Of course I mean Donald Trump stop talking sh*t and just kill that fat f*ck in North Korea. He's already called your bluff repeatedly so pony up. No ones asking for a full scale invasion just hit the research facilities and kill the fat a$$ and call it a day.
shareSo simple right? (Sarcasm)
share No the options are
1. Accept living in a world where North Korea has real and effective nuclear weapons
2. Do something about it.
Bluffing and threatning another bluffer isn't accomplishing either one.
In terms of 2 doing something about it you can
1. Pretend negotiations will be effective in disarming north korea.
This doesn't work as has been historically demonstrated. The DPRK has already decided it wants effective (usable) nuclear weapons and is willing to suffer great costs to get it. Economic sanctions have no effect on the DPRK as its demonstrated it has no problem watching its own population starve as long as its leader is clearly still eating well. Like Joseph stallin rather then feed its population north korea diverts its economy to strengthining its hermit military and proping up its leader. Sanctions actually help the DPRKs to indoctrinate its population even further by blaming the U.S. for its starvation problem. The only thing you can hope for is that you starve them enough to the point they can't develope weapons anymore but the DPRKs sponser nation won't allow that.
2. All out invasion. This would work but it would tie up the U.S. military to the point that it would have a difficult time dealing with other foreign threats. In most peoples opinion the U.S. has lost its ability to wage war on 2 fronts. The pentagons original mandate was to maintain the ability to wage war on 2 fronts. One decisive offensive war while maining a defensive front should another threat arise. The war would be very costly politically and financially to the U.S. Politically the US can't sustain a long term war and will get dragged down by its own populations voters. The opposite is true of north korea. North Korea's illusion that its always under threat from foreign powers makes for very cost effective propaganda. Its cheaper to rally support via the illusion that its always fending off foreign invasion then to actually gather support by other means.
I would tell China "your problem" and start seriously sanctioning them or even completely cutting off trade. They would make him relent or eliminate him.
share
I would tell China "your problem" and start seriously sanctioning them or even completely cutting off trade. They would make him relent or eliminate him.
NK dies without Chinese support and, while China may value "saving face", I don't think they would be willing to suffer a total loss of U.S. trade.
shareNK dies without Chinese support and, while China may value "saving face", I don't think they would be willing to suffer a total loss of U.S. trade.
other means. For example feeding its population.
The cost of course is greater for the South Koreans and the Japanese as the DPRK must target these nations in retalliation as it can't effectively reach the U.S. This option sucks as a regime that is facing an existential threat will thrash and claw every one around it as it collapses. The Chinese to north are moving their military to the southern border to prevent a refugee spill over into its own country(Some sponser nation). The south will of course be shelled with the possibly of facing nuclear bombardment.
3. A limited strike (by limited I mean one that has an exit stradegy not to invade or occupy but eliminate Kim and his current regime). This is difficult in that you must take out the regimes ability to retaliate and cripple its current nuclear research. This option is ugly but much less risky then a full out occupying invasion. The risk here of course is dealing with the regime that replaces Kim. The US is willing accept a communist/dictatorship government as has demonstrated for the last 50 years or so but it won't tolerate a nuclear regime that just threatens to nuke every one at the drop of a hat by a mad mad. A person who has no qualms about executing his own family members via artillery fire(The very same family members that helped place him in power) can't be trusted to behave when he gains nuclear weapons. Those family members that placed him in power were executed for suspicion of being spies for china. Yes China the very sponser state that is keeping the regime alive. Donald Trump is a chump but Kim is the very definition of a Mad Man.
I am advocating for option 3. All this talk of raining fire and ash is useless against a mad man like Kim. Just kill him already is all I'm saying.
North Korea isn't a threat to the U.S. and there are no American interests therefore no reason to care. Invading a foreign country because its leader called Trump a name is stupid. Bush invaded Iraq because his daddy was insulted and that became a fiasco we're still paying for. Billions of dollars wasted, lost lives and revived terrorism.
President Dotard (imaginative insult; A+ for creativity and accuracy) complained about warmongering and nation building of previous administrations. Why would he do the same exact thing? He also said that North Korea should be handled by South Korea. I'll add Japan and China. No reason for the U.S. to continue to be policeman to the world and react to every minor thing.
