Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Still Waters

Kim Jong-un promotes sister to the politburo

44 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Well, true i guess ( that US bombers didn't fly into North Korean airspace ) but they did get close to it, close enough to be threatening and that is whole point. 

As for military drills, they did include simulations of invading North, there are many sources here is one link.

Also, as stated in the article there is link between agression coming from North and those military drills by USA and allies in the region ( [edit] aggression in terms of North starting more tests, both nuclear and missile as an reply to military drills ). Usual action and reaction law i can't support either but also, can't condemn only one side.

Edited by Sir Smoke aLot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Just now, Farmer77 said:

Why is "over" North Korea a bid deal here when a two minute detour would place them in striking range? 

 

Well, I think ACCURACY is a reasonably "big deal" ? It was suggested that the US had flown bombers over North Korea. They hadn't ! they where many hundreds of miles away from the NK border... more than a "two minute detour" ? :)

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Well, true i guess ( that US bombers didn't fly into North Korean airspace ) but they did get close to it, close enough to be threatening and that is whole point. 

As for military drills, they did include simulations of invading North, there are many sources here is one link.

Also, as stated in the article there is link between agression coming from North and those military drills by USA and allies in the region ( [edit] aggression in terms of North starting more tests, both nuclear and missile as an reply to military drills ). Usual action and reaction law i can't support either but also, can't condemn only one side.

You CAN condemn only one side, if that side is causing all of the trouble, and - in my opinion - NK is INDEED causing all of the trouble.

The US maneouvers where not threatening. They where designed to practice defense against an invading NK army.

Oh.. and did you notice ? This time the Japanese air force joined in. Kim Jong un is learning that his actions have consequences.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

they where many hundreds of miles away from the NK borde

There is no reliable info about distance from the border only that it was ' closest so far ' and that ' it shows US resolve '. That is why we can't make any claim about distance other than 'closest so far' ( US official statement ) which might be translated as 'close enough' but i only assume that.

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

You CAN condemn only one side, if that side is causing all of the trouble, and - in my opinion - NK is INDEED causing all of the trouble.

The US maneouvers where not threatening. They where designed to practice defense against an invading NK army.

Oh.. and did you notice ? This time the Japanese air force joined in. Kim Jong un is learning that his actions have consequences.

Well that is where we have different opinion, i always go with '' it takes two to dance ''. If we follow simple logic, no one has self destructive desires especially people in power, they all want and strive to strenghten their position. It might be resonable to say that it's one shared characteristic among majority of presidents, dictators... People in power all aroud the world share it.

What comes from that is that any attack by Kim, in case that he strikes first, would be self signed death penalty for his regime and him personally at the end. That taken into account, he can't gamble here especially since Russia and China have both declared that they will stand behind the side which did not attack first.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RoofGardener said:

Well, I think ACCURACY is a reasonably "big deal" ? It was suggested that the US had flown bombers over North Korea. They hadn't ! they where many hundreds of miles away from the NK border... more than a "two minute detour" ? :)

 

B-1 travels around 950 MPH , yes I was being somewhat hyperbolic by the two minutes but still not too far off. 

9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

You CAN condemn only one side, if that side is causing all of the trouble, and - in my opinion - NK is INDEED causing all of the trouble.

IDK that I necessarily agree that NK is causing all of the trouble as im not sure that the US has a right to determine how another nation progresses technologically nor am I convinced she has a right to determine whether another nation has the right to defend herself or not. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

There is no reliable info about distance from the border only that it was ' closest so far ' and that ' it shows US resolve '. That is why we can't make any claim about distance other than 'closest so far' ( US official statement ) which might be translated as 'close enough' but i only assume that.

Where did the "closest so far" statement come from ? :) It wasn't in the BBC report and - accordingly - cannot possibly exist :P

The great thing about the distance not being mentioned is that I can make up any figure I want, and nobody can contradict me.

They flew over the Southern Coast, and where 1000 miles from NK territory at all times ! :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

Where did the "closest so far" statement come from ? :) It wasn't in the BBC report and - accordingly - cannot possibly exist :P

The great thing about the distance not being mentioned is that I can make up any figure I want, and nobody can contradict me.

They flew over the Southern Coast, and where 1000 miles from NK territory at all times ! :D

Quote from this link, which i posted as reference to US bombers near North, there are other, many other links but i picked first one.

'' 

Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said: "This is the farthest north of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) any US fighter or bomber aircraft have flown off North Korea's coast in the 21st century, underscoring the seriousness with which we take (North Korea's) reckless behavior."

She added: "This mission is a demonstration of US resolve and a clear message that the President has many military options to defeat any threat." ''

That's why i said it's official statement. Bolded part clearly points out it was 'very close' at the least.

img_0110.jpg

Important notice, demilitarized zone is 4km wide hence such clonclusions. Dangerous game, right now very dangerous to US pilots who fly in the area and that should not be disregarded, especially not by Trump how is far from there.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but..... you can be "north of the DMZ" and "East of North Korean airspace" whilst being in Vancouver ! :P

ZOMG..... Air Canada are threatening North Korean airspace :o

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yeah, but..... you can be "north of the DMZ" and "East of North Korean airspace" whilst being in Vancouver ! :P

ZOMG..... Air Canada are threatening North Korean airspace :o

Philosophically, yes :D i am all for it but practically, not really :)

[edit] to add, Dana White does not mention '' east of North Korean airspace '' at least not that i am aware off, in respect of main subject she talks of

 

Edited by Sir Smoke aLot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese and Russian plan to defuse the situation was for North Korea to freeze nuclear tests and for the US to stop conducting exercises near North Korea.  Neither country  agreed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

The Chinese and Russian plan to defuse the situation was for North Korea to freeze nuclear tests and for the US to stop conducting exercises near North Korea.  Neither country  agreed.

Then they should both be sent straight to bed with no supper! 


 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't there any names besides Kim over there? His parents actually named him and his sister both kim? So kim replaced kim with kim?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

Aren't there any names besides Kim over there? His parents actually named him and his sister both kim? So kim replaced kim with kim?

Kim is the family name or the equivalent of a surname.

So Kim Jong Un replaced someone from his family with someone from his family; just like the OP says.

You could play the same trick with Trump.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gromdor said:

The Chinese and Russian plan to defuse the situation was for North Korea to freeze nuclear tests and for the US to stop conducting exercises near North Korea.  Neither country  agreed.

Because it was Trump's great idea that North has to dismantle nuclear program first and only then would America go into talks. Hence those sanctions which were adopted silently in mid of this crisis with North Korea but one thing is sure, neither country has shown actual desire to make some strong steps towards making deals.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Essan said:

Then they should both be sent straight to bed with no supper! 


 

Imagine, Trump and Kimmy, together feeding one another with kebabs. World could be theirs :D

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Because it was Trump's great idea that North has to dismantle nuclear program first and only then would America go into talks. Hence those sanctions which were adopted silently in mid of this crisis with North Korea but one thing is sure, neither country has shown actual desire to make some strong steps towards making deals.

Perhaps that is because Bill Clinton gave FatBoy's dad a huge cash/food windfall and the old b****** lied through his teeth and continued working on a BOMB?  As Giuliani famously said: "What do you call a guy who plays poker with someone who cheated him twice before?  A MORON!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, and then said:

Perhaps that is because Bill Clinton gave FatBoy's dad a huge cash/food windfall and the old b****** lied through his teeth and continued working on a BOMB?  As Giuliani famously said: "What do you call a guy who plays poker with someone who cheated him twice before?  A MORON!

Maybe that food money was given because North was under sanctions and flooding made millions of hungry mouths, on top of those made by sanctions so that those who implemented sanctions at first place had to do something good. As for where did the money go, we can only speculate but thing is, no where in the world do people get everything which was ment for them. It's sad fact of humanity, if i may say humanity in this case.

Things are really not as simple as that, America wont throw money for nothing and in the case of North there was slight moral obligation to do something. Clinton's administration did quite a few morally right things, one of reasons why i still have deep respect for Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

Maybe that food money was given because North was under sanctions and flooding made millions of hungry mouths, on top of those made by sanctions so that those who implemented sanctions at first place had to do something good. As for where did the money go, we can only speculate but thing is, no where in the world do people get everything which was ment for them. It's sad fact of humanity, if i may say humanity in this case.

Things are really not as simple as that, America wont throw money for nothing and in the case of North there was slight moral obligation to do something. Clinton's administration did quite a few morally right things, one of reasons why i still have deep respect for Americans.

Whatever the reason for the agreement, do you dispute that the prior Kim broke the agreement?  I'm not sure how one rationalizes this away.  Further, what point is there in make-believe future negotiations when the leadership there is known to lie, take concessions and continue in their course toward deliverable nuclear weapons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, and then said:

Whatever the reason for the agreement, do you dispute that the prior Kim broke the agreement?  I'm not sure how one rationalizes this away.  Further, what point is there in make-believe future negotiations when the leadership there is known to lie, take concessions and continue in their course toward deliverable nuclear weapons?

I just say that any broken deal wasn't necessarily broken because of what we think could be the reason. And i have also explained why i think so. If the devil is in the details my sin here is that i was not interested in details over that particular agreement, simply because all those horors which North has faced back then said more than millions of words and agreements.

But i will look into that thanks for mentioning it.

On the other hand, right now we have Trump and Kim and that should be the focus. Trump, by refering to 'decades old extortion by North' has shown no compassion ( because the agreement back then was in background of North Koreans eating grass, literally ) and knowledge about those events. We are yet to hear propper, unfiltered, talk by Kim. So far we have numerous words which Trump say on daily basis. 

I am 100% sure that North would not ever try to commit suicide. If the get ability to attack American land in Washington, for example, they won't do it. That would be largest mass suicide in history of humankind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.