Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Rum, beer, women, movies, nice websites, gaming, etc., without interrupting the flow of martial threads.

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Steve James on Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:04 am

Iraq was a clear and present danger because it had wmds. There's a long list of clear and present dangers --except Russia.

Anyway, no doubt KJU is a loon. Face it, the world isn't worries about nuclear power. It's worried about kooks with nuclear weapons.

NK is not a threat the way that Russia was, or even Cuba. The US could eradicate NK this evening. NK can't destroy the US, or even just Hawaii. That won't ever change. Kim is the problem.

Imo, 45 is right that China is the solution. Well, any resolution will depend on China's reaction, and it --like the US and Russia-- will act in its best interests. It could possibly take Kim out, but that'd start a deep game. China might see it as a legitimization of its right to expand.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Leimeng on Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:40 pm

~ I am sure that every president since Nixon let out a great sigh of relief when the left office and North Korea had not erupted. Let the next guy deal with it because it is going to be a mess all around and whoever is POTUS/CinC when it goes probably does not want to deal with the consequences.
~ The problem is that North Korea is very 'rational' and 'realist' when it comes to foreign policy. Despite appearing crazy, the Kim dynasty has been able to stay in power and dominate all presumptive factions in Pyongyang, while being able to extort cash, food, fuel, and other concessions from the neighbors and international community for a very long time. Having offed several of his most experienced advisors and family members in a bid to solidify control over various factions, Kim Jun Un has less restraints on miscalculating, than he did a few years ago.
~ Meanwhile...
http://terminallance.com/2017/04/25/terminal-lance-things-heating/
~ Continue to discuss amongst yourselves...

Peace,

Leimeng

Flatulo Ergo Sum

(***Insert Personal One Liner Here***)
Leimeng
Anjing
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Steve James on Mon Aug 14, 2017 5:36 am

I watched FOX and Friends, and they're saying that it started with Clinton (Bill, that is). It's like nobody remembers that it goes back to Truman, and him firing MacArthur because the General wanted to use nukes to push back the Chinese who were supporting NK. Anyway, at FOX, they're happy to have a president who's not afraid to use military force.

Winning.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Michael on Mon Aug 14, 2017 9:03 am

I still think Trump is using NK as a pretext to squeeze as much as he can outta China.

'Course, someone could be using Trump to push so close to war we can't back down. Trump'll be fine either way.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11375
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Steve James on Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:08 pm

North Korea pulled back its threat to attack a U.S. territory, after days of trading increasingly bellicose rhetoric with U.S. President Donald Trump, and hours after China took its toughest steps against Pyongyang to support U.N. sanctions.

North Korean state media said Tuesday that Kim Jong Un had made his decision not to fire on Guam after visiting a military command post and examining a military plan presented to him by his senior officers. But it warned that he could change his mind “if the Yankees persist in their extremely dangerous reckless actions.”


Yep, fat boy knows when to blink. He wants to make sure China knows that he doesn't want to provoke an attack by sending missiles toward Guam. China also agreed with UN sanctions. But, they won't affect Kim's lifestyle.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Michael on Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:19 pm

If NK doesn't back down, the USA will use them as a pretext for an even more intolerable military build-up in the Pacific then they can already stomach. I think that Trump and whoever's advising him is going for. There are a few of these issues that could be used to influence China to a great extent that previous CinC's failed at.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11375
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Steve James on Tue Aug 15, 2017 10:54 am

Maybe, but check out the SK pov.

SEOUL, South Korea — With his public alarmed by President Trump’s recent threats to North Korea, President Moon Jae-in of South Korea issued an unusually blunt rebuke to the United States on Tuesday, warning that any unilateral military action against the North over its nuclear weapons program would be intolerable.

“No one should be allowed to decide on a military action on the Korean Peninsula without South Korean agreement,” Mr. Moon said in a nationally televised speech.

As a candidate for the presidency, Mr. Moon, a liberal who took office in May, said he would “say no to the Americans” if necessary. But he has aligned South Korea more closely with its military ally than many had expected. Though he suspended the deployment of a United States missile defense system opposed by China, he reversed that decision last month after North Korea tested two intercontinental ballistic missiles.

But President Trump’s threat to bring “fire and fury” to North Korea, along with other statements from American officials about the possibility of war, has unnerved many South Koreans and put pressure on Mr. Moon to live up to his campaign promise. “Our government will do everything it can to prevent war from breaking out,” he said in his speech Tuesday.

Mr. Moon’s pushback was the latest indication that Mr. Trump’s unorthodox approach to foreign policy, coupled with Pyongyang’s rapid progress toward its goal of nuclear missiles that can reach the mainland United States, was putting new strain on the longstanding alliance. And it underscored how Mr. Trump’s volatile language is sowing division with an ally whose help would be vital to the success of any American military campaign on the divided peninsula.

Since the 1950-53 Korean War, South Koreans have grown used to bellicose rhetoric from North Korea, like its routine threats to unleash “a sea of fire” on Seoul, the capital, which is within range of the North’s artillery.

But they had never seen an American president taunt the North with similar language, until Mr. Trump threatened it with “fire and fury like the world has never seen” and said his country’s military options were “locked and loaded.”

”The Americans had always been an ally who would prevent, not start, war on the Korean Peninsula,” said Kim Ji-woon, a college student attending a rally on Monday in central Seoul that featured a large banner reading: “Trump, shut up!” “With his trash war talk, Trump makes me wonder what’s the use of the alliance.”
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby everything on Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:02 pm

it seems there are perils of having:

- a buffoon "leader" whose response to everything is an off the cuff tweet his team then reacts to
- a gerrymandered constituency that is willing to elect a buffoon
- a buffoon dictator who inherited the dictatorship
- what stupid things can happen when you have 2 idiots in charge?

bringing in some of the GoT thread, it's like: what happens if you could have two King Joffreys in charge?
amateur practices til gets right pro til can't get wrong
/ better approx answer to right q than exact answer to wrong q which can be made precise /
“most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. Source of all true art & science
User avatar
everything
Wuji
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 7:22 pm
Location: USA

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby meeks on Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:32 pm

must we accept another conflict simply to secure the world bank in its wake, for the remaining countries that have not yet bowed down to its military vanguard?
rising sun kung fu vancouver
php RESTful MVC framework

"The power of Christ compels you!" *spank*
now with ADDED SMOOTHOSITY! ;D
User avatar
meeks
Administrator
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 12:27 pm
Location: vancouver, BC, Canada

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Trick on Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:44 pm

meeks wrote:must we accept another conflict simply to secure the world bank in its wake, for the remaining countries that have not yet bowed down to its military vanguard?

War and destruction is most probably very profitable for those into the big money scheme. also interesting is that the current president of the World Bank is an Korean-American
Trick
Huajing
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: Must We Accept a Nuclear North Korea?

Postby Steve James on Thu Aug 17, 2017 11:10 pm

The threat of war is more profitable financially in the long run. We end up with trillion dollar stockpiles that eventually become obsolete before they're used. Supplying weapons in order to create more business opportunities is also common. The US supplies and deploys weapons systems to the South, and China does the same for the North. Follow the profits, and you will find the reasons.

Did you hear that Betsy DeVos's brother, the guy who founded Blackwater, put in a proposal to turn the Afghan war over to a private army? It'd probably never be implemented. But, it'd be the clearest illustration of war being commercialized. And, mercenaries in the f-in opium paradise of the region? And, there's already an opioid crisis --um, make that demand-- in this country that's growing.

So, I don't buy a NK threat to the US, even Hawaii. It is just too profitable for Kim and the arms manufacturers to really want a war they can't win. Extortion doesn't work if the victim is dead. Not to mention that the ones who are really at risk from the North (barring its own people) are those in the South. And, their president has already said that they don't want a war, let alone a nuclear exchange on the Korean Peninsula. The reason should be obvious. But, an intensification of conventional weapons and ballistic-missile defense systems should be expected. '

Again, follow the profits and the most vociferous celebrants of the low unemployment rate. The one thing that alters the equations and calculations is the public reaction to the casualty numbers.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Previous

Return to Off the Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest