP optimizer knocked large parts of the internet offline today. Now, they point the finger at Cloudflare because it was noticeable due to Cloudflare's size that they were down. But if you worked on the IT side like I do and hear customers complaining, you notice that lots of other things were down too, including a lot of things hosted in Amazon that put it in the cloud. They said, it'll be reliable. They said, okay, it is reliable. But it sometimes is very noticeable when you have nothing on-prem and everything's in the cloud and the cloud that you're in, this section of the cloud you're in goes down. So this starts with the story of border gateway protocol. The essential way to look at the simplicity of border gateway protocol is a very complicated thing, but let's try to break it down very simple like they do here in a Wikipedia article. The border gateway protocol is a standardized exterior gateway protocol to exchange routing and reachability information among autonomous systems on the internet. Basically, this is the road map to how do we get from one network? Let's say a network owned by Comcast, a network owned by Verizon or a network owned by DigitalOcean. How do we get from here to there? There's always better routes and you may hear the term OSPF for open shortest path. The goal is I need to get to, let's say the Lawrence Systems Forums and you're on a Verizon network. There is a series of steps that networks and steps that it needs to follow and border gateway protocol is that map. Now this map gets updated constantly. It changes all the time because, well, there's always systems moving around, IP blocks are owned or bought or sold by companies, et cetera, et cetera. So it's a really important critical protocol. The fun part about this is where everything goes wrong with BGP is it's an old protocol based on trust. We trust that Verizon will look at the routes sent to them before they advertise them back out as, yeah, this is the best route across our network or across any network and publish them properly and any of these companies should be doing that. So let's give you a couple of visualizations here. This is what Verizon looks like. So this is AS 701. Everyone's assigned an AS number to understand how they're connected in the autonomous systems. And I'll leave links to this. This is kind of fun to visualize this. This is just the Verizon network. This is just all the little pieces and nodes that are in there. And if it looks complex, it is. So as much as I said, BGP is a road map. These are what the roads look like that are between all the machines. This is just inside Verizon's network. This is the internet. And when you look at the number of routes on the internet, you're like, wow, the interconnections are amazing. And you can pick any one of these in here. And these all represent different companies, different places that have routes. Let's just pick one. And here is the pathing for this little section here. And it goes to a bigger path, which gets here. And these are how those hops go out. So you hop from this system to system and get into where you wanna go. So it's fun to play with and kind of get an idea. And now you get a better idea of also the scale and scope of what we're doing with.  Here is the little company and their little network that I say little, it's still way bigger than my network, but still in concept, it's not too many routes that they own and this is where the mistakes were made. An internet service provider in Pennsylvania, DQE Communications was using a BGP optimizer network which meant there were a lot more specific routes in their network. Specific routes override more general routes in the, as they have a whole ways analogy of finding the most efficient path to something. Well, it announced very specific routes that are customer, Allegheny Technologies, things like you say that, all the routing routes are then sent to their other transfer provider, Verizon, who proceeded to tell the entire internet about these better routes. Basically picture someone poisoning the map, they just put the wrong map in. Oh yeah, the fastest way between these two points is through our network is essentially what they said. This was massive and I found this really cool BGP replay and we can look at what they changed because BGP announced the way the routes work and they can be announced and then logged and we'd have to log all these changes because they ought to be pushed to routers and this is like a replay so we can see what happened on that time. So here's what their network look like at 9 a.m. Here was all those route optimizations. I tried rendering it and it actually locks up in my browser. So if we wanted to go and see how these route changes were then pushed up to Verizon, it kept hanging up to do any of the rendering because they were so many and that's where the problem came in. So Verizon and they're completely just, I don't know how to do it. It's a human error at the next level. A human layer, human error at scale is what happened here. How could this risk have been prevented? Well, there was multiple ways this leak could have been avoided. A BGP session can be configured with a hard limit of prefixes to be received.  