A military strike against North Korea

I think it was the Yalta agreement where the Russians promised to attack Japan something like 1 month after they won WWII in Europe. And they did it on the day, and plowed through the Japanese army of 1 million people strong, invaded Japan and ended that war too. So, thats an example how Russia did follow up on their agreement. I don't recall where they did not. So lets have it.

 

I am talking about conventional bombing to destroy NK's nuclear program, not nuking, not an invasion, not regime change. And I am not advocating this action be taken immediately. Sanctions may yet work. There is an important meeting today in Vancouver to discuss ways to prevent NK from getting around the sanctions the way they have been doing - with the help of China of course. If ways can be found to tighten the sanctions we may see a change of attitude in NK. However, this cannot be allowed to drag on and on while NK continues to build nukes. I hope this administration does not kick this problem down the road like previous administrations have done.

 

Weasely words don't change dick.
You are talking about attacking North Korea.
Nuking, regime change, invasion, pre-emptive strike, conventional bombing...in short, war.

In my opinion this issue has been kicked down the road for the last 70 years and I see no reason to stop kicking it down the road.

I think it will only get addressed when/if NK looks weak enough. Which may be never or may be this campaigning season. Never, seems more likely to me.

 

Oh, so Russia invaded Japan and ended the war. That's why Japan was occupied by the US, the US wrote their new constitution, and Japan has been a US ally ever since. Thanks for explaining. lol

 

That's why the Russian side of Korea is communist.

Half of it was liberated by the Soviets. Half by the Americans.

 

That would never have happened if Obama hadn't pulled all US forces out of Iraq. He should have left a residual force. Remember, ISIS used to be called Al Qaeda in Iraq and were wiped out by US and Iraqi forces in 2008. They never would have made a come-back if some US forced would have remained in Iraq.

 

Yes, and that was fine by everybody until the communist north invaded the south.

 

Russia blitzed through the Japanese army of a million strong in a couple of weeks, invaded Japan and stood 15 miles out of a main Japanese island (Hokkaido). That is when Japan called it quits before they lost that as well. Russia still stands there today, at 15 miles out of Hokkaido, occupying them parts of Japan. And FYI, the US destroyed something like 80 cities in total. It's a myth that the destruction of city nr 79 en 80 was the reason to call it quits. Just like the myth of "they would never surrender", since they did.

And so much for linking me where Russia failed a promise.

 

because they are a rogue nation threatening peaceful nations with nuclear attack. This affects all of us...even where you sit as it causes global destabilization. NK needs to be wiped off the map if they dont disarm immediately. Unless you like fallout I suggest you all begin agreeing right away. When NK feels unified pressure this all ends peacefully if not...enjoy bright flashes and fallout.

 

So much for your "Not a disaster in Iraq". It was a disaster. Period.

 

The US is not a peaceful nation. Get real.

 

It wont be limited. Trump would never allow that conflict to drag on. It will be over quickly, people will be aghast at the carnage like they were in the first gulf war when our military was allowed to fight with both hands and history will show it was the right decision. Of course it could end peacefully if more nations rallied against NK. They wont. This will end ugly. Very very ugly but thats better than letting NK have the ability to nuke my house.

 

They are playing you for a sucker

China knows that sanctions will not cause kim to disarm

And so does trump

 

You said "If they wanted peace they would pressure north korea to give up its nukes"

They are pressuring Korea. You're just moving the goalpost from pressure to war when you realized you were wrong about the China helping out with the pressure.

 

I said regime change in Iraq was not a disaster. I didn't say allowing the rise of ISIS was not a disaster. It was terrible and totally unnecessary.

 

And when China gets involved and hundreds of thousands of South Koreans die, the conflict will drag on regardless of what Trump wants.

 

for what

 

Dude... wtf you on about? The US removed the army, police, government and justice department,.. and than left that place fall into total chaos. That's how the US made that regime change happen. It ended up being a total disaster.

And that is besides the point that the US arranged the previous regime change in Iraq, with Saddam Hussein at the helm. The US still supported that terrorist when he was committing genocide against the Kurds.

That's how among ways the US ends up being the biggest sponsor of terrorism on the globe. Seems perfectly normal in the eyes of NK to go nuclear and prevent you're the next on that list.

 

Maybe not. I will see that the dynamics in the Middle East, especially as they relate to Turkey, I have been able to predict well. Will the United States and NK go to war? I have no idea. If they do will China and Russia join the fighting? No, and certainly not on the side of the Kim's administration.

 

Stupid phuck that Don, we sold them reactors a mere two years before we placed them on an axis of evil list, before we knew about their mineral reserves. It was utterly bipartisan.

 

You are obviously a victim of anti-American propaganda. You're not alone. I know your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused by facts, but I'll throw a few at you anyway just in case there is a crack or two in that closed mind of yours.

When US and allied forces removed Saddam and his regime they did not leave and let the country fall into chaos. They stayed and fought the insurgency while a new constitution was drawn up and voted on by the general population. Even though terrorist groups threatened death to those who would vote the voter turn out was very high and the new constitution was approved. Then they elected a government, again with a very high voter turnout. Meanwhile US and allied forces were not only battling insurgent groups, they were also training and financing a new Iraqi army and police forces. In 2007 President Bush sent 30,000 additional troops to Iraq and the insurgency was defeated.

 

Which "peaceful nations"?

 

The communist North was never fine with America. America has been out to destroy all communism from day one. North, South anywhere.

At the time in question both governments, Soviet installed and American installed claimed hegemony over all of Korea. There was no north and south Korea back then. Only Korea.

 

I agree with the first part of this.

But there are other options, I believe.

One is a naval blockade of North Korea--strictly enforced. (This would probably not lead to war with China--just as the US naval blockade of Cuba, in 1962, did not lead to war with Russia, as so many were afraid that it would.)

The other is the assassination of Kim Jong-un--without our fingerprints on it. (I set this forth rather reluctantly, as there are certainly good reasons to be ambivalent about it. But it does seem better than the alternatives--except, perhaps, the one listed immediately above.)

 

And how, exactly, does that reflect badly on the mental capacity of Donald Trump? (To equate "Don"--presumably President Trump--with the unidentified "we," is to confuse the two.)