WHAT WOULD YOU DO ABOUT NORTH KOREA?

The response became brain dead when he said your supporting the enemy. Just blow him off.

What a pile of crap, if you have nothing but lies and twisted distortions of the truth then your simply a waste of time.

 

You want to kill a few people from your sofa I see.

 

Could you explain how your comment relates to my comment in any way?

 

I thought that your responses were well considered.

They point in a general direction of doing nothing, which is probably the best course of action, since both leaders appear to be unstable, erratic, totally untrustworthy and given to bellicose bombast.

I disagree with you about Clinton. North Korea already had an nuclear program when the Clinton Adminstration negotiated the Agreed Framework. They shuddered it and put it under international supervision. That lasted, more or less, until George W Bush gave his imfamous "Axis of Evis" speech. That speech made it clear that the US intended to make war on counties that it did not approve of. Iraq was the obvious first target (ironically, it was the on country in the imaginary axis that did NOT have a nuclear program). As a result of that speech, what remained of the Agreed Framework collapsed, and North Korea made its atomic weapons program its top priority.

Iran too, accelerated its nuclear program as a result of Bush's bombast. Fortunately, they were just ending the fuel making stage at the time the Iran deal was signed. Iran may have gone more slowly than the North Koreans because of the war in Iraq. The American presence was certainly a threat. But they had Ahmed Chalabi in their pocket, so they know that if the US "won" the Iraq war, Tehran would be the victors, as they would have a big say in any new government in Baghdad. Which is how it turned out.

 

He can't answer. He just has a fetish for white flags. Surrender at any cost.

 

In an ideal situation, the perception of America would be that we are true friends, reasonable, trustworthy and just- but at the same time, the most potent enemy one can imagine, The last kind of enemy you would want to anger. The line between these two sides should be clear. However as the Indians discovered 150 years ago, the forked tongue is always present in American leadership. Because we have a hard time defining and respecting honor among ourselves, others see that our words are a temporary promise that can change with the next election or be redefined at pleasure.

When a person decides to be honorable and always keep their word, they quickly learn to be careful what they say. Governments aren't people- they lack character other than that which the leader of the moment provides, and our position is often what is convenient at the moment. If we want to be trusted and respected, that needs to change, where certain standards that define the nation to the rest of the world are consistent and reliable over time. I don't know how we can do that, but I know the character of America today cannot earn the consistent respect and trust of it's own people, let alone the rest of the world. I'm not saying we are no good- I'm saying we need to do a lot better. The forked tongue still gets no respect.

 

I think our past actions as a nation speak louder than any words.

In the situation we find ourselves in, will we use force? I mean, of course, we'll respond with force if he acts, but our past actions is proof of that, which of course is why Kim is acting the way he is. Do we really need to say it?

Now Trump is drawing lines...."They best not make any more threats to the United States..." fire and fury blah, blah.....

2 hours later they are making threats calling Trump stupid etc threatening to send missiles to Guam... Now what?

This is the same kind of stupidity that got Obama in trouble with Syria, except Syria can barely fight its way out of a wet paper bag. NK has nukes for Christ's sake.

So what has the tough talk accomplished? Are we any closer to what we claim we want? I don't think so.

 

No, but as Trump indicated, his supporters can now thump their chests and feel like tough guys.

Well, except for Un calling him out in a matter of hours and making him look like the fool that he is. But his supporters don't seem to notice that. They can't hear the news reports over all of the chest thumping.

 

I would recognise that I don't have a solution. I would try to convince China to solve it. I would try to convince China to take over North Korea and absorb it at a province of that country, with the understanding that South Korea would never be on the table for reunification.

 

At this point I honestly don't know. What I do know is that we've had 20 plus years and 3 administrations that have failed spectacularly to prevent the crisis that we're facing now. So there are a lot of people who seem to think they know what's best who've been pretty consistently wrong for decades. We've not tried to be aggressive in this way before, so who knows, maybe it will work? Nothing else has. If it's not working against NK, it does seem to be working against China. They've modified their mutual defense of North Korea to say if NK strikes first, they'll remain neutral. That's a pretty big concession.

So to your question, are we any closer to what we claim we want? A little bit yes.

 

WHAT WOULD YOU DO ABOUT NORTH KOREA?

It's money that matters....Tell China the trillion dollars we owe them is frozen, and so is all their assets in the U.S. until N. Korea gets rid of their nukes. Trump wants to get rid of Chinese imports anyway. A trade war is better than a nuclear war, by far.

 

I'm of the belief that generally, there are lots of ways to do something right and lots of ways to do them wrong. In some cases, perhaps even most cases, there are definitely more ways to do them wrong.

Everyone once in a while, there are no ways to do something right. Or perhaps there were, but some action was taken in the past reduced the number of "right" options to choose from.

There seems to be this unspoken assertion that, because we're doing something different (in this case radically different), that this must be the right way to do things based solely on the fact that it's different than things tried in the past and at the very least, that the justification for doing it, is based entirely on the fact that it hasn't been done.

Now I realize you disagree with me, but, with respect, I think this is different, but still wrong. Anything good that comes of this, imo, will come at too high a risk, and that repeated actions like this in the future, will eventually result is a nuclear catastrophe. Or that we will come to regret "strong arm" tactics at some point in the future.

But that's just one man's opinion.

 

It is absolutely staggering how difficult it seems this lesson is to learn.

 

Well to that, all I can say is every single thing we've done for decades has been wrong. What are you offering that's different than our fairly consistent string of failures to keep this from even becoming a crisis?

 

Sure we can do that, first your so limped brained that your telling everyone that they are supporting NK, second heres your stupid comment that I was responding to ""About to attack us" is the same thing as pre-emptive war. That's what you're supporting?" Bullshit he's supporting nothing of the kind. Your sitting in your living room eating greasy food and getting fat ,with know about 1% of whats going on and you want to nuke them all. Your ingenious strategy should be picked up by the war department. Then they would nuke them into a parking lot for God And the American flag. your goofy. I hoped I explained that to your satisfaction, if your confused just ask anytime and I will be happy to help you.

 

The last thing on my list is nuking them , something that tops your list, dime store cowboy.

 

We better talk about what to do about United States which has been has been disturbing global peace here and there resulting mass massacre of people.

 

I suppose that I might be generous and assume you've gotten my response confused with someone else's, or else you're just not bright. In any case, let's follow the chain and see if it leads to your comment being a logical response.

First, I was responding to a post by Ronstar in which he said, "i only support war with NK if they attack us first or about to attack us." My response was,""About to attack us" is the same thing as pre-emptive war. That's what you're supporting?"

At this point, you jump in with the response, "You want to kill a few people from your sofa I see."

Pausing here for a moment, one has to wonder how my pointing out that Ronstar was in fact supporting a pre-emptive war leads you to assume that I want to kill people from the comfort of my living room? I puzzled over that which is why I replied to you, "Could you explain how your comment relates to my comment in any way?"

And that lead to yet another incoherent reply from you. I'm sure it all made sense in your head, but I find you comment to be totally disconnected from anything I wrote. You're welcome to give it another try, but you might want to gauge how much embarrassment you're willing to absorb.

 

At the very least the North Koreans' missile capabilities must be destroyed.

Next in priority is their nuclear weapons development facilities.

Those two are critical to the success of any action.

What is done in addition, like try to blast Kim-Jong-Eel, is just frosting on the cake.

 

The USA invented the nuke.

It belongs to us.

Nobody else should be allowed to make them.

 

That sure sounds like United States. North Korea never invaded other country. United States, BTW, .. well.. too many too list. United States is THE country who disturbs world peace.

Fact of life tells us, its the one who is poor and starving who attacks the rich.
United States has been attacker for a while, and we can see who is really poor and starving. GDP means nothing. It just means how much people had to buy to survive.

That probably is from CIA's publication that they never tell us how they derived it.

They are the one saving our planet using less energy. Why would a people of a great country like North Korea revolt?

Every country has prison. There are much more people in prision in United States. ( like 2 million )

You never thought they don't protest maybe because they have no reason to protest?

United States has been threatening to nuke North Korean even during Korean war.
United States still threatens North Korea. Basically United States threatens North Korea almost every day of the year with joint military exercises and sending out these nuke capable bombers to cruise along DMZ.

And the lunatic is United States. United States is still invading other country. United States is the one who does all kind of evil CIA plot to disturb peace of other nations. Its United States who is bothering other peaceful country not North Korea

Simple, we need to get rid of these evils WITHIN Unites States who tells all kind of lies to Americans.
We should stop getting fooled by these losers. We need to take care of ourselves before we blame our misery to others.

 

It would seem you work for the NK propaganda ministry; there is no other way you could be that far removed from reality.

 

The only problem is your claimed sequence of comment wasn't what you suggesting. The first quote was quote " Just to be clear, you are taking North Korea's side in this conflict?" That was thrown at Ronstar because he didn't agree with you, You advocated force more then once, in war that means killing people. Then you went on and said more to support your attack Ronstar said ""i only support war with NK if they attack us first or about to attack us." your response ,""About to attack us" is the same thing as pre-emptive war. That's what you're supporting?"" Pre-emptive mean attacking them first but it means more then that it mean imminent, it means unavoidable. Which in no way is the case. Not even close.

 

You continue to make my case. let me show you the sequence:

Then I posted in reply, " Just to be clear, you are taking North Korea's side in this conflict?"

So what, exactly are you talking about?

False. That was a quote from Ronstar:

So you've been wrong about every particular. You've got your quotes, order, and even the people stating things incorrect.

You are a good example as to why I have this as my signature: Brandolini's Law : “The amount of energy needed to refute BS is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”