Sure, no verification, no limit. They accepted thousands of reroutes with very specific ones and as they kind of point out and like I said, I'll leave the whole link so you can read the very detail if you want to get real nerdy into this but essentially they said we have very specific routes that are the most efficient way to get to where you want to go on the internet and a percentage of the internet then routed through Pittsburgh and it was just a big mess. So Verizon basically did everything wrong. Verizon did not validate these. They did not say, wait, why are you all of a sudden claiming that the internet would be faster routed through you? They did not like just stop the whole system based on a rate limit of this many changes coming across that affect a bigger part of the internet more than the specific company. Everything that could have been done was not done. Like no fail safes in the course. To go a step further, Verizon wasn't answering the phone. That would be a good way to describe that. So they didn't validate, they didn't rate limit and they also didn't answer the phone to fix it. So everyone affected. Cloudflare was directly impacted but as I said many other companies were too. Linode, Amazon, lots of these hosting companies and people who keep their infrastructure in one of these hosting companies were taken down by this as well. So as many people thought, a lot of these last couple of days of attacks or outages of the internet where, you know, some type of attack and breakdown, they weren't. They were just human error at scale. One caused by, oops, we had a firewall rule that peaked our CPU to 100% and Verizon just not even, no excuse. You can't even play devil's advocate and defend the behavior of Verizon of why did you accept all this, you know? You might expect this type of behavior from a very small company that says we didn't know any better, we're a small company but Verizon for better or worse owns a major piece of the internet backbone and so tons of networks traverse their network and have to listen to their BGP announcements because well, it's a big component to how this works together. The other flaw is the fact that BGP is still generally speaking based on trust. It's a matter of time before more people there has been small incidents in the past where people have abused BGP to announce routes to try to, you know, do things nefarious but most of the BGP outages and I'll leave links to a couple other times I've talked about this have been just massive amounts of human error in human error at scale due to the scale and size of Verizon. So I'll leave links so you can read about all this if you want to dig in further, play with the visualization. This is kind of fun to look at and kind of get ideas of just the scale and scope of the internet which is just outstanding and amazing and fascinating that it all works at the same time. I have several friends that work directly with dealing with BGP routes and stuff like that. They're always fun and interesting to talk to because they say just that like they facepalm about what they do with their job that it's like, you don't know how bad this is.  It just goes very wrong and using an optimizer to try and do it because we do need more automation tools to optimize these but they still have to be vetted because the stakes are high. The internet's become an integral part of how we do business and how we transact things online and how we talk to each other online. So when this all goes wrong it affects all of us in a very bad way. All right, I'll leave links to all this so you can do some more reading. It's a fun topic to dive into and have fun with it. Thanks. Thanks for watching. If you liked this video, give it a thumbs up. If you want to subscribe to this channel to see more content, hit that subscribe button and the bell icon and maybe YouTube will send you a notice when we post. If you want to hire us for a project that you've seen or discussed in this video head over to LawrenceSystems.com where we offer both business IT services and consulting services and are excited to help you with whatever project you want to throw at us. Also, if you want to carry on the discussion further head over to Forums.LauranceSystems.com where we can keep the conversation going and if you want to help the channel out in other ways we offer affiliate links below which offer discounts for you and a small cut for us that does help fund this channel. And once again, thanks again for watching this video and see you next time.


Well, today is, as it should be, a day dedicated to studying North Korea. I think so. We had Admiral Thomas Fargo come around. He was the Pacific commander for a while, and familiar with at least how it looked from the military.  And you have specific thoughts, and you've been there many times, and you've been thinking about this since your time in the Army in 1820, wasn't it? It was the War of 1812. Yeah. Anyway, here we go. So some really interesting things have happened in the past few days, and the whole game seems to be changing, and the possibilities, the options, they're changing, the likely outcomes are changing, and certainly your thoughts have been changing. How are your thoughts now? Well, they have. Enough things have happened that have never happened before that I am now satisfied that a meeting will happen, which means that the brave new world is upon us now, because these kind of things never happened before. We've been through presidencies five and six in number spanning 30 years or more where nothing has been done. The U.S. pattern of behavior, which was imposed upon us really by the State Department, is to disavow any meeting with the North Koreans unless and until, first, they have to agree to forceware any interest in nuclear weapons. Well, that's their leading calling card. That's their main, that's their card. That's the card they play. And, of course, we have to tell them that the United States will... Well, hasn't he acceded to this? He said, I'm not going to... Oh, he has now. He has now. That's what makes it different.  