BTW, I'm pretty sure most people on Earth find the senile fool in the White House with the nuclear codes much more of a threat.
North Korea isn't a threat to the U.S. and there are no American interests therefore no reason to care. Invading a foreign country because its leader called Trump a name is stupid. Bush invaded Iraq because his daddy was insulted and that became a fiasco we're still paying for. Billions of dollars wasted, lost lives and revived terrorism.
President Dotard (imaginative insult; A+ for creativity and accuracy) complained about warmongering and nation building of previous administrations. Why would he do the same exact thing? He also said that North Korea should be handled by South Korea. I'll add Japan and China. No reason for the U.S. to continue to be policeman to the world and react to every minor thing.
BTW, I'm pretty sure most people on Earth find the senile fool in the White House with the nuclear codes much more of a threat
"The U.S. Doesn't activly engage in offensively threatning behav"
It does all the time. U.S. invaded multiple nations. U.S. is the only country to deploy the atomic bomb during war. Nothing peaceful about the U.S. which has been at war 93% of the time since 1776. Most military operations since WW2 have been started by the U.S. A 2014 International Gallup poll of 68 countries found the U.S. was the #1 threat to world peace.
"Bush invaded Iraq cause stupid intel was reported that he was working on chemical and nerve agent "
Bull. Many people knew there were no weapons including myself. Bush wanted free oil. He said the oil would pay for the war which it didn't. Taxpayers did and his friends became rich rebuilding after U.S. bombs destroyed the country. Those bombs also had to be replaced. More billions made. Welcome to the military-industrial-complex that Eisenhower warned about. People who make money when there's war and find an excuse to start one. When the cold war ended and their profit was threatened, new enemies needed to be found. Osama Bin-Laden warned that the U.S. would find an excuse to invade Iran in order to steal the oil and he was proven right which did wonders for his recruitment efforts.
"North Korea admits and demonstrates its nuclear capability while threatning to use them."
His missiles can reach 600 miles. The U.S. is 6,000 miles away. His missile technology is many years away from being a threat. No evidence they can make the A-bomb small enough to fit on a missile nor do they have tech to create long range missiles and prevent burn-up in upper atmosphere. He's afraid of ending up like Hussein or Khaddafi and wants them as a deterrent. Trump's name-calling and bullying aren't helping.
"no qualms about killing his own family..."
Family thought Jr was a pushover and could overthrow him. They were wrong.
"... and starving his own people."
1995 mass floods destroyed crops leading to famine. True, government wasn't equipped to feed everyone. Since then, people are allowed to run small businesses while the government looks the other way which allows them to make money and be more self sufficient since they don't want to be fully dependent on government again. Middle and upper-classes have been growing in the country because of entrepreneurship.
"The Non Poliferation Treaty is at stake."
If you're concerned about nuclear weapons getting into the wrong hands then you should be concerned about Trump defunding the Dept of Energy which monitors nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists, nuclear waste polluting our water, etc.
"an american problem leaving this to weaker nations like Japan and South Korea (who want help dposing this nut)"
But, close NK allies like China and Russian don't. And neither of them is weak.
"If your a peace loving progressive..."
No. I just don't buy the BS that they're selling. The U.S. gov. usually creates some lie or exaggeration to start yet another war. BTW, Jong Un's grandfather and his father put a government structure in place that would survive even if Jung Un was killed.
Realize there are more ways to reaching a solution besides militarily.
"I think your trolling at this point. "
Nope. Many people not comfortable with his having the nuclear codes.
Family thought Jr was a pushover and could overthrow him. They were wrong.[/quote] His own family is who put Jr in charge cause they trusted him but Jr saw them as a threat. They were wrong to trust him.Bullshit. I'm more converned about the sissy marry ontop of the DPRK finally getting his hands on a nuke.
[quote]Middle and upper-classes have been growing in the country because of entrepreneurship.[/quote] What middle and upperclass. Every one is starving except the few elite get your progragandized ass out of pyong yang and look at the country.
[quote]you should be concerned about Trump defunding the Dept of Energy which monitors nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists, nuclear waste polluting our water, etc.
