Originally posted by Adam_PoEIt was certainly safe to bet that it was a bluff... but once again, the alternative is essentially to do nothing. I think that had we stayed silent while allowing NK to gain this capability, we lose just as much as we lost when we tried to posture and threaten them out of doing so but failed.
Any intelligent person knew 100% that this threat was not going to work, and then they immediately defied him, and proved it.
The reason I think so is that we would have to be stupid to be indifferent to NK gaining nuclear proliferation. So at the very least you want to uphold the image of having tried to stop it.
Having nuclear capabilities is one of the qualifiers of being considered a world superpower. North Korea desperately wants a metaphorical seat at the grown-ups table, and all of this saber-rattling is a tantrum designed to get them there. When you respond to their threats as if they are legitimate, you legitimize them as a threat to a world superpower. "See? The U.S. is afraid of us. Everybody should take us seriously." You are rewarding them for their bad behavior, which just encourages more of it. The best way to respond is to treat them just as you would any other child who is throwing a tantrum. "When you act like a grown up, you can sit at the grown-ups table, but not a moment before. Now stop being a little baby, and have a seat at the kids table where you belong."This is just nonsense. Even if Trump never sent a single tweet, NK would have continued their program the same as they are right now.
Of course there is an obvious advantage to being a nuclear power, which is exactly why we don't want states like NK to gain that status.
Originally posted by |King Joker|
They obviously will not willingly denuclearize, but threatening "fire and fury" against them will only encourage them to continue pursuing their nuclear program at an even faster rate. And if you say that Kim Jong-un will actually use their nuclear weapons once he has the capability to strike the U.S., then that implies that Kim Jong-un is a completely irrational actor and thus Trump's rhetoric of "fire and fury" would only exacerbate the problems we face with North Korea. You don't threaten someone who is insane like that.I think increased sanctions and pressure on China is the best course of action to take, as North Korea was obviously extremely unhappy at the recent United Nations sanctions passed recently, so it seems as if they're pretty effective. Trump's ridiculous bluster isn't helping matters and is only drawing us closer to a potential conflict.
North Korea significantly advanced its nuclear program during the era of Obama administration. Diplomacy and sanctions have failed to yield results.
China won't take any responsbility for denuclearization of DPRK. They are allies, my friend.
Earlier, DPRK wasn't much of a threat to US national security. However, with ICBMs in the picture, DPRK can actually blackmail US itself and not just Japan and South Korea.
If you are expecting rationality from Kim Jong-Un, you are expecting too much. Time for action - is now.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Please read this assessment: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/11/opinions/north-korea-crisis-opinion-stewart/index.htmlNorth Korea significantly advanced its nuclear program during the era of Obama administration. Diplomacy and sanctions have failed to yield results.
China won't take any responsbility for denuclearization of DPRK. They are allies, my friend.
Earlier, DPRK wasn't much of a threat to US national security. However, with ICBMs in the picture, DPRK can actually blackmail US itself and not just Japan and South Korea.
If you are expecting rationality from Kim Jong-Un, you are expecting too much. Time for action - is now.
What would that action be?
Originally posted by Robtard
^ BingoThat's the problem with these rubes, NK is doing what it's been doing for a long time, waving its tiny little dick. Now they've finally found themselves with a US president whose ego is so fragile, they can make him do flips and these Trumpers can't stand it because they're looking like fools.
NK's going to test more missile as planned, Trump's going to make another threat he won't follow through, as he's already opened up with threatening death and destruction and America will be laughed at some more. Blew his load early and now he has nothing for the rest of the game.
edit: What's Trump's next move when NK test more missiles? He's already threatened destruction, so how does he up that aside from actually destroying NK? Anyone.
Preemptive strikes against NK missile sites with B-1 bombers.
Originally posted by Afro CheeseRight. No option to make a measured response backed up by at least a credible threat if not an attempt at dialogue.
It was certainly safe to bet that it was a bluff... but once again, the alternative is essentially to do nothing. I think that had we stayed silent while allowing NK to gain this capability, we lose just as much as we lost when we tried to posture and threaten them out of doing so but failed.The reason I think so is that we would have to be stupid to be indifferent to NK gaining nuclear proliferation. So at the very least you want to uphold the image of having tried to stop it.[/i]
Blowing his top in an attempt to impress his voters with strongman posturing was the only alternative. 😘
Originally posted by Sin I AM
What would that action be?
Aforementioned measures would be enough to humble DPRK and US would not have to consider an occupation.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenDNorth Korea has thousands of weapons installations that the U.S. would be unable to destroy with a surgical strike because they are too well concealed or inaccessible, the idea that they could "humble" NK in this manner is false. It would not, they would retaliate, and the casualties incurred by South Korea would be extreme.
1. Take out nuclear facilities of DPRK
2. Degrade much of the military capability of DPRK
3. Assassinate Kim Jong-Un and let somebody else take charge.Aforementioned measures would be enough to humble DPRK and US would not have to consider an occupation.
So no, terrible suggestion.
Originally posted by Surtur
Serious question: was the way the previous administration handled North Korea working? Not just Obama, we can go back to Bush and Clinton as well.
Argh. I must be honest here. As much as I despise Trump, I can't really blame him for this. North Korea has been developing nukes for years despite U.S. sanctions. If Hillary was POTUS right now, she'd be in the same quagmire. And Trump's "fire and fury" comments are essentially the best he or anyone in his position can do.
Any direct military action in North Korea could set off a potential conflict with China and even Russia. That's why past presidents have avoided directly attacking NK, but they've also been lucky that hitherto 2017, NK didn't have a functional nuclear ICBM, so they were able to brush off the NKs. But now that the North Koreans have nukes, they are no longer unavoidable. They must be dealt with, and they clearly are beyond negotiation, so Trump is now in the unenviable position of resolving this quagmire.
