First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Should U.S stop North Korea's nuke? Wow, I can't even fathom the thought not to stop it
20206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 8/11/17 , edited 8/11/17

lawdog wrote:

Lots of conditions here.

NK has not mentioned sending nuclear armed missiles against Guam. They've simply talked of sending a salvo of missiles towards Guam. If they launch at a target range just outside Guam's (and therefore USA) territorial waters, that's the only time to wonder whether to intercept or not. If the missiles are headed directly to Guam, or the territorial waters around it, intercept, whether they're armed with nukes or not.


Let's say we don't intercept their missiles because it lands outside the coastal waters. We just set a precedence around the world that any of our enemies are able to conduct missile operations around any of our coastal waters because we decided we rather not look like fools if our anti- missile system fails.



12994 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
on another note, AP has friendly relations with North Korea - they even have a news bureau over there . the writer is Associated Press’ Pyongyang bureau chief and may or may not have had an influence from the N Korean government when writing said article.. the article does seem to downplay US's military strength and show N korea as being somewhat powerful:

it's highly questionable whether either or both would be able to take down the full salvo of four North Korean missiles.

translation: "N Korea can launch a full salvo of 4 missiles and US may be helpless in defending itself."

they also write off a military response as though it would be a provocation of war by the US (even though in this scenario N Korea launched the missiles first):

an attempt to intercept a missile might be misinterpreted by Pyongyang — or Beijing or Moscow — and escalate into a real shooting war.

even in the "pro" section of shooting down the missiles, the author still paints N Korea as being a country with a respectable military power.



Kim Jong Un has radically accelerated the pace of the North's missile development, and many experts believe it could have an intercontinental ballistic missile able to hit major American cities within a year or two.
It already has ballistic missiles that can strike Japan, a key ally and host to roughly 50,000 U.S. troops. It's very possible the North could attack Japan and U.S. bases there with nuclear, chemical or biological warheads.
20206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 8/11/17 , edited 8/11/17


It's been awhile since I looked at the numbers, but US alone can take on the entire Europe's army with the exception of the U.K. If you look at our Air Force, attack helicopters, tanks, and ground personnel. We match toe to toe with EU combined.
467 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
The U.S. will reign hell over North Korea. This isn't a cucked Barrack Hussein Obama administration anymore.

Fire and fury baby!
6570 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
How many more wars of choice can the United States afford to be involved in?

The so called "War on Terror" has been an ongoing disaster, why would military action against North Korea be any different?

And what happens if China ends up involved? Look at a map, the US would be fighting on their backdoor...

I cannot see that ending well...
467 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 8/11/17

TheZaphod wrote:

How many more wars of choice can the United States afford to be involved in?

The so called "War on Terror" has been an ongoing disaster, why would military action against North Korea be any different?

And what happens if China ends up involved? Look at a map, the US would be fighting on their backdoor...

I cannot see that ending well...


And how many nukes will you allow North Korea to continue to proliferate? Let's make sure we postpone and just wait and see.And then 50 years later, North Korea has every inconceivable type of missiles consisting from chemical to nuclear heads. And will and can fuck the world.

And now what?

Just because you are concerned about our current situation. This situation is just going to get worse and worse. No more fucking band-aids. FFS, this shit has been going for too long.
105873 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M / U.S.A. (mid-south)
Offline
Posted 8/11/17

TheZaphod wrote:

And what happens if China ends up involved? Look at a map, the US would be fighting on their backdoor...

I cannot see that ending well...

The best way to resolve the situation with North Korea might be to get China involved through some backdoom diplomacy.

This isn't the 1950's and I don't think they are that enthused about North Korea's leadership, either. They also have a trade relationship with the US that would make war between the two, even in another country, bad for both.

I would suggest that if taking action against North Korea is set, work out a backroom deal so that at some point they come into North Korea as if they are going to help out, the US and South Korean forces withdraw, but this time the Chinese forces seize control of North Korea. Let's face it, compared to the regime in North Korea, China's leadership would be like a breath of fresh air to the North Koreans, and certainly far more stable.

Even if such a deal couldn't be worked out, sowing seeds of doubt in the minds of the North Korean leadership that such a deal had been worked out could be beneficial.

6570 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
You are assuming the United States would actually win in a conflict with North Korea.

All China would need to do is supply it's client state with the military resources necessary to stalemate the United States until the political will to continue the campaign back home evaporates and it withdraws.

How much popular support is there amongst the American people for even more war?

The democrats are still burning W Bush at the stake over the "War on Terror",now imagine the body bags start appearing on the runway.

Congress would fold like a cheap suit and bail out 5 minutes later.

The US does not have the willpower necessary to succeed at war anymore. It is a paper tiger who's best days are long behind it.

A failed military campaign against North Korea would lay that reality bare for the entire world to see.

As for nuclear proliferation, Pakistan supplied the warhead technology to North Korea.

