Actually, Ricky that Chinese newspaper says China will intervene if US launches strikes AND attempts regime change. In other words, it doesn't say they will intervene if only strikes are launched without an concomitant attempt at regime change
You may be right that a pre-meditated strike could be coordinated with China. But if you don't warn China a strike is coming, and describe for them the parameters of the strike how would they interpret a strike as anything but an attempt at regime change and destabilization?
And if you do communicate the parameters of the operation you have to trust the Chinese not to warn the NK regime...
And even if you finesse this with the Chinese, then you're still left with the NK response which is likely to be nuclear strikes, artillery bombardment of Seoul and an attempted invasion by the NK army ... Why do we know they would do this? Because they've said they would do this....
And there is no evidence to support the notion that they would react in any other fashion. Just wishful thinking.
It's so simple, even you ought to understand it. Anyone employed by the NK regime is a liar. Liars lie.
You should be easily able to point to evidence that he is lieing then...
When Baghdad Bob lied about how well the war was going in Iraq, correspondents could point to observable events that showed he was lying.
When your President constantly lies about easily observable facts, he is easy to prove as a liar.
What this NK Minister has said is
“Should the US pounce upon the DPRK with military force at last, the DPRK is ready to teach the US a severe lesson with its strategic nuclear force
Where are the easily observable facts that PROVE he is lying?
You have none.As per usual for you, its all your unsupported deductions and assumptions .