It really doesn't matter if it was lie or not. The argument was still used.
ummm, this time it is not a lie.
Okay I say there is no debate that if there's a preemptive strike there's going to be bloodbath on the Korean peninsula.
You're missing the other half of that argument. If Kim gets his ICBMs there is just as likely to be a bloodbath in SF or LA.
So what you're saying is that we don't have all the facts regarding this subject. This contradicts what you just said earlier.
No, that is not what I said.
The point is, that you just want to put any decision off. But we've been doing that for decades in the hope that things will improve and that has shown itself to be a delusion rather than a hope. Kim is now on the verge of being able to move the site of a potential conflict from the Korean peninsula to San Francisco or Los Angeles. This is and always has been a Korean problem; I say let's keep it there.
It is not a given that an aggressive tactic now will cause him to even try to nuke Seoul; and if he does, it is not a given that he would be successful. His artillery threat is what it has always been; he can mostly do a lot of property damage. His artillery tubes would be silenced pretty quickly if he went that route. Remember, nobody's calling for an invasion of the north.
"Good genes, very good genes, Ok, very smart, the Wharton School of finance, very good, very smart."