What the Guardian says is reasonable and so like Dr Alf one can agree with it at face value.
The trouble is that the PNAC website says quite clearly that regimes in China, Russia, North Korea, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Iran are to be “taken down” and replaced with regimes more agreeable to America.
America has 185 bases throughout the world, most of which surround these countries and it has space based forces, weather warfare capability and fully cloaked weapons, aircraft, drones and people. These forces are far in excess of what it needs for its own defence, so we should not be surprised if other countries distrust American assurances.
Kim Jong Un can read the PNAC website, has seen what happened to Ghadaffi and Saddam Hussein and does not believe what is written in the Guardian.
The Chinese and Russians don’t believe it either which is why they are rearming and why they are not keen on THAAD deployments on their soil.
A deal can be struck, based on containment, and the old British technique of a balance of power.
Cutting off all trade with North Korea will drive them to war because they will have nothing to lose, so a demonstration is needed with mediation from someone other than Trump and his cabinet, possibly a General and an elder statesman like a Jimmy Carter. The demonstration should be of an earthquake weapon (Project Prime Argus) and HAARP to create storms, floods and sea boiling on a terrifying scale so as to make Kim keep his weapons but not test them every 5 minutes.
At a future point, he will perhaps have to be made to disappear with extreme prejudice using special forces with invisibility suits and a fully cloaked entry vehicle. The former have been around since 1974 and the latter more recently but the timing is not propitious right now.
Dr Alf's Blog 
John, thanks for your latest post. I relate to most of your argument but have my doubts about the demonstration of US force. Clearly, the US does not want war but recognizes the limitation of dipomacy. Sanctions will only be effective with oil included but for China that might be too much – we’ve seen China’s view is very different, arguing American escalation (if we can believe an editorial in China’s Global Times).
For me the critical question, ‘Who’s really controlling power in the US, the globalists or the nationalists?’
I fear that sanctions will not be tight enough to deter North Korea, so a military escalation will follow. History has repeatedly shown that the question of who started a conflict is blurred.
For me, the only hope is with the globalists. I fear the nationalists might favour the PNAC agenda that you highlight.