Lilly Posted April 23, 2017 #1 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Yeah, North Korea is totally nuts: http://in.reuters.com/article/northkorea-usa-idINKBN17P03G How would doing something like this benefit them? Does Kim Jung Un actually believe he can just sink a US vessel in international waters then merrily go on his way? 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #2 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, Lilly said: Yeah, North Korea is totally nuts: http://in.reuters.com/article/northkorea-usa-idINKBN17P03G How would doing something like this benefit them? Does Kim Jung Un actually believe he can just sink a US vessel in international waters then merrily go on his way? I dont think he believes the vessel will stay in international waters, nor that its aircraft will stay in international airspace. I would say perhaps Trump is the one who is nuts for escalating this whole thing in the manner he has. This is the first time that kim's rhetoric hasnt been preceded by "if we're attacked" and even then the actual verbiage in this statement could potentially be viewed as saying as much: “The closer large targets, such as the nuclear carrier, come to our shores, the more effective will be our devastating strike Im not a fan of the little fat man from Korea however with just a little bit of deep thinking, historical awareness and empathy you can see why a sovereign nation might want to protect itself from a nation its technically at war with. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #3 Share Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) Just now, Farmer77 said: Im not a fan of the little fat man from Korea however with just a little bit of deep thinking, historical awareness and empathy you can see why a sovereign nation might want to protect itself from a nation its technically at war with. Sorry for quoting myself but I just had a realization. Based on the fact that we are kinda technically still at war with Korea Trump wont have to go to congress for approval to attack them , ug .........even though there was no formal declaration of war back then Ill bet the continuation of "police action" there will conveniently fall outside the purview of congress. Edited April 23, 2017 by Farmer77 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted April 23, 2017 Author #4 Share Posted April 23, 2017 The thing is, both South Korea and Japan are pretty much terrified (hence our ships meeting up with the Japanese navy). Showing support for Japan, South Korea and anyone else close enough to get hit with crazy Kim's mid range missiles (which actually do work) isn't really such a bad idea. Remember, showing weakness instead of strength could very well be worse. Dictators like Kim Jung Un generally have no respect for weakness. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted April 23, 2017 Author #5 Share Posted April 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said: Sorry for quoting myself but I just had a realization. Based on the fact that we are kinda technically still at war with Korea Trump wont have to go to congress for approval to attack them , ug ......... The generals Trump has on his team aren't idiots...we will not strike first. However, if Lil' Kim decides he wants to take out one of his neighbors we will strike last. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #6 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, Lilly said: The thing is, both South Korea and Japan are pretty much terrified (hence our ships meeting up with the Japanese navy). Showing support for Japan, South Korea and anyone else close enough to get hit with crazy Kim's mid range missiles (which actually do work) isn't really such a bad idea. Remember, showing weakness instead of strength could very well be worse. Dictators like Kim Jung Un generally have no respect for weakness. Yeah but ever heard the saying Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.? I kinda feel like thats whats happening here, we've chosen to lower ourselves to the threatening and saber rattling stages when based on history thats not necessary. I feel like if we really didnt want little kim to have nukes we would remove S. Koreas nuclear program as a real bargaining chip Now we're potentially faced with one of the other sayings I try and live by - never fight with an ugly or crazy person, they have a lot less to lose than you do. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #7 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, Lilly said: The generals Trump has on his team aren't idiots...we will not strike first. However, if Lil' Kim decides he wants to take out one of his neighbors we will strike last. The generals arent but I think their boss just might be. Cant argue with the rest of your post though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Caspian Hare Posted April 23, 2017 #8 Share Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) My 2 cents is that the goal is to convince China that he's (Trump) willing to attack just so much that that they take measures to put real pressure on Fat Boy, but not go so far as to provoke an actual conflict. If true then that is really walking on the razor's edge. Edited April 23, 2017 by The Russian Hare clarify 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted April 23, 2017 Author #9 Share Posted April 23, 2017 13 minutes ago, Farmer77 said: Now we're potentially faced with one of the other sayings I try and live by - never fight with an ugly or crazy person, they have a lot less to lose than you do. OMG! I almost sprayed the screen with tea laughing at that one! 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWoo7 Posted April 23, 2017 #10 Share Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Lilly said: live by - never fight with an ugly or crazy person, they have a lot less to lose than you do. Prooooooooverb! grrr proper quote 21 minutes ago, Farmer77 said: and live by - never fight with an ugly or crazy person, they have a lot less to lose than you do Edited April 23, 2017 by MWoo7 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashotep Posted April 23, 2017 #11 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Little Kimmy likes to run his mouth and talk tough. I don't think even he is nutty enough to think he can just take out a aircraft carrier, which I don't think he can, and nothing will happen. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted April 23, 2017 #12 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Kim the Corpulent needs to be shown that he can't force outside nations to feed his people and pay bribes for peace. Either that is done or eventually, some other president has to deal with the war. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoofGardener Posted April 23, 2017 #13 Share Posted April 23, 2017 We need to lance the boil NOW. (and by Boil, I mean Kim Jong-un.) To NOT take action is reckless cowardice. Eventually, he WILL manage to get rockets that actually work, and maybe (though I doubt it) even put a basic fission atom bomb onto one of them. Somebody has to act, or South Korea or Japan will pay the price for our Liberal Angst. If Donald Trump does it, then everyone will criticise him publicly, whilst breathing sighs of relief when the cameras are turned off ! 