Does The USA Underestimate North Korea? Nukes A Real Within NK?

228 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
So its been a popular story lately, With Kim saying he was pointing nukes at the USA in revenge because the US sent some B-2's over the South Korea to do a drill.

N. Korea threats raise concern Kim backing regime into corner | Fox News


Is NK a real threat to the US?
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    I don't think so, but that's just me.

    We would destroy them without breaking a sweat. They know this. Everyone knows this.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7912891].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Well they do have numbers when it comes to people, obviously however their tech is behind.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7912908].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

      Well they do have numbers when it comes to people, obviously however their tech is behind.
      The may have the numbers when it comes to people, but we've got the numbers when it comes to nukes. Plus we've used them before
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913540].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    We wouldn't invade them on the ground, so their manpower is meaningless.

    We would turn their country in to a giant parking lot via airstrikes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7912928].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Thomas
      Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

      Is NK a real threat to the US?
      If it had the means to reach the US (which nobody is certain of, but it's unlikely), then yes, it is a potential threat, just like every other country with the same capabilities could be potential threats too... many of which also see the US as a potential threat to them. But "potential threat" is not the same as "OMG, they're about to murder us all in our beds!"

      In a practical sense, South Korean and Japanese missile defences are exactly as you might expect - defences for South Korea and Japan; neither country (nor US forces in either country) has the ability to intercept a missile launched from North Korea on a trajectory towards the United States. And, at present, the only defence against such an attack are interceptors in California and Alaska that MIGHT be able to hit an incoming missile, but probably won't, since they would be tiny targets basically dropping from orbit at several thousand miles an hour.

      It would be like trying to shoot a bullet with a bullet...while blindfolded; in theory, there is a chance you'd hit it, but I doubt many would be willing to put money on it.

      Originally Posted by Whos That Guru View Post

      We wouldn't invade them on the ground, so their manpower is meaningless.

      We would turn their country in to a giant parking lot via airstrikes.
      That's a pretty good example of "underestimating the enemy"; the old "we'll all be home in time for Christmas" line of thought that has failed again and again throughout history.

      If and/or when you hear officialdom engaging in the same rhetoric, it's probably time to start worrying. Alongside demonising the would-be enemy, exited bellicose claims about how "quick, easy, and painless" killing him would be are usually the first steps towards war (where lots of innocent people die in slow, hard, and (usually very) painful ways).

      In a practical sense (again), with the Chinese capital a few hours to the west, and the entire Russian Pacific Fleet a few hours to the east, any attempt to turn North Korea into "a giant parking lot", aren't exactly going to be well received by either (to put in mildly). For example, would the US sit there twiddling it's thumbs if, for example, neighbouring Canada was the big, bad enemy of some foreign power that decided to turn it into "a giant parking lot"... it simply wouldn't happen, so I don't know why anyone would think the Chinese and Russians would not respond in the same way.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913076].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
        Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

        If it had the means to reach the US (which nobody is certain of, but it's unlikely), then yes, it is a potential threat, just like every other country with the same capabilities could be potential threats too... many of which also see the US as a potential threat to them. But "potential threat" is not the same as "OMG, they're about the attack us!"

        In a practical sense, South Korean and Japanese missile defences are exactly as you might expect - defences for South Korea and Japan; neither country (nor US forces in either country) has the ability to intercept a missile launched from North Korea on a trajectory towards the United States. And, at present, the only defence against such an attack are interceptors in California and Alaska that MIGHT be able to hit an incoming missile, but probably won't, since they would be tiny targets dropping from orbit at several thousand miles an hour.

        It would be like trying to shoot a bullet with a bullet...while blindfolded; in theory, there is a chance you'd hit it, but I doubt many would be willing to put money on it.



        That's a pretty good example of "underestimating the enemy"; the old "we'll all be home in time for Christmas" line of thought that has failed again and again throughout history.

        If and/or when you hear officialdom engaging in the same rhetoric, it's probably time to start worrying. Alongside demonising your enemy, exited bellicose claims about how "quick, easy, and painless" killing him would be are usually the first steps towards war (where lots of innocent people die in slow, hard, and (usually very) painful ways).
        Which is exactly why the USA in Installing more missile defense systems on the west coast.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913113].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        When you talk about war with NK or with Iran you are on a different level in my mind. These are well-funded, well-trained and disciplined, massive forces.

        We've spent over 10 years in Iraq and Afghanistan - without a clear victory as we don't know what will happen in those countries once we leave.

        We fought an ever escalating war in Vietnam - but the country today is Communist. We fought in Korea and the result was a two state solution. Those weren't decisive victories, either.

        We value human life so we don't go into a country and bomb it into oblivion - and we won't. Our collective conscience doesn't accept masses of casualties in a civilian population.

        I don't think NK can reach the US at this point - but some of our satellite positions are in range. The greatest threat is the possible instability and lack of judgment of the current new leader in NK. We don't know what this guy is capable of doing or how far he will go in his threats.

        The only good thing I've seen recently is that China seems to be pulling back a bit from its blanket support of NK - which may indicate China's opinion of the new dictator.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913135].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author LeeLee
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post


          We value human life so we don't go into a country and bomb it into oblivion - and we won't. Our collective conscience doesn't accept masses of casualties in a civilian population.
          Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki come to mind.
          Signature
          The wisdom of life consists in the elimination of nonessentials. ~ Lin Yutang
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913509].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by LeeLee View Post

            Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki come to mind.
            Dresden seems kind of dumb, but Japan sucker punched the US, who was one of the countries working on an atomic bomb. Apparently there were discussions, and the Americans decided they couldn't properly illustrate what could happen, so they tried to hit a real city. There were problems getting a clear view on the target, so they picked an alternate site. The first one was bombed later. Had it NOT been done, the war could have gone on longer with more allied deaths. IMAGINE the horror of the three nations to realize that one bomb from one plane that they may never have seen did SO MUCH DAMAGE!

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914551].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          When you talk about war with NK or with Iran you are on a different level in my mind. These are well-funded, well-trained and disciplined, massive forces.

          We've spent over 10 years in Iraq and Afghanistan - without a clear victory as we don't know what will happen in those countries once we leave.

          We fought an ever escalating war in Vietnam - but the country today is Communist. We fought in Korea and the result was a two state solution. Those weren't decisive victories, either.

          We value human life so we don't go into a country and bomb it into oblivion - and we won't. Our collective conscience doesn't accept masses of casualties in a civilian population.

          I don't think NK can reach the US at this point - but some of our satellite positions are in range. The greatest threat is the possible instability and lack of judgment of the current new leader in NK. We don't know what this guy is capable of doing or how far he will go in his threats.

          The only good thing I've seen recently is that China seems to be pulling back a bit from its blanket support of NK - which may indicate China's opinion of the new dictator.
          so fought is the same as lost...
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913671].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post


          We value human life so we don't go into a country and bomb it into oblivion - and we won't. Our collective conscience doesn't accept masses of casualties in a civilian population.
          not countries just heavily populated cities, collective consciences not withstanding
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913867].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            Even an ugly hemerrhoid like whats his name, Junior @ NK, has the capability of a 'dirty bomb' - just a little innocuous looking suitcase left at any airport.
            Not his style. His goal is showing "strength" and taking credit for it. That's the risk - that he will bluster himself into a corner and have to "do" something to back up his own rhetoric.

            He's a young little man with a huge ego. As long as he thinks he's impressive he'll keep talking - if he feels he's being ridiculed don't know what he'll do.
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            ***
            One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
            what it is instead of what you think it should be.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913932].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Patrician
              Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

              Not his style. His goal is showing "strength" and taking credit for it. That's the risk - that he will bluster himself into a corner and have to "do" something to back up his own rhetoric.

              He's a young little man with a huge ego. As long as he thinks he's impressive he'll keep talking - if he feels he's being ridiculed don't know what he'll do.
              Hi Kay - I guess I wasn't clear in the point that the news commentator made - it was ANYBODY "LIKE" Junior - doesn't need a huge facility to create havoc - all they need is a suitcase bomb. (well maybe he could take a cue from hackers - send a 'valentine' - "this nuclear fallout has been brought to you exclusively from NK's mutant boy wonder."

              The bottom line being - no way to feel totally safe even if we have a 'wall' of 'anti-missle devices' AND/OR do a 'surgical' strike and take this ugly mutant out - there are many more where this weirdo came from - may be living next door.

              I agree with your opinion that there would not be enough grandstanding to appease Junior in something 'stealth' like a suitcase bomb.

              Quote:
              Even an ugly hemerrhoid like whats his name, Junior @ NK, has the capability of a 'dirty bomb' - just a little innocuous looking suitcase left at any airport.
              Signature
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916617].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          We value human life
          But the people at the top of the command tree don't value human life at all.

          so we don't go into a country and bomb it into oblivion - and we won't.
          Your leaders have tried bombing countries into oblivion (Vietnam, Laos, Iraq, Afghanistan) So yeah, they will do it again.

          Our collective conscience doesn't accept masses of casualties in a civilian population.
          Once again your "leaders" don't share the general populace's "collective conscience". After Vietnam they learnt the lesson of controlling what gets reported via the media so the general populace doesn't get to see the masses of civilian deaths.

          Some reading for you about how the US forces used napalm (a banned weapon) in Iraq.

          US Lied to Britain Over Use of Napalm in Iraq War
          US Uses Napalm in Iraq | Global Research
          US tried to napalm truth in justifying the Iraq war

          You might also like to search for the usage of depleted uranium (nuclear war with out the "big bang") in Iraq.

          So, saying your armed forces will abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention is quite frankly, laughable.

          I'm happy to concede that the majority of the US population are peace loving (apart from those who want to see North Korea turned into a "parking lot"), however, the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) that has taken over your country does NOT share these values. At all.

          Anyone who believes a nuclear war is winnable is an idiot. Both sides lose.

          BTW, anyone who thinks I'm defending the whacko(s) who control North Korea is wrong.

          I'm also not defending the whackos that control the US M.I.C. either.

          The world would be a better place without either of them.
          Signature
          Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
          So that blind people can hate them as well.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915169].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

            I'm happy to concede that the majority of the US population are peace loving (apart from those who want to see North Korea turned into a "parking lot")
            I don't think ANYONE here just wants NK turned into a parking lot. If at a massive war, it is a different story, and should be taken a different way. HEY, their leader says he wants to turn parts of the world into parking lots for NOTHING!

            Anyone who believes a nuclear war is winnable is an idiot. Both sides lose.
            You have that right. SOME have wondered if it isn't possible to obliterate all life on the planet just from the radiation. But the residue can carry FAR.

            BTW, anyone who thinks I'm defending the whacko(s) who control North Korea is wrong.

            I'm also not defending the whackos that control the US M.I.C. either.

            The world would be a better place without either of them.
            YEAH, if such groups were gone, this could be paradise.

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915778].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
            Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

            But the people at the top of the command tree don't value human life at all.

            Your leaders have tried bombing countries into oblivion (Vietnam, Laos, Iraq, Afghanistan) So yeah, they will do it again.

            Once again your "leaders" don't share the general populace's "collective conscience". After Vietnam they learnt the lesson of controlling what gets reported via the media so the general populace doesn't get to see the masses of civilian deaths.

            Some reading for you about how the US forces used napalm (a banned weapon) in Iraq.

            US Lied to Britain Over Use of Napalm in Iraq War
            US Uses Napalm in Iraq | Global Research
            US tried to napalm truth in justifying the Iraq war

            You might also like to search for the usage of depleted uranium (nuclear war with out the "big bang") in Iraq.

            So, saying your armed forces will abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention is quite frankly, laughable.

            I'm happy to concede that the majority of the US population are peace loving (apart from those who want to see North Korea turned into a "parking lot"), however, the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) that has taken over your country does NOT share these values. At all.

            Anyone who believes a nuclear war is winnable is an idiot. Both sides lose.

            BTW, anyone who thinks I'm defending the whacko(s) who control North Korea is wrong.

            I'm also not defending the whackos that control the US M.I.C. either.

            The world would be a better place without either of them.
            First, let's get a couple of your 'facts' straight: #1, napalm is not a 'banned' weapon. You should read up on international law (such as it is) more carefully. Incendiary Weapons - Legal Status

            #2, depleted uranium is not 'nuclear war with out the "big bang"', as you put it. DU is used in making projectiles because of its extreme density, about 1.5x that of lead.

            #3, the US never tried to 'bomb into oblivion' any of the countries you mention. If we had, they wouldn't be there (Afghanistan is basically 'oblivion' anyway, but that's neither here nor there). That isn't saying that the US didn't drop any bombs at all, mind you, just that the countries as a whole - or the cities in them - weren't the targets.

            It's obvious you don't like the US. That's fine. We as a country aren't angels, that's for sure, and our 'leaders' have made more than a few awfully dumb decisions. There are a lot of us here that don't agree with sending our military to what amounts to police actions, with their hands tied behind their backs by some pretty insane ROEs. If we're going to to go war, we need to go to war, do the job, and come home.

            War is nasty business - 'war is hell' - IMHO, it's not nasty or hellish enough. War should be uncivilized and barbaric. It should affect everyone in the countries involved. Maybe if it were less civilized than it is, if all the 'feel good' rules of the latter 20th century were ignored, it would be frightening enough for people to restrain from it, and restrain their leaders from it. Probably not, though.
            Signature

            The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

            Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918635].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

              It's obvious you don't like the US.
              Wrong. I just don't like countries who take over other countries militarily. You might like to read the post just above this one to see I don't like how the European nations did similar things in the preceding centuries.

              The US did try to bomb Vietnam into oblivion by dropping more bombs on that small nation than were dropped by all sides during the whole of WWII. Fact.

              Despite that, you lost Vietnam, and have achieved nothing in Afghanistan.

              The outcome for Iraq is that it is now an ally of Iran, whereas before the invasion, they were bitter enemies. And as someone else has pointed out, Saddam was for a long time, actively and financially supported by the US.

              In fact the US has a fairly long history of overthrowing democratically elected governments in foreign lands and installing dictators who allow US corporates to come in plunder the wealth of those countries to the detriment of its people.

              That doesn't make them the worst of the empire builders, it doesn't mean they are any better either.
              Signature
              Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
              So that blind people can hate them as well.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920912].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author socialentry
                Banned
                Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

                Wrong. I just don't like countries who take over other countries militarily
                So in short you don't like the US.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920970].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
                  Originally Posted by socialentry View Post

                  So in short you don't like the US.
                  Amongst others. If the shoe fits.............
                  Signature
                  Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
                  So that blind people can hate them as well.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7921027].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Haha nothing like making an interesting youtube clip out of that
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7912930].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    lol yeah, I'd probably watch it

    Might even click on the ads, too!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7912958].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Gotta support the publisher
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7912974].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    That's a pretty good example of "underestimating the enemy"; the old "we'll all be home in time for Christmas" line of thought that has failed again and again throughout history.

    If and/or when you hear officialdom engaging in the same rhetoric, it's probably time to start worrying. Alongside demonising your enemy, exited bellicose claims about how "quick, easy, and painless" killing him would be are usually the first steps towards war (where lots of innocent people die in slow, hard, and (usually very) painful ways).
    That's not underestimating the enemy. That is having confidence in your own country's abilities.

    Now.. whether or not the POTUS would issue the order if NK attacked is a completely different story.

    Hell, he might just call them up & apologize for making them angry. LOLLLLL
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913137].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    A guy on TV last night while on the one hand announced all the new missle defense systems going up (over 10) in Alaska, as we speak, on the other hand he brought up a good point.

    Even an ugly hemerrhoid like whats his name, Junior @ NK, has the capability of a 'dirty bomb' - just a little innocuous looking suitcase left at any airport.

    Soooooo - let's face it - when our number is up, it is up.

    My knee is jerking to remove NK from the map - just for 'good luck' -- but then there are always all the countries that love to hate us - surely we can't eliminate them all.

    ... and not to mention the enemies within -

    So have fun while you can and don't sweat it.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913201].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author fin
      Instead of turning their country into a parking lot it might be an idea to kill their leader and high-ranking officials.

