North Korea Launches Missile Through Japanese Airspace

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › North Korea Launches Missile Through Japanese Airspace

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 26

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1857988 4-Sep-2017 11:25

Rikkitic:

Wiggum:

Its time to send in the troops and put an end to it.

I have stopped responding to your silliness but I can't let this pass. It is one of the dumbest statements I have ever seen here. Do you have any idea what sending the troops in would do? What the consequences of that would be? How many people would be sent to their death? I think you have no concept of warfare or the misery it entails. You have seen too many video games and westerns. Going to battle, killing real people, being killed, suffering, civilian casualties, mass destruction, starvation, disease, all of it, there is no John Wayne 'send in the troops and put an end to it' as you seem to think. There is no tall stranger riding into town with a big stick to clean things up here. The North Koreans are a formidable foe. They have spent decade preparing for war. They fought the combined might of the USA and the United Nations to a standstill once. There is a reason that war still isn't over. Each and every one of them will fight to the death with whatever they have available to protect their country and their leader. If you seriously think you can 'send in the troops and put an end to it', there is something seriously wrong with your thinking and your understanding of the world.

Im glad KJU is the leader and Trump, than @Wiggum

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1857992 4-Sep-2017 11:30

Rikkitic:

Wiggum:

Its time to send in the troops and put an end to it.

I have stopped responding to your silliness but I can't let this pass. It is one of the dumbest statements I have ever seen here. Do you have any idea what sending the troops in would do? What the consequences of that would be? How many people would be sent to their death? I think you have no concept of warfare or the misery it entails. You have seen too many video games and westerns. Going to battle, killing real people, being killed, suffering, civilian casualties, mass destruction, starvation, disease, all of it, there is no John Wayne 'send in the troops and put an end to it' as you seem to think. There is no tall stranger riding into town with a big stick to clean things up here. The North Koreans are a formidable foe. They have spent decade preparing for war. They fought the combined might of the USA and the United Nations to a standstill once. There is a reason that war still isn't over. Each and every one of them will fight to the death with whatever they have available to protect their country and their leader. If you seriously think you can 'send in the troops and put an end to it', there is something seriously wrong with your thinking and your understanding of the world.

And read what I said

But an attack from NK would be more of a disaster. I don't believe its right to site back and wait for an attack. An attack from NK is imminent, and its coming.

Doing nothing will have dire consequences. If you understood what you were talking about perhaps you would realize the same thing. Diplomacy is not working with NK, and they are building bigger faster nuclear more potent weapons. They need to be stopped, because if they are not, a war in NK with hundreds of thousands dead, is going to look like tea party in comparison.

Quick massive strategically based air strikes on certain targets inside NK, followed by multiple beach landings, is what is required here. One does not need to go to war with NK when entering. Its a war against KJU and his empire.

This is going to require the assistance of multiple countries.

NK Civilians can be left in peace. No different to the end of WWII and the beach landings at Normandy. Nobody was at war with France, or killing the French. I dont know of any other options, perhaps you can come up with some suggestions. Everybody else just seems to be talking about doing nothing.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1857996 4-Sep-2017 11:34

Wiggum:

Rikkitic:

Wiggum:

Its time to send in the troops and put an end to it.

I have stopped responding to your silliness but I can't let this pass. It is one of the dumbest statements I have ever seen here. Do you have any idea what sending the troops in would do? What the consequences of that would be? How many people would be sent to their death? I think you have no concept of warfare or the misery it entails. You have seen too many video games and westerns. Going to battle, killing real people, being killed, suffering, civilian casualties, mass destruction, starvation, disease, all of it, there is no John Wayne 'send in the troops and put an end to it' as you seem to think. There is no tall stranger riding into town with a big stick to clean things up here. The North Koreans are a formidable foe. They have spent decade preparing for war. They fought the combined might of the USA and the United Nations to a standstill once. There is a reason that war still isn't over. Each and every one of them will fight to the death with whatever they have available to protect their country and their leader. If you seriously think you can 'send in the troops and put an end to it', there is something seriously wrong with your thinking and your understanding of the world.

And read what I said

But an attack from NK would be more of a disaster. I don't believe its right to site back and wait for an attack. An attack from NK is imminent, and its coming.

Doing nothing will have dire consequences. If you understood what you were talking about perhaps you would realize the same thing. Diplomacy is not working with NK, and they are building bigger faster nuclear more potent weapons. They need to be stopped, because if they are not, a war in NK with hundreds of thousands dead, is going to look like tea party in comparison.