"His own family is who put Jr in charge"
His daddy did, anyway. His uncle had a high position in government. He and others in government were killed so that sounds like a possible coup attempt or at least Jung-un found them to be a threat to his power. His half-brother was speaking out against him.
Dictators do things like that. Look at Putin. Same crap since governments began.
"Every one is starving except the few elite"
You need to update your propaganda source. "...many commentators rely on older information about countries and make assumptions before realizing that changes are underway..." This is a balanced(the good & bad) article from Forbes about modern day NK:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2017/06/01/north-korea-experiments-with-freer-markets/#1bf6db08f4ae
"I'm more converned about the sissy marry ontop of the DPRK finally getting his hands on a nuke."
It's common knowledge that terrorists getting their hands on a dirty bomb and sneaking it into a city is a much greater threat.
It seems you willingly drank the Kool-aid against the NK. Sorry, I'm not manipulated as easily.
"Nothing else has worked."
Not true. Former Jimmy Carter made accomplishments when he was there. Even Trump said to send in Dennis Rodman. Obviously, the two men have a rapport. Either him or Carter, again.
"stop acting like he's a bigger threat then that bloated blowfish"
NK is a tiny country with a minuscule army, minuscule economy and 6,423 miles away. It's like an elephant being bothered by an ant on the ground.
"grandfathers jung's second choice can be had."
Who's this? And why would he/she be any different?
"They won't waste resources on their rouge puppet state. "
And Trump is Putin's puppet. He won 't invade unless Putin allows him too, anyway.
I actually agreed with Trump against nation building and warmongering. That senile old man has not met a campaign promise that he can keep.
You need to update your propaganda source.[/quote]
That same forbes article shows their GDP at 16 billion. Thats like what 640 per person Stop insulting my intelligence.
[quote]
And Trump is Putin's puppet. He won 't invade unless Putin allows him too, anyway.[/quote]
Your to far gone in terms of influence. I can't argue with your tin foil hat theories.
[quote]
I actually agreed with Trump against nation building and warmongering. That senile old man has not met a campaign promise that he can keep.
"That same forbes article shows their GDP at 16 billion. Thats like what 640 per person Stop insulting my intelligence."
Source is the CIA:
GDP (purchasing power parity): $40 billion (2015 est.)
GDP (official exchange rate): $28 billion (2013 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP): $1,700 (2015 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-factbook/geos/kn.html
Your opinion vs. CIA facts. You lose.
"Your to far gone in terms of influence."
It's not about influence, but blackmail. Trump fears information that Putin could release.
"We can't afford to let west coast city go up in ash because progrressives like you pretended their wasn't a growing thread."
West Coast is filled with progressives. Only growing threat is Trump's increasing infantile behavior. Obviously, Trump didn't have the right temperament to be president after all.
"West Coast is filled with progressives. Only growing threat is Trump's increasing infantile behavior. Obviously, Trump didn't have the right temperament to be president after all."
"Your opinion vs CIA facts, you loose"
Did you forget it was your own forbes article you tried to quote that the DPRK is opening up to free markets that reported their GDP was at 16 million. Why don't you try read the fuc*ng articles you cite next time. And you talk about propaganda so much I'm really suprised to see you quoted the CIA. And for that matter does $1700 per person yearly sound sound like a country thats not starving? Even when you shop around for sources to back up your argument your still come up with an impoverished nation.
"Only growing threat is Trump's increasing infantile behavior. Obviously, Trump didn't have the right temperament to be president after all."
I haven't disagreed with you on this point at all so why do you keep brining him up?
"That same forbes article shows their GDP at 16 billion. Thats like what 640 per person Stop insulting my intelligence."
Obviously, you didn't believe the Forbes article which is why I gave you the CIA link.
"...sound like a country thats not starving?"
You're really not aware that the cost of living in the NK and US are different? Even the cost of living of different states within the U.S. is different.
"why do you keep brining him up?"
Because you don't appear to know that Trump's threats of warfare and childish taunts are not helping the situation.
"Obviously, you didn't believe the Forbes article which is why I gave you the CIA link."
The forbes article is what said the DPRK was at 16 billion GDP. To which my reply was "you really think 16 billion" which came out to $640 perperson was not a starving country of 25 million people? Your an ass hat. What world do you live in where an idiot can make a claim then try to turn the argument around y refuting their own source. The forbes article belongs to you not me jackass.