      Or you could kill millions of innocent people.

      Your call...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913218].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
        Originally Posted by fin View Post

        Instead of turning their country into a parking lot it might be an idea to kill their leader and high-ranking officials.

        Or you could kill millions of innocent people.

        Your call...
        We tried that with Kadafi(sp) years ago. We didn't get him, but he didn't cause any problems after.
        I always have thought that's a better idea instead of war.
        Just target those in charge. If all the world leaders knew it would be there asses on the line, I think we'd have a few less problems in the world.
        Signature

        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
        Getting old ain't for sissy's
        As you are I was, as I am you will be
        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913806].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author fin
          Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

          We tried that with Kadafi(sp) years ago. We didn't get him, but he didn't cause any problems after.
          I always have thought that's a better idea instead of war.
          Just target those in charge. If all the world leaders knew it would be there asses on the line, I think we'd have a few less problems in the world.
          I very much doubt they want a war. It's just attention seeking and trying to put on a show.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913878].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
            Originally Posted by fin View Post

            I very much doubt they want a war. It's just attention seeking and trying to put on a show.
            You're right. Every couple of years we have exercises in South Korea and every couple years North Korea threatens to start the war again.
            Signature

            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
            Getting old ain't for sissy's
            As you are I was, as I am you will be
            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914308].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    But... it ISN'T my call.

    As for "taking out the leader" - yeah.. let's spend 10+ years in another war that we can't afford to catch one man. Brilliant plan.

    The citizens over there have been brainwashed since birth to hate Americans.

    Same goes for plenty of other countries.

    Nothing we do or say is ever going to change that.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913243].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    If you take out the leader, another takes over and will be just the same.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913256].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Kims gonna back himself so far in his own threats that he will have to do something to prove he is not weak
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913413].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    haha numbers dont matter, its the tech that does.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913560].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Again, I still think technology weighs in more than body counts.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913736].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    I wouldn't put anything past that pudgy, spoiled little sociopath.

    I think it's not that the US underestimates him. I think our Admin is nuts, too, so they don't really give a rip. If he were to bomb us I think we'd be turning them to glass real fast. Sometimes I think that's what our leaders would LIKE to do.

    It's way past time that everyone in every country just stand up and oust their sociopaths out of office. Enough is freaking enough.........and we hit enough about half past a decade ago.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913905].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7913923].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    This an image of the Korean peninsula at night. Can you find North Korea?

    Welcome to 1852...




    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914479].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    North Korea's leadership overestimates itself and has demonstrated awe-inspiring incompetence. The fools have even managed to pretty much make enemies with China, their strongest ally. I predict that North Korea's government will implode and that there'll be a radical change of governance.
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914554].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    I think the US's biggest DIRECT fear is that they might hit GUAM. Apparently, it is currently a kind of pearl harbor. I hope they keep in mind what happened when the LAST pearl harbor was hit.

    Pearl harbor, then, was effectively in a possession. It was determined to be a strategic location, and used to store large ships. The japanese destroyed many, and was a test case for what atomic weapons can do. GUAM is a posession. It was determined to be a strategic location, and has several military bases, etc... It is thought to be the only direct US target that NK can hit. If they do though, it would certainly be an act of war.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914580].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      To respond to Thomas' comments...

      I suspect Russia and China would remove North Korea from the "independent country" category themselves. Either that, or declare a "free-fly" corridor for non-nuclear American bombers.

      Unless the current regime in NK really is as insane as they want to appear, they'd never do it. It would, one way or another, be tantamount to national suicide. The need to take out any remaining nukes that MIGHT be hidden there, anywhere they MIGHT be hidden, would be felt by every country within range of any missile the North Koreans possessed.

      Every military and industrial installation in the country would be fair game, along with any place that was even suspect. And China and Russia would have every bit as much reason to see them taken out as the US.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914638].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Well, that all makes extreme sense to the rest of the world, Paul. Unfortunately the N. K. leader is nothing more than a spoiled narcissist who will kill his own people if they don't smile and adore him broadly enough in public. No telling what a wing-nut like that will think he's capable of getting away with. The man isn't even a hint of sane.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914784].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    If they did launch, I do believe we have space based technology to knock out whatever they launch. Also, they do seem to be incompetent and it's likely we could hack their systems as seems to have happened in Iran.

    I think the likely scenario will be similar to what Tim posted in #24. And, we would get permission from China and Russia to go in to get control of NK's weapons and their government will topple from within.

    I don't know for a fact, but I'd bet that the people of NK have had enough exposure from underground internet, TV, radio, photos, verbal history, and communication from their relatives in South Korea...to know the leader is what he is and he will be killed. Perhaps a military coup from within.

    Not saying something ugly is not going to happen, but I don't think world or city ending.
    Probably he'll do something bad enough to warrant his being brought to justice.

    Dan
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914857].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      If they did launch, I do believe we have space based technology to knock out whatever they launch. Also, they do seem to be incompetent and it's likely we could hack their systems as seems to have happened in Iran.

      I think the likely scenario will be similar to what Tim posted in #24. And, we would get permission from China and Russia to go in to get control of NK's weapons and their government will topple from within.

      I don't know for a fact, but I'd bet that the people of NK have had enough exposure from underground internet, TV, radio, photos, verbal history, and communication from their relatives in South Korea...to know the leader is what he is and he will be killed. Perhaps a military coup from within.

      Not saying something ugly is not going to happen, but I don't think world or city ending.
      Probably he'll do something bad enough to warrant his being brought to justice.

      Dan
      Of course people know. You can't be forced to praise someone at the threat of torture or death and not know they are a demon.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915011].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Sal,

        You may well be right. The guy could be so deluded as to believe he could get away with it. Or just so narcissistic that he doesn't care.

        If that's the case, one hopes the people around him, who actually handle the weapons, are saner than he is. Or, more usefully, that they don't have the capability to deliver a nuke at that range.

        If the guy is any kind of sane, the bombast is likely theater, designed to bolster his image within his own country. Particularly in the military, who are always needed to maintain the power of totalitarian regimes. Of course, the problem with that kind of act is that it's easy for unstable types to start believing their own lines.

        Political onions. Peel away one layer...


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915030].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          <snip>

          If the guy is any kind of sane, the bombast is likely theater, designed to bolster his image within his own country. Particularly in the military, who are always needed to maintain the power of totalitarian regimes.<snip>l
          I suspect that more likely they're probably secretly shaking their heads and having whispered conversations on how to tidily oust that silly and embarrassing brat. I imagine China is also plotting out ways to clean up the situation before he makes things too messy with his attention-seeking temper tantrums.
          Signature

          Project HERE.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915082].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

            I suspect that more likely they're probably secretly shaking their heads and having whispered conversations on how to tidily oust that silly and embarrassing brat. I imagine China is also plotting out ways to clean up the situation before he makes things too messy with his attention-seeking temper tantrums.
            There are a few keys to running a dictatorship. ONE is to get rid of free speech, and make violations nearly impossible to pay for. You then make it a violation to even TOLERATE speech against the dictator. You also control the education system, and get kids to squeal on ANYONE! They did that in NAZI germany. The resistance had to have signs and dialog to even determine if it was ok to speak.

            So a whispered conversation isn't that easy.

            steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915759].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kay King
              I don't think NK is dumb enough to do something big and I agree China will likely rein him in.

              The secondary threat is that he will do something smaller than is viewed as "an attack" and it will generate a huge response that will escalate the problem.

              I think that's the greater threat today....that he might bolster his image by using the equivalent of a BB gun and we might respond with a bazooka that ignites the entire region.

              It happened in Iraq when the leaders bragged about WMD and we believed it - in SPITE of the fact the leader of the team who looked for WMD's said it wasn't true.
              Signature
              Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
              ***
              One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
              what it is instead of what you think it should be.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915794].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                Iraq leaders talked tough but I don't recall them bragging about having WMDs. Some of our leaders wanted to believe they did and even ignored information from those in the Iraqi government who said there weren't WMDs. The admin decided to trust a source named "curveball" who was proven wrong and totally ignore the Iraqi foreign minister, who was proven right. The info from the Iraqi foreign minister wasn't passed on to the SOS, Congress or included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002 which said Iraq had WMDs. This was a criminal act in my opinion, which lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths.

                Originally Posted by Kay King View Post


                It happened in Iraq when the leaders bragged about WMD and we believed it - in SPITE of the fact the leader of the team who looked for WMD's said it wasn't true.
                Signature
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916295].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                  Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                  Iraq leaders talked tough but I don't recall them bragging about having WMDs. Some of our leaders wanted to believe they did and even ignored information from those in the Iraqi government who said there weren't WMDs. The admin decided to trust a source named "curveball" who was proven wrong and totally ignore the Iraqi foreign minister, who was proven right. The info from the Iraqi foreign minister wasn't passed on to the SOS, Congress or included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002 which said Iraq had WMDs. This was a criminal act in my opinion, which lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths.
                  If I remember right Iraq stated many times that they did not have any WMD's. That whole deal was just to take out another leader we had installed who wouldn't play with us anymore.
                  We even set up the Kurds so we'd have another 'reason' to take him out.
                  Signature

                  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                  Getting old ain't for sissy's
                  As you are I was, as I am you will be
                  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916381].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author SandraLarkin
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

                    If I remember right Iraq stated many times that they did not have any WMD's. That whole deal was just to take out another leader we had installed who wouldn't play with us anymore.
                    We even set up the Kurds so we'd have another 'reason' to take him out.
                    Iraq broke two UN resolutions and were destroyed for it. Israel broke more han 60 and are patted on the back. The most of any country by far.

                    When you go against the central banks, you get invaded. End of story.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7931114].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Gonzosan
                  I was stationed at Osan AB in 2006 but even back then things were pretty secure from what I saw. The amount of military strength down there is just ridiculous. I'm sure if even one missile heads towards SK or even the US it would be shot down by like 40 Patriot missiles.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930004].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
                    I don't think anybody seriously thinks that North Korea has the capability to hit the US mainland at the moment. However, it does have a very serious deterrent capability in conventional arms.

                    After all, no other country on earth deserves a regime change more than NK. If Bush did not dare try it then, Obama will be less inclined even more so. For a start, NK has more armed personnel than any country on earth. That is if you include reserves and paramilitary. In fact, it is more than twice that of China's

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tary_personnel

                    Secondly, Seoul is within 35 miles from the DMZ. NK has got the largest artillery force in the world and a lot of it is aimed at Seoul. It can flatten Seoul within hours. Its artillery is well dug in and hidden. Don't even think of a pre-emptive attack against these forces because that will kill many more S. Koreans than N. Koreans.

                    MAP OF THE DAY: How North Korean Artillery Could Level Seoul In Two Hours - Business Insider

                    So basically, it is an impossible situation. That was why S. Korea put up with the sinking of the Cheonan and the bombardment of one of its island in 2010

                    ROKS Cheonan sinking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                    Bombardment of Yeonpyeong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                    In any case, S. Koreans would not want to see their compatriots (and often family members) slaughtered indiscriminately.
                    Signature

                    Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930151].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      If they did launch, I do believe we have space based technology to knock out whatever they launch. Also, they do seem to be incompetent and it's likely we could hack their systems as seems to have happened in Iran.

      I think the likely scenario will be similar to what Tim posted in #24. And, we would get permission from China and Russia to go in to get control of NK's weapons and their government will topple from within.

      I don't know for a fact, but I'd bet that the people of NK have had enough exposure from underground internet, TV, radio, photos, verbal history, and communication from their relatives in South Korea...to know the leader is what he is and he will be killed. Perhaps a military coup from within.

      Not saying something ugly is not going to happen, but I don't think world or city ending.
      Probably he'll do something bad enough to warrant his being brought to justice.

      Dan
      People laughed at the idea of creating such things, so we might not have it.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915749].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author socialentry
    Banned
    the solution to this is obviously to nuke the whales.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7914892].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author socialentry
    Banned
    Doubt that China will actively plot to remove communist NK.

    They don't want a war or increased tension with the USA.

    But NK do serve the purpose of a proxy between pro-US South Korea and the yalu river.

    What will happen is that if Kim gets too excited, China will threaten to cut off the aid to NK, and that will be the end of it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915123].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by socialentry View Post

      Doubt that China will actively plot to remove communist NK.

      They don't want a war or increased tension with the USA.

      But NK do serve the purpose of a proxy between pro-US South Korea and the yalu river.

      What will happen is that if Kim gets too excited, China will threaten to cut off the aid to NK, and that will be the end of it.
      I don't think they want to remove the Communist system, but rather want to help initiate adjustments much like those that China made. It goes without saying, they have a network within North Korea. Don't be surprised if Kim has an unfortunate accident or sudden stroke.
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7915134].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dallas playboy
    Tim;

    Why would you believe the Iraqi Foreign Minister? Poison gas of 5000 Kurds
    qualifies, in my mind, as weapons of mass destruction. Saddam put a contract
    out on our President, his sons put people in shredders, and randomly raped
    married women;

    Saddam had ignored 17 U.N. resolutions, and refused to allow inspections for
    months. He had ample time to send the WMD to Syria, or just bury them
    in the vast desert.

    It seems to me that when Nukes are involved, waiting until after your attacked is
    folly. Preemptive attacks on Iran and North Korea is long overdue. With our smart
    bombs, not Nukes, carried by our Stealth Bombers would save us all a lot to pain
    in the long run. IMO

    What would u do it a neighbor told you he was going to kill your whole family as
    soon as he gets a Bushmaster? If there were no police to call, How long would you
    wait?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916447].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      Do you think it is ok to mislead the public and congress in regards to going to war? The info from the Iraqi Foreign minister wasn't just propaganda and was being validated by the cia at the time. That war cost us thousands of lives, tens of thousands of casualties and trillions of dollars. Now you want to again do the same thing using our "smart" bombs? Sounds so simple before a war. We found out it doesn't always turn out to be so simple didn't we.
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      Tim;

      Why would you believe the Iraqi Foreign Minister? Poison gas of 5000 Kurds
      qualifies, in my mind, as weapons of mass destruction. Saddam put a contract
      out on our President, his sons put people in shredders, and randomly raped
      married women;

      Saddam had ignored 17 U.N. resolutions, and refused to allow inspections for
      months. He had ample time to send the WMD to Syria, or just bury them
      in the vast desert.

      It seems to me that when Nukes are involved, waiting until after your attacked is
      folly. Preemptive attacks on Iran and North Korea is long overdue. With our smart
      bombs, not Nukes, carried by our Stealth Bombers would save us all a lot to pain
      in the long run. IMO

      What would u do it a neighbor told you he was going to kill your whole family as
      soon as he gets a Bushmaster? If there were no police to call, How long would you
      wait?
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916473].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      Tim;

      Why would you believe the Iraqi Foreign Minister? Poison gas of 5000 Kurds
      qualifies, in my mind, as weapons of mass destruction. Saddam put a contract
      out on our President, his sons put people in shredders, and randomly raped
      married women;

      Saddam had ignored 17 U.N. resolutions, and refused to allow inspections for
      months. He had ample time to send the WMD to Syria, or just bury them
      in the vast desert.

      It seems to me that when Nukes are involved, waiting until after your attacked is
      folly. Preemptive attacks on Iran and North Korea is long overdue. With our smart
      bombs, not Nukes, carried by our Stealth Bombers would save us all a lot to pain
      in the long run. IMO

      What would u do it a neighbor told you he was going to kill your whole family as
      soon as he gets a Bushmaster? If there were no police to call, How long would you
      wait?
      You do remember we installed Hussein and armed him in the first place right?
      We set him up so he would attack Iran and when that failed we abandoned him (as usual). As for the Kurds we did pretty much the same with them. We armed them and convinced them to go after Hussein. We even told them we would have their back and be there fighting with them. Then when they did attack we just silently watched.
      About the only real excuse we had for invading Iraq was to try and clean up the mess we created.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916512].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author socialentry
    Banned
    Are we talking about Bagdad bob?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916459].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jeff Williams
      I suppose I see world events a bit differently.