Quick massive strategically based air strikes on certain targets inside NK, followed by multiple beach landings, is what is required here. One does not need to go to war with NK when entering. Its a war against KJU and his empire.

This is going to require the assistance of multiple countries.

NK Civilians can be left in peace. No different to the end of WWII and the beach landings at Normandy. Nobody was at war with France, or killing the French. I dont know of any other options, perhaps you can come up with some suggestions. Everybody else just seems to be talking about doing nothing.

Get real, the civilian casualties during the liberation of Europe by the liberators was huge. The civilian death toll in a Korean War would be in the tens of millions. This is not a game, when the participants get shot or bombed they don't regenerate or drink some healing potion that just happens to be near by. They die and never come back.

edit; FYI in the last Korean War civilian deaths were put at greater than 2.5 million

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1858026 4-Sep-2017 11:52

Wiggum:

Rikkitic:

Wiggum:

Its time to send in the troops and put an end to it.

I have stopped responding to your silliness but I can't let this pass. It is one of the dumbest statements I have ever seen here. Do you have any idea what sending the troops in would do? What the consequences of that would be? How many people would be sent to their death? I think you have no concept of warfare or the misery it entails. You have seen too many video games and westerns. Going to battle, killing real people, being killed, suffering, civilian casualties, mass destruction, starvation, disease, all of it, there is no John Wayne 'send in the troops and put an end to it' as you seem to think. There is no tall stranger riding into town with a big stick to clean things up here. The North Koreans are a formidable foe. They have spent decade preparing for war. They fought the combined might of the USA and the United Nations to a standstill once. There is a reason that war still isn't over. Each and every one of them will fight to the death with whatever they have available to protect their country and their leader. If you seriously think you can 'send in the troops and put an end to it', there is something seriously wrong with your thinking and your understanding of the world.

And read what I said

But an attack from NK would be more of a disaster. I don't believe its right to site back and wait for an attack. An attack from NK is imminent, and its coming.

Doing nothing will have dire consequences. If you understood what you were talking about perhaps you would realize the same thing. Diplomacy is not working with NK, and they are building bigger faster nuclear more potent weapons. They need to be stopped, because if they are not, a war in NK with hundreds of thousands dead, is going to look like tea party in comparison.

Quick massive strategically based air strikes on certain targets inside NK, followed by multiple beach landings, is what is required here. One does not need to go to war with NK when entering. Its a war against KJU and his empire.

This is going to require the assistance of multiple countries.

NK Civilians can be left in peace. No different to the end of WWII and the beach landings at Normandy. Nobody was at war with France, or killing the French. I dont know of any other options, perhaps you can come up with some suggestions. Everybody else just seems to be talking about doing nothing.

You make it sound like we will just invade. They will unleash on Japan and Seoul. Do you think they only had one nuke so tested it? If you let them attack, then you level Pyongyang etc. If we attack, thats another western attack disaster and you will also be fighting China and Russia

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1858040 4-Sep-2017 12:05

tdgeek:
Wiggum:

@tdgeek : Please fix your post. I did not type all of that.

The bold are my comments to your comments

Agree with Wiggum. If someone then quotes that post it becomes even messier.

If you don't want to use the correct quote tags to separate comments then it's probably better to respond in a single paragraph after the quotes.

Too late to fix the original unless by mod edit, but it's not a good habit to get into.

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1858045 4-Sep-2017 12:08

Wiggum:
SaltyNZ:

North Korea isn't going to suddenly invade South Korea just because the US moves everyone out. For one thing, South Korea isn't exactly defenseless, and for another the US would come straight back, as would everyone else, and I think that at that point even China might send in some special forces to personally express their disappointment directly to Kim Jong Un's head.

As somebody has already mentioned, there are treaties in place. The US cannot, and should not just ignore them.

Likewise your idea of war. NK may have a similar defense arrangement with China for instance.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1858046 4-Sep-2017 12:08

tdgeek:

You make it sound like we will just invade. They will unleash on Japan and Seoul. Do you think they only had one nuke so tested it? If you let them attack, then you level Pyongyang etc. If we attack, thats another western attack disaster and you will also be fighting China and Russia

Or NK will go on the defensive, inside NK. A far better place for them to be IMO.

One thing is certain, Its a no win situation either way. We can all talk this one into the ground, but unless something is done, NK will just continue advancing their nuclear program. Those consequences are dire.