"You're really not aware that the cost of living in the NK and US are different? Even the cost of living of different states within the U.S. is different. "
Your really not aware of what "Purchasing Power Parity" means even though its in the CIA factbook measure you cited. Read up on economics, world history, and maby a math lesson or two could help you not look like an absolute fool when you make crazy arguments. Its ok to be wrong in your opinions but at least try to get the facts straight. And try to stop shooting yourself in the foot by being ignorant of what your own sources are really saying. Lets try this again. North Koreas GDP(PPP) is 40 billion as of 2015. divided by 25 million people that comes out to 1600 per person per year. I make that in a week. Even at purchase power parity you not achieving your goal. I'm just wondering what is motivating you to be so wrong? Are you trying to save face by refusing to admit your error, Or do you value your erroneous beliefs so much that you prefer to ignore reality.
Putins gonna do nothing more then try to broker a cease fire like they always do when the shit hits the fan.
It does all the time. U.S. invaded multiple nations. U.S. is the only country to deploy the atomic bomb during war. Nothing peaceful about the U.S. which has been at war 93% of the time since 1776. Most military operations since WW2 have been started by the U.S. A 2014 International Gallup poll of 68 countries found the U.S. was the #1 threat to world peace.
that was over 50 years ago and were pretty close with the nation that was attacked now. Europe was the real villian of the 20th centruary stop projected your nonsense on us. 68% of those polled are clearly listing their frustration with their lack of influence over the last remaining super power. During the cold war that percentage was 50 hated russia half hated the US with russia gone who's left to hate.
Osama Bin-Laden warned that the U.S. would find an excuse to invade Iran in order to steal the oil and he was proven right which did wonders for his recruitment efforts.
"that was over 50 years ago"
Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.
"Europe was the real villian of the 20th centruary"
France, Germany, Britain, Spain, former Soviet Union and The United States are notoriously imperialistic.
"During the cold war that percentage was 50 hated russia half hated the US with russia"
Source? BTW, gallup poll I referred was re: to militarism and anti-world peace, not being hated which is a non sequitur.
"pulling out of mogadishu and iraq is what created recruitment for Osama Bin ladin."
You're confusing terrorist organizations. Not all the same. Al-Quaida's(Bin-ladin) increased membership (which had been falling) after the Iraq invasion. BTW, U.S. empowered Bin-Ladin to fight the Soviets who had invaded Afghanistan.
Bush purposely destroyed Iraq's infrastructure including the power Hussein's Baathists group held in the military and government. Those Baathists former military, etc. became ISIL which even Al-Quaida considers too extreme.
"muslims attack every one including themselves"
That's not true. They've been attacking each other for centuries. But, they didn't start attacking the U.S. and Europe until after the former Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Muslims worldwide joined the "Mujahideen" to fight them and the U.S. supported them against the Soviets. A part of the Mujahideen morphed into the Taliban. Al-Quaeda then formed.
"Incase you also forgotten Iraq wasn't attacked till after 9/11."
I remember because Bush lied and said that Hussein had something to do with 9/11. Hussein was mainly secular and the terrorist groups hated him for it. He had nothing to do with 9/11.
"according to CNNs own cited experts"
I heard the same nonsense and am disappointed in their yellow journalism. NK has a 2 stage IBM, not the 3 stage IBM that's needed. Miniaturizing atomic bombs aren't so simple and they need to be able to prevent the rocket from burning up at reentry. Years away.
Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it.[/quote]
Yea real cute comming from some one stuck in the last century that ignored both world wars were started in Europe.
[quote]"During the cold war that percentage was 50 hated russia half hated the US with russia"[/quote]
It was one of Madeleine Albright's quote in response to reports of anti US
[quote]That's not true. They've been attacking each other for centuries. But, they didn't start attacking the U.S. and Europe until after the former Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Muslims worldwide joined the "Mujahideen" to fight them and the U.S. supported them against the Soviets. A part of the Mujahideen morphed into the Taliban. Al-Quaeda then formed.[/quote]
And that contradicts my statement how? And your missing the point entirely. Al Quada grew in rank after the pull out from mogadishu. The U.S. was called a paper tiger by Osama who seemed ignorant that the US has two party system.