      I used to get caught up in the minutia in the past until I realized that almost every country seems to be following the UN Millennium Goals as outlined in 2009:

      http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pd...t_2009_ENG.pdf

      So, if I'm ever tempted to be outraged about new laws being implemented or suggested, I just take a look at the UN game plan and it all makes sense at the macro level.

      The UN doesn't exactly recognize things like sovereign nations anymore. They have grouped the world's regions into 10 distinct parts and are dealing with each in radically different ways. And although we may "feel" as if we are free and independent as nations, we are mistaken.

      Check out page 57 of that pdf to find out which "region" you actually belong to and you'll recognize more accurately why our fearless leaders are now making more and more unusual decisions, even in the face of public protest.

      So, what does this have to do with North Korea and nukes?

      Well, all of Korea can be either classified as a developed nation or distinctly part of SE Asia. What that really means is that they will be required by the UN to function as a part of US societal structure or the Chinese system. They can't simply choose to be "sovereign". (tsk, tsk, tsk .... silly Koreans)

      Unfortunately for the true power brokers and lawmakers, North Korea still actually has physical control over one of the last sovereign nations on Earth. (Iran could be considered as sovereign and rogue too. However, I think the plan may be to make an example of NK first through invasion or destruction, allowing Iran to change their position. Just speculation at this point though.)

      In any event, the notion of sovereignty is simply unacceptable to the UN. At least according to their grand design for all of humanity.

      So, there are a number of options. China, The US, or a UN coalition of forces could choose to go to war with North Korea, introduce the North Korean people to things like food, electricity, clean water, and of course, UN laws and regulations. The nukes would need to be rounded up, too.

      Right now, we are being inundated with news reports detailing just how crazy the North Korean leader is. And while this may in fact be true, it doesn't explain why the media are so focused on telling us about it everyday. Propaganda perhaps?

      Truth is, we no longer have to wait for North Korea to attack the U.S. (which I believe to be highly unlikely) or South Korea. All that is required now is to perform an attack on our soil or the South Korean's soil and blame it on North Korea. ie., a false flag attack. That is the American way, btw...

      Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      Your guess is as good as mine as to how this will all play out in the end. But, eventually North Korea, Iran, or any other nation will no longer be allowed to function independently as a "sovereign" nation. It's already been decided. North Korea just hasn't read the memo yet.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916582].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Danny Shaw
    Its is no NK you have to worry about! Any small exchange could bring R + C in to the picture? Then we might have a fair fight?

    If NK coordinated an attack at the same time as Ir hits Is?? Shit get in your shelters.
    Signature
    **5 DAY FREE TRIAL** - The ultimate social media bot (FB, Instagram, Pinterest & G+).........
    Grab it >> HERE
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916549].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author scrofford
    Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

    So its been a popular story lately, With Kim saying he was pointing nukes at the USA in revenge because the US sent some B-2's over the South Korea to do a drill.

    N. Korea threats raise concern Kim backing regime into corner | Fox News


    Is NK a real threat to the US?
    I think NK has no idea what could happen to them. I think if we (the US) went to war, it would be a long drawn out fight, but I think in the end NK would fall. I don't think China would jump in this time. That's my opinion though. If China stayed out of it, NK would fall. If China didn't stay out of it, well we might have a problem because of China has so many people.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916817].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lcombs
    We put a Cruise missile through Khadfi's bedroom window.
    I don't think NK would be a problem.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916842].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
    The question isn't can the US take down North Korea. The question is will the US take down North Korea. The answer is no. The US no longer has the stomach to win a war. We'll just end up in another quagmire like Iraq.

    Winning wars takes a fortitude we haven't had in generations. You have to decimate the enemy and cast aside stifled "rules of engagement" that your enemy uses against you. The US takes the "high road" and ensures a drawn out process that, in the end, costs more in resources, money and lives.

    If you don't have the will to decimate the enemy and end the conflict, you shouldn't go to war at all. Yes, it's a broad stroke, but it should be considered the rule of thumb.
    Signature

    Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916910].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      Today Kim says there is a state of war with South Korea. Now what?

      It seems like North Korea is pushing itself into a corner if the US does not do whatever it is supposed to do.

      Will Kim just declare the "crisis" is over? Perhaps after a Photoshopped picture of some military success?

      Will North Korea attack another South Korean ship?

      Or maybe the regime is so sheltered from reality it believes its own propaganda?

      I'm not sure what the "end game" is and haven't seen that discussed in the media. It's like poker and Kim's weak hand is being called as a bluff. What does he do?

      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7916970].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        Today Kim says there is a state of war with South Korea..
        Technically, the Korean War never ended. North and South are still in a state of ceasefire.
        Signature
        Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
        So that blind people can hate them as well.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7917704].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

          Technically, the Korean War never ended. North and South are still in a state of ceasefire.
          THAT is why there is a DMZ!

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918361].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Our troops have the fortitude to win - we just have gov and brass who won't give them what they need to do it. Do you realize how much money some people in our gov, the bank cartels, and the elite are making enormous amounts of money funding both sides of wars. These elites have supported both sides for the whole 20th century. If war stopped, so would billions of dollars - if not trillions to their personal wallets. That won't happen.

      We're in more military conflict at this time than Hitler was in 1938 (and don't scream Godwin at me - I'm just giving the true image of how much conflict we're in right now). The whole globe is churning - and the cause is the pure sociopathic greed at the top of the money pyramid.

      Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

      The question isn't can the US take down North Korea. The question is will the US take down North Korea. The answer is no. The US no longer has the stomach to win a war. We'll just end up in another quagmire like Iraq.

      Winning wars takes a fortitude we haven't had in generations. You have to decimate the enemy and cast aside stifled "rules of engagement" that your enemy uses against you. The US takes the "high road" and ensures a drawn out process that, in the end, costs more in resources, money and lives.

      If you don't have the will to decimate the enemy and end the conflict, you shouldn't go to war at all. Yes, it's a broad stroke, but it should be considered the rule of thumb.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7917881].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
        Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

        Our troops have the fortitude to win - we just have gov and brass who won't give them what they need to do it. Do you realize how much money some people in our gov, the bank cartels, and the elite are making enormous amounts of money funding both sides of wars. These elites have supported both sides for the whole 20th century. If war stopped, so would billions of dollars - if not trillions to their personal wallets. That won't happen.

        We're in more military conflict at this time than Hitler was in 1938 (and don't scream Godwin at me - I'm just giving the true image of how much conflict we're in right now). The whole globe is churning - and the cause is the pure sociopathic greed at the top of the money pyramid.
        I never said our fighting forces don't have the fortitude to win. We, as a people, don't.
        Signature

        Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7917889].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
      Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

      The US takes the "high road" and ensures a drawn out process that, in the end, costs more in resources, money and lives.
      You might like to read the post where I posted links to the US using napalm in Iraq, and read up on the use of depleted uranium there as well before claiming the US takes the "high road". A viewing of the "Collateral Murder" video wouldn't go astray either. You can go back even further and read up on the My Lai incident to show more examples of not taking the high road.

      Before I get accused of "America bashing", I feel the same way about how the current American Empire is being built as I do about how the British Empire was built. It certainly wasn't done by holding afternoon teas with scones, crumpets and cucumber sandwiches being served to the natives. It was done by the most blood thirsty savagery imaginable.

      The same is true with all the European empires (Spanish, French, Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese, etc.), in fact you can also look back through history at the Roman, Greek, Mongol, Persian, etc., etc., Empires as well.

      There was no "high ground" taken by any of them.
      Signature
      Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
      So that blind people can hate them as well.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918393].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        You might like to read the post where I posted links to the US using napalm in Iraq, and read up on the use of depleted uranium there as well before claiming the US takes the "high road". A viewing of the "Collateral Murder" video wouldn't go astray either. You can go back even further and read up on the My Lai incident to show more examples of not taking the high road.

        Before I get accused of "America bashing", I feel the same way about how the current American Empire is being built as I do about how the British Empire was built. It certainly wasn't done by holding afternoon teas with scones, crumpets and cucumber sandwiches being served to the natives. It was done by the most blood thirsty savagery imaginable.

        The same is true with all the European empires (Spanish, French, Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese, etc.), in fact you can also look back through history at the Roman, Greek, Mongol, Persian, etc., etc., Empires as well.

        There was no "high ground" taken by any of them.
        Napalm and DU are weapons of war. War should have no 'high ground', but there are some who think it should, that it should be 'civilized'.

        You brandish the My Lai tragedy as proof that the US doesn't hold itself to a higher standard. How laughable. You have only to revisit the internal uproar of the people 'back home' to put the lie to that. You don't have enough post space to list the thousands of atrocities of the same nature that the Viet Cong visited on the villages in the south at the same time. Yet somehow, the US is pilloried for isolated incidents where the VC and NVA are not, even though it was common occurrence. Any reasoning behind that?

        The US is taken to task for using 'enhanced interrogation' techniques (which I personally don't have a problem with, BTW), while atrocities committed by muslim extremists - use of children as soldiers, use of civilians as shields, beheadings, stonings, etc. - garners barely a mention.

        Can anyone say 'double standard'?
        Signature

        The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

        Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918690].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author fin
          Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

          Napalm and DU are weapons of war. War should have no 'high ground', but there are some who think it should, that it should be 'civilized'.
          This is true.

          If someone is coming down on a parachute to kill my family I'll blast them out of the sky.

          I was always puzzled why this is against the Geneva Convention.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918734].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by fin View Post

            This is true.

            If someone is coming down on a parachute to kill my family I'll blast them out of the sky.

            I was always puzzled why this is against the Geneva Convention.
            The geneva convention was mainly to try to improve treatment of those in distress or captured. For example, military hospitals were generally not to be touched, and foreign combatants were to be cared for, fed, and not tortured. The biggest argument in its favor though is that the other side would do the same. So hurting a vietcong could lead to the killing of an American that would otherwise be treated OK in hopes that the vietcong would be. Almost like MAD in reverse.

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7919393].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
          Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

          Yet somehow, the US is pilloried for isolated incidents where the VC and NVA are not, even though it was common occurrence. Any reasoning behind that?
          Yes, because the US claims a higher standard of civilsation than them. Two wrongs don't make something right.

          The US is taken to task for using 'enhanced interrogation' techniques (which I personally don't have a problem with, BTW),
          By that, you're referring to torture. The main problem with that, is it achieves nothing. Someone will tell you whatever you want to hear (but not necessarily the truth) when they're tortured.

          while atrocities committed by muslim extremists - use of children as soldiers, use of civilians as shields, beheadings, stonings, etc. - garners barely a mention.
          Wrong. They attract massive publicity, and outrage.

          Can anyone say 'double standard'?
          Can you? You're saying that it's OK for you to be a savage, but not ok for your enemies. I'm saying it's wrong for both. It's a single standard applied to both sides of the equation.
          Signature
          Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
          So that blind people can hate them as well.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920941].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
            Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

            Yes, because the US claims a higher standard of civilsation than them. Two wrongs don't make something right.
            Point to where I said it was 'right', or where I made an "if it's okay for them, it's okay for us" statement. This 'higher standard of civilisation' stuff is crap, though, in a war. The British prided themselves on their level of civility in warfare when the US Revolutionary War broke out. The colonists were barbaric because they refused to line up in firing lines and instead fought from behind trees. Did that work out so well for the Brits?

            By that, you're referring to torture. The main problem with it is that achieves nothing. Someone will tell you whatever you want to hear (but not necessarily the truth) when they're tortured.
            Two things - NO, I'm not referring to torture. I'm referring to enhanced interrogation techniques. And if you don't think they work, you haven't a clue on how they're conducted. It is a rare occasion that interrogators don't get the truth.

            Wrong. They attract massive publicity, and outrage.
            On what planet?

            Can you? You're saying that it's OK for you to be a savage, but not ok for your enemies. I'm saying it's wrong for both. It's a single standard applied to both sides of the equation.
            That's not what I'm saying at all, and you very well know it. I'm saying there is not a 'single standard' applied, which you know is true also.
            Signature

            The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

            Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7921047].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author scrofford
        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        You might like to read the post where I posted links to the US using napalm in Iraq, and read up on the use of depleted uranium there as well before claiming the US takes the "high road". A viewing of the "Collateral Murder" video wouldn't go astray either. You can go back even further and read up on the My Lai incident to show more examples of not taking the high road.

        Before I get accused of "America bashing", I feel the same way about how the current American Empire is being built as I do about how the British Empire was built. It certainly wasn't done by holding afternoon teas with scones, crumpets and cucumber sandwiches being served to the natives. It was done by the most blood thirsty savagery imaginable.

        The same is true with all the European empires (Spanish, French, Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese, etc.), in fact you can also look back through history at the Roman, Greek, Mongol, Persian, etc., etc., Empires as well.

        There was no "high ground" taken by any of them.
        I read through it. First off, I don't know where you get that napalm is banned in the US arsenal. When I was in the Army back in the 80's napalm was a weapon used by the US. Maybe they have banned it since, but I am not aware of it.

        Second, Depleted Uranium is in the Sabot round the M1A1 Abrams shoots. They used those rounds in the M60's also.

        The United States has a lot of nasty weapons of war, and Napalm and Depleted Uranium are just a couple. I think we have worse weapons that could be unleashed also, but choose not to use such as chemical and biological weapons.

        But Napalm being a banned weapon? I don't think so.

        As far as the U.S. Taking the "high ground," I don't know about that anymore. I don't think we necessarily do. I wasn't in favor of the Iraq war, though I think some good came out of it. I think we need to get out of Afghanistan also. Now we might be getting into it with NK. I don't know what to think except that NK is a Communist nation and I think that we have a right to protect non-communist nations and our interests. But I think we are setting up to possibly start this one.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7923992].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Thomas
      Originally Posted by fin View Post

      If someone is coming down on a parachute to kill my family I'll blast them out of the sky.

      I was always puzzled why this is against the Geneva Convention.
      It isn't; the protection is intended for pilots and crew escaping from a damaged aircraft... not for paratroopers (who usually jump out of a perfectly good aircraft, as it happens).

      Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

      You brandish the My Lai tragedy as proof that the US doesn't hold itself to a higher standard. How laughable. You have only to revisit the internal uproar of the people 'back home' to put the lie to that. You don't have enough post space to list the thousands of atrocities of the same nature that the Viet Cong visited on the villages in the south at the same time. Yet somehow, the US is pilloried for isolated incidents where the VC and NVA are not, even though it was common occurrence. Any reasoning behind that?

      The US is taken to task for using 'enhanced interrogation' techniques (which I personally don't have a problem with, BTW), while atrocities committed by muslim extremists - use of children as soldiers, use of civilians as shields, beheadings, stonings, etc. - garners barely a mention.

      Can anyone say 'double standard'?
      It's only a double standard if you see the US Army (a professional army raised by a legitimate government in accordance with the law), the Viet Cong (the armed wing of an unofficial and illegal political organisation), and Muslim extremists (fanatical religious terrorists) as being equals.

      For obvious reasons, people don't, which is why organisations like the US Army are, and should be, held to a higher standard.

      Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

      There are a lot of us here that don't agree with sending our military to what amounts to police actions, with their hands tied behind their backs by some pretty insane ROEs. If we're going to to go war, we need to go to war, do the job, and come home.

      War is nasty business - 'war is hell' - IMHO, it's not nasty or hellish enough. War should be uncivilized and barbaric. It should affect everyone in the countries involved. Maybe if it were less civilized than it is, if all the 'feel good' rules of the latter 20th century were ignored, it would be frightening enough for people to restrain from it, and restrain their leaders from it. Probably not, though.
      Steve, you say all that, but, above, complain, that the atrocities of others aren't given equal consideration when compared to US atrocities :confused:

      Also, there are two sides in any war; in cases where the US has been on the receiving-end, the logic expressed in your post suggests that the 9/11 attackers didn't kill enough people... or that the Japanese didn't sink enough ships in Pearl Harbour... or that the Koreans and Viet Cong didn't torture enough American POWs. They all should have gone farther... inflicted more torture... killed more people... caused more destruction... basically, "done the job, and gone home".