Is there or is there? I'm telling you, at a given date in either late May or early June, two guys with funky haircuts are going to meet somewhere and talk for a while. My prediction would be that they will meet in a small city in the free world, because Kim Jong-un, like his father and like his grandfather, has never answered to a hostile press. They've never put themselves in that situation, and that's why every time there's a meeting between North and South, it always happens in Pyongyang, and it probably always will. So those are the... That's the lay of the land. Are you saying this meeting is going to happen in Pyongyang, too? No. As a matter of fact, I'm telling you, it won't happen anywhere on the Korean Peninsula, because Trump, being the negotiator that he is, will not allow Kim Jong-un to have home field advantage. That's why the real likelihood is that it'll be in a place like Reykjavik, a small city in Iceland, where Gorbachev and Reagan met, or it could be where President Ford met in one of the smaller cities. Why about Hawaii? No, because it's the United States. It gives us home field advantage. And the press would be here in droves. Oh, can you imagine? I can. Yeah. Okay, so Helsinki, Finland is another good example of a very small locale. Where they could have a meeting and don't expect a lot of advance notice because they don't want to give the press advance notice. And they would like very much to have all the rooms and all the facilities sold out so that not everybody can get in. Of course, you and I could get in easily because we're the staff. You're right. Those cities are relatively small. Yeah. I think they're both in less than 300,000, something like that. Yeah, that's right. And they've been used before with success. Gerald Ford met with Brezhnev in Finland. Yeah. Okay. Anyway, so what I get, Pat, is you think this meeting will happen? It will happen. And because it happens, the world is automatically different because since the war, we have never met with a North Korean leader. Kim Il-sung, during the time of Detente back in the 70s, actually thought, really thought that he would get an invitation to the White House because all of the Warsaw Pact countries over on the other side of the globe were also getting invitations because Nixon was trying to wean the Warsaw Pact countries away from Russia to gain advantage over them. And that's why he went to China. Some people think that just to meet with Kim Jong-un, just for Trump, just to meet with him, that's giving up too much. No. You know, is that giving up anything significant? It's giving up something and it's something that we should want to give up because what we're saying to the whole world is we, as the leader of the free world and effectively of the world, are approachable. The one thing that looks rigid and inflexible is the notion, because we've always said the State Department has let us down this path and it's not a good choice. They've let us down the path of saying the only way we'll meet with you is in six-party talks. The two Koreas, Japan, Russia, China, U.S. will only meet you in six-party talks. Now, you and I both know that you don't get anything done with a committee. When I was stationed in Korea, I remember that the Catholic pastor always said, God so loved the world that he did not send a committee. So it has to be a one-on-one meeting between North Korea and the United States. And it shows a flexibility which changes things completely. One thing I can tell you for sure. Fast forward to 2020. I know Trump is running. I don't know whether he'll win or lose, but I know one thing's for sure. The Democratic nominee will have a plan for how to deal with North Korea. There may be economic elements to it. There may be military elements, but the Democratic nominee will have a plan for how to deal with North Korea and it will be, it will have a detail that you've never seen before at all. Well, they'll be criticizing whatever Trump does, won't they? Not only criticizing, but they'll be saying we can handle it better and they'll have a plan for handling it better. Because it's a big issue. Because look, once one president meets with Kim Jong-un, a North Korean leader, another one will. And another will. And another will. That's it. Yeah. That's it. The status quo is over as of now. It's already changed. Let's talk about what Kim Jong-un is looking for. That's a very good question. And you'd be amazed. One of the things they're looking for derives from what Kim Il-sung said in the 70s. I never get an invitation to the White House. They want respect and they're getting it by virtue of this conference. That's why if we have to surrender something in the deal, let's stop thinking about who's winning and who's losing and let's figure out a way for everybody to win. So one thing, is it worth our trouble to talk about regime change? I would say no. We didn't get it in Cuba and we didn't get it in Germany. What happened is Germany evolved out of communism and that's the best we can hope for. The other thing is this, I would hope that we can talk the North Koreans out of nuclear weapons. If we can't, every other country in the world that we tried to talk out of it, we failed. Look at what happened so recently. In 2011, practically in order to catch Osama bin Laden, we invaded Pakistan. Pakistan has the bomb, but whoever talked about, oh, maybe we'll have a bomb dropped on us. The mutually assured destruction that we've operated on for so long tells countries no matter what their makeup is, no matter how radical they may otherwise seem, it tells them don't push the button because if you push the button, this is true of the United States too. If you push the button, a button will be pushed dedicated to you. That is mutually assured destruction.  