Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Trump and North Korea


Recommended Posts

I agree, which is the point I was trying to make, Trump's rhetoric of late has been that war is inevitable and imminent. I'm hoping that's not the case. As for why the U.S. has been at the forefront of this issue (which we usually are on these international issues; flaunting the title of "world's greatest superpower" and "first among nations" comes at a price), the U.S. has been directly and repeatedly threatened by NK, unlike most others countries, with the exception of SK and, to a lesser degree, Japan. I would say that NK, and specifically Kim Jong Un, has reason to be afraid of us, after we labeled them a member of the "Axis of Evil" under GWB, and have openly and repeatedly called for the ouster, peacefully or violently, of whichever Kim is in power at the time. 

Apparently China was beginning to ratchet up its pressure on NK, but now with Trump repudiating Tillerson and any form of diplomacy they will probably stop or reverse course.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Apparently China was beginning to ratchet up its pressure on NK, but now with Trump repudiating Tillerson and any form of diplomacy they will probably stop or reverse course.

 

Pressure on NK for what purpose???    

 

It use to be 'the world,  using the USA as their cop, needs to prevent NK from building nukes,  at ALL cost'.  

 

NOW,  it appears to be 'the USA,  needs to avoid war with NK,  at ALL cost'.

 

As I have said;  I believe the mission needs to change;  The USA and the world need to accept a nuclear NK.    

 

So call off the sanctions instead of increasing them and end any and all hostility towards NK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Pentagon reports that securing nuclear weapons in NK would require ground forces which means major war.  Also, would expose US and allied troops, NK and SK to biological and chemical weapons.

Not to mention what would China do if its protege/ally was attacked.

 

www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/securing-north-korean-nuclear-sites-would-require-a-ground-invasion-pentagon-says/2017/11/04/32d5f6fa-c0cf-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?undefined=&utm_term=.d3b1eb8a59ed&wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for s***t's and giggles let say a nuclear war accidentally started in NK. That cloud of radioactive material isn't gonna stay there over NK it's gonna blow around, SK gonna be a gonner given, but could go to Russia, China, Japan, Alaska, and right across the Pacific to Canada, the lower 48, even Mexico, possibly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2017 at 3:03 PM, jamesjazzguitar said:

 

Pressure on NK for what purpose???    

 

It use to be 'the world,  using the USA as their cop, needs to prevent NK from building nukes,  at ALL cost'.  

 

NOW,  it appears to be 'the USA,  needs to avoid war with NK,  at ALL cost'.

 

As I have said;  I believe the mission needs to change;  The USA and the world need to accept a nuclear NK.    

 

So call off the sanctions instead of increasing them and end any and all hostility towards NK.

right...until NK fires an ICBM at southern california.

what's that schtootz jerry brown the fruitfly gonna hand the people of SoCal then?

"everything's okay. it was just an unarmed test missile."

Image result for jerry brown

"don't mind us, billy. just...ignore us." -james cagney, captains of the clouds

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

right...until NK fires an ICBM at southern california.

what's that schtootz jerry brown the fruitfly gonna hand the people of SoCal then?

"everything's okay. it was just an unarmed test missile."

 

I guess it doesn't matter to you that if Trump were to do a preemptive strike against North Korea's nuclear facilities they could retaliate with the largest supply of chemical weapons in history from many silos taking out most of the population of South Korea and a great deal of Japan too.  Trump has apparently been advised by the Pentagon to do as Obama was doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

I guess it doesn't matter to you that if Trump were to do a preemptive strike against North Korea's nuclear facilities they could retaliate with the largest supply of chemical weapons in history from many silos taking out most of the population of South Korea and a great deal of Japan too.  Trump has apparently been advised by the Pentagon to do as Obama was doing.

Those chemical weapons are extremely deadly. Judging by the kind they used to kill Jong Un's brother, just a dab of it could kill an entire room of people. It's a miracle noone else got infected.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

I thought you didn't watch CNN.

Perhaps when he would like to see some news he watches CNN.  Lately as Trump is going south Fox has been avoiding covering the news altogether.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

The Politics of the North Korea Terrorism Designation

The country's support for terrorism is less extensive than in the past, but something else has changed.

 

".....It also will likely complicate any attempts at negotiating with Pyongyang on its ballistic-missile and nuclear-weapons programs—something the Trump administration has said it’s open to.

The designation could instead provoke the North to resume its missile or nuclear testing. After a flurry of such tests early in the year, North Korea hasn’t conducted one since September, though the reasons are unclear. (It may have less to do with pressure from the U.S. than with the North’s own winter military training schedule.) In any case, the South Korean intelligence agency said Monday that the North could conduct more tests this year. Monday’s designation could give the country an impetus.........

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/11/north-korea-state-sponsor-terrorism/546386/

Link to post
Share on other sites

VoteVetsVerified account @votevets 3h3 hours ago

 
 

VoteVets Retweeted Will Ripley

Another escalation from our President. This will not solve the North Korean nuclear issue. It's just another step towards war.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Will RipleyVerified account @willripleyCNN

 

North Korea's Foreign Ministry via KCNA: US decision to name North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism is "a serious provocation and a violent infringement upon our dignified country," and says it shows they should "keep the treasured nuclear sword in our hands more tightly”

3:39 AM - 22 Nov 2017 from Minato-ku, Tokyo
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mr6666 said:

VoteVetsVerified account @votevets 3h3 hours ago

 
 

VoteVets Retweeted Will Ripley

Another escalation from our President. This will not solve the North Korean nuclear issue. It's just another step towards war.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Will RipleyVerified account @willripleyCNN

 

North Korea's Foreign Ministry via KCNA: US decision to name North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism is "a serious provocation and a violent infringement upon our dignified country," and says it shows they should "keep the treasured nuclear sword in our hands more tightly”

3:39 AM - 22 Nov 2017 from Minato-ku, Tokyo

Hasn't NK been considered a state sponsor of terrorism since it was included in the Axis of Evil? Hardly the current president's fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

Hasn't NK been considered a state sponsor of terrorism since it was included in the Axis of Evil? Hardly the current president's fault.