      Going back to the OP, the same logic also suggests North Korea should try to nuke American cities, and do so sooner rather than later! That's the one means they have (or claim to have) to make sure a future Korean war affects one of the countries involved, and make sure it's people experience, first-hand, just how uncivilised and frightening political violence really is.

      Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

      You have to decimate the enemy and cast aside stifled "rules of engagement" that your enemy uses against you.

      If you don't have the will to decimate the enemy and end the conflict, you shouldn't go to war at all.
      That's the same line of thought expressed by Steve above. I don't get where it comes from. If you really believe war should be conducted like that, then, for example, there should be no prisoners of war - they should be tortured for information and immediately exectuted. You also don't bother trying to distinguish the civilian population... they're the people who pay for the war effort against you anyway, so why would you? In fact, since nuclear weapons are a much faster way to kill more people, you shouldn't even bother mobilising any conventional forces... at the first sign of conflict you just nuke your would-be enemies major population centres. That way, you eliminate the population and the economy that powers the war effort against you right from the get-go.

      Job done... go home.

      (Unless, of course, your would-be enemy thinks the same thing, and does all of the above to you first :rolleyes.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920540].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
        Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

        If you don't have the will to decimate the enemy and end the conflict, you shouldn't go to war at all. Yes, it's a broad stroke, but it should be considered the rule of thumb.
        Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

        That's the same line of thought expressed by Steve above. I don't get where it comes from. If you really believe war should be conducted like that, then, for example, there should be no prisoners of war - they should be tortured for information and immediately exectuted. You also don't bother trying to distinguish the civilian population... they're the people who pay for the war effort against you anyway, so why would you? In fact, since nuclear weapons are a much faster way to kill more people, you shouldn't even bother mobilising any conventional forces... at the first sign of conflict you just nuke your would-be enemies major population centres. That way, you eliminate the population and the economy that powers the war effort against you right from the get-go.

        Job done... go home.

        (Unless, of course, your would-be enemy thinks the same thing, and does all of the above to you first :rolleyes.
        That's a hasty generalization of what Steve and I were saying. Decimating your enemy doesn't certainly mean going all Tarantino on an entire country and its citizens and simply kill everyone.

        Obviously wiping out their military, communications, infrastructures, supply lines, and government with as few losses of "innocent civilians" as possible without putting your own forces in harm's way is the goal. Flattening them back to the point it will take them 30 years to regroup.

        The nuclear option is the last resort, hopefully a point we never get to.

        Quite honestly, depending on the situation, I can't say I would be against your mock scenario of eliminating the population and the economy that powers the war effort against you right from the get-go. If it would make the world a better place...

        I stand by the assertion that if you don't have the will to destroy your enemy, you shouldn't be going to war at all. Either the dispute isn't that serious or you won't have the will to finish the job.

        I just see no point going in saying, "Eh, we'll kill a few of these folks and secure a couple square miles and sit here for fifteen years as fodder for children strapped with dynamite."
        Signature

        Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920615].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author fin
        Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

        It isn't; the protection is intended for pilots and crew escaping from a damaged aircraft... not for paratroopers (who usually jump out of a perfectly good aircraft, as it happens).
        So it's to protect the people that have just been bombing you so they can sneak off to their own country and eventually try to bomb you again, this time killing your family?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920696].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Thomas
          Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

          Quite honestly, depending on the situation, I can't say I would be against your mock scenario of eliminate the population and the economy that powers the war effort against you right from the get-go. If it would make the world a better place"
          Which would make you a war criminal, were you the one responsible for putting such a plan into action.

          Originally Posted by fin View Post

          So it's to protect the people that have just been bombing you so they can sneak off to their own country and eventually try to bomb you again, this time killing your family?
          You may not like it, but it is expressly forbidden. Killing them would make you as much a war criminal as, for example, someone who decided to shoot shipwrecked sailors in the water. Any incapacitated or captured enemy could end up back into their own country and reenter whatever war happens to be going on... but killing them on thst basis is just plain old murder, which, even in the middle of a warzone, is still illegal.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920793].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
            Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

            Which would make you a war criminal, were you the one responsible for putting such a plan into action.

            We all have our dreams and aspirations.
            Signature

            Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7921604].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Thomas
              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

              I'm sorry, but that is just a completely ludicrous argument. "It's okay for you to hang the mayor of that village and gut him in front of his family because you're an illegal fighter, but you let us know if US soldiers ever do that, and we'll string them up!"
              It's not okay in either case, but if you think there is some connection, then I would assume you do think, for example, the US Army and Muslim extremists are on the same level (i.e. "Yeah, our professional armed forces raised in accordance with the law did indeed kill all those innocent people, but WTF is your problem... X group of fanatical religious terrorists have done worse, ya know!").

              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

              I'm not complaining - I frankly don't pay much attention to the hues and cries of the 'world community' when it comes to supposed US 'atrocities'. Most of them are as ludicrous as your statement above.
              Same thing.

              US atrocities = "they're fine, what on earth are you complaining about!"; the atrocities of others = "Grrr, evil b**tards... we gotta wipe 'em out!".

              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

              This 'higher standard of civilisation' stuff is crap, though, in a war. The British prided themselves on their level of civility in warfare when the US Revolutionary War broke out. The colonists were barbaric because they refused to line up in firing lines and instead fought from behind trees. Did that work out so well for the Brits?
              That's great, until you're on the receiving end of it.

              Suppose the Russians or Chinese get tired of American military adventures in their geopolitical backyards and decide to make their world 'a better place' with a preemptive nuclear strike against the several hundred urban areas in which most of the US population lives, thereby eliminating the people that are paying for the transgressions against them.

              Not so good for you, but a pretty dandy outcome for Russia and/or China.

              If the 'higher standard of civilisation' stuff really is crap, then that's a perfectly acceptable course of action for them. In fact, if they think the same way you claim to, they'd probably wonder why on earth anyone would have a problem with it.

              Originally Posted by SteveJohnson View Post

              NO, I'm not referring to torture. I'm referring to enhanced interrogation techniques. And if you don't think they work, you haven't a clue on how they're conducted. It is a rare occasion that interrogators don't get the truth.
              The term "enhanced interrogation techniques" is just a tired old euphemism for torture that has long-ago been found to violate international law. The generally-accepted prohibitions on torture of prisoners exist for a very good reason. If, however, you're in favour of such behaviour, that's fine, but it leaves little room for complaint when the shoe is on the other foot; the use of such "techniques" by the US gives all-and-sundry ample excuse to torture American prisoners in any future conflict based on the fact that the US does exactly the same thing to its prisoners, and claims there is nothing whatsoever wrong with it.

              Originally Posted by Dan Riffle View Post

              We all have our dreams and aspirations.
              Cool... I'll come visit you during your trial in The Hague.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7923545].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
                Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

                Cool... I'll come visit you during your trial in The Hague.
                What Hague? In this scenario there is no place such as The Hague because I wipe the city right off the map as soon as I am done with my other enemies. Then, in my final deranged assault, I strap myself to a nuclear warhead and launch it and myself to Ireland. But first I alert the Irish media that I decided to cripple the country because once upon a time an Irishman responded to one of my threads with a sarcastic eye roll emoticon.

                I do this because I'm a madman, a war criminal.
                Signature

                Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7923761].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author SteveJohnson
        Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

        It's only a double standard if you see the US Army (a professional army raised by a legitimate government in accordance with the law), the Viet Cong (the armed wing of an unofficial and illegal political organisation), and Muslim extremists (fanatical religious terrorists) as being equals.

        For obvious reasons, people don't, which is why organisations like the US Army are, and should be, held to a higher standard.
        I'm sorry, but that is just a completely ludicrous argument. "It's okay for you to hang the mayor of that village and gut him in front of his family because you're an illegal fighter, but you let us know if US soldiers ever do that, and we'll string them up!"

        Steve, you say all that, but, above, complain, that the atrocities of others aren't given equal consideration when compared to US atrocities :confused:
        I'm not complaining - I frankly don't pay much attention to the hues and cries of the 'world community' when it comes to supposed US 'atrocities'. Most of them are as ludicrous as your statement above.

        Also, there are two sides in any war; in cases where the US has been on the receiving-end, the logic expressed in your post suggests that the 9/11 attackers didn't kill enough people... or that the Japanese didn't sink enough ships in Pearl Harbour... or that the Koreans and Viet Cong didn't torture enough American POWs. They all should have gone farther... inflicted more torture... killed more people... caused more destruction... basically, "done the job, and gone home".
        If you want me to be perfectly honest about it, they didn't. All they succeeded in doing was piss us off. The Japanese tried and failed, the Arabs tried and failed, the Koreans and the VC both tried and failed. They got their licks in. The Japanese paid for poking the tiger with a stick, the others, not so much, mainly because WWII was the last time the US went to war.

        Going back to the OP, the same logic also suggests North Korea should try to nuke American cities, and do so sooner rather than later! That's the one means they have (or claim to have) to make sure a future Korean war affects one of the countries involved, and make sure it's people experience, first-hand, just how uncivilised and frightening political violence really is.
        Nobody (but you) is saying any country should try to make war on another, using any kind of logic.

        But it should be a foregone conclusion - it isn't, anymore, given the attention to 'political considerations' - that if you make war on the US, it had better be a killing blow from the outset because if it isn't, we will get up and wipe you off the map.

        That's the same line of thought expressed by Steve above. I don't get where it comes from. If you really believe war should be conducted like that, then, for example, there should be no prisoners of war - they should be tortured for information and immediately exectuted. You also don't bother trying to distinguish the civilian population... they're the people who pay for the war effort against you anyway, so why would you? In fact, since nuclear weapons are a much faster way to kill more people, you shouldn't even bother mobilising any conventional forces... at the first sign of conflict you just nuke your would-be enemies major population centres. That way, you eliminate the population and the economy that powers the war effort against you right from the get-go.

        Job done... go home.

        (Unless, of course, your would-be enemy thinks the same thing, and does all of the above to you first :rolleyes.
        Exactly.

        The horrors of war should be the horrors of war. There would be fewer of them.

        Listen, I'm not a barbaric person. I'm the furthest thing from it, in fact. I'm not a warmonger; I'd much prefer that there were no more wars, ever. I think the 'civilization' of war has made it more palatable than it ever should be. If the consequences for starting and losing a war were total destruction - none of this 'measured response' crap - fewer wars would get started. That's probably wishful thinking given the sociopaths of the world, but WTH.
        Signature

        The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

        Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920995].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
    Funny, I must have missed the trillion dollar wars started the last four years. That's what happens I guess when I watch Storage Wars marathons.
    Originally Posted by Ken_Caudill View Post

    Interestingly, the current administration went right ahead with the policies of the previous administration with no qualms at all.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7917227].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

      Funny, I must have missed the trillion dollar wars started the last four years. That's what happens I guess when I watch Storage Wars marathons.
      Tim I think he's talking about ending Iraq on Bush's schedule and not pulling out of Afghanistan.
      Not to mention Libya and the continuing aid in money and weapons to countries in the Middle East that are having issues with each other.
      Like giving Israel 3 billion annually in aid and giving their self proclaimed enemies 8 billion a year. We are basically enabling the conflicts in the Middle East.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7917261].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author t3cn1c0
    Yes, well if they want another world war why would they even flaunt their WMD. Because of their decision many lives are at stake.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7917835].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918474].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      We're in more military conflict at this time
      Conflict is the key word. We hold back, there are no additional taxes to pay for wars, we don't have any shortages of goods or arms. Except for the military members and their families, we aren't directly affected by these conflicts in our daily lives. That's one reason they've been allowed to continue as long as they have.

      If we are ever directly attacked - our military can respond effectively. Whether the public can rise to the occasion is another story.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918553].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author scrofford
        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

        Conflict is the key word. We hold back, there are no additional taxes to pay for wars, we don't have any shortages of goods or arms. Except for the military members and their families, we aren't directly affected by these conflicts in our daily lives. That's one reason they've been allowed to continue as long as they have.

        If we are ever directly attacked - our military can respond effectively. Whether the public can rise to the occasion is another story.
        We WERE directly attacked on 9/11/2001. That plunged us into a huge war. It was a war. Not a conflict. And as far as it not affecting anyone besides military members and their families, that's just not true! It affected everyone!

        The deaths of our military people didn't just affect their families. It affects everyone. I'm sure most people here in the US know of at least one person who has been killed, wounded or served during the Iraq war.

        I know a lot of people that this war affected in their daily lives. Some who fought in it and some who cared about others that fought in it. This war affected EVERYONE in the United States. And I think the effects of this war are going to go on for years!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7924010].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
          Originally Posted by scrofford View Post

          We WERE directly attacked on 9/11/2001. That plunged us into a huge war. It was a war. Not a conflict. And as far as it not affecting anyone besides military members and their families, that's just not true! It affected everyone!

          The deaths of our military people didn't just affect their families. It affects everyone. I'm sure most people here in the US know of at least one person who has been killed, wounded or served during the Iraq war.

          I know a lot of people that this war affected in their daily lives. Some who fought in it and some who cared about others that fought in it. This war affected EVERYONE in the United States. And I think the effects of this war are going to go on for years!
          I didn't personally know anybody who died in the 9/11 attacks.

          But when they announced that Osama had been killed, I admit.. it brought tears of joy to my eyes, and I'm a grown man.

          Whether or not it's true, I don't know. I'd like to think it is tho. F**K that stupid POS. I hope he burns in hell.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7928404].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dan Riffle
    Well, Steve went and stole my thunder. Eh, he probably said it better than I would have anyway.
    Signature

    Raising a child is akin to knowing you're getting fired in 18 years and having to train your replacement without actively sabotaging them.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7918661].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    As long as the elite make money making wars, they will. As long as the elite can put people into war, they will. What the whole WORLD has to start understanding is that war is usually based on lies, deceit, and propaganda to get people to support it. It is willed only by those in power because they want MORE power.

    If every human would drop their weapons and tell the elite - "you want to fight - go have at it, but don't send me to die for you", we would not have war. We would not have leaders with the power to hurt us en mass at all.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7919645].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MissTerraK
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post


      If every human would drop their weapons and tell the elite - "you want to fight - go have at it, but don't send me to die for you", we would not have war. We would not have leaders with the power to hurt us en mass at all.
      Exactly! This reminds of a line from the movie Troy when the warrior Achilles says to Agamemnon, "Imagine a king who fights his own battles. Wouldn't that be something?"

      Terra
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7919744].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author socialentry
        Banned
        Originally Posted by MissTerraK View Post

        Exactly! This reminds of a line from the movie Troy when the warrior Achilles says to Agamemnon, "Imagine a king who fights his own battles. Wouldn't that be something?"

        Terra
        Temujin fought his own battles.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920261].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author MissTerraK
          Originally Posted by socialentry View Post

          Temujin fought his own battles.
          Well, Genghis Khan was way after Achilles time. :p

          Terra
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920295].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    Here's food for thought: North Koreans must think about food a lot.

    "Chronic food insecurity and malnutrition affect about two-thirds of the country's 24 million people, according to a UN assessment last June."

    South Korea vows fast response to North - The Irish Times - Mon, Apr 01, 2013
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7920717].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    Another possible perspective I don't think has been addressed here -

    Junior is having a tantrum just to get attention - He needs us to bribe him to sit down and shut up. He wants concessions - financial aid, etc.

    It even had a picture of him smiling and acting like a warm-blooded human being on the newscast where they gave this opinion.

    When you figure how stupid it would be to threaten us into attacking him, maybe this is logical that Junior is just being manipulative.

    With that said, I would be the last person to reward him for his nasty threats. I would sooner take him out and shut him up for good.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7922252].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    Originally Posted by scrofford View Post

    We WERE directly attacked on 9/11/2001. That plunged us into a huge war. It was a war. Not a conflict. And as far as it not affecting anyone besides military members and their families, that's just not true! It affected everyone!

    The deaths of our military people didn't just affect their families. It affects everyone. I'm sure most people here in the US know of at least one person who has been killed, wounded or served during the Iraq war.