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoofGardener Posted April 23, 2017 #14 Share Posted April 23, 2017 2 hours ago, Lilly said: Yeah, North Korea is totally nuts: http://in.reuters.com/article/northkorea-usa-idINKBN17P03G How would doing something like this benefit them? Does Kim Jung Un actually believe he can just sink a US vessel in international waters then merrily go on his way? No doubt he will use the technique recently trumpeted by the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard ? They claim they have a fleet of attack boats that will emerge from underwater tunnels to attack any US warships in the area. Yes... you read that correctly... boats - not submarines, but BOATS - in underwater tunnels. No doubt with lasers in their foreheads. It's a scary thought, but... Kim Jong-un isn't even the MOST insane of the World Nutter Nations. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted April 23, 2017 #15 Share Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) If you're being threatened by them, is it so unreasonable to threaten them in return? In WWII, they didn't worry about niceties about whether they were in international waters or not before attacking the Japanese carrier fleet at Midway, did they. I don't really think he's being mad, evil or insane here. Whether he could possibly have the means to do so, of course, is another question, certainly one of his not-terribly-reliable ballistic missiles would never have the accuracy. The attitude does seem to be "The US can bluster and threaten all it likes, but if anyone does the same in reply they're made, evil and insane." Edited April 23, 2017 by Manfred von Dreidecker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #16 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, RoofGardener said: We need to lance the boil NOW. (and by Boil, I mean Kim Jong-un.) I do hope you have children who will be doing the cleanup along side mine when they're drafted to clean up the mess left by "lancing that boil" . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #17 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, Manfred von Dreidecker said: The attitude does seem to be "The US can bluster and threaten all it likes, but if anyone does the same in reply they're made, evil and insane." Im having such a hard time with that. Especially in the context of this conversation when the realities of our hyperbole could very well mean millions dead. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted April 23, 2017 #18 Share Posted April 23, 2017 23 minutes ago, RoofGardener said: We need to lance the boil NOW. (and by Boil, I mean Kim Jong-un.) To NOT take action is reckless cowardice. Eventually, he WILL manage to get rockets that actually work, and maybe (though I doubt it) even put a basic fission atom bomb onto one of them. Somebody has to act, or South Korea or Japan will pay the price for our Liberal Angst. If Donald Trump does it, then everyone will criticise him publicly, whilst breathing sighs of relief when the cameras are turned off ! You'd get on well with Raptor Witness, who was recommending the use of neutron bombs not too long ago. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.ZZ. Posted April 23, 2017 #19 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Lil' Kim is all talk. Even he knows it would be suicide. I'm sure that all eyes are on his country right now, we can defend ourselves. "Bring it on" "Go ahead, make my day" 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted April 23, 2017 #20 Share Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Farmer77 said: I dont think he believes the vessel will stay in international waters, nor that its aircraft will stay in international airspace. I would say perhaps Trump is the one who is nuts for escalating this whole thing in the manner he has. This is the first time that kim's rhetoric hasnt been preceded by "if we're attacked" and even then the actual verbiage in this statement could potentially be viewed as saying as much: “The closer large targets, such as the nuclear carrier, come to our shores, the more effective will be our devastating strike Im not a fan of the little fat man from Korea however with just a little bit of deep thinking, historical awareness and empathy you can see why a sovereign nation might want to protect itself from a nation its technically at war with. Ok...again, people are gonna probably think I've gone off the deep end with this one, but... how much does Trump want North Korea to actually take out Cali so he doesn't have to worry about all those liberal voters? Edited April 23, 2017 by ChaosRose 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted April 23, 2017 #21 Share Posted April 23, 2017 I mean...he's already on record trying to tell them there is no drought. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted April 23, 2017 #22 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, ChaosRose said: Ok...again, people are gonna probably think I've gone off the deep end with this one, but... how much does Trump want North Korea to actually take out Cali so he doesn't have to worry about all those liberal voters? Now THAT is a conspiracy theory ! But wow as it sinks in, I could see it. Maybe as only a half conscious thought on his part but it certainly would explain his willingness to gamble in this scenario. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted April 23, 2017 #23 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Just now, Farmer77 said: Now THAT is a conspiracy theory ! But wow as it sinks in, I could see it. Maybe as only a half conscious thought on his part but it certainly would explain his willingness to gamble in this scenario. I realize that I sound incredibly dark, but I can't help thinking these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted April 23, 2017 #24 Share Posted April 23, 2017 Nothing will happen because Kim Jung Ding-Dung for is a scaramouch and paper tiger only. Even he is an insane 9yo mind, he is very well aware about the fact that such an attack would get a (flexible) response that would crush his reputation as "the big leader" of NK, by the destruction of military bases and infrastructure. (Hyper-friendly, fluent Korean speaking US cruise missiles: "Good Morning, Sir. I just came here to detonate and I`m delighted that you are here to share this exiting event with me".) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.ZZ. Posted April 23, 2017 #25 Share Posted April 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, Farmer77 said: Now THAT is a conspiracy theory ! But wow as it sinks in, I could see it. Maybe as only a half conscious thought on his part but it certainly would explain his willingness to gamble in this scenario. It's a gamble now? You wouldn't call it a defensive move? Would it make you happy if he just left the fleet in harbor enjoying R&R? What would a Liberal POTUS do? Go on TV and talk about BS red lines and do nothing? Is that what you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now