We can only hope that the supposed don't -need-political-background deal-making business acumen his voters elected him for wasn't yet another lie.
Originally posted by Beniboyblinglol.... there is no credible threat we could make that would convince Kim to stop seeking nuclear status. at this point you guys are just whining for the sake of it.
Right. No option to make a measured response backed up by at least a credible threat if not an attempt at dialogue.
The main problem I have is that people seem more concerned with Trump's demeanor than with nuclear weapons being pointed at us by an unstable pill popping despot.
We are basically just banking on the assumption that they will never actually use them, as to do so would be suicidal. That's an assumption that I desperately hope is true. But I think that we should be cognizant of the fact that there is no actual guarantee here. This is what makes our current situation so particularly unnerving.
Now, the situation with NK is so potentially disastrous because any action we could take against them could easily result in hundreds of thousands of deaths.
But another, less likely scenario to consider is that our initial assumption turns out to be incorrect. That at one point they actually decide to send a nuke our way. Sure, it will be the end of their regime. But don't think for a second that Trump and all of the previous administrations that have allowed this threat to manifest won't be blamed for not preventing such an incident. The same way that Clinton (along with the intelligence agencies) are retroactively blamed for failing to deal with Al Qaeda.
And then what's more... once/if we have an actual precedent to fear nukes being used by a rogue power... we won't be nearly so hesitant to act the next time we find ourselves in a such a situation. Even if the prospective death toll is high.
I know most people will just dismiss this as "it will never happen so it doesn't matter." Let's just hope they're right.
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
The main problem I have is that people seem more concerned with Trump's demeanor than with nuclear weapons being pointed at us by an unstable pill popping despot.We are basically just banking on the assumption that they will never actually use them, as to do so would be suicidal. That's an assumption that I desperately hope is true. But I think that we should be cognizant of the fact that there is no actual guarantee here. This is what makes our current situation so particularly unnerving.
Now, the situation with NK is so potentially disastrous because any action we could take against them could easily result in hundreds of thousands of deaths.
But another, less likely scenario to consider is that our initial assumption turns out to be incorrect. That at one point they actually decide to send a nuke our way. Sure, it will be the end of their regime. But don't think for a second that Trump and all of the previous administrations that have allowed this threat to manifest won't be blamed for not preventing such an incident. The same way that Clinton (along with the intelligence agencies) are retroactively blamed for failing to deal with Al Qaeda.
And then what's more... once/if we have an actual precedent to fear nukes being used by a rogue power... we won't be nearly so hesitant to act the next time we find ourselves in a such a situation. Even if the prospective death toll is high.
I know most people will just dismiss this as "it will never happen so it doesn't matter." Let's just hope they're right.
The difference is that we have very little control over what other sovereign nations do. If North Korea is intent on developing nuclear weapons, we can make it difficult for them, but we most certainly will not be able to stop them. The only thing that is in our ability to control is how we respond to what they do, and on that front, we failed spectacularly.
Originally posted by Lestov16
Argh. I must be honest here. As much as I despise Trump, I can't really blame him for this. North Korea has been developing nukes for years despite U.S. sanctions. If Hillary was POTUS right now, she'd be in the same quagmire. And Trump's "fire and fury" comments are essentially the best he or anyone in his position can do.Any direct military action in North Korea could set off a potential conflict with China and even Russia. That's why past presidents have avoided directly attacking NK, but they've also been lucky that hitherto 2017, NK didn't have a functional nuclear ICBM, so they were able to brush off the NKs. But now that the North Koreans have nukes, they are no longer unavoidable. They must be dealt with, and they clearly are beyond negotiation, so Trump is now in the unenviable position of resolving this quagmire.
We can only hope that the supposed don't -need-political-background deal-making business acumen his voters elected him for wasn't yet another lie.
First I want to applaud you. No seriously. Some people might have just said "screw Trump" to screw Trump. You did not. This shows you do not suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome, where anything and everything he does is bad(he could cure lung cancer and they'd call him sexist cuz he didn't cure breast cancer) So.. 👆
I feel like maybe Obama should have paid more attention when he first got information about them years ago, and maybe he shouldn't have gutted our missile system.
Then again..great family photos though.
#forgiven
Originally posted by Beniboybling
North Korea has thousands of weapons installations that the U.S. would be unable to destroy with a surgical strike because they are too well concealed or inaccessible, the idea that they could "humble" NK in this manner is false. It would not, they would retaliate, and the casualties incurred by South Korea would be extreme.So no, terrible suggestion.
You are assuming that DPRK will be able to dictate the terms of this conflict without incurring significant losses of its own which is far from truth. You think South Korea is not prepared for this war? It is.
If were a citizen of Seoul, I would wish for a denuclearized DPRK and would be willing to seek shelter elsewhere for a temporary term as long as the government is willing to take care of my finances.
A military operation against DPRK would incorporate assistance from South Korea and Japan - and this much support is good enough.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
1. Take out nuclear facilities of DPRK
2. Degrade much of the military capability of DPRK
3. Assassinate Kim Jong-Un and let somebody else take charge.Aforementioned measures would be enough to humble DPRK and US would not have to consider an occupation.
Bad idea
Originally posted by Beniboybling
North Korea has thousands of weapons installations that the U.S. would be unable to destroy with a surgical strike because they are too well concealed or inaccessible, the idea that they could "humble" NK in this manner is false. It would not, they would retaliate, and the casualties incurred by South Korea would be extreme.So no, terrible suggestion.
This. As someone who has beem to Korea any action taken by the US will bring hell to South Korea and the troops stationed there. China will HAVE to step in with Russia in tow. I say let them posture and or strike 1st.