So would you agree with me that his comment, Kim Jong-un's comment about seeking a better economic future for North Korea is the core point here? It's one of them. We haven't ever talked about commercially connecting with North Korea, but there's no reason it couldn't happen. And I think you'll hear more talk along that vein in the near future. Is there anything necessarily wrong with weaning North Korea off of China so that now their quasi-alliance with the U.S. makes the Chinese a little worried? Here's what the Chinese are worried about. Ever since the time of Mao Tse-tung, they have not wanted U.S. troops anywhere near their border. And what Douglas MacArthur was threatening when he said, hey, this is World War III, you know, let's go for the big win. And that's why they went all the way up to the Yalu River. And that was the time when the Chinese invaded with their 200,000 volunteers. That was the time they did not before. Mao Tse-tung. We provoked them, is what you're saying? That's actually true. That's actually true. Once we were past the 38th parallel into what now is North Korea, we provoked them. And that's a result that we got. OK. Let's take a short break. There's Pat Border, an interested diplomat, a citizen diplomat. We're going to come back and talk about exactly what is going on with China and this deal with North Korea. There's a lot of wrinkles to that. It's kaleidoscopic. We'll be right back. I'm DeSoto Brown, the co-host of Human Humane Architecture, which is seen on Think Tech, Hawaii every other Tuesday at 4 p.m. And with the show's host, Martin Desbang, we discuss architecture here in the Hawaiian Islands and how it not only affects the way we live, but other aspects of our life, not only here in Hawaii, but internationally as well. So join us for Human Humane Architecture every other Tuesday at 4 p.m. on Think Tech, Hawaii. We're back. We're live with Pat Border, who has followed Korea, North Korea for a lifetime, really. It's been 40 years because I started in the South. And he's a citizen diplomat, and he follows it by going there, by studying it. Today, we're talking about, you know, the extraordinary events that have taken place over the past, what, week or so. And China. You know, I thought that China was engaged somehow in a sort of combined strategy with North Korea. But I think that's probably not so. Its self-interest is predominant here. And then there was this article recently suggesting that they kind of lost control of what North Korea is doing. So what do you think? China is like the parent of a misbehaving child. And they are, for the first time, having to rein in that child. I think it's enormously significant that Kim Jong-un took the night train to Beijing under instructions. For the first time, we're beginning to realize that North Korea is essentially a vassal state of China. China has absolute sway over North Korea. On every trip that I've ever taken to North Korea, I've had the best food, Western, and Korean, and others as well. There are fresh eggs, there's bakery goods, there's particularly fruits, more fruits than vegetables. And if you go to the international club, you can get the best beef, even though your typical North Korean never tastes beef, whereas it may be... He's still starving. That's right. That's right. And so China has been the supplier and the benefactor of North Korea. And you're absolutely right. And it's only come at a time, and I don't know whether Trump planned this or whether it just fell in his lap. But this threat on a trade war has got the Chinese spooked, and it should, because China manipulates its currency. If they want to have good trade relations and have the best in the way of exports, they manipulate their currency, so it's cheaper compared to the dollar. They can do that all the time. We don't have the luxury of doing that because we are the world's currency. We can't do that sort of thing. So they're finding themselves in a very precarious situation. Look at it this way. Let me put it to you this way, because I know you know the answer to it. Would you rather have a trade war with China or a nuclear war with North Korea? That's just the way it is. And Trump, I think, knows that, but it operates whether he knows it or not. I'm not claiming that Trump is Nixonian in his wisdom, but he's done a pretty good job of pairing two issues just as you were saying. How does this deal affect China, though? In other words, it sounds to me like China, although China, you said instructed Kim Jong-un to come to Beijing and all that, and they probably had some suggestions for him. But the bottom line is that he's like the wayward son, he's going to do what he's going to do. He's got his own agenda going on, is that what you're saying? To a point, yes, but he is a vassal state. He relies for support upon his benefactor, and if that's ever withdrawn, North Korea won't stand up for a very long time. The message that I would like to convey to you is that the reason they have lots of food for foreign travelers. I've been in huge places where they were serving breakfast to hundreds, even thousands of people, and it's all good Western food that keeps people coming for their tours.  In other words, the hardship will be spread to everyone, including the travelers, and it will ruin the industry. Do you want to see a deal between the United States and North Korea or not? It's probably, probably it does, because it wants North Korea to survive. Ever since Mao's time, one of the most fervent beliefs, fears if you will, was that there would be US troops on the Chinese border, and they want that buffer. They want it to survive. So if we consider that as part of what we're willing to deal with, then that means China can be accommodated at the same time that our interests can be accommodated. And is it possible that the North Koreans would actually give up nuclear warfare and nuclear weapons? Is it? It's possible. No country. Well, actually Libya forced war nuclear weapons back before 2010, but one of the arguments within North Korean circles is, yeah, they did, and that's why Gaddafi fell, because he didn't have nukes anymore. That belief actually has some currency within the discussion. It's a fascinating topic, but it's clear from the things that are happening that everything is negotiable, that North Koreans dropped their demand that the US forces leave Korea. They dropped it. We dropped the command as a part of this meeting that the North Koreans forswear for all times nuclear weapons. That's all on the table, so we can negotiate all of it, and we don't really know what will end up. But my point to you here and now today is that even if no agreement comes out of it, this is different, because