Is North Korea really a problem?

[The Caspian Hare]

3 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

I sometimes think that Trump isn't talking to Kim but to the people around him or the upper echelon of the military, and letting them know that they had better do something about their dear leader before their world blows up.   That would explain why he kills his perceived enemies in such gruesome ways.

 

It would be nice if some general turned his tanks around and stormed the presidential compound, put a pistol to the back of Fat Boy's head then picked up the phone to Seoul and said "we fold, game over." But he has a well-developed sense for disloyalty and paranoia so that may not be possible.

Edited April 26, 2017 by The Russian Hare
spelling errors

[Lilly]

1 minute ago, SNR said:

 

And in case anyone doesn't understand.. All these 9 nations with nuclear weapons have to be stable FOREVER. Has any country been stable forever. I'm thinking not. So what you say won't stand forever. 

So we need to be able to deal with situations as they come about...it's called 'life'.

I've experienced quite a bit of life. I can personally recall the Cuban Missile Crisis (I was 10 yrs old) and I've paid fairly close attention to everything that's lead up to where the world is today. Nothing is forever, nothing. We simply have to do the best we can when and where we can. And, in my personal opinion allowing the likes of Kim Jung Un to achieve nuclear capable missiles would be a great big mistake.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

Oh, so your policy is for us to go belly up and hope they don't hurt us. Well you can stuff that where the sun don't shine. How typical of a liberal to fantasize they can talk a bully out of beating the crap of them. If our Prince of Peace couldn't get the guy back to the table, game over, dude. The time for talk is over. Actions speak louder than words. It's his turn to blink.

So you're just a full fledged war monger....copy that. 

How is what I proposed going belly up? I find it incredibly ironic that you're willing to sacrifice millions of S. Korean lives but not their nuclear program. 

 

[Lilly]

1 minute ago, The Russian Hare said:

 

It would be nice if some general turned his tanks around and stormed the presidential compound, put a pistol to the back of Fat Boy's head then picked up the phone to Seoul and said "we fold, game over." But he has a well-developed sense for disloyalty and paranoia so that may not be possible.

What a wonderful idea this is. Too bad they are all brainwashed and Lil' Kim just whacks anyone who even remotely might be disloyal.

[Merc14]

50 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

Not in it but what about this?

Saudi Arabia has invested in Pakistani nuclear weapons projects, and believes it could obtain atomic bombs at will, a variety of sources have told BBC Newsnight.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24823846

Yes, I know about that and that was one of the reasons I was so against Obama's folding on Iran getting a bomb.   I have little doubt that once Iran goes nuclear the Saudi's will do likewise and they won't be asking permission as they see Iran as an existential threat.   I rewatched Six days in June on YouTube last night and for anyone interested in how the Arab/Persian mind works.   The six day war was a study Middle Eastern thuggery and super-power tinkering.

[bee]

.

I propose that - to save a lot of money and prevent the loss of life that Kim and Donald strip to the waist
and have a cage fight - to decide -

Not quite sure what they will be deciding but it could be entertaining --- 

Bring back the good old war days when the leaders actually put themselves at risk -

Even Richard the Third who had sclerosis of the spine fought and died on the battlefield -

.

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

11 hours ago, FLOMBIE said:

Saudi Arabia does not have a nuclear arsenal. 

Yh well done. Thanks for the contribution hahaha. They are seeking them though. Wasn't it mainly Saudi's that hijacked them airliners on 9/11. American allies pfft.. When that day comes when the Saudi's get their nukes let's see the rhetoric Washington spills out then.

[Lilly]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

So you're just a full fledged war monger....copy that. 

How is what I proposed going belly up? I find it incredibly ironic that you're willing to sacrifice millions of S. Korean lives but not their nuclear program. 

 

How's that? I don't read his response to mean we should be the one to start a nuclear war. Keep in mind it's Kim Jung Un who wants to have a nuclear war.

[FLOMBIE]

Just now, SNR said:

Yh well done. Thanks for the contribution hahaha. They are seeking them though. Wasn't it mainly Saudi's that hijacked them airliners on 9/11. American allies pfft.. When that day comes when the Saudi's get their nukes let's see the rhetoric Washington spills out then.

You're welcome.

[FLOMBIE]

1 minute ago, Lilly said:

How's that? I don't read his response to mean we should be the one to start a nuclear war. Keep in mind it's Kim Jung Un who wants to have a nuclear war.

Does he really? The nuclear arsenal is the only trump (hrhrhr) he holds. 

[Farmer77]

Just now, Lilly said:

How's that? I don't read his response to mean we should be the one to start a nuclear war. Keep in mind it's Kim Jung Un who wants to have a nuclear war.

Does he really? Ive only heard him say that is what would happen if he is attacked. 

The very first think NK is going to do if attacked is hit the south with the massive amounts of conventional artillery they currently have pointed at Seoul, a city of somewhere around 20 million people. 

