yeah - but he’s also threatening Japan given the trajecotry and reliability of his missiles.
I hope you’re right, but I am not so confident. See below.
This whole affair is reminding me more and more of the runup to the Iraq invasion. There, elements within the Bush administration decided they were going to take out the Saddam Hussein regime and used ambiguous intelligence reports concerning Iraqi chemical or biological weapons as a fig leaf for an invasion that the administration had pre-planned and was going to execute no matter what.
Here, elements within the Trump administration appear to have decided they have an opportunity to take out the Kim regime and may be using an ambiguous, confidential DIA report leaked to the press as a fig leaf for some sort of pre-planned military operation. In this case, however, an invasion seems unlikely; maybe something more along the lines of a massive air strike. Trump seemed inordinately impressed with the April cruise missile attack on Syria; I would not be surprised if he thought we could magically disable the bulk of North Korea’s offensive weapons if only we fire enough missiles at them.
Saddam handled the US ultimatum badly and got steamrollered for his trouble. Kim seems to be going in the same direction. If NK actually goes ahead and launches four missiles in the direction of Guam, as they are currently suggesting, I don’t see how this doesn’t result in a military response by the US, at which point, as the Brits say, ‘the balloon goes up’.
As stated previously, I hope I’m wrong on this and welcome correction on any of the points above.
Sure fine. Point is still that people saying “if he drops a nuke on Guam” are overstating things.
the media has been full of stories regarding NKs progression toward having nukes along with Kim’s own statements of raining nuclear terror down upon the US.
it’s not a far stretch to state that Kim would want to ‘drop a nuke on Guam’ or what would happen if he did.
So - its not really overstating things - it may be overstating NK’s ‘actual’ ability - but it is not overstating Kim’s desire.
Hell, at this point he could lob an apple core at Guam and get the cheeto to respond with ‘fire and fury’ - it doesn’t much matter since Trump said to “stop threatening”.
Coming from the North Koreans that’s pretty hilarious.
That if you suggest that you’re going to blow up Guam with a nuclear weapon, or better yet launch it into the Untied States, or our allies, we’re going to respond by blowing your nation off the face of the earth.
Talking in terms they use to talk to us and the world.
No, not that. More like if you get hit sometimes the best response is to hit back. Not always, but it shouldn’t ever be taken off the table.
- I read your thread on pacifism and assume that ideal is guiding your responses in this thread. Since I answered your question will you answer mine? That is if North Korea Nukes the United states or its allies first, should we respond in kind?
Let’s see…
Increase number of troops in Afghanistan…
Renege on the nuclear deal with Iran…
Provoke North Korea into a new military entanglement, possibly leading to a nuclear exchange…
Troll China on the South China Sea…
Jesus Christ. How many fights shall we conduct simultaneously? I’m already so sick of “winning.”
Bad analogy-Trump said he would respond with “Fire And Fury” if North Korea threatened us again, not if they attacked us. Do you approve of this plan of action?
You’re avoiding the question, as you’re wont to do, by asking another question.
I’ll answer your question when you answer mine.
I would describe my own feelings, and tone here, as “concerned,” rather than frightened.
You’re right: Trump is responding in kind.
But since I don’t regard North Korea’s deportment as a model to which other countries should aspire, Trump’s response-in-kind concerns me.
We probably shouldn’t.
We don’t need to. MAD nuclear deterrence works between two nations that can annihilate each other.
NK can’t annihilate the US. NK can barely dent the US. If they have a dozen warheads that can go on missiles (massive overestimate of the capabilities), and each one of them hits the US, that’d be pretty annoying, but we would not be annihilated.
Responding with nuclear annihilation is not what we should do. We have allies in the area who would be harmed by the fallout.
We certainly should respond, and part of that will be toppling the regime, but that’s a mess too. We have the capability of destroying anything that needs to be destroyed using conventional weapons.
I can think of no scenario where responding to anything that NK does with nuclear weapons is appropriate.
It would concern me too if that’s how he talked to them from now on, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. I take the statement he made as a slap back to a pretty balsy stance and comment from the North Koreans.
A one-off.
- Does that answer your question Czarcasm? Because it should. The United States should not and will not ever be the nuclear provocateur… against North Korea now or the foreseeable future, or any other threat. I have never and never will say otherwise.
Now how about my question to you.
From the BBC, two hours ago:
That’s not a benefit. All you did was rephrase the words Trump already said.
What I’m asking you is: After Kim Jong hears Trump’s words, in what way do you think he will respond that is of benefit to the US?
Do you think Kim Jong is going to quake in his boots and STFU?
Seems to me, Trump wants to buy the world a Coke, and, way he’s going, one Coke just might be enough.
Ah yes, the elusive Trump pivot. Nothing but calm, thoughtful, and presidential from now on. This time, for sure!
[QUOTE=The Black Adder]
King: Do you want me to be honest or tactful?
Harry: Er, tactful, I think.
King: Tell him to get stuffed!
[/quote]
Diplomacy needs all the words it can get it’s hands on.
No. Because everyone freaking knows that Trump just says stupid shit without thinking all the fucking time. Just because he’s not the center of attention at any given moment.
But no one with an R after their name is allowed to admit that. Instead, they just start raging verbal dumpster fires and spin around until they manage to vomit out some bullshit about alternative facts or something. Then Trump unthinkingly says something else stupid that ruins all their hard work. And makes them look insane. Because the only sane response to that blowhard is “Really guys- everyone knows He says stupid shit without thinking. Ignore him”.
But they can’t say that. So it’s fun to watch. And pretending to take the stupid shit that Trump says seriously is the best way to get some entertainment. And I need laughter.
Indeed, every branch of the military has done just that with regards to Trump and his transgender comments.
And it’s my hope that when he flies off the handle and tries to start a war, the military will pretend not to hear him.
The problem is, what do they do if he does the typical Trump thing and tweet the damned order to launch?