I'm still skeptical on Russia and China

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1858054 4-Sep-2017 12:14

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

You make it sound like we will just invade. They will unleash on Japan and Seoul. Do you think they only had one nuke so tested it? If you let them attack, then you level Pyongyang etc. If we attack, thats another western attack disaster and you will also be fighting China and Russia

Or NK will go on the defensive, inside NK. A far better place for them to be IMO.

One thing is certain, Its a no win situation either way. We can all talk this one into the ground, but unless something is done, NK will just continue advancing their nuclear program. Those consequences are dire.

I'm still skeptical on Russia and China

Nuclear is done, non negotiable. China, Russia, and now Mattis i think for the USA has stated that a nuclear NK may be what everyone has to settle with. Its done

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1858070 4-Sep-2017 12:35

tdgeek:

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

You make it sound like we will just invade. They will unleash on Japan and Seoul. Do you think they only had one nuke so tested it? If you let them attack, then you level Pyongyang etc. If we attack, thats another western attack disaster and you will also be fighting China and Russia

Or NK will go on the defensive, inside NK. A far better place for them to be IMO.

One thing is certain, Its a no win situation either way. We can all talk this one into the ground, but unless something is done, NK will just continue advancing their nuclear program. Those consequences are dire.

I'm still skeptical on Russia and China

Nuclear is done, non negotiable. China, Russia, and now Mattis i think for the USA has stated that a nuclear NK may be what everyone has to settle with. Its done

I don't have a problem with nuclear. Building weapons out of nuclear for their own security I could possibly also pass off as OK. But thats not NK's intent. Many threats are continuing to be made, not only to the US. They have threatened to reduce SK's capital to a sea of fire. These threats take on a new meaning when a country holds nuclear weapons. If NK invade SK (again). What do we all do? Lots of questions which need answering.

Its very tempting to do nothing. But sometimes doing nothing can actually be the more dangerous option.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1858072 4-Sep-2017 12:41

MikeB4:
Pumpedd:

MikeB4:
Pumpedd:

Too late for all that. Screw China and Russia for allowing things to get this bad. USa has very strong allies that it must protect via treaties (SK and Japan). It is the US, Japan and SK that will determine what happens next and it has passed words. 5 years of heavy attempts at words have failed. NK just wont listen to reason and that has to be the largest warning that NK will strike first, and it will be soon.

First step is for US to bonb NK side of China to destroy all supply lines form China, using conventional bombing. This needs to happen now before NK can launch anything. Hopefully the effect of this would be to force NK to the table.

China has repeatedly said a first strike on NK by the US would not be tolerated Even SK has repeatedly said no to that. It would end extremely badly.

China says a lot of things but all very meaningless. China could have been much stronger a long time ago. Where do you think all the supplies and technology came from for these arms?

The allies must act within the next few months and it must be decisive in order to force NK to start talking before it can launch a real weapon.

What Allies?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_Between_the_United_States_and_the_Republic_of_Korea

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Mutual_Cooperation_and_Security_between_the_United_States_and_Japan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Defense_Treaty_(United_States%E2%80%93Philippines)

Compelte list here:

https://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/collectivedefense/

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1858077 4-Sep-2017 12:47

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

You make it sound like we will just invade. They will unleash on Japan and Seoul. Do you think they only had one nuke so tested it? If you let them attack, then you level Pyongyang etc. If we attack, thats another western attack disaster and you will also be fighting China and Russia

Or NK will go on the defensive, inside NK. A far better place for them to be IMO.

One thing is certain, Its a no win situation either way. We can all talk this one into the ground, but unless something is done, NK will just continue advancing their nuclear program. Those consequences are dire.

I'm still skeptical on Russia and China

Nuclear is done, non negotiable. China, Russia, and now Mattis i think for the USA has stated that a nuclear NK may be what everyone has to settle with. Its done

I don't have a problem with nuclear. Building weapons out of nuclear for their own security I could possibly also pass off as OK. But thats not NK's intent. Many threats are continuing to be made, not only to the US. They have threatened to reduce SK's capital to a sea of fire. These threats take on a new meaning when a country holds nuclear weapons. If NK invade SK (again). What do we all do? Lots of questions which need answering.

Its very tempting to do nothing. But sometimes doing nothing can actually be the more dangerous option.

