Trump's fighting talk on North Korea may prove wise

That's what Donald Trump told North Korea would be in the post if it issued any more threats.

Predictably, an hour or so later, the North Koreans responded with, what else, a threat - to attack the US Pacific territory of Guam.

What does Trump do now?

Credibility compels the President to respond forcibly and with authority, but he's left little headroom in the war of rhetoric.

Against the shadow of looming conflict, he's succumbed to premature articulation of military intent. Either that, or he's all but committed his country to war intentionally.

Predictably, his actions have divided opinion in the US, between those who back military action tomorrow and those who want to let diplomacy play out.

In the diplomatic arena, for that is where peace lies, his leadership was being lauded after the US steered fresh sanctions against North Korea through the UN Security Council.

The key players - Russia and China included - were lined up behind punitive action against Pyongyang, but the measured diplomatic offensive was shattered when the President entered the game in person.

Think Brian Glover as the PE teacher in the film Kes.

His "fire and fury" comments on a working holiday at his New Jersey golf club were typical Trump.

He's a man who speaks off the cuff on matters large and small - war and peace, life and death.

It's the worry, as this tense situation plays out.

On the one hand a tough-guy dictator whose mental state is hard to assess, let alone his ability to make measured decisions for the good of his people.

On the other, an inexperienced, untested and single-minded President prone to erratic and impulsive behaviour.

North Korea is a country that's cheerfully waved two fingers at UN sanctions for over a decade. Maybe chest-beating is the best way to address that - Trump supporters think so.

His critics, though, have berated his behaviour as unbecoming to a president and unhelpful in a conflict that's drifting perilously towards the brink of nuclear war.

For them, the focus - and the language - should be on robust diplomacy that targets North Korea and leans heavily on China.

Whilst Beijing is deemed to have fallen short on its sanctions responsibilities against its neighbour and ally, the increased potential for conflict is bound to sharpen its focus.

China doesn't want a US intervention in the region that creates a democratic Korean peninsula aligned with the United States.

Like everyone else, they have much riding on the diplomatic effort against North Korea.

For the Chinese and, indeed, everyone else... diplomatic norms, in language and in deed, might help the process of peace.