one of the great roadblocks to an accommodation has been solved. That's why I say for the North Koreans, give them a win, okay? So if Kim Jong-un wants to look like the big man on campus back home, and he can show photos of himself with Donald Trump, it's a reasonable concession to them to do that, because when are we going to finally do this? This has been going on for 70 years. There has to be an end to it, and the more that we can be accommodated by the North Koreans, the easier that life gets in South Korea, because there'll be more at ease, and maybe we can spend a little bit less. Now remember, Germany is a perfect example, because originally in the 60s, the Germanies were bitter opponents, and then Nixon came along with Dayton in the 70s and eased it up, so they both had diplomatic ties with each other, and now they're so warm that the Chancellor of Germany is a former East German politician. Angela Merkel is from East Germany, so the chances for improvement and the chances for surprising events happening is quite within contemplation. We can do a lot better. And the North Koreans are not the only people who have maybe not been the best of neighbors in some ways we haven't. I think the State Department is in for a lot of criticism, because you can name so many countries where the State Department got involved and we got in a mess. The best example of all is China itself. For 22 years, we didn't have any relations with him, and do you know that when Richard Nixon went to China, he arranged it privately through Pakistan, and the State Department didn't know about it. Henry Kissinger wasn't there. Henry Kissinger was there, but he was not the Secretary of State. He was in the White House as an advisor to Nixon, and he was the one who used the back channel of Pakistan to set up the whole thing. So he set it up, but he wasn't Secretary of State. Now what about the Mike Pompeo thing? Still, even now today, we're not sure the State Department is really involved in setting this up. The State Department has been minimized. Oh yeah, they're naysayers all the time. We've had problems with China. We have problems with Vietnam. We have problems with Cuba, and now we're having problems with North Korea. Is anybody surprised? I'm not. And I actually saw a story in the New York Times where they said, the whole thing is going to hell because our senior Korean diplomat, Joseph Yoon, is retiring, and he's retiring because he's hopping mad because they're not dealing with the State Department. He was in office for 30 years. What did he do for us for the past 30 years? Nothing. Have a happy retirement, Joe. We don't need you. That's my message. Got it. What about the possibility of reunification? Does this take us closer to that, or does it have no effect on that? You have to wait for the regime in, I'm sorry, I tried to turn this off. We have to see what happens first within the communist world, and that is, will the communist world cave in on its own? Because wherever we gained against the communists, it's not because we conquered them. It's because they failed on their own. The Berlin Wall came down because Mikhail Gorbachev decided, I can't afford this anymore. I can't afford to send in troops to Germany to keep the wall up. So they tore it down. And that's why it happened. It was out of a sense of weakness. Kim Jong-un is not going to give up his control. He won't give up his control, but his position is determined by how much his benefactor the Chinese will give him. And so that's susceptible to changes over time. That could be changed. Okay, last question. And the more, let me make this final point, the more that China suffers from the economic situation, a change in the agreement with the United States, the more they suffer, the less they can afford. You've got to think about that. You can prop up North Korea. The Chinese are building high-rise buildings that won't be occupied for 25 years. And they're bringing in people from the countryside who are going to have to find their way back to the countryside on their own because the Chinese are not going to send them back. They're using labor as they need it, as they think they need it today, but in order to keep the economy humming, they're building buildings. That's what you do when you're in a slump and you want to, you know, that's what we did during the Great Depression. So it depends on their economy. We invented jobs. Yeah. Last question. You know, you're optimistic about this. My perception is you've always been optimistic about the possibilities of a kind of detente with North Korea. Yes. I would say yes. But what about the worst case analysis, Pat? Isn't it possible, and a lot of people have speculated on this, that Trump would either not have this meeting or go to this meeting and there would be an argument that would lead to, you know, a degradation of whatever advantage we've had in setting it up. You're right. You don't know that Trump won't walk out on it, but the next president could be a Democrat or it could be a different Republican. And I'm betting that in the long run, not tomorrow, not six months from now, but in the long run, a president will meet a dictator and he won't walk, she won't walk out of it. So the possibilities are endless. Now I'm disappointed. Are we close to the end of time? Yeah. Okay. I was disappointed because I told you that there was a Vulcan proverb that was involved and I was hoping that you would ask me what Vulcan proverb did Spock invoke to support peace between the Klingons and the Federation. And in the 23rd century, do you want to know what that? Yes, I do. Okay. I was hoping you'd ask. Yeah. I consider the question asked. Okay. And in Star Trek 6, he said, the old Vulcan proverb is, only Nixon could go to China. And there you have it, the ultimate wisdom. Fred Pat Porter, citizen diplomat, comes to talk to us about North Korea and I think he'll be back. Oh, I hope so. Thank you, Pat. Thank you.