They want bargaining power. and there is no way in hell we pay more demands. They have nuclear thats the way it is, so there will never be peace in the region, always tension. If we attack thats a multi nation war, if they attack the US levels the place. The latter is a better option if it came to that. Nuclear is a deterrent, that may have tiobe what we accept

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1858085 4-Sep-2017 13:00

tdgeek:

They want bargaining power. and there is no way in hell we pay more demands. They have nuclear thats the way it is, so there will never be peace in the region, always tension. If we attack thats a multi nation war, if they attack the US levels the place. The latter is a better option if it came to that. Nuclear is a deterrent, that may have tiobe what we accept

Thats nonsense. Many countries have nuclear and are not seen as a threat.

I'm sure if nuclear countries like South Africa/China/India started making nuclear threats to its neighbors, and/or the US. It would be met with a similar reaction.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1858093 4-Sep-2017 13:16

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

They want bargaining power. and there is no way in hell we pay more demands. They have nuclear thats the way it is, so there will never be peace in the region, always tension. If we attack thats a multi nation war, if they attack the US levels the place. The latter is a better option if it came to that. Nuclear is a deterrent, that may have tiobe what we accept

Thats nonsense. Many countries have nuclear and are not seen as a threat.

I'm sure if nuclear countries like South Africa/China/India started making nuclear threats to its neighbors, and/or the US. It would be met with a similar reaction.

What absolute rubbish. Compare the nuclear armed countries in the world, and look at NK. That's one bad rotten ugly apple. So, it is quite obvious, that when that country has nuclear there will be tension.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1858096 4-Sep-2017 13:19

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

They want bargaining power. and there is no way in hell we pay more demands. They have nuclear thats the way it is, so there will never be peace in the region, always tension. If we attack thats a multi nation war, if they attack the US levels the place. The latter is a better option if it came to that. Nuclear is a deterrent, that may have tiobe what we accept

Thats nonsense. Many countries have nuclear and are not seen as a threat.

I'm sure if nuclear countries like South Africa/China/India started making nuclear threats to its neighbors, and/or the US. It would be met with a similar reaction.

South Africa is not a nuclear armed nation

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1858105 4-Sep-2017 13:38

There is no ‘answer’ to the North Korean situation. There are options. Some are less awful than others.

One option is to stop trying to face Kim down. Quit threatening him. Quit pushing him into a corner. This only makes him react in kind, and as he has shown, he is not exactly defenceless. It is the same way you deal with an aggressive dog. You don’t bark at it. You back slowly away.

Another option is engagement. This has worked in the past. The North Koreans are convinced America is their enemy. This is what their propaganda tells them. So give them aid. Not in the form of hand-outs, but in the form of knowledge. There are many opportunities for university exchanges and research cooperation in non-threatening areas like agriculture and medicine.

Stimulate cultural interactions. American orchestras have visited North Korea in the past. The arts are a great way to show that Americans do other things than just invade with guns.

Sports are a big area of opportunity. Kim is a basketball fan. Why not build on that?

The North Korean leader rightly thinks the world is out to get him. He is already paranoid. He also happens to be a psychopath lacking the restraints of normal human values. So what do the Americans do? With their usual finesse, they have decided to feed his paranoia by poking him with a stick. They hold military exercises on his border, they utter threats, they do everything possible to pull his triggers. Gee, that really makes sense. Let’s make the armed to the teeth paranoic even more paranoid.

There is a human tendency to want to ‘punish’ transgressors. Those who break the rules should not be allowed to get away with it. If someone wrongs you, at least you can derive satisfaction from tit for tat. Never mind trying to find out why they did what they did, or if something might be done to prevent others from doing the same. It is all about retribution and punishment and getting even. It doesn’t matter if this is shown over and over again not to work. Victims want their pound of flesh.

Something of the same has governed the American relationship with North Korea and it continues to pollute current thinking. There is a reluctance to ‘reward’ unacceptable North Korean behaviour by going back to the negotiation table. But the reality is that the North Koreans have nuclear weapons, they have an unstable leader, and they have the west over a barrel. This is what now has to be worked with.

There are really only two possibilities from this point. One is a truly terrible war, with many, many victims and unthinkable devastation. There can be no such thing as a ‘surgical strike’ here. It will be all or nothing.

The other is to accept that Kim and his nukes are part of today’s reality and to try to find a way to work with that. The way is to engage, to constantly reassure him that his position is secure and no-one wants to threaten it, to avoid confrontation. That does not have to mean abandoning allies or giving in to his every whim. But there are ways of communicating bottom lines without holding a gun to someone’s head.

That is what diplomacy is all about.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 26