    I know a lot of people that this war affected in their daily lives. Some who fought in it and some who cared about others that fought in it. This war affected EVERYONE in the United States. And I think the effects of this war are going to go on for years!
    That's true, scrofford - terror -- in the psychological sense - affected EVERYONE. A total 'mindblower' - nobody will ever be the same -- just like any citizens - in any country that has been attacked.

    ... on our own soil - we got to see what war is really like first-hand - and then 'the chickens came home to roost' - i for one knew what they must be feeling in Iraq and Israel and Palestine - and Vietnam when their little buildings were bombed in broad daylight. It just happened bigger here - and so bizarre. Never before in most of our lifetimes - and hopefully never again.

    "Have mercy if you want to be shown mercy" - and the other side of the coin - "you reap what you sow" (maybe it will go down easier if i call it 'karma'). Call off ALL Your Stupid Wars Already! Bring Home the Troops Yesterday! 'World Peace' (would rock)! ;o)

    when i truly realize how depraved and degenerated we are as 'mankind' - the most shameful horror is all of the military who have been maimed and died. ours and everybody else's - what total agony. i won't say 'for what' because then they will think I feel it was all in vain. (i do only in the sense it never ends)... and nothing ever changes. Not really.

    the only analogy i can give is being worried about what people do with the money you give them (like donations/charity/church, etc) -- WE are blessed in and for GIVING -- even if the recipient pours the money down the toilet. >>> How many human lives have we wasted on the killing fields? so many families have been injured and mutiliated - they have given the ultimate. This has to be worse than 'Sodom and Gemorrah' - anyday for perversion.

    (just think if one of the nukes ever get 'sent off' - oh wait - maybe a nuclear power plant will be in melt down - from something we can't control like a tsunami, earthquake, or etc.) it could happen any minute - <<they already have happened>>

    (i used to think they 'surely' had that all covered until Chernobyl and the Japanese Tsunami) - TOTAL STUPIDITY. (and we believe nobody wants to commit suicide and that is what protects us from them using the weapons, right?) what about your common worker spaz? (like the engineering, etc @ both facilities in 'question') - "design flaws" - Criminal NEGLIGENCE that has resulted in actually contaminating us right now with RADIATION (at least here on the west coast).

    ... from one of my favorite poems as a pre-teenager (and now it has more meaning than ever)

    "... the world is a cancer eating itself away".

    ;o(
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7924106].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      We were not attacked by Iraq. I'm not going to argue wars and politics here - just gave my opinion of what's been going on...as I see it.

      Others are free to have other opinions.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7925665].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Is still think that NK will talk so much BS that they have to bite at some point only to keep their so called "Dignity"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7925900].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      Every year, we have a month of war games with So Korea and it is taken as a threat by NK and they respond with threats and bluster.

      The concern is that at some point it will go over the top. Meanwhile, we couldn't afford to send a support ship to the Persian Gulf but we can send a destroyer headed toward NK.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7925983].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    I dont think the word "afford" is part of the vocabulary of our government lol, they just do it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7926359].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      Speaking of "afford" - noticed today "they" have added some new stats to the debt clock (at the top)

      U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7928379].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    The reason the Bush admin didn't "catch" Osama is because he was a close business associate of the family. Who betrayed who will always be a puzzle. Old man Bush directly betrayed Saddam. It was the US that put Saddam in power in the first place.

    Hilary admitted out loud on C-span that the US gov created Al Qaeda. I about fell over. I knew that - but never expected anyone in our offices to ever actually admit it - especially publicly.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7928586].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      Hilary admitted out loud on C-span that the US gov created Al Qaeda.
      What Clinton (and others) said is that the TERM (the name) Al Qaeda was a coined phrase rather than the name a group gave itself. She did not claim we created the group even though some have decided to make that claim since to promote their own agendas.

      It basically means "the base" in English and first use is credited to an ex-intelligence officer in the UK and then was adopted by US intel to refer to this terrorist group.

      I was a bit embarrassed when officials loudly patted ourselves on the back after "getting ben laden". I'm glad we found him - but it took ten years so not a lot of bragging rights except for the military personnel who did the deed.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7929882].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HeySal
        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

        What Clinton (and others) said is that the TERM (the name) Al Qaeda was a coined phrase rather than the name a group gave itself. She did not claim we created the group even though some have decided to make that claim since to promote their own agendas.

        It basically means "the base" in English and first use is credited to an ex-intelligence officer in the UK and then was adopted by US intel to refer to this terrorist group.

        I was a bit embarrassed when officials loudly patted ourselves on the back after "getting ben laden". I'm glad we found him - but it took ten years so not a lot of bragging rights except for the military personnel who did the deed.
        Yes Kay - I know what it means. The truth is, though, that WE created the group as well. It means database - the live members bore the name - it was started as a group working fot the CIA. Just one more example of how US officials are manipulating the whole world for their own benefit. If you listen to her again, you will hear how she gave away the whole kit and kaboodle in that statement.

        BTW - for you that LOVE your mainstream media:

        http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000158018
        Signature

        Sal
        When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
        Beyond the Path

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7932294].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Again, I still think that NK is going to talk sooooo much that they have to do something in order to keep their "hard on look" for their people.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930230].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

      Again, I still think that NK is going to talk sooooo much that they have to do something in order to keep their "hard on look" for their people.
      Hopefully, what they'll do is have a mutiny and get rid of their toxic dear leaders responsible for this present mess.
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930624].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
        Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

        Hopefully, what they'll do is have a mutiny and get rid of their toxic dear leaders responsible for this present mess.
        That wont happen. The leadership in NK only leads with Fear. People are way too fearful to present an action of mutiny
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930669].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
          Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

          That wont happen. The leadership in NK only leads with Fear. People are way too fearful to present an action of mutiny
          I think it would have to be a clean military coup by leaders with clout, if it were to happen. I bet that not only could it happen but that it will happen.
          Signature

          Project HERE.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930787].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
            Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

            I think it would have to be a clean military coup by leaders with clout, if it were to happen. I bet that not only could it happen but that it will happen.
            true i would agree
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7932032].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
      Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

      Again, I still think that NK is going to talk sooooo much that they have to do something in order to keep their "hard on look" for their people.
      There is definitely a chance this could happen. It will be a tough choice on S. Korea but perhaps they should respond much firmer this time. It may what it takes to depose this regime if its military is shown not to be as strong as it claims.

      Kim Jong Un has been very disappointing. Instead of opening up N. Korea to reform, this series of provocations is far beyond what his father did.
      Signature

      Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7930740].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SandraLarkin
    Banned
    There have been like five movies recently depicting NK of invading the USA and now all of this conflict is happening.


    Just another manufactured war scenario for the public to consume.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7931100].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
      Originally Posted by SandraLarkin View Post

      There have been like five movies recently depicting NK of invading the USA and now all of this conflict is happening.


      Just another manufactured war scenario for the public to consume.
      can i have the titles please

      i like futuristic movies, order them from china
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7944153].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Reading the news today, NK has authorized its millirary to send an attack our way lol, whens this nonsense gonna end!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7934490].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      I think we are making a mistake. What we've been doing for the past couple of weeks is reacting to the new leader's threats. I think it's a dangerous path. He threatens, we roll out more planes in "war games" - he threatens, we send destroyers in that direction - he threatens, we announce new securities for Guam.

      Problem is - we don't know how far he will go. We need to stop trying to match every threat he makes with some action of our own. We need to make a definitive statement and then stop the public displays of reacting to everything he says. We almost seem to be egging him on by taking some action every time he opens his mouth.

      There are rumors that he is not as popular with his own people as his predecessor was. If that's the case, there's no telling how far he might go to bolster his image as a tough guy.

      I thought at first China might want to rein him in - but I'm not sure that's the case. China might want him to go off on a tangent and may have an agenda of it's own.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7935108].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
        Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

        I think we are making a mistake. What we've been doing for the past couple of weeks is reacting to the new leader's threats. I think it's a dangerous path. He threatens, we roll out more planes in "war games" - he threatens, we send destroyers in that direction - he threatens, we announce new securities for Guam.

        Problem is - we don't know how far he will go. We need to stop trying to match every threat he makes with some action of our own. We need to make a definitive statement and then stop the public displays of reacting to everything he says. We almost seem to be egging him on by taking some action every time he opens his mouth.

        There are rumors that he is not as popular with his own people as his predecessor was. If that's the case, there's no telling how far he might go to bolster his image as a tough guy.

        I thought at first China might want to rein him in - but I'm not sure that's the case. China might want him to go off on a tangent and may have an agenda of it's own.
        Thats exactly what I am saying. I think that Kim will talk sooooo much that he has GOT to ACT on his THREATS in order to keep any image for himself towards his people. The news article I saw today even said that he was thinking about waging war either today or tomorrow.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7935210].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jared Alberghini
    This just in...

    Anonymous Hacks Official North Korean Social Media Accounts

    "In addition, several sites hocking propaganda material have been hit by digital graffiti (visit Aindf.com to see a wanted poster of Kim Jong Un). North Korean state-run news site Uriminzokkiri.com has been knocked offline, possibly by related DDoS attack. The Next Web is reporting that a Pastebin note, allegedly from the hacktivists, claims that they have agents on the ground fighting off the North's "cyber army.""

    North Korean social media apparently hacked - CNN.com
    Signature

    P.S.

    Join The Future: Telekinetic Marketing

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7935301].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
      Originally Posted by Jared Alberghini View Post

      This just in...

      Anonymous Hacks Official North Korean Social Media Accounts

      "In addition, several sites hocking propaganda material have been hit by digital graffiti (visit Aindf.com to see a wanted poster of Kim Jong Un). North Korean state-run news site Uriminzokkiri.com has been knocked offline, possibly by related DDoS attack. The Next Web is reporting that a Pastebin note, allegedly from the hacktivists, claims that they have agents on the ground fighting off the North's "cyber army.""

      North Korean social media apparently hacked - CNN.com
      I have to admit, thats some good Photoshop skills Lulz
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7935379].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        I don't think such an attack is particularly helpful. This isn't a leader who takes kindly to criticism and let's face it - isn't HE the only one on social media there?

        I certainly don't want to see this escalate into attacks because Anonymous decided to ridicule the NK nutcase.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7936097].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          I don't think such an attack is particularly helpful. This isn't a leader who takes kindly to criticism and let's face it - isn't HE the only one on social media there?

          I certainly don't want to see this escalate into attacks because Anonymous decided to ridicule the NK nutcase.
          I think Kim might underestimate the USA, and SK really. however, Im not sure the techo levels of SK.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7939171].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Mayo
    DARPA(Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) has been working on the
    HELLADS(High Eenergy Liquid Laser Area Defense System) since 2008.
    It is designed to destroy surface-to-air missiles or rockets with high-energy laser beams.
    They are testing and plan to have them on fighter jets and other military aircraft in 2014.

    Here's a link for more info: http://mashable.com/2013/01/27/laser...ter-jets-2014/

    Have a Great Day!
    Michael
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7936317].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Patrician
    From what I understand NK citizens are starving - and now it is also the army that is starving.

    I am pretty sick of our sanctions which never hit 'home' but only punish the helpless citizens for their leader's stupidity and evil.

    While I am not for starving anybody including their army, this might just work a lot more effectively as a real good reason for them to depose or even dispose of the little man with the big mouth.

    Hunger is painful and I am sure people are desperate.

    At the same time as I don't want to see anybody starve, I don't want to pander to his little tantrum and bribe him with money for food (which the people will never see).

    I think the only answer is to get rid of him figuratively and even literally - and anyone who is loyal to his fascist regime - his relatives, etc.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7939404].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      The citizens in NK blame the US and other countries for their starvation - that's what they've been told and what they believe.

      To them, the little despot is a god among men and they will follow him blindly. That's what happens when you have a horde of people who are uneducated and isolated. They blame the enemy they don't know.

      Usually when the NK leader does his annual tirade, he ends up with concessions. It's not usual players this year as several countries have new leaders and that changed the dynamics.

      If he acts, it may be on the 10th as it's a special day for NK. I think the biggest risk is that he will "act out" by shooting into the sea and the action will be viewed as "an attack" an ignite a real war.

      Understandable no one wants to take on NK - if you won you'd have millions of starving people to feed for years to come.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7939631].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    This is a man who kills and tortures citizens for not openly worshiping him. They also have strict gun control so the citizens will have a hard time fighting back against any army that is under his control. I don't think that they are all as blind to his status as a scumbag as some might think.

    Actually - if he's stupid enough to starve his army, he's a blithering idiot. Starvation can make people very violent -- and if that army gets hungry enough, they will turn on him like rabid dogs. Smart leaders pamper their defending forces. I think our own admin is making its most blatant mistakes by pulling benefits out from under our armed forces -- they are trained to kill, and trained to oppose tyranny. How much will our own army take before it just walks in, seizes our criminals in office?

    The feds are now trying to exert illegal authority over our police force - and the police force is starting to take a strong stand against them.

    Greed kills. Why can't powerful psychotics figure that out? They always feel they are immune to retaliation. Go figure.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7940115].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    My guess is that this article sums up what's actually going on with North Korea and Kim Jong-Un:

    North Korea's Bluffing Blowhard; The American Magazine
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7941378].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Yesterday, I saw a show about a guy that managed to get out of an NK concentration camp! The story is that he somehow made it ALL THE WAY into china, found an SK embassy, and got asylum and is now in SK!

    Supposedly, he was locked up because he believed the dictator's word was law, his parents did wrong, and all would be treated ok. His family was killed, and he turned them into a guy who took all credit so the kid was locked up.

    He said one reason he did it was for a meal. He views freedom as broiled chicken, or rather being able to eat whatever you want.

    And I found out something very interesting, actually two, recently. It is a pity I can't talk about it here.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7942022].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

      <snip>

      Supposedly, he was locked up because he believed the dictator's word was law, his parents did wrong, and all would be treated ok. His family was killed, and he turned them into a guy who took all credit so the kid was locked up.<snip>
      I'm totally confused and can't understand what this means. Why was he locked up? What did he believe? Why would he be locked up because of that? What does, "he turned them into a guy who took all credit so the kid was locked up" mean?
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7942522].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

        I'm totally confused and can't understand what this means. Why was he locked up? What did he believe? Why would he be locked up because of that? What does, "he turned them into a guy who took all credit so the kid was locked up" mean?
        He believed that his parents broke the law, and would be treated fairly. The FACT is that the "law" was a dictators whim, and they were KILLED! HE was locked up because he was the minor of "traitors". They believed that he was merely a minor that maybe could be swayed. Had HE turned his family in, he would have been seen as a "patriot", and possibly been left alone, but the fact that he turned them in was covered up, because the guy he turned the into wanted credit.

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7942588].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
          Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

          He believed that his parents broke the law, and would be treated fairly. The FACT is that the "law" was a dictators whim, and they were KILLED! HE was locked up because he was the minor of "traitors". They believed that he was merely a minor that maybe could be swayed. Had HE turned his family in, he would have been seen as a "patriot", and possibly been left alone, but the fact that he turned them in was covered up, because the guy he turned the into wanted credit.

          Steve
          I don't know why I was reading it wrong to begin with, but thanks for elaborating on it.
          Signature

          Project HERE.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7945716].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Newbieee
        Actually i thought this is under politics.
        But since its here.. i shall contribute. haha

        From what i heard on the news, NK is so sensitive because in the past, US conducted an airstrike on them and flattened them.
        Get this.. They said "until there was no more targets for the pilots to bomb"

        That is why when US sent bombers over to SK, they were so "sensitive" about this.

        I dont know about you but when i see KJI, i see a small boy.
        Not to mention over weight..
        Signature
        Pain is a perception, so is defeat & happiness!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7942599].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author socialentry
        Banned
        Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

        I'm totally confused and can't understand what this means. Why was he locked up? What did he believe? Why would he be locked up because of that? What does, "he turned them into a guy who took all credit so the kid was locked up" mean?
        Under Juche (NK's ideology), the family is held responsible for the treason of one individual.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7943266].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dallas playboy
    Tim;

    My previous post was deleted, so I'll try again. Why should we believe the Iraqi
    foreign minister? I know I wouldn't.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7942901].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      It wasn't, see posts #52 and #54.
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      Tim;

      My previous post was deleted, so I'll try again. Why should we believe the Iraqi
      foreign minister? I know I wouldn't.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7943065].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7943081].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Oh wayia. LMAO.