[ellapenella]

10 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Yes, I know about that and that was one of the reasons I was so against Obama's folding on Iran getting a bomb.   I have little doubt that once Iran goes nuclear the Saudi's will do likewise and they won't be asking permission as they see Iran as an existential threat.   I rewatched Six days in June on YouTube last night and for anyone interested in how the Arab/Persian mind works.   The six day war was a study Middle Eastern thuggery and super-power tinkering.

I know you know about that, I wanted to hear your perspective on it.

I'm going to view that on youtube. Six Days In June.

 

Edited April 26, 2017 by Ellapennella

[Grey Area]

Do not forget the elephant in the room, and it is a pretty big elephant... China.  Any armed conflict with North Korea will not be a lone engagement, China has turned the tide before, and is likely to be able to do it again, given that the intervening decades between the Korean war and now has seen a great deal of China's military development based on one thing and one thing alone, countering US hardware.

Now I don't think China wants a war, we have seen them being increasingly rational in their stance toward the North Korean situation, but, and here is the problem, and it's one that I haven't seen given much consideration, if any.

If North Korea were successfully invaded and liberated(?) what then?  Well for one thing, we would likely see a humanitarian crisis, the scale and depravity not seen since the holocaust.  Now there are two major issues with this.  Firstly, China is slowly but surely rolling it's way toward globalisation, the restrictions on it's citizens are easing as more and more of the population join the middle classes.  If these new waves of liberated Chinese middle classes were to learn that their own country had defended such depravity, it could well be a regime changer.  But not only that, the on going cost of such a victory in terms of GDP and manpower would be astronomical, and it would be a bill the US would be obligated to accept.

Personally however, I think if there were any way to take out the leadership of North Korea in it's entirety, then it should be taken, with extreme prejudice. 

[kartikg]

27 minutes ago, bee said:

.

I pro. pose that - to save a lot of money and prevent the loss of life that Kim and Donald strip to the waist
and have a cage fight - to decide -

Not quite sure what they will be deciding but it could be entertaining --- 

Bring back the good old war days when the leaders actually put themselves at risk -

Even Richard the Third who had sclerosis of the spine fought and died on the battlefield -

.

winner takes all country and nukes

[+and-then]

5 hours ago, Astra. said:

I totally get where you are coming from...and just like you, I would like to see pudgy Kim gone for good, and I don't care how it's done.

But I would also like to see the people of NK eventually become a more vibrant and free nation. Because they could start thinking for themselves. I have read some horrific things of what the people there go through because of this regime. Families, and others are simply trapped there and live in constant fear of that crazy lunatic. It's time that he and this backward regime was ousted once and for all.

Oh just to add...seems Kim's young wife has gone missing. She hasn't been seen tagging along behind him for quite some time. Who knows - maybe the little madman has got her chained up in some dungeon somewhere. Or maybe he just got sick of her altogether...and bumped her off.

 

Thanks, Astra, and if Manfred weren't enjoying his foray into "high dudgeon" so thoroughly, he'd admit that I'm right as well.  A person can desire to defend his home, yet not be gleeful over the suffering of innocents who are just as endangered by that Loon as Americans are.  His answer first, last and always, appears to be that America is wrong, no matter the situation or circumstance.  People like that are just haters and are beyond reaching with any logic.  It is my sincere hope that Trump's message to Xi was understood and that Xi will relieve us of that pudgy freak soon.  This is in China's hands.  And if he HAS gone truly rogue and they cannot stop him short of invasion, that is their problem as well.  There is a level of responsibility when one trains and uses mentally unbalanced killer regimes.  And before hizzoner von Driedel makes some snarky turn of phrase based on that statement, he can sod off and let the adults deal with the real world.

[ellapenella]

5 minutes ago, and then said:

Thanks, Astra, and if Manfred weren't enjoying his foray into "high dudgeon" so thoroughly, he'd admit that I'm right as well.  A person can desire to defend his home, yet not be gleeful over the suffering of innocents who are just as endangered by that Loon as Americans are.  His answer first, last and always, appears to be that America is wrong, no matter the situation or circumstance.  People like that are just haters and are beyond reaching with any logic.  It is my sincere hope that Trump's message to Xi was understood and that Xi will relieve us of that pudgy freak soon.  This is in China's hands.  And if he HAS gone truly rogue and they cannot stop him short of invasion, that is their problem as well.  There is a level of responsibility when one trains and uses mentally unbalanced killer regimes.  And before hizzoner von Driedel makes some snarky turn of phrase based on that statement, he can sod off and let the adults deal with the real world.

What do you mean by that? I don't see it that way.

[Einsteinium]

I don't think we honestly can prevent other nations from developing their own nuclear weapons over the long term. Short term yes, but long term nuclear weapons are only becoming easier to manufacture due to technological advances across the board in all areas of engineering. Like with guns, once the first guns were used on the battlefield that technology spread like wildfire across the world and changed everything. Nukes are different insofar as the level of difficulty in designing and building them, but the nuclear deterrent is seen as such a powerful tool to prevent an attack as a defensive measure that other countries are going to develop them or buy them from those who can. We must do all we can to slow this process down, but it is going to happen.

Pandora's box was opened in WW2 and it is impossible to close it now. We either learn to tolerate each other and get along in the LONG TERM, or we blow everything up and go extinct eventually. Nuclear weapons could very well be the 'great filter' proposed by scientists as one reason why advanced civilizations who can travel the stars seem to either be extremely rare that we have not found signs of one yet, or none exist due to some kind of 'great filter' that destroys advanced species before they are able to reach such an advanced state.

Maybe we should just get it over with, just start WW3 already Trump if you are going to do it let's get it over with already.

[Lilly]

I really hope China does whatever it takes to either take out or rein in KJU. We need to keep in mind that we don't know everything that's going down.

I'm at class now...back later on. 

[Merc14]

31 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

Do not forget the elephant in the room, and it is a pretty big elephant... China.  Any armed conflict with North Korea will not be a lone engagement, China has turned the tide before, and is likely to be able to do it again, given that the intervening decades between the Korean war and now has seen a great deal of China's military development based on one thing and one thing alone, countering US hardware.

Now I don't think China wants a war, we have seen them being increasingly rational in their stance toward the North Korean situation, but, and here is the problem, and it's one that I haven't seen given much consideration, if any.

If North Korea were successfully invaded and liberated(?) what then?  Well for one thing, we would likely see a humanitarian crisis, the scale and depravity not seen since the holocaust.  Now there are two major issues with this.  Firstly, China is slowly but surely rolling it's way toward globalisation, the restrictions on it's citizens are easing as more and more of the population join the middle classes.  If these new waves of liberated Chinese middle classes were to learn that their own country had defended such depravity, it could well be a regime changer.  But not only that, the on going cost of such a victory in terms of GDP and manpower would be astronomical, and it would be a bill the US would be obligated to accept.

Personally however, I think if there were any way to take out the leadership of North Korea in it's entirety, then it should be taken, with extreme prejudice. 

I don't understand why modern China supports the regime in NK?   I understand that during their Mao days they wanted a solid buffer between them and the west on their southern border but nowadays our economies are so intertwined and codependent and travel through our borders so commonplace that it makes little sense to protect the little monster to the south.   Could you imagine what a cold war, much less a hot one, between the US and China would do to China's economy?  

Edited April 26, 2017 by Merc14

[imrunningthismonkeyfarm]

1 hour ago, Bama13 said:

Well I live on the planet Earth, which is populated run by a race called Humans. Not sure where you live, but here on Earth that is known as a pipe dream. In real life some countries on Earth do invade other countries. Should the rest of the countries just ignore such actions?

But that's what we're all aspiring to isn't it??? Sorry I mean on my planet Earth.. where there are still people who would like to live in peace. Not everyone likes war you know.

And by the way your planet Earth isn't working. Not like it should.

Look. I understand the progress of stones to nuclear weapons quite well and we wouldn't be where we are today without wars. Yes most species battle but we should know better by now. And yes things like space travel wouldn't be possible without it and if it was all defensive great. But by the track record of the last few American presidents their goal isn't peace but world domination. We are still heading in the wrong direction. 

And these humans that you say run this planet should be more responsible by now instead of being a disgrace to the planet to the animals and to themselves.

[Farmer77]

 

Just now, SNR said:

But by the track record of the last few American presidents their goal isn't peace but world domination.

This is so blatantly obvious at this point its really becoming hard to take any of these discussions seriously, well it would be anyways if millions of lives werent at risk as a result. 

Just now, SNR said:

And yes things like space travel wouldn't be possible without it

Or Nazis, dont forget the nazis 

[+Hammerclaw]

57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

So you're just a full fledged war monger....copy that. 

How is what I proposed going belly up? I find it incredibly ironic that you're willing to sacrifice millions of S. Korean lives but not their nuclear program. 

 

Yes, and you're a gutless wonder willing to grovel for peace. What is sacrificed by North Korea is up to their leader.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

Yes, and you're a gutless wonder willing to grovel for peace. What is sacrificed by North Korea is up to their leader.

You're cute 

[+Hammerclaw]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

You're cute 

Sorry, honey, I don't swing that way.

[skliss]

1 hour ago, The Russian Hare said:

 

It would be nice if some general turned his tanks around and stormed the presidential compound, put a pistol to the back of Fat Boy's head then picked up the phone to Seoul and said "we fold, game over." But he has a well-developed sense for disloyalty and paranoia so that may not be possible.

I've thought about this...I get that KJU is delusional and that his populace and most likely his military probably are fed the lies that they are all powerful and could win a war with the U.S. But, there has to be some members of his council or administrators that realize that is a pipe dream and know a conflict with us would wipe them out. You gotta think they either plan or wish they could plan to remove him from power. Unfortunately it would probably mean another power hungry person would step into his shoes.