[quote]Bush purposely destroyed Iraq's infrastructure including the power Hussein's Baathists group held in the military and government. Those Baathists former military, etc. became ISIL which even Al-Quaida considers too extreme. [/quote]
And bush is an idiot we arn't debating that but if saddam didn't have weapons why did he keep kicking inspectors out he made it real easy for his nation to be invaded by not compling and being confrontational. Like what was the point of that.
[quote]I remember because Bush lied and said that Hussein had something to do with 9/11. Hussein was mainly secular and the terrorist groups hated him for it. He had nothing to do with 9/11.[/quote]
Is this a counterpoint how is this related to my statement?
[quote]
I heard the same nonsense and am disappointed in their yellow journalism.
"both world wars were started in Europe."
There were more wars and military actions than WW1 & WW2 which the United States was involved in along with European countries.
"It was one of Madeleine Albright's quote in response to reports of anti US "
A personal opinion isn't a credible rebuttal to an international gallup poll.
"And that contradicts my statement how?"
You wrote that they were attacking EVERYONE which is clearly untrue.
"And your missing the point entirely."
No, I'm not so let me further clarify. I'm glad you admit Bush was an idiot because he was repeatedly warned that attacking Iraq would create a quagmire making it impossible for Amercian soldiers to pull out. And we're still there. The problem is that we don't live there so they can wait us out.
I blame the quagmire on Bush. Shifting the blame to Obama is nonsensical. Your plan appears to be to keep American troops in Iraq forever. Stupid plan.
"if saddam didn't have weapons..."
Of course, the U.S. knew he didn't have WMD (already proven) and knew exactly which weapons he did have because the U.S. had given him some during the Iraq-Iranian War. He was an ally.
He invited the inspectors back into the country, but had wanted sanctions removed. Bush started the war despite the inspectors' report because it was about oil.
"Is this a counterpoint how is this related to my statement?"
You obviously don't understand how propaganda works. Lies were created in order to get Americans to support the Iraq invasion.
"There were more wars and military actions than WW1 & WW2 which the United States was involved in along with European countries."
Those had the greatest casualties.
"You obviously don't understand how propaganda works. Lies were created in order to get Americans to support the Iraq invasion."
Why cause I'm not bying yours?
"You wrote that they were attacking EVERYONE which is clearly untrue. "
You haven't been ignorning world history for the past 15 hundred years apparently.
"Those had the greatest casualties."
Agreed. 90,000β146,000 deaths in Hiroshima and 39,000β80,000 in Nagasaki.
"Why cause I'm not bying yours?"
Are you still hoping those WMD are found? LOL.
Present examples of Muslim terrorist groups attacking Americans during the 1700s-1960.
"Agreed. 90,000β146,000 deaths in Hiroshima and 39,000β80,000 in Nagasaki."
Why are you flat out ignoring the millions of deaths in the European theater which is nearly 3 orders of magnitude higher. You repeatedly grasp at straws in your argument but fail to realize your credibility suffers every time.
"Are you still hoping those WMD are found? LOL"
What makes you think i'm looking.
"Present examples of Muslim terrorist groups attacking Americans during the 1700s-1960."
What for. Your just a moron who will ignore the source. And why are you trying to isolate this to attacks just attacks concerning the united states. I don't expect you to recognize the violence that stems from islam. I just expect you to have the intelligene to recognize that muslim violence isn't just isolated to the USA. Muslims have a history of attacking alot of people. But of course my expectations of you are pretty nil as you'll of course bring up some obscure disproportionate argument about that one time the US stood its ground and attacked another country while ignoreing the circumstances and magnitude of the world stage. Even now your fail to realize the US was a pacifiest nation that got dragged into world war I and iI during the early last century that then got dragged into a containment cold war during the later half of the century. America's late involvment in the war efforts last century are why the nation of farmers became a superpower. Europe was devistated at the time. I just ask you to put your leftiest blind fold off and look at world history before you like you said your self in a foolish formulaic response "repeat it" As I've already said before my expectations for you are pretty danm low right aout now.
"Why are you flat out ignoring the millions of deaths in the European theater which is nearly 3 orders of magnitude higher."
Why are you ignoring that the U.S. exploded TWO atomic bombs on citizens?
"What makes you think i'm looking."
You drank the Kool-aid.
"What for."
Why can't you just admit you're not able to name any examples of Muslim terrorism against the U.S. during the 1700-1960 so therefore you're wrong.
"Why are you ignoring that the U.S. exploded TWO atomic bombs on citizens?"
I'm not but you've clearly ignored the scale of the two.
"You drank the Kool-aid. "
You don't know sh*t about my motives or history. All you do is accuse and make bad inferences.
"Why can't you just admit you're not able to name any examples of Muslim terrorism against the U.S. during the 1700-1960 so therefore you're wrong."
Because you'll find an excuse to dismiss anything I find so I refuse to participate in your wild goose chase which has no purpose but to distract from the argument.
Back to original subject:
Trump said he was against nation building and war. Why would you want him to break both campaign promises?
Iraq is a quagmire that the U.S. can't escape. Why would you want to create another in N.K.?
Why do you assume that attacking the N.K. won't degenerate into a catastrophic mess with hundreds of thousands in both N.K. and S.K. dying since they have weapons pointing at each other?
Russia has major financial investments in the N.K. Do you really believe they will remain silent?
Who do you want to replace Jong-Un? And if there is an election and the people vote for Jong-Un, do you believe their decision should be honored?
"Iraq is a quagmire that the U.S. can't escape. Why would you want to create another in N.K.?"
The US is not in Iraq. There only there in an advisory and training role.
"Why do you assume that attacking the N.K. won't degenerate into a catastrophic mess with hundreds of thousands in both N.K. and S.K. dying since they have weapons pointing at each other?"
Thats a small number compared to the millions that will die in a nuclear war.
"Who do you want to replace Jong-Un? And if there is an election and the people vote for Jong-Un, do you believe their decision should be honored?"
It won't matter. If he's making nuclear threat I say kill the bastard already.
"Russia has major financial investments in the N.K. Do you really believe they will remain silent?"
Are you scared of the russians now?
"There only there in an advisory and training role. "
American troops are still in Iraq and a few were killed in August. Fewer now because of Obama.
"It won't matter."
It always matter. One has to be certain that the consequences aren't worst than the problem. Koreans can vote his widow or sibling as leader until his son is old enough to take over. They can happily continue their nukes program.
"Are you scared of the russians now?"
Just pointing out a consequence(see above) could be war with Russia. You're terrified of NK's puny atomic bomb which can't reach the U.S., but unconcerned about the 7,300 Russian nukes which can.
"It always matter. One has to be certain that the consequences aren't worst than the problem. "
The same can be said about letting a rouge nation that is runing out of its few only friends develope nuclear weapons.
"Just pointing out a consequence(see above) could be war with Russia. You're terrified of NK's puny atomic bomb which can't reach the U.S., but unconcerned about the 7,300 Russian nukes which can."
The NK continues to demonstrate its ability and activly threatens the US. Russia knows the role of nuclear weapons in the scenario of mutually assured destruction. Notice how russia is just being critical of US policy rather then threatning the US.
Jong-un wants the nukes as a deterrent against ending up like Gaddafi or Hussein. A consequence of killing foreign leaders.
It wouldn't be a deterrent if he actually used them. Obviously we disagree, but I don't see the NK as a threat. I also don't see Trump attacking him unless he wants to start a war in the region.
Putin owns Trump so I doubt if he'll do anything much about Jong-un except call him childish names.
"Jong-un wants the nukes as a deterrent against ending up like Gaddafi or Hussein. A consequence of killing foreign leaders. "
If thats the case why is he always threatning to premptivly attack the U.S. Thats not how the doctrine of mutually assured destruction works. MAD is based on the threat of retaliation not on first strike.
"Obviously we disagree, but I don't see the NK as a threat"
Sounds like your the one making the nationalist mistake then. You underestimate the motives and capabilities of the DPRK.
" I also don't see Trump attacking him unless he wants to start a war in the region."
I doubt he wants to engage in a war the results in U.S. occupation of the DPRK. He and the pentagon would prefer a crippling attack that disables the DPRKs nuclear development but now it seems we will need to cripple the DRPKs military all together as South Korea and Japan will be proxy targets against the U.S. during retailiation. And there is no war to be started the north has always considered the US and the DPRK to be in a state of war as no peace treaty was signed. (I'm expecting the russians to step in eventually during the military campaign and offer to be an intermediary during treaty talks.) Thats what they tend to do as of the last few decades.
Trump was threatening Jong-un, but Jong-un was smart enough to know Trump was all talk. Jong-un is all talk too but you're not smart enough to know it.
Childish nonsense from two 6 year old mentalities.
"it seems we will need to cripple the DRPKs military all together"
That's called a war in the region. It'll tank the stock market and set-off a long overdue recession here. People usually vote the party out of office when there is a downturn in the economy. Good news for Democrats. I doubt if the Republicans would want to risk it.
Besides, how are the rich going to get their tax cut if you're spending money on war?
"Trump was threatening Jong-un, but Jong-un was smart enough to know Trump was all talk. Jong-un is all talk too but you're not smart enough to know it.
Childish nonsense from two 6 year old mentalities."
Kim Jong is now just threatning japan haven't you noticed.
"That's called a war in the region. It'll tank the stock market and set-off a long overdue recession here. People usually vote the party out of office when there is a downturn in the economy. Good news for Democrats. I doubt if the Republicans would want to risk it."
The GOP believes in national security above politics.
"Besides, how are the rich going to get their tax cut if you're spending money on war?"
Another Red herring, thats not even related to this discussion.
Iran will be able to restart its nuclear program thanks to Trump junking the agreement. He is also underfunding and understaffing the Dept of Energy which is responsible for keeping nukes out of the hands of terrorists.
"The GOP believes in national security above politics. "
Then why don't they support reasonable gun control laws?
"thats not even related to this discussion."
Of course it is. The reason they want to gut ACA is to get money for taxbreaks for the rich. Wars cost big money.
"A personal opinion isn't a credible rebuttal to an international gallup poll."
You asked for my source I gave it too you retro activly. It wasn't a rebuttel. And a gallop poll only shows the world hates the U.S. The majority opinion doesn't form truth. m
"I blame the quagmire on Bush. Shifting the blame to Obama is nonsensical. Your plan appears to be to keep American troops in Iraq forever. Stupid plan."
My plan? Who exactly is "your plan" you think your talking about?
"It wasn't a rebuttel."
Obviously, it was. And a very weak one.
"And a gallop poll only shows the world hates the U.S"
It sounds more like the world fears our government which is imperialistic and warmongering.
"My plan?"
Yes. You're the one crying about Obama sending American troops home instead of keeping them indefinitely in Iraq.
"Obviously, it was. And a very weak one."
Idiot that state wasmade before your argument was even made.
" Yes. You're the one crying about Obama sending American troops home instead of keeping them indefinitely in Iraq."
I never said that ass hat. I even acknowledged the war was a mistake. Your confused as to who your arguing with apparently.
You allow yourself to be easily manipulated by propaganda into wanting the U.S. to attack foreign countries and leaders. You made the mistake with Iraq by believing there were WMD and you're doing it again with North Korea.
I notice that Trump hasn't tweeted anything about NK since they said that Trump declared war and therefore NK can shoot down bombers. Trump's advisors probably told him to shut up since his tweets are irresponsible and endanger the lives of American pilots.
"You allow yourself to be easily manipulated by propaganda into wanting the U.S. to attack foreign countries and leaders. You made the mistake with Iraq by believing there were WMD and you're doing it again with North Korea. "
Why do you keep addressing me as if I attacked iraq. Wtf is your problem with reality?
"I notice that Trump hasn't tweeted anything about NK since they said that Trump declared war and therefore NK can shoot down bombers. Trump's advisors probably told him to shut up since his tweets are irresponsible and endanger the lives of American pilots."
Or maby he's being silent during the military build up is what you'd expect.
"Why do you keep addressing me as if I attacked iraq" Because you haven't learned from history.
"Or maby he's being silent during the military build up is what you'd expect."
I doubt it. He'd be bragging about putting together his really BIG, BIG, so very large army.
BTW, there are Puerto Ricans starving now. No food, water, electricity. People are dying because of Trump's total incompetence and/or bigotry. (You mentioned the people starving in N.K. during their floods.)