    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7944705].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
    It looks like that the US has blinked first.


    What has happened with N. Korea over the years is reminiscent of appeasement to Nazi Germany. I just hope it won't end extremely badly for the Korean people.
    Signature

    Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7946027].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      How so Derek? I don't see anything remotely close, besides a crazy dictator who makes threats. The difference is Hitler started following through on his threats while NK hasn't and most likely won't.
      Originally Posted by derekwong28 View Post


      What has happened with N. Korea over the years is reminiscent of appeasement to Nazi Germany.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7947806].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

        How so Derek? I don't see anything remotely close, besides a crazy dictator who makes threats. The difference is Hitler started following through on his threats while NK hasn't and most likely won't.
        Tim, quite often at the past, NK follows up the threats with small provocations months afterwards. Besides the recent sinking of the S. Korean warship, they have bombed a S. Korean jet and bombed a S. Korean mission in Burma

        Korean Air Flight 858 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Rangoon bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Both of these events would have been serious enough to trigger a war. However S. Korea did not really retaliate then as for other incidents. However, there is no guarantee that S. Korea will not retaliate much more firmly in future and that could lead to real war.

        It is likewise with its nuclear program. All the years of diplomacy and agreements have come to nothing. In principle, I am not against non-nuclear getting nuclear weapons. However, N. Korea is clearly a true terrorist state and is blatantly carrying nuclear blackmail.
        Signature

        Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951868].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Derek,

    That doesn't count as blinking. The US has a STRONG presence there. It has for a LONG time. That has NOT changed. They simply don't want that IDIOT to take the next step. If he does, THEY will HAVE to, and that could start WWIII! If he DOES take the next step, within MINUTES, possibly within 10, ALL sides of the country could be hit from no less than 4 totally different areas. And that does NOT count the US mainland or states! ONE WOULD be a US possession, but it isn't considered a state. It would be a DUMB move for him to make, especially since one of the locations I am talking about may not even have conventional weapons. They certainly DO have atomic missiles though. They may EVEN already have targets picked and setup just in case. If he tries to shoot a missile to the US, they will have the retaliatory strike hit their soil possibly 15 minutes before the US could even detect them on domestic radar!

    So NO, the US didn't blink! It was merely trying to not escalate things further.

    Seriously, nobody knows how educated he is, but China and Russia and Cuba certainly wouldn't take the next step. Russia THOUGHT about it once. One story claimed that Fidel Castro asked Russia to follow through. Russia decided to pull the missiles out, and Castro supposedly recently asked kim jong whatever to NOT go further. And the US hasn't attacked China or Russia, or even Cuba! One concession the US supposedly made to avert the cuban missile crises was to promise never to attack Cuba.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7946128].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    Just as I expected, China firmly tells North Korean pipsqueak to cease with the temper tantrum and making an embarrasing scene:
    Xi warns against chaos in region|Politics|chinadaily.com.cn

    I have to say that my toddler displays more maturity and consideration for others than Kim Jong-un. Don't be surprised by a sudden stroke, military coup, unfortunate accident, or major reshuffle that puts Kim Jong-un somewhere where he can play alone (aka the naughty seat).
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7946207].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Exactly why I am finding all the pics of him so funny, TB. Kim's not a leader - he's a little kid that was spoiled so badly that he's sociopathic enough to torture and kill people just because they don't fawn over him. Little boy big shot should have his chubby little buttocks thrown in the Gulag and let those people have a leader who knows how to deal with the difficulties that are starving them. Guaranteed - if US started running guns to that population, Kim wouldn't stand a chance. I'm surprised that army hasn't already defected.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7947756].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      <snip>I'm surprised that army hasn't already defected.
      My bet is that he'll soon be disposed of in ways that don't involved the US.
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7947842].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
        Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

        My bet is that he'll soon be disposed of in ways that don't involved the US.
        How do you mean?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951242].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author HeySal
          Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

          How do you mean?
          It means that someone is going to step in and squash his meglomanical little butt so they can put in someone with a more realistic view of their position in the office and around the globe.
          Signature

          Sal
          When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
          Beyond the Path

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951336].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

            It means that someone is going to step in and squash his meglomanical little butt so they can put in someone with a more realistic view of their position in the office and around the globe.
            EVENTUALLY it happens! It happened in nearly every country, and perhaps every country. It could be another country, or from the inside. What if cuba decided to use those missiles? RUSSIA may have killed castro! Several attempts were made on Hitler from inside and outside of the country.

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951416].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Thomas
              Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

              What if cuba decided to use those missiles?
              If you mean during the Cuban Missile Crisis, they couldn't have; the Russians kept control of everything, and backed-up that control by deploying about 50,000 troops and other military personnel into Cuba alongside the missiles, aircraft, etc. They were there as Cuban allies, but would have violently squished any local attempt to take control of the hardware; they wouldn't have killed Castro, but alot of Cubans would have died.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951454].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

                If you mean during the Cuban Missile Crisis, they couldn't have; the Russians kept control of everything, and backed-up that control by deploying about 50,000 troops and other military personnel into Cuba alongside the missiles, aircraft, etc. They were there as Cuban allies, but would have violently squished any local attempt to take control of the hardware; they wouldn't have killed Castro, but alot of Cubans would have died.
                Just my point!

                Steve
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951459].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Thomas
                  Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                  Just my point!
                  I know!
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951474].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dallas playboy
    To all those who seem to blame America for every dirty trick in the book, even
    blaming us for the Kurds getting gassed, getting rid of poor Saddam, and
    water-boarding really bad guys, I have two questions.

    Have any of you been in our military? What is your solution to N/K ?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7950389].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      To all those who seem to blame America for every dirty trick in the book, even
      blaming us for the Kurds getting gassed, getting rid of poor Saddam, and
      water-boarding really bad guys, I have two questions.

      Have any of you been in our military? What is your solution to N/K ?
      It isn't blame, it's just stating facts.
      As for North Korea, wait till they actually attack or till they show absolute prove that an attack is eminent, they drop a few bombs on his place and his head of military place. Like we did years ago with Kadafi.
      What does having been in the military have to do with anything?
      Or are you one of those people who think blindly following orders is a qualification for discussing govt. policy?
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7950544].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Thomas
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      To all those who seem to blame America for every dirty trick in the book, even blaming us for the Kurds getting gassed ...
      I wouldn't take it personally; you guys tried to blame the Iranians for that, even though you already knew it was the Iraqis. I'm sure they were as miffed about it as you are, especially since the atrocity was brought to world attention by Iranian journalists in the first place.

      And I'm sure you won't want to hear that the US is as good, if not better, than any third-world, tin-pot dictatorship when it comes to dirty tricks. In fact, many of them learned it from you guys (and, by that, I mean they were literally taught the fine arts of torture, extrajudicial execution, targeting civilians, rounding up entire families, etc. by the US Army).

      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      getting rid of poor Saddam
      :confused:

      You did.

      (Cynical addition of adjective noted.)

      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      ...and water-boarding really bad guys
      :confused:

      You do.

      (But such practices are never limited to "really bad guys", though laws against torture don't say it's actually okay, as long as you think the victim is a really bad guy).

      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      Have any of you been in our military?
      Nope, I never served in any foreign military. That would be illegal.

      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      What is your solution to N/K ?
      The US has committed itself to the defence of South Korea; China has committed itself to the defence of North Korea (and would honour that commitment, despite the hopeful claims to the contrary by various war-mongers). So, unless you're willing to see war between China and the United States, both of whom would probably resort to levelling each other with nukes, and draw the rest of the industralised world into the conflict, then I don't think there is a military solution, which is what this whole thread is about.

      The 'Korea problem' is a hang-over from WW2 that will only be solved by political compromise, waiting around to see if the North Korean regime eventually collapses, or making it a handy transition point to WW3.

      Personally, I like the first option.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951465].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      To all those who seem to blame America for every dirty trick in the book, even
      blaming us for the Kurds getting gassed, getting rid of poor Saddam, and
      water-boarding really bad guys, I have two questions.

      Have any of you been in our military? What is your solution to N/K ?
      going on recent history the usa military loses wars, or let them drag on and on, maybe north korea is just another endless mindgame

      a recent tv poll showed 63% did not want to send troops and only 37% did
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7970199].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
        Originally Posted by hardraysnight View Post

        going on recent history the usa military loses wars, or let them drag on and on, maybe north korea is just another endless mindgame

        a recent tv poll showed 63% did not want to send troops and only 37% did
        You're just saying that because the last war we won was WWII and we had help
        Signature

        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
        Getting old ain't for sissy's
        As you are I was, as I am you will be
        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7970448].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    The US has committed itself to the defence of South Korea; China has committed itself to the defence of North Korea (and would honor that commitment, despite the hopeful claims to the contrary by various war-mongers). So, unless you're willing to see war between China and the United States, both of whom would probably resort to levelling each other with nukes, and draw the rest of the industralised world into the conflict, then I don't think there is a military solution, which is what this whole thread is about.
    I say we just get this BS over with. I'm sick of China owning the majority of our currency anyway.

    Whatever happens, happens. Oh well. It's not like this is something that we as civilians, or even active military, could avert. We are merely pawns in their giant chess game.

    Suit up & strap up, and be ready for whatever comes next. That's all we can do.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7951620].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Commander defends move to delay missile test, says US can defend against NK launch | Fox News

    Looks like no matter what NK decides to do, USA will be safe ; ) I hope... Lol
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7955309].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/wo...ency-says.html

      And with that, I say we flatten every major military and potentially arms-related industrial complex in North Korea. We could do it from SK and offshore, without sending anything into Chinese or Russian air space.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7964879].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jimbo13
        You are not going to be having a war with NK so don't worry.

        Dan
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7965000].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/wo...ency-says.html

        And with that, I say we flatten every major military and potentially arms-related industrial complex in North Korea. We could do it from SK and offshore, without sending anything into Chinese or Russian air space.


        Paul
        I thought they figured that earlier this year, and THAT is why I spoke of them possibly hitting GUAM, which would be an act of war against the US.

        Frankly, if not for the potentially innocent, and the other fallout, I would agree with you 100%!!!! I also spoke of FOUR places we could hit them from.....

        SKY --->PLANES
        WATER ---> SUBS or SHIPS. There are subs over there MADE for sending NUCLEAR missiles into such places, and some are there NOW!
        GUAM --> We have military bases there. One "representative" ACTUALLY claimed the island might SINK under their weight! OK, he didn't know what islands were!!!
        SK

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7965319].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Thomas
        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/wo...ency-says.html

        And with that, I say we flatten every major military and potentially arms-related industrial complex in North Korea.
        Have to say - I'm genuinely surprised to hear that from you, Paul.

        And re. the DIA - they're not exactly the most trustworthy people. From the article itself: "the Defense Intelligence Agency, which has primary responsibility for monitoring the missile capabilities of adversary nations but which a decade ago was among those that argued most vociferously -- and incorrectly -- that Iraq had nuclear weapons".

        Like all alphabet agencies, I'm guessing they're willing to put out as fact whatever suits the agenda of the day. They may, or may not, be correct... but it sounds suspiciously like a case of "this time it's different" syndrome.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7965493].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kay King
          Hard to trust intelligence that changes week to week - or that was used to go into Iraq. The intelligence may be good - but can be misinterpreted or misrepresented, too, as we've seen.

          I'm not convinced we know the enemy as well as think we do. If we aren't willing to cut off all aid - including fuel and food - as well as access into and out of the country - with a strictly enforced embargo...we aren't ready to go to war.

          It's Not a Hermit Kingdom, and 4 Other Myths About North Korea - Joel S. Wit and Jenny Town - The Atlantic

          The last paragraph of that article is on target for me.
          Signature
          Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
          ***
          One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
          what it is instead of what you think it should be.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7965625].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
            Agreed. The intelligence for Iraq was also ignored, cherry picked and still being gathered when we decided on our preemptive war which didn't turn out so well.
            Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

            Hard to trust intelligence that changes week to week - or that was used to go into Iraq.
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966042].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Thomas,
          Have to say - I'm genuinely surprised to hear that from you, Paul.
          Probably not nearly as surprised as I was to come to the conclusion that it may be the appropriate response.


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7965629].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author LarryC
    North Korea is the villain du jour, so the media is giving us plenty of reasons to fear it. The trouble is, I'm not sure that the corporate owned U.S. media is much more credible than anything coming out of NK.
    Signature
    Content Writing, Ghostwriting, eBooks, editing, research.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966233].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Originally Posted by LarryC View Post

      North Korea is the villain du jour, so the media is giving us plenty of reasons to fear it. The trouble is, I'm not sure that the corporate owned U.S. media is much more credible than anything coming out of NK.
      Yeah. There's that.

      Fortunately, the people who have to make the actual decisions have more, and more reliable, information. They can ignore us people who don't have all the facts.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966343].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Looks like Fox news came out with a story today that claims NK actually has launchable nuclear tech
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966351].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      the people who have to make the actual decisions have more, and more reliable, information
      And they'll dribble out to the public the parts that support what they want to do - and no more.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966649].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        I think if we get through next weekout attacks from NK - what will happen is a ramping down (again) as we agree to more "humanitarian aid".

        This time I don't think we should back down and let him get by with the bluster again. He may be crazy - or may be crazy like a fox and willing to play chicken right up to the line. It's worked before year after year - as other countries cave in and send aid. Then he boasts his ploy worked - and we'll hear it again same time next year.

        As I said - my view is to keep tightening the screws on NK - shut it down - make the isolation complete and if people starve and die - it's on him, not us.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7966695].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    I predict that China will take strong measures to resolve this absurd situation. North Korea's new leader is bad news, apparently a combination of immature, incompetent, and brutal. If this news is reliable, here's what he's done so far:
    Since his father's sudden death, reports have surfaced that Kim Jong-un has been purging the North Korean military of "unsound elements" in order to tighten his grip on power.
    ....Kim Chol, the North Korean vice-defense minister, was reportedly caught "drinking and carousing" in January, a month after Kim Jong-il died.
    Intelligence data submitted to the lawmaker Yoon Sang-hyun, a member of the National Assembly’s Foreign Affairs, Trade and Unification Committee, claimed that Chol was executed by firing squad.
    But a source inside the South Korean government said that Kim Jong-un ordered those carrying out the sentence to leave "no trace of him behind, down to his hair."

    Read more: North Korea Purging Leaders With Mortar - Business Insider "
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7967015].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
    Know this.. a nuclear missile without the technical ability to strike the target with reasonable accuracy is far more of a threat to the world at large compared to a a missile that can strike the target with reasonable accuracy.
    Signature
    In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7967952].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Just watched on the TV/news that NK said nuclear war is the only option & Japan would be the first that NK targets.

    I'm thinking If Fatty Arbuckle pushes the nuke button on Japan, it would be the green light to turn NK into a crater.

    That pretty much sucks for the NK civilians, it's not like they can just leave, they're basically screwed no matter what they do.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7968192].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    It's a little ridiculous to worry about a guy who has several countries ready to retaliate if he gets out of line. He decides to blast off a nuke and he's dead. If he doesn't know that already, he needs to figure it out. He's sitting right there with Russia and China both on his doorstep. I don't think we'd even need to take action. I think if he doesn't STFU pretty soon, someone's going to do it for him.

    Rather than give him more aid - it's time to cut him off completely. Let him rant about it. He lifts a finger and countries will be climbing over each other to get rid of him no matter WHO it is he threatens. His kind of stupidity is suicidal.

    This whole situation makes me wonder if NK is sitting on REE's.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7968651].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      It's a little ridiculous to worry about a guy who has several countries ready to retaliate if he gets out of line. He decides to blast off a nuke and he's dead. If he doesn't know that already, he needs to figure it out. He's sitting right there with Russia and China both on his doorstep. I don't think we'd even need to take action. I think if he doesn't STFU pretty soon, someone's going to do it for him.