And Iran is well on it's way to producing it's own nuclear arsenal.

Why not invade them as well?




6616 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / Pacific North West
Online
Posted 8/11/17 , edited 8/11/17
A few thoughts...

Firstly, the missiles are supposed to target 20 miles off the coast of Guam which is international waters... there is not a country out there that doesn't test fire rockets or missiles into the ocean(well no countries that have navies).

IF and that's a big IF the missiles are thermo-nuclear or even just nuclear the fallout even from 20 miles off shore could be world changing. Just look at the ecological toll that is still present today from the Bikini island tests.

The issue with N, Korea and any kind of military action is we know they are capable of launching high yield nuclear warheads short range. This includes S. Korea, Japan, and possibly China. Seoul S. Korea is over 10m people alone.... 4 short or intermediate ranged missiles with high yield warheads could lead to the worlds highest/worst body county for one act of aggression. Whats more the 3 countries I have listed are all at-least relative allies of the US. So any retaliation the US may or may not take to N. Korea's aggression could potentially end in the genocide of one or more of our Allies.

My Hope is the Outrage in Beijing will bring the Chinese govt to take a hardliner stance against N. Korea. Economic sanctions from China would effectively kill N. Korea within 3-5years. Its not even up for debate that a war with a country that has nuclear capability is completely off the table and would/could wipe the planet devoid of life.


TheZaphod wrote:

You are assuming the United States would actually win in a conflict with North Korea.

All China would need to do is supply it's client state with the military resources necessary to stalemate the United States until the political will to continue the campaign back home evaporates and it withdraws.



The only issue with this theory is China doesn't want a nuclear armed N. Korea nor does it like its current leadership. The only benefit China gets from N. Korea is N. Korea is dependent on china for all its food/fuel/ect needs. The US buys more stuff from China then N. Korea... business wise N. Korea will get the boot.
467 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 8/11/17

TheZaphod wrote:

You are assuming the United States would actually win in a conflict with North Korea.

All China would need to do is supply it's client state with the military resources necessary to stalemate the United States until the political will to continue the campaign back home evaporates and it withdraws.

How much popular support is there amongst the American people for even more war?

The democrats are still burning W Bush at the stake over the "War on Terror",now imagine the body bags start appearing on the runway.

Congress would fold like a cheap suit and bail out 5 minutes later.

The US does not have the willpower necessary to succeed at war anymore. It is a paper tiger who's best days are long behind it.

A failed military campaign against North Korea would lay that reality bare for the entire world to see.

As for nuclear proliferation, Pakistan supplied the warhead technology to North Korea.

And Iran is well on it's way to producing it's own nuclear arsenal.

Why not invade them as well?






The difference?

Unlike Iran, North Korea is a rogue state unwilling to negotiate diplomacy.

That's the DIFFERENCE.

riverjustice just stated earlier that the U.S. military has more firepower and personnel than EU combined with the exception of the U.K. included and you are concerned with our ability to lose to North Korea in modern warfare.

12994 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 8/11/17 , edited 8/11/17

TheZaphod wrote:
The democrats are still burning W Bush at the stake over the "War on Terror"

i'm not sure this is really due to failed foreign policies or due to partisanship. given that they are more than willing to forgive a certain democrat for emphatically supporing the illegal war on iraq, it makes me think it's the latter, but i disgress...


TheZaphod wrote:
And Iran is well on it's way to producing it's own nuclear arsenal.
Why not invade them as well?

unlike N Korea, Iran isn't actually actively threatening other countries and releasing nukes/ missiles left and right.
they may hate the US, but are actually reasonable when it comes to foreign matters.

edit: N Korea is a liability to China. China also wants the North to stop with the missile launch and come to the table, but that's not happening
362 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Quebec, Canada
Offline
Posted 8/11/17
Of course it should... that's a stupid question.
60 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/12/17
Sorry if this is been posted I don't feel like reading through all this. But the title and OP first post is very misleading. North Korea isn't threating to fire "nukes" (nuclear warheads) they are saying they plan to test the missiles that could carry those warheads by firing them aggressively close to Guam and over the southern part of Japan.
20206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17

Grahdens wrote:

Sorry if this is been posted I don't feel like reading through all this. But the title and OP first post is very misleading. North Korea isn't threating to fire "nukes" (nuclear warheads) they are saying they plan to test the missiles that could carry those warheads by firing them aggressively close to Guam and over the southern part of Japan.


This has been addressed...

20206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 8/12/17

Grahdens wrote:

Sorry if this is been posted I don't feel like reading through all this. But the title and OP first post is very misleading. North Korea isn't threating to fire "nukes" (nuclear warheads) they are saying they plan to test the missiles that could carry those warheads by firing them aggressively close to Guam and over the southern part of Japan.


I recommend you read through all of thread. There are a lot of good responses from different users. If you want to skip and read the best, just read my responses.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.