• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
777222LR
Topic Author
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 2:19 am

Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:56 am

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/politics/north-korea-considering-guam-strike-trump/index.html

The language he uses, is that of a dictator like North Korea's leader. We've not had a sitting US president threaten "Nuclear War" with North Korea, or any other country since WWII with Japan. This is dangerous rhetoric, and one beneath a US president. He sounds like the North Korean leader, if we take a moment to step back and look at the big picture. I know he doesn't directly say, "Nuclear War," but does anyone have any reason to think he means otherwise? To me it's pretty clear.

What, if any power does anyone have to stop Donald Trump from doing so? This makes me so uneasy, and I honestly feared we'd come to this moment. He's irrational, uneducated on war, and refuses to listen to others regarding most things. For the first time, I can absolutely say, I have quite a bit of fear about our own president.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 5076
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:58 am

And North Korea has threatened to obliterate Guam. So it's all equal.

Doesn't make me particularly uneasy. I see this as a wedge tactic to try and force China to step in and deal with the North Korean problem once and for all.

China doesn't want a nuclear war. And it certainly doesn't want a war on its doorstep. Trump is playing on that.
 
coolian2
Posts: 2328
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:34 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:31 am

I'll believe Trump the second he gets some legislation passed.
Q300/ATR72-600/737-200/-300/-400/-700/-800/A320/767-200/-300/757-200/777-300ER/
747-200/-300/-400/ER/A340-300/A380-800/MD-83/CRJ-700/-900
 
af773atmsp
Posts: 2138
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:37 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:41 am

He also said he would lock up Hillary, build a wall and make Mexico pay for it, bring back coal jobs, "drain the swamp", and repeal and replace Obamacare. Those five off the top of my head are promises he didn't deliver, and perhaps there are more. Just like Kim Jong Un, he's more talk than actually doing, which is a good thing.
DC10-40,MD88,A319,A320,A332,717,722,733,737,738,752,ATR-72

SY, DL, FI, FL, BA, EI, NW, MG, DY, EZY, F9, WN

MSP, BOS, JFK, DCA, LAX, SAN, MCO, RSW, PIE, ATL, DTW, PSP, ORD, MDW, MKE, MCI, IND, NAS, KEF, LHR, MUC, OSL, BOO, CPH, HEL, BUD, AMS, EDI, DUB
 
User avatar
BobPatterson
Posts: 3198
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:18 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:48 am

In my opinion, the only thing that can prevent (within weeks or 2-3 months) a preemptive (non-nuclear) strike by the USA against North Korea, is if China moves in and takes total control of North Korea.

Compared to the "shock and awe" in Iraq, this will be orders of magnitude greater.

President Trump only needs to give the "GO" order. The planning has already been done (and is constantly ongoing).
Facts are fragile things. Treat them with care. Sources are important. Alternative facts do not exist.
 
seb146
Posts: 15554
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:48 am

I hope all those who think Trump is the great white savior to go be on the front lines. They love guns and death so much, it just makes sense....
You say Merry Christmas, I say All Holidays Matter
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:55 am

It would be a historic move, guaranteed to put Trump in the history books forever.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4245
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:25 am

seahawk wrote:
It would be a historic move, guaranteed to put Trump in the history books forever.


As the man responsible for hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths... sure.

And don't worry about it, war or no war, Trump will be in the history books. Probably not for the reasons you are hoping for.


That's what happens when you put an angry prepubescent teenager in charge of diplomacy. Trump is only able to escalate the war rhetoric using his primary school 150 words vocabulary (like the world has never seen before... for someone who loves using superlatives so much, you'd think he would know more than 2), as he has no idea what NK's endgame is, hasn't the faintest clue when it comes to geopolitics or international diplomacy, and has no regard for the vast population surrounding surrounding NK which will be on the direct line of fire when someone eventually gets trigger happy.

But they're foreigners living thousands of miles away, so they don't really count, right?

We have a perfect storm brewing... Kim Jong Un is doing the same he's always done, throwing fits and threatening the West to get attention and to use it to control an entire population. I credit him with the intelligence to understand that pulling the trigger would mean the end of his life, which he likes way too much to lose.
Until now, world leaders in the west have been able to read through that facade and leave the toddler get on with his fit, while maintaining a reasoned and pragmatic approach to prevent escalation into a war.

Except now, there's also a toddler in the white house, and worse, one with an overbearing ego who is trying to ward off utter failure and disgrace to his name... He even has a state-sponsored propaganda channel just like Kim!
He is unfortunately more than capable of starting a war to divert the masses' attention from the daily clusterf*#k that is his government and to try a rally a country behind him in war.
He'd rather send thousands of US soldiers to their unnecessary death, along with potentially an order of magnitude more civilians, just to make himself look better.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
JJJ
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:37 am

I think he just watched last GoT episode and the Targaryen rhetoric rubbed on him.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 6634
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:42 am

BobPatterson wrote:
President Trump only needs to give the "GO" order. The planning has already been done (and is constantly ongoing).


...while those plans for sure exist, i am pretty sure that it has a rather unattractive casualty estimate in it that probably exceeds that of a limited nuclear exchange. North Korea does have a smart military in the sense that they are well aware of their limitations and set up accordingly.

best regards
Thomas
Times are changing: 70 years ago the USA went to war to defeat the Nazis, now they elect them to run their country.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:16 am

And how, pray tell, does the Trumpanzee envision the elimination of 17.000 artillery tubes, all pointed towards Seoul? By laying to waste the entire northern part of the Korean peninsula with nuclear weapons? Has he ever heard of wind patterns? Where to you expect all that nuclear fall-out to go? I'll give you a hint: The winds are generally from the west (one of many reasons why the Warsaw Pact had serious issues using nuclear weapons in a conflict with NATO, as the fall-out would blow back in their faces), and to the immediate East of Korea you'll find an island nation called Japan. They've already suffered from two nuclear attacks, I'm rather certain they'd be highly miffed if subjected to a third.

But, then again, deploying intellectual capacity seems to be way outside the Trumpanzee's comfort zone.
From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:20 am

Take out the nuclear facilities in N.Korea while having some B-2s on standby in the airspace over the sea of Japan and if N. Korea retaliates in any way by attacking S. Korea, Japan or anyone else, well then it's time to end N. Korea. In that way N. Korea had the chance to do the right thing before retaliating.
 
TheF15Ace
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:27 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:25 am

787Driver wrote:
Take out the nuclear facilities in N.Korea while having some B-2s on standby in the airspace over the sea of Japan and if N. Korea retaliates in any way by attacking S. Korea, Japan or anyone else, well then it's time to end N. Korea. In that way N. Korea had the chance to do the right thing before retaliating.


Even if all 20 available B-2s along with other assets were deployed there is no way in hell they'll be able to stop N Korean retaliation. And once the bodies start piling up try not to act too shocked when South Koreans and Japanese who lost their entire families because of our war mongering start to blow themselves up in our cities.
 
agill
Posts: 978
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:49 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:26 am

787Driver wrote:
Take out the nuclear facilities in N.Korea while having some B-2s on standby in the airspace over the sea of Japan and if N. Korea retaliates in any way by attacking S. Korea, Japan or anyone else, well then it's time to end N. Korea. In that way N. Korea had the chance to do the right thing before retaliating.


So how would that work. You'd need to drop a fair amount of nukes on the borderzone to knock out all the thousands of NK artillery aimed at Seoul, and I doubt that the people in Seoul would like that prospekt much more than the firestorm of arillery. I guess you could try it conventionally, but then the NK army would have time to flatten Seoul.
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:36 am

agill wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Take out the nuclear facilities in N.Korea while having some B-2s on standby in the airspace over the sea of Japan and if N. Korea retaliates in any way by attacking S. Korea, Japan or anyone else, well then it's time to end N. Korea. In that way N. Korea had the chance to do the right thing before retaliating.


So how would that work. You'd need to drop a fair amount of nukes on the borderzone to knock out all the thousands of NK artillery aimed at Seoul, and I doubt that the people in Seoul would like that prospekt much more than the firestorm of arillery. I guess you could try it conventionally, but then the NK army would have time to flatten Seoul.


In a coordination with SK military. B2s would be armed with nuclear weapons and should not be used at the border. Possibly have some B52s on standby for the border region loaded with conventional bombs. B2s would be used for other parts of the country.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:39 am

A war, nuclear or not, is a non-starter. The regime will fight to the death, they have nothing to lose. So South Korea will be gone, Japan probably will sustain major damage. Granted America itself will ones again be out of the fire zone.
If America attacks North Korea, then that will result in millions of death and be sure it will take years to fight every North Korean, so also expect 100.000 US military to die or be wounded. Don't expect the rest of the world to contribute, why would they? Expect the world's attitude towards the US to change even more, so the fallout - not meaning the nuclear one - be great. Containment is the best strategy, they have threatened South Korea for that past 70 odd years, the North Korean regime has nothing to gain with starting a war or attacking Guam, they will be wiped out and they know it, they pay the ultimate price, the region will pay a very high price, the rest of the world pays a high price and America itself will pay a price.

China doesnot really control North Korea, suggesting China will solve this or even can solve this lives in a parallel universe. So I hope for a professional US military whom say: "well Mr. President, that is a nice suggestion, but neah, we think not". Especially when concerned with nuclear weapons.

So I am counting on you, the US soldier, to prevent this catastrophe. Congress does not do anything against this baboon. The world has become less safe and less stable with this latest rant.

787Driver wrote:
Take out the nuclear facilities in N.Korea while having some B-2s on standby in the airspace over the sea of Japan and if N. Korea retaliates in any way by attacking S. Korea, Japan or anyone else, well then it's time to end N. Korea. In that way N. Korea had the chance to do the right thing before retaliating.


We are talking about missiles, the mobile kind also deployed to the Chinese border. And are you prepared to go to war with China? They have a pact with North Korea, the same way the US has a pact with South Korea. So what kind of casualty tally are you prepared to have with this kind of attack? And how many may be Americans? With 20 B-2's you are not going to cut it, you are talking about an army of 1 million and we will not know how the population is going to react after dozens of years of indoctrination. Are you prepared to find out? And what exactly do you mean with: "it's time to end N. Korea."? Because in this case you could mean it quite literally.

Never sees to amaze me how some people have war on their mind when it comes to solving diplomatic problems. War should be the last resolve, not the first response.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:44 am

Dutchy wrote:

We are talking about missiles, the mobile kind also deployed to the Chinese border. And are you prepared to go to war with China? They have a pact with North Korea, the same way the US has a pact with South Korea. So what kind of casualty tally are you prepared to have with this kind of attack? And how many may be Americans? With 20 B-2's you are not going to cut it, you are talking about an army of 1 million and we will not know how the population is going to react after dozens of years of indoctrination. Are you prepared to find out? And what exactly do you mean with: "it's time to end N. Korea."? Because in this case you could mean it quite literally.

Never sees to amaze me how some people have war on their mind when it comes to solving diplomatic problems. War should be the last resolve, not the first response.


That's all about weighing the probability of what China will do. They didn't publicly say what they will do, but I'm sure China wants a full scale war with the US as much as the US wants a full scale war with China which isn't desirable for anyone.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:45 am

787Driver wrote:
agill wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Take out the nuclear facilities in N.Korea while having some B-2s on standby in the airspace over the sea of Japan and if N. Korea retaliates in any way by attacking S. Korea, Japan or anyone else, well then it's time to end N. Korea. In that way N. Korea had the chance to do the right thing before retaliating.


So how would that work. You'd need to drop a fair amount of nukes on the borderzone to knock out all the thousands of NK artillery aimed at Seoul, and I doubt that the people in Seoul would like that prospekt much more than the firestorm of arillery. I guess you could try it conventionally, but then the NK army would have time to flatten Seoul.


In a coordination with SK military. B2s would be armed with nuclear weapons and should not be used at the border. Possibly have some B52s on standby for the border region loaded with conventional bombs. B2s would be used for other parts of the country.


So how many casualties are you prepared to endure? How many North Korean? (or don't you mind those?), Chinese?, South Korean (perhaps also expendable?), Japanese (don't mind those?) and Americans. 1 million? And why would the South Koreans help in such an endeavor? They will pay a very high price. Don't see that happening.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:48 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
agill wrote:

So how would that work. You'd need to drop a fair amount of nukes on the borderzone to knock out all the thousands of NK artillery aimed at Seoul, and I doubt that the people in Seoul would like that prospekt much more than the firestorm of arillery. I guess you could try it conventionally, but then the NK army would have time to flatten Seoul.


In a coordination with SK military. B2s would be armed with nuclear weapons and should not be used at the border. Possibly have some B52s on standby for the border region loaded with conventional bombs. B2s would be used for other parts of the country.


So how many casualties are you prepared to endure? How many North Korean? (or don't you mind those?), Chinese?, South Korean (perhaps also expendable?), Japanese (don't mind those?) and Americans. 1 million? And why would the South Koreans help in such an endeavor? They will pay a very high price. Don't see that happening.


Bizarre question. Nobody wants any casualties, but if there's going to be casualties, of course the US would rather want the casualties to be overseas rather than in the US.

Why SK would help? Well if NK decided to retaliate after their nuclear facilities were taken out, I'm quite convinced that SK would not just surrender but fight back.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:50 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

We are talking about missiles, the mobile kind also deployed to the Chinese border. And are you prepared to go to war with China? They have a pact with North Korea, the same way the US has a pact with South Korea. So what kind of casualty tally are you prepared to have with this kind of attack? And how many may be Americans? With 20 B-2's you are not going to cut it, you are talking about an army of 1 million and we will not know how the population is going to react after dozens of years of indoctrination. Are you prepared to find out? And what exactly do you mean with: "it's time to end N. Korea."? Because in this case you could mean it quite literally.

Never sees to amaze me how some people have war on their mind when it comes to solving diplomatic problems. War should be the last resolve, not the first response.


That's all about weighing the probability of what China will do. They didn't publicly say what they will do, but I'm sure China wants a full scale war with the US as much as the US wants a full scale war with China which isn't desirable for anyone.


Exactly, so why would you advocate that the US has a chance to start one? If China honors its commitment, they will fight right along the North Koreans side. China has shown it will take what it wants, despites US wishes, just look at what is happening in the South China sea. China doesn't welcome a pro-American regime at its border, likewise, America didn't like Cuba becoming communist. So why are you so sure that China will not react to an American attack?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:53 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

We are talking about missiles, the mobile kind also deployed to the Chinese border. And are you prepared to go to war with China? They have a pact with North Korea, the same way the US has a pact with South Korea. So what kind of casualty tally are you prepared to have with this kind of attack? And how many may be Americans? With 20 B-2's you are not going to cut it, you are talking about an army of 1 million and we will not know how the population is going to react after dozens of years of indoctrination. Are you prepared to find out? And what exactly do you mean with: "it's time to end N. Korea."? Because in this case you could mean it quite literally.

Never sees to amaze me how some people have war on their mind when it comes to solving diplomatic problems. War should be the last resolve, not the first response.


That's all about weighing the probability of what China will do. They didn't publicly say what they will do, but I'm sure China wants a full scale war with the US as much as the US wants a full scale war with China which isn't desirable for anyone.


Exactly, so why would you advocate that the US has a chance to start one? If China honors its commitment, they will fight right along the North Koreans side. China has shown it will take what it wants, despites US wishes, just look at what is happening in the South China sea. China doesn't welcome a pro-American regime at its border, likewise, America didn't like Cuba becoming communist. So why are you so sure that China will not react to an American attack?


I calculate their reaction to be different than you do. But in the end we are both speculating. The fact that they agreed to the strong sanctions against NK is saying that they are tired of NK acting the way they do.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:54 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

In a coordination with SK military. B2s would be armed with nuclear weapons and should not be used at the border. Possibly have some B52s on standby for the border region loaded with conventional bombs. B2s would be used for other parts of the country.


So how many casualties are you prepared to endure? How many North Korean? (or don't you mind those?), Chinese?, South Korean (perhaps also expendable?), Japanese (don't mind those?) and Americans. 1 million? And why would the South Koreans help in such an endeavor? They will pay a very high price. Don't see that happening.


Bizarre question. Nobody wants any casualties, but if there's going to be casualties, of course the US would rather want the casualties to be overseas rather than in the US.

Why SK would help? Well if NK decided to retaliate after their nuclear facilities were taken out, I'm quite convinced that SK would not just surrender but fight back.


Why is it a bizarre question? Starting a war with North Korea will have a major impact and there will be massive loss of life.

So yes, if I understand you correctly, you would take out North Korean nuclear facilities, you would accept the North Koreans to retaliate and therefore force the South Koreans in a war with its northern neighbor. Do you think South Korean should have any say in this at all? Or should they be told and they should just hope for the best when America does his thing?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:58 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

So how many casualties are you prepared to endure? How many North Korean? (or don't you mind those?), Chinese?, South Korean (perhaps also expendable?), Japanese (don't mind those?) and Americans. 1 million? And why would the South Koreans help in such an endeavor? They will pay a very high price. Don't see that happening.


Bizarre question. Nobody wants any casualties, but if there's going to be casualties, of course the US would rather want the casualties to be overseas rather than in the US.

Why SK would help? Well if NK decided to retaliate after their nuclear facilities were taken out, I'm quite convinced that SK would not just surrender but fight back.


Why is it a bizarre question? Starting a war with North Korea will have a major impact and there will be massive loss of life.

So yes, if I understand you correctly, you would take out North Korean nuclear facilities, you would accept the North Koreans to retaliate and therefore force the South Koreans in a war with its northern neighbor. Do you think South Korean should have any say in this at all? Or should they be told and they should just hope for the best when America does his thing?


Of course it will be. But it's bizarre because if we let NK have their ICBM, they could potentially fire them at major cities in the US and with a leader like Kim Jong Un, it would be a realistic scenario that it could happen. So I could ask you in return; how many people should die outside the Korean peninsula before you think it's worth handling the problem?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:59 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

That's all about weighing the probability of what China will do. They didn't publicly say what they will do, but I'm sure China wants a full scale war with the US as much as the US wants a full scale war with China which isn't desirable for anyone.


Exactly, so why would you advocate that the US has a chance to start one? If China honors its commitment, they will fight right along the North Koreans side. China has shown it will take what it wants, despites US wishes, just look at what is happening in the South China sea. China doesn't welcome a pro-American regime at its border, likewise, America didn't like Cuba becoming communist. So why are you so sure that China will not react to an American attack?


I calculate their reaction to be different than you do. But in the end we are both speculating. The fact that they agreed to the strong sanctions against NK is saying that they are tired of NK acting the way they do.


So? That does not mean that they condone a pro-American regime in reunited Korea. Sure, nobody can be sure what the reaction of China will be, but are you willing to take the real chance of war with China? I am not, and since the other option is containment without the loss of life and without a possibility of triggering a global war, I will take the second option. The North Korean regime will collapse, perhaps in 5 years, perhaps in 10 years, perhaps in 25 years, perhaps in 50 years, but it will.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:04 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Exactly, so why would you advocate that the US has a chance to start one? If China honors its commitment, they will fight right along the North Koreans side. China has shown it will take what it wants, despites US wishes, just look at what is happening in the South China sea. China doesn't welcome a pro-American regime at its border, likewise, America didn't like Cuba becoming communist. So why are you so sure that China will not react to an American attack?


I calculate their reaction to be different than you do. But in the end we are both speculating. The fact that they agreed to the strong sanctions against NK is saying that they are tired of NK acting the way they do.


So? That does not mean that they condone a pro-American regime in reunited Korea. Sure, nobody can be sure what the reaction of China will be, but are you willing to take the real chance of war with China? I am not, and since the other option is containment without the loss of life and without a possibility of triggering a global war, I will take the second option. The North Korean regime will collapse, perhaps in 5 years, perhaps in 10 years, perhaps in 25 years, perhaps in 50 years, but it will.


If the attack on NK is agreed to with China, then it could work. Agreement could be that China gets to choose the new leader of the country and it will not end with a reunited Korea that is pro US.

But yes, it's worth taking the risk if the alternative is a nuke detonating in the middle of LA, Chicago, San Francisco etc.
Are you willing to take the risk of trusting Kim Jong Un blindly? I'm not.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:06 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

Bizarre question. Nobody wants any casualties, but if there's going to be casualties, of course the US would rather want the casualties to be overseas rather than in the US.

Why SK would help? Well if NK decided to retaliate after their nuclear facilities were taken out, I'm quite convinced that SK would not just surrender but fight back.


Why is it a bizarre question? Starting a war with North Korea will have a major impact and there will be massive loss of life.

So yes, if I understand you correctly, you would take out North Korean nuclear facilities, you would accept the North Koreans to retaliate and therefore force the South Koreans in a war with its northern neighbor. Do you think South Korean should have any say in this at all? Or should they be told and they should just hope for the best when America does his thing?


Of course it will be. But it's bizarre because if we let NK have their ICBM, they could potentially fire them at major cities in the US and with a leader like Kim Jong Un, it would be a realistic scenario that it could happen. So I could ask you in return; how many people should die outside the Korean peninsula before you think it's worth handling the problem?


So it was no trigger that NK had nuclear weapons, it was no trigger that NK had medium range missiles, but now they have a possibility to reach the old mighty USofA, it is time to intervene with the loss of millions of lives on the Korean peninsula and its immediate surroundings? If North Korea attacks America, then I will support an attack on North Korea, not before.

The North Korean regime has no reason to attack America, it will be a suicide mission on the North Korean regime part. It will react in self-defense, but will not shoot in an aggressive way, MNKAD: Mutrual North Korean Assured Destruction.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:10 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Why is it a bizarre question? Starting a war with North Korea will have a major impact and there will be massive loss of life.

So yes, if I understand you correctly, you would take out North Korean nuclear facilities, you would accept the North Koreans to retaliate and therefore force the South Koreans in a war with its northern neighbor. Do you think South Korean should have any say in this at all? Or should they be told and they should just hope for the best when America does his thing?


Of course it will be. But it's bizarre because if we let NK have their ICBM, they could potentially fire them at major cities in the US and with a leader like Kim Jong Un, it would be a realistic scenario that it could happen. So I could ask you in return; how many people should die outside the Korean peninsula before you think it's worth handling the problem?


So it was no trigger that NK had nuclear weapons, it was no trigger that NK had medium range missiles, but now they have a possibility to reach the old mighty USofA, it is time to intervene with the loss of millions of lives on the Korean peninsula and its immediate surroundings? If North Korea attacks America, then I will support an attack on North Korea, not before.

The North Korean regime has no reason to attack America, it will be a suicide mission on the North Korean regime part. It will react in self-defense, but will not shoot in an aggressive way, MNKAD: Mutrual North Korean Assured Destruction.


Of course it wasn't a trigger. Would it be a trigger for the Netherlands to risk a war with a south american country if say Curacao was invaded? Possibly risking thousands of dutch soldiers lives? Or would that only make sense once a rogue nation is threatening the netherlands with missiles aimed at Amsterdam? Come on, that can't be difficult to understand.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:11 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

I calculate their reaction to be different than you do. But in the end we are both speculating. The fact that they agreed to the strong sanctions against NK is saying that they are tired of NK acting the way they do.


So? That does not mean that they condone a pro-American regime in reunited Korea. Sure, nobody can be sure what the reaction of China will be, but are you willing to take the real chance of war with China? I am not, and since the other option is containment without the loss of life and without a possibility of triggering a global war, I will take the second option. The North Korean regime will collapse, perhaps in 5 years, perhaps in 10 years, perhaps in 25 years, perhaps in 50 years, but it will.


If the attack on NK is agreed to with China, then it could work. Agreement could be that China gets to choose the new leader of the country and it will not end with a reunited Korea that is pro US.

But yes, it's worth taking the risk if the alternative is a nuke detonating in the middle of LA, Chicago, San Francisco etc.
Are you willing to take the risk of trusting Kim Jong Un blindly? I'm not.


That is speculation, my bet would be that China doesn't agree to this, so would you chose to attack regardless?

And there you go, you basically say you value the potential (which in my view is highly unlikely) loss of American civilian lives more than the sure loss of millions of Korean lives.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:16 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

So? That does not mean that they condone a pro-American regime in reunited Korea. Sure, nobody can be sure what the reaction of China will be, but are you willing to take the real chance of war with China? I am not, and since the other option is containment without the loss of life and without a possibility of triggering a global war, I will take the second option. The North Korean regime will collapse, perhaps in 5 years, perhaps in 10 years, perhaps in 25 years, perhaps in 50 years, but it will.


If the attack on NK is agreed to with China, then it could work. Agreement could be that China gets to choose the new leader of the country and it will not end with a reunited Korea that is pro US.

But yes, it's worth taking the risk if the alternative is a nuke detonating in the middle of LA, Chicago, San Francisco etc.
Are you willing to take the risk of trusting Kim Jong Un blindly? I'm not.


That is speculation, my bet would be that China doesn't agree to this, so would you chose to attack regardless?

And there you go, you basically say you value the potential (which in my view is highly unlikely) loss of American civilian lives more than the sure loss of millions of Korean lives.


Wouldn't you value Dutch lives more than the enemy's lives?
And yeah I think a deal with China could be made and if not, well then they can't really blame the US for acting because they've had decades to deescalate the conflict in a peaceful way. Did SK ever develop nukes aimed at China and if it had ever done so, how would China handle that? Possibly similarly to how the US is now reacting.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:18 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

Of course it will be. But it's bizarre because if we let NK have their ICBM, they could potentially fire them at major cities in the US and with a leader like Kim Jong Un, it would be a realistic scenario that it could happen. So I could ask you in return; how many people should die outside the Korean peninsula before you think it's worth handling the problem?


So it was no trigger that NK had nuclear weapons, it was no trigger that NK had medium range missiles, but now they have a possibility to reach the old mighty USofA, it is time to intervene with the loss of millions of lives on the Korean peninsula and its immediate surroundings? If North Korea attacks America, then I will support an attack on North Korea, not before.

The North Korean regime has no reason to attack America, it will be a suicide mission on the North Korean regime part. It will react in self-defense, but will not shoot in an aggressive way, MNKAD: Mutrual North Korean Assured Destruction.


Of course it wasn't a trigger. Would it be a trigger for the Netherlands to risk a war with a south american country if say Curacao was invaded? Possibly risking thousands of dutch soldiers lives? Or would that only make sense once a rogue nation is threatening the netherlands with missiles aimed at Amsterdam? Come on, that can't be difficult to understand.


If Curacao was invaded by Venezuela, the Dutch military will react in some way. Curacao is part of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, so a bad example. That would be the equivalent to Guam was invaded or American Samoa or something like that.

So the problem is not that there is a rogue nation out there, the problem is indeed that the mighty United States of America feels a bit threatened. And to eliminate that threat you advocate that others pay the ultimate price. That's too easy don't you think. But at least you are honest about what matters here and what you are willing to sacrifice.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Redd
Posts: 509
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:40 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:24 am

af773atmsp wrote:
He also said he would lock up Hillary, build a wall and make Mexico pay for it, bring back coal jobs, "drain the swamp", and repeal and replace Obamacare. Those five off the top of my head are promises he didn't deliver, and perhaps there are more. Just like Kim Jong Un, he's more talk than actually doing, which is a good thing.



Don't forget 'rid the White House of Wall Street'. Instead he moved Wall Street into the White house.
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:24 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

So it was no trigger that NK had nuclear weapons, it was no trigger that NK had medium range missiles, but now they have a possibility to reach the old mighty USofA, it is time to intervene with the loss of millions of lives on the Korean peninsula and its immediate surroundings? If North Korea attacks America, then I will support an attack on North Korea, not before.

The North Korean regime has no reason to attack America, it will be a suicide mission on the North Korean regime part. It will react in self-defense, but will not shoot in an aggressive way, MNKAD: Mutrual North Korean Assured Destruction.


Of course it wasn't a trigger. Would it be a trigger for the Netherlands to risk a war with a south american country if say Curacao was invaded? Possibly risking thousands of dutch soldiers lives? Or would that only make sense once a rogue nation is threatening the netherlands with missiles aimed at Amsterdam? Come on, that can't be difficult to understand.


If Curacao was invaded by Venezuela, the Dutch military will react in some way. Curacao is part of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, so a bad example. That would be the equivalent to Guam was invaded or American Samoa or something like that.

So the problem is not that there is a rogue nation out there, the problem is indeed that the mighty United States of America feels a bit threatened. And to eliminate that threat you advocate that others pay the ultimate price. That's too easy don't you think. But at least you are honest about what matters here and what you are willing to sacrifice.


What if it was a financially more powerful country that invaded Curacao? Well then not much The Netherlands could do about it other than wasting many soldiers lives, so not a bad example. And at least you are honest about your flawed one sided logic too.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:25 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

If the attack on NK is agreed to with China, then it could work. Agreement could be that China gets to choose the new leader of the country and it will not end with a reunited Korea that is pro US.

But yes, it's worth taking the risk if the alternative is a nuke detonating in the middle of LA, Chicago, San Francisco etc.
Are you willing to take the risk of trusting Kim Jong Un blindly? I'm not.


That is speculation, my bet would be that China doesn't agree to this, so would you chose to attack regardless?

And there you go, you basically say you value the potential (which in my view is highly unlikely) loss of American civilian lives more than the sure loss of millions of Korean lives.


Wouldn't you value Dutch lives more than the enemy's lives?
And yeah I think a deal with China could be made and if not, well then they can't really blame the US for acting because they've had decades to deescalate the conflict in a peaceful way. Did SK ever develop nukes aimed at China and if it had ever done so, how would China handle that? Possibly similarly to how the US is now reacting.


Again you are vastly overestimating Beijing's influence over the Pyongyang's regime. The rest are "what if" questions which are impossible to answer. But if I can make an estimation, they would not attack South Korea, and I will grant you this one, SK isn't a rogue state.

My estimate is that NK developed nuclear weapons because it is the cheapest way to make sure that America should not attack the North Korean regime. Show us what kind of thinking there is, what gains are to be made by North Korea attacking America with a nuclear device? I see no benefit at all, but perhaps I am missing something here.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:28 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

That is speculation, my bet would be that China doesn't agree to this, so would you chose to attack regardless?

And there you go, you basically say you value the potential (which in my view is highly unlikely) loss of American civilian lives more than the sure loss of millions of Korean lives.


Wouldn't you value Dutch lives more than the enemy's lives?
And yeah I think a deal with China could be made and if not, well then they can't really blame the US for acting because they've had decades to deescalate the conflict in a peaceful way. Did SK ever develop nukes aimed at China and if it had ever done so, how would China handle that? Possibly similarly to how the US is now reacting.


Again you are vastly overestimating Beijing's influence over the Pyongyang's regime. The rest are "what if" questions which are impossible to answer. But if I can make an estimation, they would not attack South Korea, and I will grant you this one, SK isn't a rogue state.

My estimate is that NK developed nuclear weapons because it is the cheapest way to make sure that America should not attack the North Korean regime. Show us what kind of thinking there is, what gains are to be made by North Korea attacking America with a nuclear device? I see no benefit at all, but perhaps I am missing something here.


No I'm not. If they had been more responsible a few decades ago, they could have had a much bigger impact on the country than what is the case today. Which is why NK is starting to bother even China too, and which is why I highly doubt China would start a full scale war with the US over NK.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:29 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

Of course it wasn't a trigger. Would it be a trigger for the Netherlands to risk a war with a south american country if say Curacao was invaded? Possibly risking thousands of dutch soldiers lives? Or would that only make sense once a rogue nation is threatening the netherlands with missiles aimed at Amsterdam? Come on, that can't be difficult to understand.


If Curacao was invaded by Venezuela, the Dutch military will react in some way. Curacao is part of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, so a bad example. That would be the equivalent to Guam was invaded or American Samoa or something like that.

So the problem is not that there is a rogue nation out there, the problem is indeed that the mighty United States of America feels a bit threatened. And to eliminate that threat you advocate that others pay the ultimate price. That's too easy don't you think. But at least you are honest about what matters here and what you are willing to sacrifice.


What if it was a financially more powerful country that invaded Curacao? Well then not much The Netherlands could do about it other than wasting many soldiers lives, so not a bad example. And at least you are honest about your flawed one sided logic too.


Could you help me with my flawed logic, I don't see it.

The way I see it, in that case, The Netherlands would be North Korea and the way more powerful, the aggressor would be America, so in that logic, why would North Korea attack in the first place?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Redd
Posts: 509
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:40 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:30 am

seahawk wrote:
It would be a historic move, guaranteed to put Trump in the history books forever.


Just like Napoleon's retreat from Moscow, more likely something closer to Stalingrad though, X 10 or 100.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 14230
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:30 am

I can't say I agree with the President's use of rhetoric here. I'd much rather he'd declared, similar to JFK's declaration in 1962, that it will be the policy of the U.S. government to treat any ballistic missile launch from North Korea against any U.S. allies or territories as an attack by the North Korean military on the United States, prompting a full-scale military response by the U.S. armed forces to neutralize the DPRK's ability to wage war.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:34 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

Wouldn't you value Dutch lives more than the enemy's lives?
And yeah I think a deal with China could be made and if not, well then they can't really blame the US for acting because they've had decades to deescalate the conflict in a peaceful way. Did SK ever develop nukes aimed at China and if it had ever done so, how would China handle that? Possibly similarly to how the US is now reacting.


Again you are vastly overestimating Beijing's influence over the Pyongyang's regime. The rest are "what if" questions which are impossible to answer. But if I can make an estimation, they would not attack South Korea, and I will grant you this one, SK isn't a rogue state.

My estimate is that NK developed nuclear weapons because it is the cheapest way to make sure that America should not attack the North Korean regime. Show us what kind of thinking there is, what gains are to be made by North Korea attacking America with a nuclear device? I see no benefit at all, but perhaps I am missing something here.


No I'm not. If they had been more responsible a few decades ago, they could have had a much bigger impact on the country than what is the case today. Which is why NK is starting to bother even China too, and which is why I highly doubt China would start a full scale war with the US over NK.


Are you prepared to take that chance?

I would say it is way more likely that China will defend North Korea against American aggression, than North Korea attacking an American city. Why would North Korea do this? They know the response will be elimination. So feeling threatened isn't good enough for me to justify such an attack. International law will not permit it.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:35 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

If Curacao was invaded by Venezuela, the Dutch military will react in some way. Curacao is part of the Kingdom of The Netherlands, so a bad example. That would be the equivalent to Guam was invaded or American Samoa or something like that.

So the problem is not that there is a rogue nation out there, the problem is indeed that the mighty United States of America feels a bit threatened. And to eliminate that threat you advocate that others pay the ultimate price. That's too easy don't you think. But at least you are honest about what matters here and what you are willing to sacrifice.


What if it was a financially more powerful country that invaded Curacao? Well then not much The Netherlands could do about it other than wasting many soldiers lives, so not a bad example. And at least you are honest about your flawed one sided logic too.


Could you help me with my flawed logic, I don't see it.

The way I see it, in that case, The Netherlands would be North Korea and the way more powerful, the aggressor would be America, so in that logic, why would North Korea attack in the first place?


Well there you have it. That is quite a flawed logic. Are you now comparing the Netherlands with North Korea? Did The Netherlands develop ICBMs with nuclear warheads against UN resolutions, and then threatened to use it against the EU, US? And if they then decided to place some of them on Curacao, then I'm quite sure that the rest of the world wouldn't mind the US attacking that island before it could become a threat to the US or anywhere else.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:37 am

787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:

What if it was a financially more powerful country that invaded Curacao? Well then not much The Netherlands could do about it other than wasting many soldiers lives, so not a bad example. And at least you are honest about your flawed one sided logic too.


Could you help me with my flawed logic, I don't see it.

The way I see it, in that case, The Netherlands would be North Korea and the way more powerful, the aggressor would be America, so in that logic, why would North Korea attack in the first place?


Well there you have it. That is quite a flawed logic. Are you now comparing the Netherlands with North Korea? Did The Netherlands develop ICBMs with nuclear warheads against UN resolutions, and then threatened to use it against the EU, US? And if they then decided to place some of them on Curacao, then I'm quite sure that the rest of the world wouldn't mind the US attacking that island before it could become a threat to the US or anywhere else.


No, I am asking why a vastly weaker nation would attack a militarily strong nation. I failed to see the logic in that. And that seems to be the basis of you advocating the loss of lives of millions.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 3783
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:38 am

787Driver wrote:
.


thanks for this exchange, 787driver, I really should be going back to work :D
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:40 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

Could you help me with my flawed logic, I don't see it.

The way I see it, in that case, The Netherlands would be North Korea and the way more powerful, the aggressor would be America, so in that logic, why would North Korea attack in the first place?


Well there you have it. That is quite a flawed logic. Are you now comparing the Netherlands with North Korea? Did The Netherlands develop ICBMs with nuclear warheads against UN resolutions, and then threatened to use it against the EU, US? And if they then decided to place some of them on Curacao, then I'm quite sure that the rest of the world wouldn't mind the US attacking that island before it could become a threat to the US or anywhere else.


No, I am asking why a vastly weaker nation would attack a militarily strong nation. I failed to see the logic in that. And that seems to be the basis of you advocating the loss of lives of millions.


You are right, it wouldn't make sense, but that weak nation has a mad leader and it only takes a single nuke to cause extreme damage and many many casualties, and for that reason I would say that you are advocating the loss of millions of lives if you trust the NK leader enough to believe he would never use the ICBMs he's doing everything he can to develop.
 
User avatar
787Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 9:05 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:42 am

Dutchy wrote:
787Driver wrote:
.


thanks for this exchange, 787driver, I really should be going back to work :D


OK take care. Interesting discussion ;)
 
tommy1808
Posts: 6634
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:03 am

787Driver wrote:
In a coordination with SK military. B2s would be armed with nuclear weapons and should not be used at the border. Possibly have some B52s on standby for the border region loaded with conventional bombs. B2s would be used for other parts of the country.


so.. your brilliant plan is to do exactly what the NK military is preparing itself for?

Taking out 17.000 Artillery pieces, camouflaged and inside of bunkers specifically designend to be hard PGM targets, will take long enough to wrack the world economy, lots of critical electronic components are made within artillery range of NK.

best regards
Thomas
Times are changing: 70 years ago the USA went to war to defeat the Nazis, now they elect them to run their country.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4245
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:20 am

787Driver wrote:
You are right, it wouldn't make sense, but that weak nation has a mad leader and it only takes a single nuke to cause extreme damage and many many casualties, and for that reason I would say that you are advocating the loss of millions of lives if you trust the NK leader enough to believe he would never use the ICBMs he's doing everything he can to develop.


You are advocating the potential loss of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of lives just because you speculate that Kim would be foolish enough to hurl a ballistic missile at the US...

But what possible reason would he have to do that, since that would mean the end of him? There may be angry rhetoric coming out of NK, but all I hear are threats if NK is attacked. The fat kid, for all his boasts, has never said he would attack the US unprovoked.

KJU is not the first brutal autocrat to be in possession of nukes. The very nature of nukes is that they're a double-edge sword.
He has been menacing to spread fire and destruction onto his 'enemies' ever since he took power. His father did the same, and so did his grandfather.
It's the only political line that NK's regime knows, and the only way they try to perpetuate their unstable brutal regime. That's how they bring world leaders to the table to negotiate and allow the ruling family to thrive off of the sustained exploitation of an entire country.
Obtaining ICBMs is the only way NK has found to ensure its long term survival as a modern day dysfunctional authoritarian dystopia.

I'm sure it all sounds very simple to you - just bomb the shit out of everything in NK before thay can do anything - but you seem to severely underestimate the challenge that a successful preemptive strike represents.
The problem is, you can't start playing with a madman with nukes in the middle of one of the most populated region of the world without risking big.
At the very least, there will be no easy way to protect Seoul and its 10 Million inhabitants from the huge NK arsenal deployed at the border.
At the very worst, you make a mess of it and start pissing off China and Russia, destroying whatever diplomatic relations we have with them and trigger a massive global financial crisis, and at the very worst start WWIII, the prospect of which I would normally laugh at given that the leaders involved would normally preach pragmatism and intelligent behavior, but with Trump at the reign on the American side, that bet is off.

Not to mention that while Kim has everything to lose if he tries to strike first against the US or its allies, he has absolutely nothing to lose if he gets attacked, and will start throwing all he's got as far and as long as he can.
There is no way that a 'strike first' scenario would play out well. Let the diplomats do their job. It's boring and time consuming which, in this case, is a good thing.

To be honest, in that scenario, I trust Kim Jung Un to not launch a nuke more than I trust Trump to not start a war just to please the military lobbies and help himself find renewed political popularity... It's been done before.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12962
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:52 am

As I have said before, don't blame me, I voted for Hillary Clinton. As terribly flawed as she is, she had enough experience in government and in life to not get into a confrontation with DPRK.
One big problem with President Trump's big mouth is that it likely to rattle the financial markets, especially in South Korea but also in the USA and Europe as this warmongering escalates, affecting trillions in wealth and savings of everyone.
Sadly too, Trump and a lot of his supporters and insiders want a war to prove their 'right' and their manhood. They see the 'dear leader's' threats as insulting to the USA and in need of being put down like a very sick dog. Many believe that past deals with billions of in effect bribes to hold down their nuke programs are unacceptable and don't work long term. Still I would rather make a deal for $50 Billion that the obscene non-monetary costs in human lives if a war happens.
 
wardialer
Posts: 1184
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 1:08 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:45 am

Yeah right....The US will NEVER attack NK because NK does not have any profit like Oil and Opium unlike Iraq and Afghanistan.
It will never happen. Trust me.

Secondly, NK is a very poor country and they do not have any missiles as a threat to the US and nearby US bases. I do not see any money coming in from a poor country like NK. They don't have the cash to do so.

The US is more focused on the Middle East, because of oil and opium, to them, that's more of a gain than attacking NK.

This has been going on for almost 10 to 20 years that NK will attack the US. The world is still spinning and there is nothing to talk about here. An attack from NK will NEVER happen, it is all a show.

So people, lets move on and forget about it.

NK can make threats, but if there is no action, then it is useless.
 
User avatar
einsteinboricua
Posts: 5822
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:14 am

I've come to believe that the GOP is the "Make America Feel Good" party.

What good comes out of saying "radical Islam"? None. But hey, they've said it officially. I'm sure terrorists will be demoralized everywhere.
What good comes out basking in poll numbers that are low? None, just that they could be way worse (38% approval is way better than, say, 20%).
What good comes out of denouncing media as "fake news"? None. The reports will still be coming out.

The same thing is happening here. What good comes out of threatening "fire and fury"? None...just the feeling of being tough. I'm sure the North Koreans will back down because they don't want to match up against the all powerful Donald Trump, Lord of Fire and Fury.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
 
wardialer
Posts: 1184
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 1:08 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:48 am

Nothing is going to come out of this ordeal with NK.
I am pretty sure Kim knows that the US has missile defenses spread across mainland North America and the Pacific.
He would be too dumb to start anything.

And besides, NK is too poor of a nation to have nuclear missiles. And likely they do not have one. Its all made up by the media.
If you all think I am wrong, please do so and explain where the cash flow is coming from in order to fund these NK missile programs?

As posted before, let me stress this one more time by saying that NK does not have any commodities like oil and opium unlike Iraq or Afghanistan and this is the reason that the US did not decapitate the NK leader. If we did it to UBL, why not Kim?? Can someone explain that to me as well?
There is NO EXCUSE as to why the US is unable to track down Kim. We have the technology and satellites to do so. So why not track down his compound?

I would ignore this and life will still move on. NK is harmless. Kim is just throwing a temper tantrum like a crying baby...
 
tommy1808
Posts: 6634
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:56 am

einsteinboricua wrote:
What good comes out of denouncing media as "fake news"? None. The reports will still be coming out.


gives them a reasonable chance that some people pick up arms to "protect" Trump....

The same thing is happening here. What good comes out of threatening "fire and fury"? None..


Not exactly nothing. It is a clear indication that foreign policy statements by the government are worthless, can´t be trusted and won´t be backed up by action. I am sure NATO members get the message.

best regards
Thomas
Times are changing: 70 years ago the USA went to war to defeat the Nazis, now they elect them to run their country.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aesma, BlueLine, DarkSnowyNight, tommy1808 and 48 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos