Trump Threatens "Fire and Fury" toward North Korea

BobPatterson · Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:07 am

rfields5421 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
Why would the President of the United States by "crazy" for responding to a military attack against the United States?

Much of the world, especially China, would view a direct military response of bombing or launching cruise missiles against North Korea as 'crazy'.

In the current world, sane leaders don't respond with military action against attacks. They use diplomacy, economic pressure, etc.

So, you suggest doing nothing but talking if we (the USA) is attacked militarily?

Would you suggest the same thing if burglars (robbers, rapists, murderers) were trying to force their way into your home, or perhaps just standing out front and lobbing Molotov cocktails against your windows?

Is there any point at all when you will defend with force yourself, family, country?

That should be the easy part to answer if you have a spine.

But what if you are "merely" threatened by a mad man who possesses missiles and nuclear warheads?

Do you wait for him to first destroy one of your cities before you take action?

rfields5421 · Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:25 am

Bob,

I was talking what I personally think is behind Trump's public statements.

He's a terrible President, a liar and a cheat, but I also think he understands the art of the bluff very well. He has a lot of information we do not know. I think he is talking to the public and to diplomats in other nations than North Korea. He wants them to take action/ initiate more pressure.

I was not talking about what I think the President should do if North Korea does launch missiles.

BobPatterson wrote:
So, you suggest doing nothing but talking if we (the USA) is attacked militarily?

Is there any point at all when you will defend with force yourself, family, country?

I am a retired US Navy Senior Chief with a Purple Heart. I have successfully fired my personal weapon on target in Vietnam and Lebanon.

BobPatterson · Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:33 am

rfields5421 wrote:
Bob,

I was talking what I personally think is behind Trump's public statements.

He's a terrible President, a liar and a cheat, but I also think he understands the art of the bluff very well. He has a lot of information we do not know. I think he is talking to the public and to diplomats in other nations than North Korea. He wants them to take action/ initiate more pressure.

I was not talking about what I think the President should do if North Korea does launch missiles.

BobPatterson wrote:
So, you suggest doing nothing but talking if we (the USA) is attacked militarily?

Is there any point at all when you will defend with force yourself, family, country?

I am a retired US Navy Senior Chief with a Purple Heart. I have successfully fired my personal weapon on target in Vietnam and Lebanon.

Thanks for your reply, Chief, I honor your service. I have a son who retired as a Gunny, USMC. He never had to fire a shot in anger.

I agree with you about the terrible man in the White House. I hope that we don't start off using nuke's in North Korea.

But I'm afraid we are going to have to take action there, sooner or later.

rfields5421 · Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:39 am

I am certain that President Trump is learning a lot about the negatives of using nukes from his SecDef, COS, and others.

It is physically impossible to use nukes in North Korea, even just one, and not cause radiation damage to US military personnel and their dependents, not to mention local friendly populations in South Korea and Japan.

A large scale nuke attack will cause radiation injuries and deaths on the west coast of the US.

As I said in an earlier post - North Korea is one of the two or three best countries in the world to defend physically - based on their terrain. Digging them out will be hard and bloody. Nukes are not a magic answer.

CH47A · Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:06 am

seb146 wrote:
CH47A wrote:

<> <> <> 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.

seb146, 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

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:14 am

BobPatterson wrote:
rfields5421 wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
Why would the President of the United States by "crazy" for responding to a military attack against the United States?

Much of the world, especially China, would view a direct military response of bombing or launching cruise missiles against North Korea as 'crazy'.

In the current world, sane leaders don't respond with military action against attacks. They use diplomacy, economic pressure, etc.

So, you suggest doing nothing but talking if we (the USA) is attacked militarily?

Would you suggest the same thing if burglars (robbers, rapists, murderers) were trying to force their way into your home, or perhaps just standing out front and lobbing Molotov cocktails against your windows?

Is there any point at all when you will defend with force yourself, family, country?

That should be the easy part to answer if you have a spine.

But what if you are "merely" threatened by a mad man who possesses missiles and nuclear warheads?

Do you wait for him to first destroy one of your cities before you take action?

You are talking about a preemptive strike, not about when America is attacked, e.g. a missile does hit somewhere on US soil or Japanese or South Korea. Then yes, you can go ahead with an attack. Preemptive, no. NK isn't forcing their way into America. If you have a spine, you don't advocate war which will result in millions of death, ok they mostly will not be Americans, but they are humans after all if you have a spine you will advocate restrained response.

Nobody has given one solid reason why the Democratic People's Republic of Korea would attack the US, they know they will be wiped out.

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:44 am

So I guess we can add Venezuela on the hitlist of the American President.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1AR2GR

seahawk · Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:14 am

So you mean he tries to out-Kim little Kim when it comes to seeming dangerous and crazy?

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 12:50 pm

I guess so, yes. Rhetoric can be dangerous and could trigger an attack from North Korea, use it or lose it situation.

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:31 pm

Interesting talk: North Korean threat: Bernie and former Sec. of Defense William Perry discuss defense issues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vq_trWAHvXI

Seems more realistic than the rhetoric from the current administration. Deescalation, instead of "putting oil on the fire".

kasimir · Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:33 pm

More than 200 replies here, news media talking about this non-stop... Most of the people are falling for Trump's trick! Because the only real battle Trump is fighting is his LEGAL BATTLE, around the election and the Russia affair.

The best way to distract the public from all his personal problems, is to wave around with the threat of war and scaring the public that there is a need for war!

Please guys, don't fall for this easy trick by Trump! He is distracting... This is exactly what he wanted!

Nothing has changed in North Korea, the Kim's have been shouting "death to america" for decades and they didn't start testing rockets yesterday! The only difference now, is that previous Presidents just ignored the NK rhetoric and replied with harsher sanctions.

Boeing1978 · Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:46 pm

kasimir wrote:
Nothing has changed in North Korea, the Kim's have been shouting "death to america" for decades and they didn't start testing rockets yesterday! The only difference now, is that previous Presidents just ignored the NK rhetoric and replied with harsher sanctions.

Except now NK has nuclear weapons.
And a penchant for blackmail and murder. Other than that, yeah, I guess nothing has changed.
Decades of negotiation, incentives, patience, etc. with NK have accomplished nothing, apparently.

socalgeo · Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:49 pm

seb146 wrote:
socalgeo wrote:
seb146 wrote:

.....We didn't need nukes against Stalin or Hitler. The only reason, "they" say nukes were used in Japan was to speed up the inevitable.

Your complete lack of understanding is truly a spectacle to behold.

This. Just say "you are wrong" and that makes you right, Socalgeo. Understanding what? The orange menace just said yesterday that nukes were not enough for DPRK and he should have threatened more. Why? It has been proven time and again nukes or more are not needed. Just ignore the little jerk in DPRK and save millions of lives.

Lay off the Ganga for awhile - your posts might become less incomprehensible. After you've sobered up you ought to do some reading. Here are a few worthwhile titles:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_the_Rising_Sun

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/12/12/r ... lkert.html

https://m.barnesandnoble.com/p/the-holo ... id=3x20456

kasimir · Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:44 pm

Boeing1978 wrote:
kasimir wrote:
Nothing has changed in North Korea, the Kim's have been shouting "death to america" for decades and they didn't start testing rockets yesterday! The only difference now, is that previous Presidents just ignored the NK rhetoric and replied with harsher sanctions.

Except now NK has nuclear weapons.
And a penchant for blackmail and murder. Other than that, yeah, I guess nothing has changed.
Decades of negotiation, incentives, patience, etc. with NK have accomplished nothing, apparently.

They had nuclear capabilities for quite a while, but never bothered to use it! Check this site, that lists all the nuclear tests we know of:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... orth_Korea

First test was 11 years ago!

NK is just showing power, but will never use it, because Kim Jong Un is not interested in dying, they just want power for their own country and the a-bomb is another symbolic tool!

This fear mongering by the US media and politicians is just disgusting and everybody needs to calm the heck down! Most people outside of the US are more worried about the US and "president crazy" then North Korea!

The US lives in constant fear and always need to have some kind of bogeyman/scapegoat that they (= media & politicians) can portray their hate and blame their problems on! This simplistic black and white thinking and dividing the society in good and evil, just simply destroys the society in the long-term and creates more hate!
If its not North Korea, we would be talking about Muslims, Iran, China etc. In the past it was the communists, soviet union, drugs, heavy metal etc...

Only state of tyrannies divide the world in good and evil, but the world is much more complex then to divide it in 2 parts and everybody needs to be very careful, since most of this fear mongering comes from a very corrupted system (politics and media), that first and foremost want to serve themselves.

Every time I see media hysteria, I am more worried about what they are NOT talking about...

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:52 pm

Boeing1978 wrote:
kasimir wrote:
Nothing has changed in North Korea, the Kim's have been shouting "death to america" for decades and they didn't start testing rockets yesterday! The only difference now, is that previous Presidents just ignored the NK rhetoric and replied with harsher sanctions.

Except now NK has nuclear weapons.
And a penchant for blackmail and murder. Other than that, yeah, I guess nothing has changed.
Decades of negotiation, incentives, patience, etc. with NK have accomplished nothing, apparently.

They have had a nuclear bomb since: 9 October 2006 01:35:27, so about 11 years now, so nothing has changed. They have an ICBM now, so they kind of threaten the mighty United States of America, just like they have threatened South Korea and Japan for decades and nothing has really happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... orth_Korea

A nuclear weapon will ensure the regime survival, nothing more nothing less, MAD on a small scale.

CH47A · Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:10 pm

When analyzing the different aspects of an international situation such as this there are many "players" to keep one's eyes on. Sometimes surprises that arise can be a significant indication of something going on that we nobodies on the sidelines can't yet see.

So one thing I have a habit of doing in a bad situation is keeping an eye on all manner of media types. By "all manner of media types" I mean established left and right and center media players.

I don't know who of you has already spotted this, but it makes me very, very nervous. When a known left-leaning media player of the size of CNN suddenly starts reading like Fox media I get mighty nervous.

Quite frankly, I couldn't believe this title of an opinion piece at CNN:

Brutal talk is exactly what North Korea needs to hear

Then, as I started reading the piece I was thinking that it was reading like I would expect a CNN piece to read; then a bit down the page I saw that paragraph about Senator Marco Rubio defending the President and I was beginning to wonder.

Then I hit the following:

Diplomacy has not worked with the madmen of Korea. It's time to replace tepid talk with tough talk. If North Korea does not halt its weapons program, it is indeed time to be ready with a "rain of ruin" like they have never seen.

Folks, that just ain't the CNN style. Plain and simple it ain't. It makes me very nervous.

The kind of nervous that somebody at CNN knows something new and realizes an about-face is necessary.

That just ain't the CNN style I have been seeing since way back when that Fonda's husband fella started that media organization.

I think it is time to start investing in more canned goods than I usually have in stock.

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:20 pm

That is an opinion piece, not news from CNN or an official position. The piece was written by Alice Stewart, the former communication director for Ted Cruz for President. https://twitter.com/alicetweet

So I guess it is more Republican party-line talk than anything else.

Boeing1978 · Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:36 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Boeing1978 wrote:
kasimir wrote:
Nothing has changed in North Korea, the Kim's have been shouting "death to america" for decades and they didn't start testing rockets yesterday! The only difference now, is that previous Presidents just ignored the NK rhetoric and replied with harsher sanctions.

Except now NK has nuclear weapons.
And a penchant for blackmail and murder. Other than that, yeah, I guess nothing has changed.
Decades of negotiation, incentives, patience, etc. with NK have accomplished nothing, apparently.

They have had a nuclear bomb since: 9 October 2006 01:35:27, so about 11 years now, so nothing has changed. They have an ICBM now, so they kind of threaten the mighty United States of America, just like they have threatened South Korea and Japan for decades and nothing has really happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... orth_Korea

True enough. What has changed is reportedly they now have nuclear warheads small enough to fit on an ICBM.
Their penchant for blackmail and murder remain unchanged.

Nothing to worry about, right?

Dutchy · Sat Aug 12, 2017 5:59 pm

Boeing1978 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Boeing1978 wrote:

Except now NK has nuclear weapons.
And a penchant for blackmail and murder. Other than that, yeah, I guess nothing has changed.
Decades of negotiation, incentives, patience, etc. with NK have accomplished nothing, apparently.

They have had a nuclear bomb since: 9 October 2006 01:35:27, so about 11 years now, so nothing has changed. They have an ICBM now, so they kind of threaten the mighty United States of America, just like they have threatened South Korea and Japan for decades and nothing has really happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... orth_Korea

True enough. What has changed is reportedly they now have nuclear warheads small enough to fit on an ICBM.
Their penchant for blackmail and murder remain unchanged.

Nothing to worry about, right?

Like I said, the only thing that might have changed, we don't know this for a fact, is that DPRK could threaten the USA directly. But the point is that they have no incentive to actually attack because the consequence will be that the leadership will be gone, so political suicide. Or perhaps you could show me the way, of an attack from DPRK.

So until someone shows a real benefit for the leadership of the DPRK to send over an ICBM, I would say, nothing has really changed and yes, nothing to really worry about.
Or are you perhaps worried that Russia and China could reach the US with nuclear weapons? I understand the unease with this fact, but it is a fact on the ground now and it doesn't really change the strategic situation, other than beside South Korea and Japan, some cities on US soil might be flattened if Amrica decides to attack the DPRK regime.

Just move away from the rhetoric, from both sides unfortunately at the moment, and just look the interest of nations, real diplomatic.

BobPatterson · Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:36 pm

Dutchy wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
rfields5421 wrote:

Much of the world, especially China, would view a direct military response of bombing or launching cruise missiles against North Korea as 'crazy'.

In the current world, sane leaders don't respond with military action against attacks. They use diplomacy, economic pressure, etc.

So, you suggest doing nothing but talking if we (the USA) is attacked militarily?

Would you suggest the same thing if burglars (robbers, rapists, murderers) were trying to force their way into your home, or perhaps just standing out front and lobbing Molotov cocktails against your windows?

Is there any point at all when you will defend with force yourself, family, country?

That should be the easy part to answer if you have a spine.

But what if you are "merely" threatened by a mad man who possesses missiles and nuclear warheads?

Do you wait for him to first destroy one of your cities before you take action?

You are talking about a preemptive strike, not about when America is attacked, e.g. a missile does hit somewhere on US soil or Japanese or South Korea. Then yes, you can go ahead with an attack. Preemptive, no. NK isn't forcing their way into America. If you have a spine, you don't advocate war which will result in millions of death, ok they mostly will not be Americans, but they are humans after all if you have a spine you will advocate restrained response.

Nobody has given one solid reason why the Democratic People's Republic of Korea would attack the US, they know they will be wiped out.

See post #5. I have indeed suggested that a preemptive (non nuclear) strike will be necessary. Massive. Really yuge.

seb146 · Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:41 pm

socalgeo wrote:
seb146 wrote:
socalgeo wrote:

Your complete lack of understanding is truly a spectacle to behold.

This. Just say "you are wrong" and that makes you right, Socalgeo. Understanding what? The orange menace just said yesterday that nukes were not enough for DPRK and he should have threatened more. Why? It has been proven time and again nukes or more are not needed. Just ignore the little jerk in DPRK and save millions of lives.

Lay off the Ganga for awhile - your posts might become less incomprehensible. After you've sobered up you ought to do some reading. Here are a few worthwhile titles:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_the_Rising_Sun

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/12/12/r ... lkert.html

https://m.barnesandnoble.com/p/the-holo ... id=3x20456

OH, that's hilarious!! "I'll just assume he is drunk and/or high because I don't agree with his opinion!" Classic.

NoTime · Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:10 pm

LMP737 wrote:
NoTime wrote:

"When you examine the nature of the American security commitment ... it is pointless for them to try to develop nuclear weapons," Mr. Clinton said today. "Because if they ever use them, it would be the end of their country." -- Bill Clinton, 1993 (http://www.nytimes.com/1993/07/12/world ... -zone.html)

When in doubt blame the Clintons.

Nah, not blaming them (at least, not in that instance). Just proving the original poster's statement, "we've not had a sitting US president threaten "Nuclear War" with North Korea ... since WWII with Japan", as blatantly incorrect.

But, if it's blame you want, here you go:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TcbU5jAavw

(A 60 second snippet of Slick Willy's presser following his deal with North Korea, in which he claims "this is a good deal for the United States" and "North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program" and "South Korea and our other allies will be better protected."

(Also, coming soon to Iran, thanks to Obama.)

socalgeo · Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:41 pm

seb146 wrote:
socalgeo wrote:
seb146 wrote:

This. Just say "you are wrong" and that makes you right, Socalgeo. Understanding what? The orange menace just said yesterday that nukes were not enough for DPRK and he should have threatened more. Why? It has been proven time and again nukes or more are not needed. Just ignore the little jerk in DPRK and save millions of lives.

Lay off the Ganga for awhile - your posts might become less incomprehensible. After you've sobered up you ought to do some reading. Here are a few worthwhile titles:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_the_Rising_Sun

http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/12/12/r ... lkert.html

https://m.barnesandnoble.com/p/the-holo ... id=3x20456

OH, that's hilarious!! "I'll just assume he is drunk and/or high because I don't agree with his opinion!" Classic.

No, your posts are impossible to follow, and you seem to be answering to different posts than the ones you quoted. Referring to some person as the "orange menace" in reference to a post about how you have little understanding of the situation with Nazi Germany and Japan in WWII seems to be a reference to some marvel comic book, which is very far off the subject. The only logical reasons for this are 1) stupidity on your part or 2) inebriation on your part. I'm being generous and assuming that you are high. I apologize if my assumption is incorrect. The good news is that either way, some reading on your part would likely improve the quality of your posts.

BobPatterson · Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:57 pm

socalgeo wrote:
The good news is that either way, some reading on your part would likely improve the quality of your posts.

Are you always this optimistic?

kasimir · Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:33 pm

Boeing1978 wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Boeing1978 wrote:

Except now NK has nuclear weapons.
And a penchant for blackmail and murder. Other than that, yeah, I guess nothing has changed.
Decades of negotiation, incentives, patience, etc. with NK have accomplished nothing, apparently.

They have had a nuclear bomb since: 9 October 2006 01:35:27, so about 11 years now, so nothing has changed. They have an ICBM now, so they kind of threaten the mighty United States of America, just like they have threatened South Korea and Japan for decades and nothing has really happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... orth_Korea

True enough. What has changed is reportedly they now have nuclear warheads small enough to fit on an ICBM.
Their penchant for blackmail and murder remain unchanged.

Nothing to worry about, right?

How do you sleep at night? Take a chill pill... If I would be you, I would be more worried about Pakistan that has 130 nuclear warheads ready to go. By the way, Pakistan is that Muslim country next to Afghanistan, where they found Osama bin Laden!

I hope with that information I didn't gave you a heart attack? But I forgot, it's only relevant to you if Dictator Trump says Pakistan is dangerous and Fox news confirms this.

It's just ironic, when it comes to saving American lives the flag waving Americans go all out "Merica F4ck Yeah", but when Trump wants to change health care that will put thousands of Americans in danger, its a patriotic thing! I am really confused...

Like I said before, turn off your TV and relax a little... You will see that tomorrow your country will still be the same and no ICBM's have been launched to attack your country...

socalgeo · Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:23 pm

kasimir wrote:
it's only relevant to you if Dictator Trump says Pakistan is dangerous and Fox news confirms this. ...

Really? Dictator Trump? Are you really that ridiculous? One day Trump is incompetent because he cant get Congress to pass the bills he wants and the courts are limiting his power, and on another day he's Dictator Trump.

Do you people ever actually think about what you post or do you just type whatever drivel your brain comes up with without any forethought or research?

SAD

kasimir · Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:33 pm

socalgeo wrote:
kasimir wrote:
it's only relevant to you if Dictator Trump says Pakistan is dangerous and Fox news confirms this. ...

Really? Dictator Trump? Are you really that ridiculous? One day Trump is incompetent because he cant get Congress to pass the bills he wants and the courts are limiting his power, and on another day he's Dictator Trump.

Do you people ever actually think about what you post or do you just type whatever drivel your brain comes up with without any forethought or research?

SAD

Sad? You can be lucky that the democratic system still kind of functions in the US, because if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator... He would still call himself President, but act like a dictator! He is already extremely close to be Tyrant... Dictator just the next career step for him!

Let's see what other BS he comes up to distract the people from the real crap that goes on! Maybe next week he will tell us there are aliens at Area 51, that might keep us talking for another week...

MAGA

socalgeo · Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:06 pm

kasimir wrote:
socalgeo wrote:
kasimir wrote:
it's only relevant to you if Dictator Trump says Pakistan is dangerous and Fox news confirms this. ...

Really? Dictator Trump? Are you really that ridiculous? One day Trump is incompetent because he cant get Congress to pass the bills he wants and the courts are limiting his power, and on another day he's Dictator Trump.

Do you people ever actually think about what you post or do you just type whatever drivel your brain comes up with without any forethought or research?

SAD

Sad? You can be lucky that the democratic system still kind of functions in the US, because if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator... He would still call himself President, but act like a dictator! He is already extremely close to be Tyrant... Dictator just the next career step for him!

Let's see what other BS he comes up to distract the people from the real crap that goes on! Maybe next week he will tell us there are aliens at Area 51, that might keep us talking for another week...

MAGA

Again - Do you read this stuff before you hit submit? You ought to start. Hit the preview button and then read the post 3 times. Perhaps you could look for claims that you are making that need some sort of evidence. Then go find a link from a trustworthy web site that actually supports your claim. For example this claim on your part

kasimir wrote:
... if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator...

It would be great if you could find a speech or interview of Trump where he says "if I had my way I'd be a dictator" or "I want to be a dictator", heck, a quote from Trump where he says - "you know what, those guys like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Idi Amin, they were pretty cool, I'd like to be like them"

That would really bolster your claim, and prevent people from thinking that you are an idiot.

Otherwise you are just full of sh&t...

Know what I mean?

seb146 · Sun Aug 13, 2017 4:20 am

socalgeo wrote:
kasimir wrote:
socalgeo wrote:

Really? Dictator Trump? Are you really that ridiculous? One day Trump is incompetent because he cant get Congress to pass the bills he wants and the courts are limiting his power, and on another day he's Dictator Trump.

Do you people ever actually think about what you post or do you just type whatever drivel your brain comes up with without any forethought or research?

SAD

Sad? You can be lucky that the democratic system still kind of functions in the US, because if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator... He would still call himself President, but act like a dictator! He is already extremely close to be Tyrant... Dictator just the next career step for him!

Let's see what other BS he comes up to distract the people from the real crap that goes on! Maybe next week he will tell us there are aliens at Area 51, that might keep us talking for another week...

MAGA

Again - Do you read this stuff before you hit submit? You ought to start. Hit the preview button and then read the post 3 times. Perhaps you could look for claims that you are making that need some sort of evidence. Then go find a link from a trustworthy web site that actually supports your claim. For example this claim on your part

kasimir wrote:
... if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator...

It would be great if you could find a speech or interview of Trump where he says "if I had my way I'd be a dictator" or "I want to be a dictator", heck, a quote from Trump where he says - "you know what, those guys like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Idi Amin, they were pretty cool, I'd like to be like them"

That would really bolster your claim, and prevent people from thinking that you are an idiot.

Otherwise you are just full of sh&t...

Know what I mean?

Just to back up for a second:

I had uncles in WWII. One was in the second wave at Iwo Jima. Another gave support for allied ships crossing the Atlantic. Still another made many successful bombing raids over Germany. You want to know why I am not cheering on nuclear war between to mad men? Now you know. I am sorry you can not follow simple logic. I feel sorry for you that your impared judgement from various substances or lack of basic education blinds you to see anything other than hurling insults. Maybe if you dry out, you can comprehend more.

See? Anyone can hurl insults. And it still makes the poster sound silly. To get respect you must give respect. Something neither you nor Trump understand.

As far as the orange menace being dictator, he is brushing that as we speak. By calling all news that is critical of him as fake and firing anyone who crosses him and constant saber rattling for no good reason.

http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-ho ... tor-592238

787Driver · Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:13 am

seb146 wrote:
socalgeo wrote:
kasimir wrote:

Sad? You can be lucky that the democratic system still kind of functions in the US, because if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator... He would still call himself President, but act like a dictator! He is already extremely close to be Tyrant... Dictator just the next career step for him!

Let's see what other BS he comes up to distract the people from the real crap that goes on! Maybe next week he will tell us there are aliens at Area 51, that might keep us talking for another week...

MAGA

Again - Do you read this stuff before you hit submit? You ought to start. Hit the preview button and then read the post 3 times. Perhaps you could look for claims that you are making that need some sort of evidence. Then go find a link from a trustworthy web site that actually supports your claim. For example this claim on your part

kasimir wrote:
... if Trump had his way he would like to become a dictator...

It would be great if you could find a speech or interview of Trump where he says "if I had my way I'd be a dictator" or "I want to be a dictator", heck, a quote from Trump where he says - "you know what, those guys like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Idi Amin, they were pretty cool, I'd like to be like them"

That would really bolster your claim, and prevent people from thinking that you are an idiot.

Otherwise you are just full of sh&t...

Know what I mean?

Just to back up for a second:

I had uncles in WWII. One was in the second wave at Iwo Jima. Another gave support for allied ships crossing the Atlantic. Still another made many successful bombing raids over Germany. You want to know why I am not cheering on nuclear war between to mad men? Now you know. I am sorry you can not follow simple logic. I feel sorry for you that your impared judgement from various substances or lack of basic education blinds you to see anything other than hurling insults. Maybe if you dry out, you can comprehend more.

See? Anyone can hurl insults. And it still makes the poster sound silly. To get respect you must give respect. Something neither you nor Trump understand.

As far as the orange menace being dictator, he is brushing that as we speak. By calling all news that is critical of him as fake and firing anyone who crosses him and constant saber rattling for no good reason.

http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-ho ... tor-592238

Why did so many Americans vote for Trump and now you all suddenly think he is a 'mad man'? Should have realized before voting for him.

DIRECTFLT · Sun Aug 13, 2017 7:42 am

Remind me.... what UN Military actions have actually made the world a better place??

GDB · Sun Aug 13, 2017 8:31 am

Dutchy wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
rfields5421 wrote:

Much of the world, especially China, would view a direct military response of bombing or launching cruise missiles against North Korea as 'crazy'.

In the current world, sane leaders don't respond with military action against attacks. They use diplomacy, economic pressure, etc.

So, you suggest doing nothing but talking if we (the USA) is attacked militarily?

Would you suggest the same thing if burglars (robbers, rapists, murderers) were trying to force their way into your home, or perhaps just standing out front and lobbing Molotov cocktails against your windows?

Is there any point at all when you will defend with force yourself, family, country?

That should be the easy part to answer if you have a spine.

But what if you are "merely" threatened by a mad man who possesses missiles and nuclear warheads?

Do you wait for him to first destroy one of your cities before you take action?

You are talking about a preemptive strike, not about when America is attacked, e.g. a missile does hit somewhere on US soil or Japanese or South Korea. Then yes, you can go ahead with an attack. Preemptive, no. NK isn't forcing their way into America. If you have a spine, you don't advocate war which will result in millions of death, ok they mostly will not be Americans, but they are humans after all if you have a spine you will advocate restrained response.

Nobody has given one solid reason why the Democratic People's Republic of Korea would attack the US, they know they will be wiped out.

Here's an obvious one, to deter.
While they are a vile, cruel, crooked and paranoid regime, they also know that Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi did not have the sort of deterrence they are seeking.
While they are paranoid, many in North Korea, even those who quietly wish they were not under such a regime, also know that mass US bombing in the Korean War destroyed large parts of the North with around 1 million deaths.
65 years on they play that card.

I don't think many in the US get that, it's not in any way an excuse for the regime, the oxymoron of a Communist Family Dynasty.
The US is very fortunate never to have had war on it's soil since the Civil War of the 19th Century, or even near it.

Ultimately this regime wants security pledges, it wants US forces out of the South (highly unlikely given that the DPRK is still pledged to 're-unite' by force of arms if need be). Unless they are willing to trade dropping that and reducing it's ability to ever do it.

I do not however share the view that Trump knows more about this than we do, this is a man who cannot see anything beyond the prism of instant approval, stiffing people in property deals, he hates memos more than a few pages, there have been a torrent of leaks about how he has an attention span of around two minutes.
His latest laughable lie that in 6 months he has 'modernised' the US nuclear arsenal is another sign of this, like all incoming administrations a review on posture, future spending, procurement will have started, that's all.

Dutchy · Sun Aug 13, 2017 8:50 am

GDB wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Nobody has given one solid reason why the Democratic People's Republic of Korea would attack the US, they know they will be wiped out.

Here's an obvious one, to deter.

And that is the perfect reason why they will not attack, deter is one thing, actually attacking is another. It will result in the fall of the regime. Having a nuclear bomb as a deterrence is very rational for the leadership of the DPRK, and certainly in combination with an ICBM. It will raise the cost significantly, they will not win.

seahawk · Sun Aug 13, 2017 8:59 am

The whole motivation for NK is too keep others from attacking them. In the end the bomb is only there to keep Kim in power. For him it means he can make any attack on him more costly for the other side, which gives him a feeling of safety.
In reality however attacking NK was no option for at least 3 decades, because South Korea has developed into a industrialized nation with a measurable influence on the world´s economy while Seoul always was within range of North Korea´s conventional, chemical and biological weapons.

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:09 am

I had a bit of time earlier today that allowed me just to sit and look out at the ridgeline on the other side of this valley where I am located and it hit me that we really have here a situation that parallels the Cuban Missile Crisis, which was the event that brought me out of kiddom and into the world of adults, like my father's world. He/We were stationed at Homestead at the time, so we knew we were doomed. It is funny how that works, you just take the extreme view -- we are going to die -- and anything less is welcomed.

The next thing that actually made me chuckle to the many insects sitting around watching me was how I could create quite a stir here in this thread by explaining this to y'all, because so many of y'all are clearly left-leaning and you left-leaning types probably have engrained JFK into your scrolls as a kind of Have-To-Look-Up-To human.

So where do I get off with this claim of similarity between then and now, you are asking yourselves?

Well, for a place where pilots hang out that answer is a single word you certainly understand — range. Plain and simple, range.

JFK was willing to go all the way with the military option to get rid of those missiles in Cuba because they had the range from where they were sitting in Cuba to hit so much of the United States. I am not sure if "so much of" was in his thinking and maybe if it had been just Florida within range he wouldn't have pushed the military option like he did, but the fact remains that the world knew he wasn't bluffing. And that was even after the Soviet leadership publicly stated those missiles there were for defense only. No way that JFK could accept that.

In this present situation with the DPRK it is, of course, possible that chemical weapons being used on top of one of those longer range missiles deserves full respect by any sitting president, but there are far too many rumors out and about that, in fact, the DPRK has made a warhead small enough to be able to pack some sort of nuclear detonation device inside it. But it is again, range, that is the key.

Well, not quite — sorry.

It is also that words from the mouth of the leadership of the DPRK that have to be taken into account. They (all three) have repeatedly stated they want to do some sort of bad thing to the United States and if we were to just ignore that we would be bloody fools. I do not believe any president has publicly stated they were sure that the DPRK leadership was just bluffing when the leader has mouthed off about doing harm to the citizens of the United States. I think that would be a kind of political suicide, right?

Presidents are not authorized to ignore threats to the citizens of the United States, or citizens of nations we have special arrangements with to protect them.

Now you might want to make the claim that the United States has been facing adversaries with nuclear weapons systems for a long time, true. But how many of them have had leaders that have repeatedly advocated the wiping out of the United States? Or the doing of serious harm to the United States? Yes, they might have, from time-to-time stated they would wipe out the United States IF — that "if" is the key word. In other words, if the leaders a bit back, of the USSR had started a campaign of speeches about once a month that stated they would be soon blowing up U.S. cities, I think we would not be here right now. There was restraint.

I would bet that if you asked me to I could post here a whole mess of threats from the DPRK to the citizens of the United States, without any restraints in the threats.

So what is the bottom line, you might ask in this long speech I am writing?

We now have to treat every launch of a missile from the DPRK as hostile, UNLESS they state beforehand the reason for a particular launch.

Folks, the bottom line is we are already in a state of war with the DPRK. Until they fully explain their intentions. In detail. We absolutely have to view every missile launch from now on as hostile, until we get some information.

This is not President Trump's fault. We have been heading toward this situation since President Clinton's days. Maybe earlier, but I think it was during President Clinton's administration when the DPRK pulled out of their agreement with the world community concerning their nuclear stuff.

They now have a weapons system that can reach the United States and have stated they want to use it for doing harm. President Trump didn't cause that to happen. It don't make no rat's arse what the words are from anyone, we cannot ignore that threat. Very, very basic. And if we were to state we don't care, the United States would be tromped on by all others that don't like our policies. We would no longer be taken seriously on the world stage. Do any of you advocate we should become a meaningless entity on the world's stage?

Dutchy · Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:33 am

CH47A wrote:
They now have a weapons system that can reach the United States and have stated they want to use it for doing harm. President Trump didn't cause that to happen. It don't make no rat's arse what the words are from anyone, we cannot ignore that threat. Very, very basic. And if we were to state we don't care, the United States would be tromped on by all others that don't like our policies. We would no longer be taken seriously on the world stage. Do any of you advocate we should become a meaningless entity on the world's stage?

So it is ego? At what human cost may this ego be bolstered?

Attacking means hundreds of thousands of death or worse, depending on the reaction of China.

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:57 am

I'm sorry, but I don't get that ego business in the calculation of protecting the citizens of the country. Ego doesn't make that piece of equipment fly through the air. No matter what caused that vehicle to be launched from the ground the person who is responsible for stopping it from doing its job doesn't have time for considerations about ego.

The person who is responsible for stopping the flight of that missile has to have already received the proper authority to do his/her job.

You are not, Dutchy, in some way offering the view that we should not give our military commanders the authority to stop that missile, are you?

salttee · Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:23 pm

CH47A wrote:
we really have here a situation that parallels the Cuban Missile Crisis............JFK was willing to go all the way with the military option to get rid of those missiles in Cuba............

You have the Cuban missile crisis history wrong, JFK was resistant to the plans of the joint chiefs who were intent on invasion. He thought that the joint chiefs were a bit looney. When McNamara got behind the third way (an embargo instead of diplomacy or war) the joint chiefs were treated like children and weren't even invited to the real discussions that were taking place.

Making a parallel with Cuba is a real stretch.

CH47A wrote:
Folks, the bottom line is we are already in a state of war with the DPRK.

It may appear that way to a hillbilly pseudo intellectual sitting on a couch, but in the real world we are not currently at war.

CH47A wrote:
I think it was during President Clinton's administration when the DPRK pulled out of their agreement with the world community concerning their nuclear stuff.

No, it was under shrub that North Korea was called "axis of evil" and negotiations were terminated - that's when North Korea pulled out of the agreed framework.

CH47A wrote:
We would no longer be taken seriously on the world stage. Do any of you advocate we should become a meaningless entity on the world's stage?

Where have I heard that line before: Vietnam? Iraq? It sounds so old stale and meaningless.

And lest you think I'm some kind of ultra liberal peacenik, if you look back a bit in this forum you'll find a thread where I advocate presenting China with the option of solving the problem or getting used to the idea that the US is going to take out the North Korean regime completely and permanently, beginning in a matter of days. Because I see China as the genesis and facilitator of the ongoing problems we have with NK, I think that tactic has a very good chance of solving the problem without bloodshed, but it will solve the problem either way.

Trump's stooping to baby Kim's level accomplishes nothing and can only lead to war - or a giant loss of face for the US. (Further evidence that Trump is an idiot.)

BTW
I suggest that you drop your southern writing style when discussing non-fiction. It appears that you get so focused on style that you lose track of content when you try to emulate the way shrub used to talk.

Freakysh · Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:27 pm

God help us

I can't believe people are taking this seriously.

To think that some are advocating pre-emptive strikes and nuclear retribution.

You yanks really are on another planet.

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:44 pm

I did not know I was using a southern style. I also didn't know I was copying anybody. And I am almost thinking that what you wrote at the end was an insult to me. But I am going to pass on that thought, because people who have to rely on using insults when engaged in serious discussion of serious issues are people who are not too smart.

<> <> <> <> <> Moving on ... <> <> <> <> <>

Now that bit about JFK and Cuba and something about somebody changed his mind and all that.

Yes, some of the people whose job it was to give advice were overruled, BUT -- and that is a big BUT -- the fact is that the military was placed out there in front of some Soviet ships and told to stop them and were properly informed to be prepared to use force. Or do I have that wrong?

That is a Yes or No question, by the way. Let us quit playing games with words and start answering directly!

Was the military told to stop those ships or not?

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Southern style? I guess I better try and find out what that is? Thirty plus years out of the country and hardly ever using English and somebody states I write in a southern style. That is actually pretty interesting. I might be able to learn something from that. Almost sounds cool.

*Except for the manner in which it was stated!*

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:59 pm

Freakysh wrote:
God help us

I can't believe people are taking this seriously.

To think that some are advocating pre-emptive strikes and nuclear retribution.

You yanks really are on another planet.

A leader of a country is spending millions of dollars (Won, Yen, whatever currency) -- spending millions of dollars on weapons designed for the sole purpose of delivering a lethal weapon to a distant land AND the people under the protection of that leader are starving and you don't take that leader's stated intention seriously?

By the way, which God do you want help from?

Oh yes, I will go back and study which member of our community wrote something about striking before an overt act was committed. I must have missed that. Thank you for making me aware of that error in my study of this thread.

salttee · Sun Aug 13, 2017 1:03 pm

CH47A wrote:
the fact is that the military was placed out there in front of some Soviet ships and told to stop them and were properly informed to be prepared to use force. Or do I have that wrong?

That is a Yes or No question, by the way. Let us quit playing games with words and start answering directly!

They were no doubt told to "prepare", but they were also told not to fire unless fired upon. And during the embargo, the Navy chain of command was circumvented and those ships received instruction directly from the White House; the CNO was cut out of the loop. The Naval chief of staff lost his job over this because he complained about being overruled too much.

CH47A wrote:
Southern style?........... Almost sounds cool.

It may sound cool to you, but it has a bitter ring to those of us who paid attention to (Connecticut native) George Bush's colloquial southern jargon as he went about whipping Saddam's ass and making America oh so great back in 2003.

BTW
Your colloquial, "as I sat looking at the ridgeline, etc" sounds almost as if it was lifted from William Faulkner.

Freakysh · Sun Aug 13, 2017 1:38 pm

CH47A wrote:
Freakysh wrote:
God help us

I can't believe people are taking this seriously.

To think that some are advocating pre-emptive strikes and nuclear retribution.

You yanks really are on another planet.

A leader of a country is spending millions of dollars (Won, Yen, whatever currency) -- spending millions of dollars on weapons designed for the sole purpose of delivering a lethal weapon to a distant land AND the people under the protection of that leader are starving and you don't take that leader's stated intention seriously?

By the way, which God do you want help from?

Oh yes, I will go back and study which member of our community wrote something about striking before an overt act was committed. I must have missed that. Thank you for making me aware of that error in my study of this thread.

You don't know which currency they use.

Their people are starving?

How can I take your evaluation of this seriously when you don't have a clue about North Korea generally?

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 1:46 pm

Okay, let me try my hand at this style.

I am whomever the commander is that was assigned to do this part of the job:

"You commanders of the ships we are sending out are ordered to prepare to stop some Soviet ships. You are not being sent out in front of those ships to actually stop them. You are only being sent out to prepare to stop them."

One ship commander:

"Sir, are we to stop those ships or not?"

Answer:

"You are to prepare to stop them."

Okay, I think I better find some solid information on what is what with regard to what their orders were.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

By the way, I know jack shit about how any Bush individual writes or talks or takes a shit on the toilet.

I apologize everybody for my foul style just above, but I have been put in a foul mood by a very, very impolite individual.

wardialer · Sun Aug 13, 2017 1:47 pm

This is a joke! Both the US and NK are making threats at each other without any action for weeks now. Really???

This will blow over in a few days, you will see.

This is just a show and I really do think that NK does not even have nukes or missile systems for that matter.

Nobody cares, so let's move on people. This is a comedy with no real action.

We are at war with NK but the war is with words only...

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:00 pm

Freakysh wrote:
CH47A wrote:
Freakysh wrote:
God help us

I can't believe people are taking this seriously.

To think that some are advocating pre-emptive strikes and nuclear retribution.

You yanks really are on another planet.

A leader of a country is spending millions of dollars (Won, Yen, whatever currency) -- spending millions of dollars on weapons designed for the sole purpose of delivering a lethal weapon to a distant land AND the people under the protection of that leader are starving and you don't take that leader's stated intention seriously?

By the way, which God do you want help from?

Oh yes, I will go back and study which member of our community wrote something about striking before an overt act was committed. I must have missed that. Thank you for making me aware of that error in my study of this thread.

You don't know which currency they use.

Their people are starving?

How can I take your evaluation of this seriously when you don't have a clue about North Korea generally?

When you buy that sort of equipment on the world market I believe you might use dollars. What currency they have established as their nation's currency makes a rat's arse to the situation. Would you like me to start being impolite to you, as you are being to me?

You are asking a question about whether they have a food shortage problem at this time? This year? If you do not know, I can provide links for you. Do you need my help on that?

And your last question is just meant to insult, isn't it? I wonder why people resort to that style? On the other hand, your two lines before that last one make it rather clear you are in over your head and can only resort to some sort of nasty style.

By the way, did you think I was joking about the question about which God? Do you know how many Gods we have in this part of the world?

And if you haven't been paying attention to any of my other posts (which I suspect you have some really smartass answer about not needing to pay attention to my other posts) we have a lot of Gods in Northeast Asia, where I live. And have lived for over four decades.

Dutchy · Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:43 pm

CH47A wrote:
I'm sorry, but I don't get that ego business in the calculation of protecting the citizens of the country. Ego doesn't make that piece of equipment fly through the air. No matter what caused that vehicle to be launched from the ground the person who is responsible for stopping it from doing its job doesn't have time for considerations about ego.

The person who is responsible for stopping the flight of that missile has to have already received the proper authority to do his/her job.

You are not, Dutchy, in some way offering the view that we should not give our military commanders the authority to stop that missile, are you?

I am trying to assess why you are so eager to pull the trigger and launch a pre-emptive strike. If a missile is launched, your military hopefully will knock it out of the sky. My assessment is that the DPRK has no incentive to actually attack, no one advocating a pre-emptive strike has offered a single view why they would do it and thus a pre-emptive strike would be deemed necessary. If someone would actually give a good reason, then I might change my mind.

At the world stage, you can't just attack a country without making clear that this country possess an immediate danger and thus there is no other solution. Advocating a war which will cause a million death for certain or more (China's reaction is an unknown) to prevent a launch an ICBM towards an American city, which will probably not happen. That is what you have to explain if you advocate a pre-emptive strike.

Why I refer to ego reasoning, your quote: "We would no longer be taken seriously on the world stage. Do any of you advocate we should become a meaningless entity on the world's stage?"

If that is the reason to do a pre-emptive strike, then that is just ego, nothing more and that should never be a reason to start a war. That is Iraq 2003 all over again.

Freakysh · Sun Aug 13, 2017 2:53 pm

CH47A wrote:
Freakysh wrote:
CH47A wrote:

A leader of a country is spending millions of dollars (Won, Yen, whatever currency) -- spending millions of dollars on weapons designed for the sole purpose of delivering a lethal weapon to a distant land AND the people under the protection of that leader are starving and you don't take that leader's stated intention seriously?

By the way, which God do you want help from?

Oh yes, I will go back and study which member of our community wrote something about striking before an overt act was committed. I must have missed that. Thank you for making me aware of that error in my study of this thread.

You don't know which currency they use.

Their people are starving?

How can I take your evaluation of this seriously when you don't have a clue about North Korea generally?

When you buy that sort of equipment on the world market I believe you might use dollars. What currency they have established as their nation's currency makes a rat's arse to the situation. Would you like me to start being impolite to you, as you are being to me?

You are asking a question about whether they have a food shortage problem at this time? This year? If you do not know, I can provide links for you. Do you need my help on that?

And your last question is just meant to insult, isn't it? I wonder why people resort to that style? On the other hand, your two lines before that last one make it rather clear you are in over your head and can only resort to some sort of nasty style.

By the way, did you think I was joking about the question about which God? Do you know how many Gods we have in this part of the world?

And if you haven't been paying attention to any of my other posts (which I suspect you have some really smartass answer about not needing to pay attention to my other posts) we have a lot of Gods in Northeast Asia, where I live. And have lived for over four decades.

Well getting facts like currency and starvation, which in the scheme of things may seem insignificant, wrong, shows a lack of in depth knowledge of your opponent. That would suggest you haven't really studied north Korea and probably aren't in a good position to make tactical assessments and recommendations, certainly none that can be taken seriously.

Which God? I don't care, pick one.

And congratulations on living in NE Asia for over 4 decades, it's a commendable effort and whatever prize you were hoping to achieve telling me this, you certainly deserve it. Glad to see you've spent the last 40 years learning about the world around you

CH47A · Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:14 pm

Fears of food shortages as North Korea faces worst drought in 15 years

North Korea is facing severe food shortages after being hit by its worst drought in more than 15 years, the UN said, calling for urgent food imports to stop children going hungry.

seb146 · Sun Aug 13, 2017 4:02 pm

787Driver wrote:
seb146 wrote:
socalgeo wrote:
Again - Do you read this stuff before you hit submit? You ought to start. Hit the preview button and then read the post 3 times. Perhaps you could look for claims that you are making that need some sort of evidence. Then go find a link from a trustworthy web site that actually supports your claim. For example this claim on your part

It would be great if you could find a speech or interview of Trump where he says "if I had my way I'd be a dictator" or "I want to be a dictator", heck, a quote from Trump where he says - "you know what, those guys like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Idi Amin, they were pretty cool, I'd like to be like them"

That would really bolster your claim, and prevent people from thinking that you are an idiot.

Otherwise you are just full of sh&t...

Know what I mean?

Just to back up for a second:

I had uncles in WWII. One was in the second wave at Iwo Jima. Another gave support for allied ships crossing the Atlantic. Still another made many successful bombing raids over Germany. You want to know why I am not cheering on nuclear war between to mad men? Now you know. I am sorry you can not follow simple logic. I feel sorry for you that your impared judgement from various substances or lack of basic education blinds you to see anything other than hurling insults. Maybe if you dry out, you can comprehend more.

See? Anyone can hurl insults. And it still makes the poster sound silly. To get respect you must give respect. Something neither you nor Trump understand.

As far as the orange menace being dictator, he is brushing that as we speak. By calling all news that is critical of him as fake and firing anyone who crosses him and constant saber rattling for no good reason.

http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-ho ... tor-592238

Why did so many Americans vote for Trump and now you all suddenly think he is a 'mad man'? Should have realized before voting for him.

He actually lost the popular vote by nearly 3,000,000. And those of us who wanted literally anyone else to be the Republican nomination pointed out on a daily basis why literally any of the other Republican nominees were head and shoulders above him. We spelled out what "MAGA" is about. We spelled out how he is not "family values." We pointed to all the times he was in with Russia. Don't blame ALL Americans. A majority of us didn't want him, either.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net