"BTW, there are Puerto Ricans starving now. No food, water, electricity. People are dying because of Trump's total incompetence and/or bigotry. (You mentioned the people starving in N.K. during their floods.) "
Trump is just a red hering to keep deflecting from the DPRK issue for you and puerto rico is a strawman. I never implied puerto rico should be left to starve.
And wtf dude I never said anything about NK starving because of or during a flood. Those are your words. Are you like autistic and don't recognize and remember your own writing? Somethings really wrong with you.
"And wtf dude I never said anything about NK starving because of or during a flood."
That's because you only believed the propaganda that the NK starvation was due to Jong-Un being mean. He may be, but the starvation was caused by flooding.
Just pointing out your hypocritical lack of criticism of Trump's failure to get aid to starving Americans in Puerto Rico.
Now, Trump is criticizing San Juan's mayor for asking for help because people are dying. Unbelievable!
"Just pointing out your hypocritical lack of criticism of Trump's failure to get aid to starving Americans in Puerto Rico."
This is what I'm talking about. You have this fantasy that I brought up any flooding what so ever and call me a hypocrite for these voices in your head. And again you have no clue as to scale your complaing about an Ant hill will ignoring the mountain in front of it.
I just have to accept that your not capable of rational conversation and live with it.
"Now, Trump is criticizing San Juan's mayor for asking for help because people are dying. Unbelievable!"
I don't even like trump so you can stop brining that red herring into the conversation.
Of course, you didn't bring up the flooding in NK because you don't know anything about them except propaganda. You made a comment about North Koreans starving because of their government, I just informed you the starvation was because of catastrophic flooding throughout the country.
"I don't even like trump"
Then why would you believe he would be able to get rid off Jong-un without turning it into a major crisis? Trump has literally been calling him names like kindergartners do.
Of course, you didn't bring up the flooding in NK because you don't know anything about them except propaganda.
The floods in NK weren't recent. You said the government was starving the people as if it were wilful. I only informed you as to the origin of the starvation. Of course, there are poor people in the NK. News flash! There are poor people in the U.S. too.
"a state that is poring all its resources into their military,"
LOL. If that's not the kettle calling the pot black...
"the military does one thing well and thats fight wars or military actions."
We haven't won recent wars like Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria. You have to have competent leadership which we don't have. Bad cabinet picks. Doesn't Trump fire someone every week?
You sound like a chicken hawk. Whose sons/daughters are you planning to send to be killed for a war that YOU want?
"The floods in NK weren't recent. You said the government was starving the people as if it were wilful. I only informed you as to the origin of the starvation. Of course, there are poor people in the NK. News flash! There are poor people in the U.S. too."
The DPRKs been starving for decades. Once again your taking things out of way out of scale. Your trying to construct the narrative that a man that willingly isolates his people and starves them in mass while he focuses all their economy on building up a broken military is morally equivalent to another fool who is botching relieve efforts in Puerto Rico. And your also trying to equate the small amount of impoverished people in america with the starving masses of the DPRK. Your lack proportion when attempting to deflect the argument at hand is a bold straw man. Not a compelling argument.
"Bad cabinet picks. Doesn't Trump fire someone every week?"
red herring fallacies don't make for a compelling argument.
"You sound like a chicken hawk. Whose sons/daughters are you planning to send to be killed for a war that YOU want?"
You sound like an osterich with your head in the sand that doesn't give a danm about the security of america yet the day a nuke goes off in the U.S. you'll probably try to blame that on the right instead of recognizing your own negligence in dealing nuclear threats. No body wants this war but its going to happen if the DPRK continues to try to develope nuclear weapons.
Both are pathetic cowards that are just all talk--no action-- for now.
It's like watching two toddlers fighting and name-calling each other in the playground. Except the scenario lacks an larger authority or such that probably doesn't want to bother slapping some sense out of these kids' nonsense. *cough*UN*cough*
Agreed but both are backing each other into a courner. I want to know the motivation behind that. Sooner or later some ones going to have to put up or shut up.
they are pushing each other to see how much crap they can talk without actually using a military option, but like you said eventually it will be put up or shut up because words are just that.
share