<> <> <> truncated <> <> <>
You know, a quote of my writing that nuclear weapons systems need to be used by UN Forces.
I'd appreciate your help. Thank you.
You write like I do and I know it is frustrating to others here.
This is what I read from your posts in this thread so far:
You are for a nuclear strike. You use subtle wording to spell out your reasoning why this is a good thing.
That is what I read.
, there is absolutely nothing subtle about asking for a quote!
Just so we do not misunderstand what I wrote I did change the format and it is very clear up above where I asked for a quote.
Now the polite style in polite company or when being polite on a board like this is to not dance around with funny language and to flatly state that there is nothing to quote BUT ...
Other styles might be considered by some folks as impolite.<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> Moving on ... <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
When we move into practical tactical thinking and dump the political stuff we had better take into consideration the possibility that an announcement of a flight of four missiles over a sovereign nation, Japan, but intended for an area under the responsibility of another nation could just be a ruse. What if the actual target were some bases in Kyushu?
What if we were to think that we should give the DPRK leadership the benefit of the doubt and trust that they are only doing what they state; a kind of warning shot of empty warheads splashing down around Guam and then they use that "trust" and do a sneak attack on multiple targets in Kyushu?
What do you folks think the other nations of the world would then think of the United States of America?
You reckon we would be trusted after such a miscalculation?'Oh, them U.S. folks are really good people and they just got screwed (tricked) by some young upstart on the world stage. No biggie. We still trust the United States.'
Well, I don't care what you fine folks of this community think on this particular issue, to be quite blunt. I don't think it would be a good idea to trust that new young DPRK leader. We take out those missiles in the first 15 to 30 seconds and view the launching of the missiles as a hostile act and respond accordingly. And that is exactly what is going to happen!
By the way, I do not see -- well, I might have missed it -- I don't think I saw anyone post that China has made it very clear that if the DPRK starts this mess by doing any launch then they, the Chinese, are going to stay out of the resultant fray. They know darn well what is at stake here because they play by the same rules as nations have been playing by for hundreds of years. Probably longer -- nations, kingdoms, regional powers. You folks can yak-yak-yak about your political views all you want, but the bottom line is what has to be done to keep folks we are responsible for safe. Those missiles get launched, we are then engaged in armed conflict.
One more thing, if it is okay with management here, I want to provide you folks with a link to somebody who does a pretty good job with the pen. Yeah, I know, it's a keyboard now, but it (this writing [logging] of your thoughts)
is the same idea as it was back when Descartes was writing.Why North Korea Is Planning Long-Range Missile Flight Tests Over Japan and Toward Guam