      Rather than give him more aid - it's time to cut him off completely. Let him rant about it. He lifts a finger and countries will be climbing over each other to get rid of him no matter WHO it is he threatens. His kind of stupidity is suicidal.

      This whole situation makes me wonder if NK is sitting on REE's.
      heysal,

      He is putting people in a BAD situation. The USA has allies and possessions there. They could be obliterated or hurt if the US does nothing. But the US won't. HECK, the US military WILL react orders or no! Kerry did about the best he could, and said he would ask China to explain it to that PUNK! He didn't say it quite in that way, but STILL.... You have to be careful, or that punk WILL shoot.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7969051].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Haha when Kerry talked to China, china said they didnt want NK having nukes, but they also said they do not want the NK government to fall either. So whos side are they on?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7970114].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jimbo13
      Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

      Haha when Kerry talked to China, china said they didnt want NK having nukes, but they also said they do not want the NK government to fall either. So whos side are they on?
      These are not mutually exclusive you know.

      Dan
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7970165].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Thomas
      Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

      Haha when Kerry talked to China, china said they didnt want NK having nukes, but they also said they do not want the NK government to fall either. So whos side are they on?
      China's side.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973174].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Michael
    BREAKING NEWS:

    North Korea has just launched a missle aimed for a US base located in South Korea.

    CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7970482].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by Whos That Guru View Post

      BREAKING NEWS:

      North Korea has just launched a missle aimed for a US base located in South Korea.

      CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS

      I guess they forgot the aerosol, or is that one of those hydrogen peroxide deals?

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7970565].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    NOW, IRAN is saying THEY will help NK! TOGETHER, they plan to start WWIII! GOOD LUCK WITH THAT! I doubt islamic countries would try to attack the US in that manner and, if they did, that portion of the war could probably be over within 15 minutes. Same with NK. We would likely have to START with conventional BUT, if it is provoked and they escalate it, few could blame us for a careful little nuke.

    Seriously though, I hope neither is willing to try.

    As for Israel? A perfect shot(probably unlikely) to israel would STILL affect several arab countries. Does Iran REALLY want to risk that? Saudi arabia has jets that would have made those planes, that Iran has left RUSTING, look like WWII fighters, even when they were NEW. They could do some damage to Iran THEMSELVES and NOBODY would shed a TEAR!

    They would want that bomb about the center of the land mass, so it is AWAY from the water. That would place it within 30miles of jordan and as close as 90 miles from saudi arabia. NOT a good situation. And DON'T forget! At least one major arab holy structure would be practically on ground zero! Seriously, the Jewish people have to be careful at the temple mount because some land has a moslem mosque on it! That is the major reason it hasn't been rebuilt yet. They have been trying for DECADES!

    With Iraq, you could do damage and have it nowhere near anyone israel cares about, and over 400 miles from anyone the US cares about. One of the problems about having lots of friends that kept your main enemy so small, and being so big! HECK, the US has ALREADY hit the two biggest countries to either side. So Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should think about toning down his bravado. He has to be SO precise, and israel could miss by over 100miles and still succeed!

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973236].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

      NOW, IRAN is saying THEY will help NK! TOGETHER, they plan to start WWIII! GOOD LUCK WITH THAT! I doubt islamic countries would try to attack the US in that manner and, if they did, that portion of the war could probably be over within 15 minutes. Same with NK. We would likely have to START with conventional BUT, if it is provoked and they escalate it, few could blame us for a careful little nuke.

      Seriously though, I hope neither is willing to try.

      As for Israel? A perfect shot(probably unlikely) to israel would STILL affect several arab countries. Does Iran REALLY want to risk that? Saudi arabia has jets that would have made those planes, that Iran has left RUSTING, look like WWII fighters, even when they were NEW. They could do some damage to Iran THEMSELVES and NOBODY would shed a TEAR!

      They would want that bomb about the center of the land mass, so it is AWAY from the water. That would place it within 30miles of jordan and as close as 90 miles from saudi arabia. NOT a good situation. And DON'T forget! At least one major arab holy structure would be practically on ground zero! Seriously, the Jewish people have to be careful at the temple mount because some land has a moslem mosque on it! That is the major reason it hasn't been rebuilt yet. They have been trying for DECADES!

      With Iraq, you could do damage and have it nowhere near anyone israel cares about, and over 400 miles from anyone the US cares about. One of the problems about having lots of friends that kept your main enemy so small, and being so big! HECK, the US has ALREADY hit the two biggest countries to either side. So Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should think about toning down his bravado. He has to be SO precise, and israel could miss by over 100miles and still succeed!

      Steve
      That sounds more like propaganda then actual fact.
      Despite the bull our govt. feds us through the media, Iran isn't a threat to us. Also Ahmaninejad is more of a figure head and not the actual ruler of Iran. The Muslim cleric runs Iran not him.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973289].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

        That sounds more like propaganda then actual fact.
        Despite the bull our govt. feds us through the media, Iran isn't a threat to us. Also Ahmaninejad is more of a figure head and not the actual ruler of Iran. The Muslim cleric runs Iran not him.
        Yeah, you ARE right about the cleric to a degree. after all, THEY kicked out the SHAH.

        But he apparently DOES say such things.

        As I said, it would be FAR easier for someone to take out have of IRAN than to even really touch ISRAEL. And people that would hurt iran probably wouldn't care about iraq or afganistan, and maybe not even pakistan. But someone wanting to hurt israel might want to avoid all the countries that lie practically across the street. And if they DID hit the water, it could hurt fishing, desalination plants, ships, other countries, and possibly cause a tsunami! as the bombs grow in size, this becomes more true.....

        suicide bombs? OK
        grenades? OK
        mortars? CAREFUL
        LOCALLY DROPPED BOMBS? DISTURBANCES!
        BALLISTIC MISSILES? DANGEROUS!
        ATOMIC? FORGET IT!

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7973772].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
          Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

          Yeah, you ARE right about the cleric to a degree. after all, THEY kicked out the SHAH.

          But he apparently DOES say such things.

          As I said, it would be FAR easier for someone to take out have of IRAN than to even really touch ISRAEL. And people that would hurt iran probably wouldn't care about iraq or afganistan, and maybe not even pakistan. But someone wanting to hurt israel might want to avoid all the countries that lie practically across the street. And if they DID hit the water, it could hurt fishing, desalination plants, ships, other countries, and possibly cause a tsunami! as the bombs grow in size, this becomes more true.....

          suicide bombs? OK
          grenades? OK
          mortars? CAREFUL
          LOCALLY DROPPED BOMBS? DISTURBANCES!
          BALLISTIC MISSILES? DANGEROUS!
          ATOMIC? FORGET IT!

          Steve
          Haha I would never want to touch Israel. God forbid we'd all get screwed.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7975487].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            The above is an interesting examination of NK's threats and the purpose of the threats.

            I found the "end is not nigh" section about halfway down the page an interesting perspective - and one that makes sense.

            Meanwhile - this week we've gone back to the "let's tlak about this - let's back this down" approach to NK. Perhaps because Kerry went to China to convince those leaders to issue a statement against NK's actions....and China declined to do that.

            Also, if the range map on the site below is accurate - or even close - we may be continuing to underestimate the potential.

            BBC News - How potent are North Korea's threats?

            It's true this bluster and threat cycle happens every year - but also true the stock of weapons and range of missiles held by NK grows each year.
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            ***
            One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
            what it is instead of what you think it should be.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7975800].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dallas playboy
    you're just saying that because the last war we won was WWII and we had help<

    What do ya mean WE? Something tells me you, Steve and Tim never put on a uniform.
    Ain't that right?

    American fighting men and women never lost a war. In Nam WE never lost a battle;
    The politicians and those who never fought for America lost the war for us. dah!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7975972].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      you're just saying that because the last war we won was WWII and we had help<

      What do ya mean WE? Something tells me you, Steve and Tim never put on a uniform.
      Ain't that right?

      American fighting men and women never lost a war. In Nam WE never lost a battle;
      The politicians and those who never fought for America lost the war for us. dah!
      Keep telling yourself that.
      Fact is WWII was the last constitutionally declared war we where in and won.
      Korea and Viet Nam where called conflicts at the time to get around the constitution. Korea went into a draw (or trusse and we lost V.N. (remember the last helicopters pulling out of the embassy with the Viet Cong at the gate?).
      Iraq and Afghanistan where both illegal wars and with the costs of both well into the trillions and bankrupting this country I'd say they where both looses.
      My family on my mothers side served in the military going back to the revolution. On my fathers side my family served in WWI and WWII and going back further served in the Prussian Army. There is a very long military history in my family going back over 200 years.
      My father convinced me not to join up during Viet Nam because as he said it was an illegal war and had nothing to do with defending this country or our freedoms. But he only spent 8 years fighting for our freedom in WWI and my half-brother only spent 4 years fighting for our freedom in WWII so what does he know, right?
      At 60 years old the vast majority of my friends are vets, mostly from Viet Nam and they'll all tell you the same as I.
      I'm not a pacifist by any means, not even close to it.
      But the truth is the truth and the truth is the last declared war we were in and won was WWII.
      The politicians and those who never fought for America lost the war for us. dah!
      Politicians put us into those "conflicts". Those who never fought just recognized the conflicts for what they where and decided not to be apart of the unconstitutional activities.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7976118].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
        Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

        Fact is WWII was the last constitutionally declared war we where in and won.
        Don't forget that you had help in that as well. It wasn't a solo effort.

        The US did the major share of the war in the Pacific, but in Europe, the Russians did the major share. The Brits also did some "heavy lifting". The Battle of Britain effectively pinned the Axis down on mainland Europe, and the Battle of Stalingrad stopped them in the east.

        If not for these events the war in Europe could've had a completely different ending, or at least have been prolonged.
        Signature
        Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
        So that blind people can hate them as well.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7976812].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author ThomM
          Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

          Don't forget that you had help in that as well. It wasn't a solo effort.

          The US did the major share of the war in the Pacific, but in Europe, the Russians did the major share. The Brits also did some "heavy lifting. The Battle of Britain effectively pinned the Axis down on mainland Europe, and the Battle of Stalingrad stopped them in the east.

          If not for these events the war in Europe could've had a completely different ending, or at least have been prolonged.
          The first time I mentioned WWII in this thread I said we had help
          Signature

          Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
          Getting old ain't for sissy's
          As you are I was, as I am you will be
          You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7976816].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      you're just saying that because the last war we won was WWII and we had help<

      What do ya mean WE? Something tells me you, Steve and Tim never put on a uniform.
      Ain't that right?

      American fighting men and women never lost a war. In Nam WE never lost a battle;
      The politicians and those who never fought for America lost the war for us. dah!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7977162].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      you're just saying that because the last war we won was WWII and we had help<

      What do ya mean WE? Something tells me you, Steve and Tim never put on a uniform.
      Ain't that right?

      American fighting men and women never lost a war. In Nam WE never lost a battle;
      The politicians and those who never fought for America lost the war for us. dah!
      By STEVE, I hope you don't mean ME. How did I get singled out. Frankly, I am too young to really have fought in a war I would fight in, etc...

      BTW if family counts, I have a lot of uncles, and MOST were in the military.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7977221].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
    Lol children. lets play nicely here.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7979859].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dallas playboy
    What good does it do to say he cannot nuke America now? What is needed
    is to ask ourselves "do we wait until he has ten ICBM's, and can hit any of the
    free world?

    We need action now, not sitting on our asses and doing nothing. This guy and
    Iran are only going to get more dangerous, and then blackmail the free world;

    You can worry about China and Russia getting mad as us, collateral damage,
    and the Boogie Man all you want. Go hide under the covers if that makes you
    feel safe, and let those of us who deal with the real world. as it is, not as you
    think it should be, or the way it could be, and let us make the world really safe.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7984086].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      What good does it do to say he cannot nuke America now? What is needed
      is to ask ourselves "do we wait until he has ten ICBM's, and can hit any of the
      free world?

      We need action now, not sitting on our asses and doing nothing. This guy and
      Iran are only going to get more dangerous, and then blackmail the free world;

      You can worry about China and Russia getting mad as us, collateral damage,
      and the Boogie Man all you want. Go hide under the covers if that makes you
      feel safe, and let those of us who deal with the real world. as it is, not as you
      think it should be, or the way it could be, and let us make the world really safe.
      In the real world we already have over 3 dozen military bases surrounding Iran. IF they ever actually become a real threat we got them covered. We also have the capabilities in place to knock anything out of the sky that N.K. could throw at us.
      What we don't need to continue doing is creating problems in the middle east that we then have to put the lives of our service men at risk to contain.
      When our unmanned drone strikes are killing innocent children do you think that makes their relatives like us more or want to kill us more. Our actions in the middle east create our enemies there.
      And again N.K. isn't a threat because they don't have the firepower, they're not a threat because we have superior firepower. There is no need for us to do anything more then be prepared at this time.

      Your reactions to all this seem to indicate that you are more scared of those two countries then we are. Either that or you enjoy senseless fighting and killing.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7984324].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
        Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

        In the real world we already have over 3 dozen military bases surrounding Iran. IF they ever actually become a real threat we got them covered. We also have the capabilities in place to knock anything out of the sky that N.K. could throw at us.
        What we don't need to continue doing is creating problems in the middle east that we then have to put the lives of our service men at risk to contain.
        When our unmanned drone strikes are killing innocent children do you think that makes their relatives like us more or want to kill us more. Our actions in the middle east create our enemies there.
        And again N.K. isn't a threat because they don't have the firepower, they're not a threat because we have superior firepower. There is no need for us to do anything more then be prepared at this time.

        Your reactions to all this seem to indicate that you are more scared of those two countries then we are. Either that or you enjoy senseless fighting and killing.
        As far as shooting stuff out of the sky, and flying rockets, did you know the USA has a plane now that can carry payloads to any location within less than an hour?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7985167].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author ThomM
          Originally Posted by KingMighty View Post

          As far as shooting stuff out of the sky, and flying rockets, did you know the USA has a plane now that can carry payloads to any location within less than an hour?
          Yep Just another way we can shut down any attack by N.K. or Iran before they even get started.
          Signature

          Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
          Getting old ain't for sissy's
          As you are I was, as I am you will be
          You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7985226].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            did you know the USA has a plane now that can carry payloads to any location within less than an hour?
            Do we have it? It got a lot of attention a couple years ago but tests don't seem to be going well.

            Skin-peeling speed doomed hypersonic glider, U.S. says – CNN Security Clearance - CNN.com Blogs
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            ***
            One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
            what it is instead of what you think it should be.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7985981].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Newbieee
              Im not a USD citizen, but i fully support USA and i have faith in their abilities.
              No doubt.

              To me i see USA as the worlds international police. [the big brother]

              Just like a local police, you wouldnt like them, IF you are the bad guys.
              If you are just a normal law abiding citizen, you would have no problems with them.

              Just saying..
              Signature
              Pain is a perception, so is defeat & happiness!
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7986003].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
                Originally Posted by Newbieee View Post

                Im not a USD citizen, but i fully support USA and i have faith in their abilities.
                No doubt.

                To me i see USA as the worlds international police. [the big brother]

                Just like a local police, you wouldnt like them, IF you are the bad guys.
                If you are just a normal law abiding citizen, you would have no problems with them.

                Just saying..

                Ha, big brother is right, just keep big brother off the internet
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7988222].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
                Originally Posted by Newbieee View Post

                Im not a USD citizen, but i fully support USA and i have faith in their abilities.
                No doubt.

                To me i see USA as the worlds international police. [the big brother]

                Just like a local police, you wouldnt like them, IF you are the bad guys.
                If you are just a normal law abiding citizen, you would have no problems with them.

                Just saying..
                right

                my big brother was a bully too
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7996370].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7987284].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      "I dream of a world where I don't have to worry about my daughter being blown
      off the map."

