Jump to content

North Korea, Kim Jong-Un shit all over imbecilic, fake, wanna-be alpha Donald Trump


'Nator

Recommended Posts

I thought it was one of Obama's failures to allow himself to be bullied by Republicans from talking with Kim one on one. I liked that he indicated his willingness to do that on the campaign trail. But of course all the people praising Trump were the ones who said Obama was naive and weak and stupid for suggesting we give North Korea this huge coup of one on one talks. Remember that Republican Party? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 621
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sox, you start this rant with a blatantly racist comment about intelligence of blacks. Hard to get past that without shutting down on all arguments.   You then imagine that we separate peopl

What am I suppose to do with the commemorative coin Tux sold me?  

Pretty sure this is a thread about North Korea, not working class white people...   Next time you want to randomly bring up your criticisms of black people, you should perhaps stick to Storm

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, Soxcat said:

None of that matters.  This is beyond politics.  This is about making sure a war is not ignited.  Obama let Trump know when he took office that North Korea was a real hotspot.

 

And then Trump threatened nuclear war...

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

They launched an ICBM with the range to reach the east coast of the US back in 2017. So yes, the have the capability to retaliate.

Still no proof that they have mastered the technology for the warhead to survive reentry into the atmosphere so that is speculation, and even if they were to get an ICBM launched, it would likely be intercepted and they know such a launch would be suicidal. But to allow them the time to perfect that technology is something that should be feared. Their missiles are not reliable at this point either and many of their launches fail. Again, giving time to perfect this could be a costly mistake. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Former_Fan said:

Still no proof that they have mastered the technology for the warhead to survive reentry into the atmosphere so that is speculation, and even if they were to get an ICBM launched, it would likely be intercepted and they know such a launch would be suicidal. But to allow them the time to perfect that technology is something that should be feared. Their missiles are not reliable at this point either and many of their launches fail. Again, giving time to perfect this could be a costly mistake. 

So you believe there is a legitimate military option for the US?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Former_Fan said:

Still no proof that they have mastered the technology for the warhead to survive reentry into the atmosphere so that is speculation, and even if they were to get an ICBM launched, it would likely be intercepted and they know such a launch would be suicidal. But to allow them the time to perfect that technology is something that should be feared. Their missiles are not reliable at this point either and many of their launches fail. Again, giving time to perfect this could be a costly mistake. 

So, we know they already have nukes and ICBMs capable of hitting the entire continental US. When you say “giving time to perfect this could be a costly mistake” means what? That you want to attack them and chance that they can’t retalliate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Legaltitan said:

I thought it was one of Obama's failures to allow himself to be bullied by Republicans from talking with Kim one on one. I liked that he indicated his willingness to do that on the campaign trail. But of course all the people praising Trump were the ones who said Obama was naive and weak and stupid for suggesting we give North Korea this huge coup of one on one talks. Remember that Republican Party? 

Left leaners and left leaning news often attempted such an objective look at everything Obama did, to the point of micro-evaluation, and "hearing the other side's argument" which, is how it should be, but often hurt the Dems politically to the point where they wouldn't talk about his accomplishments. 

 

Right news unabashedly praises and takes the most rosiest view possible of everything Trump does, often to a hyperbolic degree.

 

Right news: "Trump fixed the economy! Tax cuts, YOOOGE VICTORY for America! Trump TALKED to Kim: NOBEL PEACE PRIZE! USMCA FLAWLESS VICTORY FOR AMERICA! Trump SINGLE HANDEDLY DEFEATS ISIS!" 

 

Left News on Obama: "Well there's a lot to unpack here. Time will tell. It's not perfect, but it's a start" etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, begooode said:

So you believe there is a legitimate military option for the US?

Without cost of human life, no. Diplomacy still the best option, but there needs to be a timeline and progress made. NK is starving and they need relief from sanctions, but NK is going to have give up the nuclear program first. If Kim decides to resume nuclear and missile tests, then military options have to be back on the table however. This can't go unchecked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Btowner said:

NK defines denuclearization as the US reducing troops and no military exercises with South Korea. The US definition is Kim getting rid of his nukes. At a bare minimum, before Trump met with Kim, they should have defined denuclearization.

 

This is why presidents send their diplomats and SoS to negotiate. Kim now has tape of  a US president kissing his ass. The NK  propaganda machine will play those  sound bites for the next 20 years. 

 

 

North Korea has wanted its leader to meet with a sitting US President, for decades, in order to use it as your described.

 

President Trump gave Korea what it has wanted for so long twice in less than a year - without getting anything in return. 

 

It's like two adversaries meet, one asks the other what he wants, and the second says this or that, then the first agrees to give the second this or that and then the second asks the first what he wants, and the first answers, "nothing." 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

So, we know they already have nukes and ICBMs capable of hitting the entire continental US. When you say “giving time to perfect this could be a costly mistake” means what? That you want to attack them and chance that they can’t retalliate?

Giving them time to perfect a reliable missile as well as a reliable warhead that can deliver a nuclear strike. With time and money, they will figure it out. Not many countries on this planet want NK to be a nuclear power. I never said we should attack them. It would be suicide for South Korea and likely Japan. I don't think we would strike first with no reason other than a preemptive strike from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Former_Fan said:

Giving them time to perfect a reliable missile as well as a reliable warhead that can deliver a nuclear strike. With time and money, they will figure it out. Not many countries on this planet want NK to be a nuclear power. I never said we should attack them. It would be suicide for South Korea and likely Japan. I don't think we would strike first with no reason other than a preemptive strike from them.

So what is the alternative to “giving them time to perfect a reliable missile as well as a reliable warhead that can deliver a nuclear strike”? Attacking them or... what?

Edited by Starkiller
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Former_Fan said:

Without cost of human life, no. Diplomacy still the best option, but there needs to be a timeline and progress made. NK is starving and they need relief from sanctions, but NK is going to have give up the nuclear program first. If Kim decides to resume nuclear and missile tests, then military options have to be back on the table however. This can't go unchecked.

I'll just have to disagree.  The reverence for Dear Leader from the NK military and populace is fanatical and absolute.  The death sentence for Seoul and potentially Japan would be untenable, all in the shadow of a hyper-strong China.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Former_Fan said:

NK is a rogue regime. It has been said that any military action would initially be targeted strikes on NK nuke sites to take out storage, testing, and launch platforms. The response from them would likely not be good, and could very likely start an all out war, but to simply give no timeline to abandon their nuclear program is foolish in every way. Kim crumbled to the pressure of the US Military, which paved the way for the first Summit. He knows that 24/7 there is a US sub right off his coast that could wipe his entire country off the map by itself. Hope it doesn't ever come to this, but this needs to be taken care of now while we still have all the leverage. Russia and China have leverage because the have the nuclear capability to counter attack, which would result in mutually assured destruction for all involved. NK does not have that capability....yet.

If America really went into an all out war with North Korea, I am not sure what would last longer, that war or a typical football game. 

 

I remember an assessment in the early 2000s about how long it would take America to decimate the entire Middle East in a no holds barred war - full nuclear strikes across the regions.  I think the estimate was that in 13 hours there would be nothing left and the estimate was based on public knowledge about US capabilities.  

Edited by 9 Nines
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, begooode said:

I'll just have to disagree.  The reverence for Dear Leader from the NK military and populace is fanatical and absolute.  The death sentence for Seoul and potentially Japan would be untenable, all in the shadow of a hyper-strong China.  

VS putting the entire Continental US at risk of nuclear annihilation? I'm not advocating for war, and hope it never happens. War is not pretty. But what do you care more about, your family and loved ones here, or an overseas Ally? China would fall apart economically without the US as well. If this turned into an all out nuclear exchange none of this matters anyways, we are all gone. China wants NK nuke free as well, as they want our presence softened on the NK peninsula. A nuclear free NK benefits everybody.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 'Nator said:

Left leaners and left leaning news often attempted such an objective look at everything Obama did, to the point of micro-evaluation, and "hearing the other side's argument" which, is how it should be, but often hurt the Dems politically to the point where they wouldn't talk about his accomplishments. 

 

Right news unabashedly praises and takes the most rosiest view possible of everything Trump does, often to a hyperbolic degree.

 

Right news: "Trump fixed the economy! Tax cuts, YOOOGE VICTORY for America! Trump TALKED to Kim: NOBEL PEACE PRIZE! USMCA FLAWLESS VICTORY FOR AMERICA! Trump SINGLE HANDEDLY DEFEATS ISIS!" 

 

Left News on Obama: "Well there's a lot to unpack here. Time will tell. It's not perfect, but it's a start" etc. 

Let me tell you something. The right has fundamentally changed how I look at politics. The way the do shit is unscrupulous but it works big time. I'm sure it helps that their base is mindless drones but at times they're actually able to successfully gaslight people who know better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...