Ah,  someone here that actually gets it as it relates to NK.    I assume we both agree that Trump has said and tweeted some very dumb and immature things as it relates to NK,  but the USA's overall policy is really just the same as that of the 3 previous administrations.    

In addition it appears one's hate of all-things-Trump causes people to forget what the 'mission' was of the previous 3 admins;  Stop NK from developing nukes.   This is a mission the US took on,  on behalf of the entire WORLD.   

Now that NK appears to have nukes I say that ALL sanctions be removed.   I.e. the mission has failed so why continue with the mission.    It makes zero sense.    BUT this isn't what the WORLD wants either.   The USA should tell the WORLD;  hey we tried, but you didn't back us up.  So we are stopping and making peace with N.K.

If the WORLD doesn't like that,  they can find someone else to take up the cause (like China which should have been the leaders in this in the first place).

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Ruben GallegoVerified account @RepRubenGallego 22h22 hours ago

 
 

Lt. Gen. Jan-Marc Jouas painted a bleak picture of war w/ North Korea in his letter to @RepTedLieu, @SenDuckworth & me. The American people & our military deserve an Administration committed to exhausting all other avenues before resorting to military force.

before it was just the west coast now they can hit NYC and DC and all egg sucking liberal appeasers can do is suggest more wasting of time with more useless diplomacy...

just what the **** is left to exhaust??? diplomacy is talk, talk isn't going to prevail upon NK to give up their nuclear ambitions. if it were it woulda ******** happened by now. this kinda hopeless impotent HS from schtootzettes like Duckworth is the end result of the past 50 years of liberal democrat politics...

an appalling disregard for national and domestic security and it has a name...

abdication of responsibility.

but we have the remedy for this weak laughable HS on hand...

 

Related image

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Ruben GallegoVerified account @RepRubenGallego 22h22 hours ago

 
 

Lt. Gen. Jan-Marc Jouas painted a bleak picture of war w/ North Korea in his letter to @RepTedLieu, @SenDuckworth & me. The American people & our military deserve an Administration committed to exhausting all other avenues before resorting to military force.

First,  what is the mission with regards to North Korea?   E.g. why are there sanctions?   What is the goal of these sanctions?

Second,   once one defines the mission,  what additional 'other avenues' should be exhausted that may lead to accomplishing the defined mission.

I ask these questions because my gut tells me Lieu and Duckworth can't answer these basic questions.   

Now I'll answer these questions;   The mission was to ensure NK didn't development Nukes.  Now that this mission has failed (due to the failure of the U.N. and the prior 3 US admins),  the mission is now to stop them from developing ballistic missiles that can hit the US mainland.

IS this still a mission the USA should pursue?   I say NO.   Therefore call off all sanctions,  make peace with NK, and remove all of our military from South Korea.   (and tell Japan they are on their own,  I.e. the USA will NOT get into a nuclear war to defend them from N.K.)  

For those that believe my ideas are nonsense,  please offer alternatives.   

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

before it was just the west coast now they can hit NYC and DC and all egg sucking liberal appeasers can do is suggest more wasting of time with more useless diplomacy...

just what the **** is left to exhaust??? diplomacy is talk, talk isn't going to prevail upon NK to give up their nuclear ambitions. if it were it woulda ******** happened by now. this kinda hopeless impotent HS from schtootzettes like Duckworth is the end result of the past 50 years of liberal democrat politics...

an appalling disregard for national and domestic security and it has a name...

abdication of responsibility.

but we have the remedy for this weak laughable HS on hand...

 

Related image

You are right that diplomacy is useless at this point and NK won't give up their nukes but why would they? The US is a bigger threat to them than vice-versa and another war isn't going to solve anything but just lead to countless deaths.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

First,  what is the mission with regards to North Korea?   E.g. why are there sanctions?   What is the goal of these sanctions?

Second,   once one defines the mission,  what additional 'other avenues' should be exhausted that may lead to accomplishing the defined mission.

I ask these questions because my gut tells me Lieu and Duckworth can't answer these basic questions.   

Now I'll answer these questions;   The mission was to ensure NK didn't development Nukes.  Now that this mission has failed (due to the failure of the U.N. and the prior 3 US admins),  the mission is now to stop them from developing ballistic missiles that can hit the US mainland.

IS this still a mission the USA should pursue?   I say NO.   Therefore call off all sanctions,  make peace with NK, and remove all of our military from South Korea.   (and tell Japan they are on their own,  I.e. the USA will NOT get into a nuclear war to defend them from N.K.)  

For those that believe my ideas are nonsense,  please offer alternatives.   

 

I agree with all that except taking the troops out of SK. While I think an aggressive policy from the US and SK is a bad idea, NK would absolutely invade and destroy SK without American protection.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, whatta we supposed to do? just hope that NK can't load anything on to their NYC and DC reaching ICBMs?

 

just live with a nuclear armed NK? that is suicidal defeatism and not at all why we elected a real tiger like donny for.

 

no sir!

Related image

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
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...