      Steven Wagenheim - April 18, 2013
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7987612].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Thomas
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      Handy... as long as you have good weather with no sea spray, and the target is at very close range, and agrees to take absolutely no evasive action whatsoever during the more-than-a-few seconds it takes to heat a particular area up to the point of destruction (something that would be easy even for a human pilot, never mind a computer).

      And the chances of having anything similar in space is between slim and none: the reason weapons like these are being mounted on ships is that they are huge... and that's just for short-range stuff. A laser powerful enough to pass through the entire atmosphere and still retain enough power to do damage would, apart from likely violating a number of international treaties, be gigantic... even assuming there was a means to launch something that big into space, it would simply be so big that it would attract a hell of a lot of attention from other countries, some of whom would feel entirely justified in destroying it in the interests of maintaining national security.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7987711].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author seasoned
        Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

        Handy... as long as you have good weather with no sea spray, and the target is at very close range, and agrees to take absolutely no evasive action whatsoever during the more-than-a-few seconds it takes to heat a particular area up to the point of destruction (something that would be easy even for a human pilot, never mind a computer).

        And the chances of having anything similar in space is between slim and none: the reason weapons like these are being mounted on ships is that they are huge... and that's just for short-range stuff. A laser powerful enough to pass through the entire atmosphere and still retain enough power to do damage would, apart from likely violating a number of international treaties, be gigantic... even assuming there was a means to launch something that big into space, it would simply be so big that it would attract a hell of a lot of attention from other countries, some of whom would feel entirely justified in destroying it in the interests of maintaining national security.
        Actually, a REAL laser works at about the speed of LIGHT. Ever see a kid using a magnifying glass to focus the sun ti set something on fire? Well, a laser is MORE coherent and concentrated. And computers aren't fast enough. By the tie they could validate that it was a laser, damage would be done. A person might not even notice, since it could be a form of light beyond that detected. The MYTH about all being white, green, red, etc.... is not really valid. Most are MADE to be seen, like pointers and laser sights.

        Steve
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7989293].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
        Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

        Handy... as long as you have good weather with no sea spray, and the target is at very close range, and agrees to take absolutely no evasive action whatsoever during the more-than-a-few seconds it takes to heat a particular area up to the point of destruction (something that would be easy even for a human pilot, never mind a computer).

        And the chances of having anything similar in space is between slim and none: the reason weapons like these are being mounted on ships is that they are huge... and that's just for short-range stuff. A laser powerful enough to pass through the entire atmosphere and still retain enough power to do damage would, apart from likely violating a number of international treaties, be gigantic... even assuming there was a means to launch something that big into space, it would simply be so big that it would attract a hell of a lot of attention from other countries, some of whom would feel entirely justified in destroying it in the interests of maintaining national security.
        That clip is about three years old and I'm sure they have made advancements
        to overcome the issues you raised. Probably more of a pulse laser and/or
        combination of technologies such as laser and electro magnetic pulse so they
        could first disable maneuverability.

        Also I think that clip is likely a bone they threw to the popular press. A nd, we all
        know how large the first computers were compared to today's devices with
        the same computing power.

        Dan
        Signature

        "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7989673].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Thomas
          Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

          Actually, a REAL laser works at about the speed of LIGHT. Ever see a kid using a magnifying glass to focus the sun ti set something on fire? Well, a laser is MORE coherent and concentrated.
          Really? I had no idea. :rolleyes:

          Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

          And computers aren't fast enough. By the tie they could validate that it was a laser, damage would be done. A person might not even notice, since it could be a form of light beyond that detected. The MYTH about all being white, green, red, etc.... is not really valid. Most are MADE to be seen, like pointers and laser sights
          Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

          That clip is about three years old and I'm sure they have made advancements to overcome the issues you raised. Probably more of a pulse laser and/or combination of technologies such as laser and electro magnetic pulse so they could first disable maneuverability.

          Also I think that clip is likely a bone they threw to the popular press.
          I'm aware of all that (except that it would be easy for even a human pilot to counter a "laser attack"), and I'm aware of the fact that military technology is often more advanced than that available to civilians. However, it isn't that much more advanced... whatever the movies might suggest, the laws of physics don't change just because your research is being paid for by a military budget instead of a civilian one.

          They are still subject to the same fundamental facts as the rest of us, and one of those is the existence of the atmosphere, which deflects and distorts laser beams, no matter how powerful they are. If anyone really thinks a laser can exist in a nice, handy portable form that is capable of firing through hundreds of miles of atmosphere, and still retain enough power to instantly destroy a target, then I suggest they go back to watching Star Wars, because that's the only place such technology can exist... and 3 years of research isn't going to overcome that (nor is 10 years...or even 50 years, for that matter).

          Even the much-vaunted "airbourne laser" program that the US Air Force had a few years ago was abandoned after 16 years of research because they just couldn't make it powerful enough to be a viable weapon. The laser which, incidentally, weighed more than 20 tonnes and took up the entire interior of the Boeing 747 being used, didn't work unless you were already so close to the missile that you'd practicaly have to be circling the launch site... and, even at that, it still took more than 5 seconds and would only work while the missiles were in the so-called "launch phase", which is the 10 or 15 seconds right after launch when they are moving relatively slowly and in a nice, predictable straight line. And, even then, it still didn't burn through or disintegrate the target... it could only heat the skin to weaken it, with the hope being that flight stress would then cause it to fail.

          Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

          And, we all know how large the first computers were compared to today's devices with the same computing power.
          Yes, but they're still just computers.

          A computer from the 1960s and once from 2013 look very different, and are vastly different in size, but they both still just carry out sets of logical operations. And they are both still subject to the laws of physics.

          I don't discount advancements in laser technology (even "secret" advancements ) but a laser you can buy in your local electronics store and a super-duper, more-advanced-than-everyone-else laser in secret development in some military lab somewhere are the same in that they are both still lasers. Again, the may look different, and have much different power outputs, but like computers, they are still both subject to the laws of physics and fundamental facts about the world.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7990585].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    Some accurate and inaccurate info on this thread.

    In April, the US Navy deployed the first laser on a Navy ship:
    U.S. Navy to field first laser weapon, could shoot down a drone | Reuters

    It won't be used against missiles and won't work in fog, rain, snow, etc. But it does show the US military hasn't abandoned the idea of using lasers as weapons.

    And despite what teve said, it's reported that lasers do travel at the speed of light.


    Here it is in action:
    Signature
    Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
    Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7991124].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jeffery
    Actually, laser weapons are not the prime weapons used to combat ballistic missiles. Microwave weapons are the prime weapons used to combat ballistic missiles. Also, conventional computers are not used to control the weapons. Organic computers combined with conventional computers are used to control the weapons.

    Here is how it works. A ballistic missile launched from any known geo is detected by early warning stations (land, air, space) almost immediately. Unknown geos only take 15 seconds or less. The target system is manually driven, but may also work on autopilot. When the missile reaches predetermined altitude(s) the microwave targets the missile(s) and the end result is a complete "melt" of the missile. Also, depending on the altitude, the spread and strength of the microwave will "melt" third party objects as well as the geo.
    Signature
    In the minute it took me to write this post.. someone died of Covid 19. RIP.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7991151].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dallas playboy
    I think the only answer is to get rid of him figuratively and even literally - and anyone who is loyal to his fascist regime - his relatives, etc.>

    It appears Pat is one of the few who agrees with me that this nut has to go, NOW!

    If we have a few planes that can hit any target in the world in one hour, it still too
    long a response time for NUKES attacking. Besides, Obama is cutting the military
    funding to the bone, so these programs will be put on the shelves.

    ThomM; Do you really think these fanatics will like us if we stop using drones?
    Most civilian damages results because they mingle with civilians as a shield;
    They win the propaganda war, because they want the civilians to die so they can
    convince guys like you that we're the bad guys.

    Our military presence is to keep out troops sharp, and to practice rapid responses
    under the stress of war. In addition, our allies like SK, Japan, Guam need to know
    we have their back.

    Kim sends missiles over Japan, and shells S.K. with impunity in the past.All that
    did was embolden him to act more provocatively in the future. This time he knows
    we're going to respond in kind, and he's getting the message;

    One other question, how come all you guys who bad mouth America don't say
    where your from. Just giving your latitude, or just USA, don't get it. Put you balls
    on the line and tell us where you live exactly. Put on your Big Guy Pants!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7995247].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      ThomM; Do you really think these fanatics will like us if we stop using drones?
      Most civilian damages results because they mingle with civilians as a shield;
      They win the propaganda war, because they want the civilians to die so they can
      convince guys like you that we're the bad guys.
      But yet you believe the propaganda that they all use civilians as shields.
      You fail to realize that one of the reasons they can recruit more members is because of our actions over there. Even the C.I.A. understands that. They even coined a term for it called "blow back".
      That is the term for the unintended reactions to our actions.
      Our involvement with trying to manipulate and control countries in the Middle East goes back at least 60 years when Eisenhower used the C.I.A. to oust the rulers in Iran and replace them with the Shah all because Iran threw B.P. out of their country.
      If a foreign country invaded us or manipulated our government installing one that was their puppet you'd be doing the same things they are doing to us now.
      I don't agree with what the terrorist are doing, but at least I know the real reasons for it and as an American I can man up and admit it's our fault.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7995374].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author hardraysnight
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      I think the only answer is to get rid of him figuratively and even literally - and anyone who is loyal to his fascist regime - his relatives, etc.>

      It appears Pat is one of the few who agrees with me that this nut has to go, NOW!

      If we have a few planes that can hit any target in the world in one hour, it still too
      long a response time for NUKES attacking. Besides, Obama is cutting the military
      funding to the bone, so these programs will be put on the shelves.

      ThomM; Do you really think these fanatics will like us if we stop using drones?
      Most civilian damages results because they mingle with civilians as a shield;
      They win the propaganda war, because they want the civilians to die so they can
      convince guys like you that we're the bad guys.

      Our military presence is to keep out troops sharp, and to practice rapid responses
      under the stress of war. In addition, our allies like SK, Japan, Guam need to know
      we have their back.

      Kim sends missiles over Japan, and shells S.K. with impunity in the past.All that
      did was embolden him to act more provocatively in the future. This time he knows
      we're going to respond in kind, and he's getting the message;

      One other question, how come all you guys who bad mouth America don't say
      where your from. Just giving your latitude, or just USA, don't get it. Put you balls
      on the line and tell us where you live exactly. Put on your Big Guy Pants!
      what country is dallas texas in please or is dallas texas a country?

      would you buy an used ebook off this person?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7996383].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        The month of war games with SK will be over soon and we'll stop the show of strength till next year.

        I think at that point Kim Jong Un will declare "victory" and his sheeple will believe the US and SK backed down due to his strong threats.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7996404].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          The month of war games with SK will be over soon and we'll stop the show of strength till next year.

          I think at that point Kim Jong Un will declare "victory" and his sheeple will believe the US and SK backed down due to his strong threats.
          Well, if I were a citizen in NK, I would FIRST have to see the submarines leave, and guam virtually SHUT DOWN, to believe that. If the US REALLY "backed down" it would be a MAJOR operation. The US was in the EXACT same position in the 1960s! OK, OK! The technology wasn't as good! A THIRD party was involved. It was a MINOR portion of the country, but they WERE nuclear weapons close by that were aimed at the US from an island off shore. It WAS a major production in the 1960s when russia left. GUAMS major export and business is handling the US military!!!!

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7996427].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      Originally Posted by dallas playboy View Post

      One other question, how come all you guys who bad mouth America don't say
      where your from. Just giving your latitude, or just USA, don't get it. Put you balls
      on the line and tell us where you live exactly. Put on your Big Guy Pants!
      Says the guy with no name and avatar. :/

      By the way, I haven't been bad mouthing the US anymore than you have. I criticized a US leader and his admin and I believe you have done the same thing in this thread when you said our troops never failed it was our leaders. So we are basically saying the same thing, except you didn't like me criticizing your guy because he's from your state and you apparently agreed with his leadership for some reason.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7997516].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        if I were a citizen in NK, I would FIRST have to see the submarines leave
        No, Steve, you wouldn't have to see anything. The level of indoctrination of citizens in NK is beyond anything we can imagine. They are exposed to propaganda day after day and they don't require proof or question the leaders pronouncements.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7997535].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          No, Steve, you wouldn't have to see anything. The level of indoctrination of citizens in NK is beyond anything we can imagine. They are exposed to propaganda day after day and they don't require proof or question the leaders pronouncements.
          You want to bet? HEY, WE have that TOO!

          steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7997712].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author KingRoyal
            Its sad that they do not need prrof based on what their leaders say Thats a bit scary
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7997833].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Craig Allen
    I think it may be true. I mean like how can you know if NK don't have hidden resources of Uran or Pluton under their lands? Even if they have quite outdated technology then imagine they pack the missile with 3 times the normal amount of uran or pluton and send near our lands. Imagine what will happen... . If only few grams of uran is able to propel a tens of tons submarine and make it able to go around our globe 3 times in a row then... well the conclusions are quite clear.

    Other than that I have also another side of own me which tells that they are just playing a poker game and having loud mouths. However, this theory of mine makes me quite confused afterwards as I don't know what they want to achieve by using such a harsh words and threatening everyone around.
    Signature
    You Can't Miss This!

    Business card included, Unlimited Revisions, rich portfolio.
    Please help us grow simply by clicking the link above
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7995495].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by Craig Allen View Post

      I think it may be true. I mean like how can you know if NK don't have hidden resources of Uran or Pluton under their lands? Even if they have quite outdated technology then imagine they pack the missile with 3 times the normal amount of uran or pluton and send near our lands. Imagine what will happen... . If only few grams of uran is able to propel a tens of tons submarine and make it able to go around our globe 3 times in a row then... well the conclusions are quite clear.

      Other than that I have also another side of own me which tells that they are just playing a poker game and having loud mouths. However, this theory of mine makes me quite confused afterwards as I don't know what they want to achieve by using such a harsh words and threatening everyone around.
      That's a big part of the problem we have right there.
      We use "image what will happen" as a reason for our actions way more then we should.
      How about we image what will happen if we pull our troops out of all those countries that don't want us there. Image what will happen if instead of wasting our resources in countries where we're not wanted we used those resources at home building a strong country and economy. Image if we invested in education and creating an environment that was conducive for small businesses to thrive and grow. Image if we actually worked on cleaning up the environment instead of creating regulations that favor large corporations.

      Kim is already starting to back down, he wants to talk 'with conditions'. He knows we won't meet those conditions though. Now he'll say he was willing to talk but we weren't and it will be back to the stand off till next year.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7995756].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by Craig Allen View Post

      I think it may be true. I mean like how can you know if NK don't have hidden resources of Uran or Pluton under their lands? Even if they have quite outdated technology then imagine they pack the missile with 3 times the normal amount of uran or pluton and send near our lands. Imagine what will happen... . If only few grams of uran is able to propel a tens of tons submarine and make it able to go around our globe 3 times in a row then... well the conclusions are quite clear.

      Other than that I have also another side of own me which tells that they are just playing a poker game and having loud mouths. However, this theory of mine makes me quite confused afterwards as I don't know what they want to achieve by using such a harsh words and threatening everyone around.
      Im sure it is MORE than a few grams. The first two bombs used more than a few grams. A gram is about 1/29th of an ounce.

      From wikipedia:

      Radioisotope heater units normally provide about 1 watt of heat each, derived from the decay of a few grams of plutonium-238. This heat is given off continuously for several decades.
      It talks about the near worthless polonium generating the power of 140watts per gram. Unfortunately, the time is too short. if P238 were 1 watt per gram, you would probably want a MINIMUM of about 200Grams. So you can imagine that it is more than 1 GM.

      Regarding little man:
      It contained 64 kg (140 lb) of uranium, of which less than a kilogram underwent nuclear fission, and of this mass only 0.6 g (0.021 oz) was transformed into a different type of energy (initially kinetic energy, then heat and light).[11][12]

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7995766].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
    A good cartoon from Ben Jennings of The Guardian:

    Ben Jennings on Kim Jong-un
    Signature
    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
    So that blind people can hate them as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7996199].message }}

Trending Topics