[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

July 2025 Photo Theme - Stone - Alchemist - Jul 16, 2025 - 11:10pm
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2025 - 8:41pm
 
Movies to avoid? - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2025 - 7:24pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - kurtster - Jul 16, 2025 - 5:47pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2025 - 3:30pm
 
Russia - R_P - Jul 16, 2025 - 3:15pm
 
Trump - R_P - Jul 16, 2025 - 2:55pm
 
Things You Thought Today - black321 - Jul 16, 2025 - 1:53pm
 
Israel - R_P - Jul 16, 2025 - 1:48pm
 
The Marie Antoinette Moment... - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2025 - 1:36pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2025 - 1:31pm
 
New Music - R_P - Jul 16, 2025 - 1:05pm
 
Trump Lies™ - Proclivities - Jul 16, 2025 - 12:39pm
 
NY Times Strands - geoff_morphini - Jul 16, 2025 - 12:27pm
 
Play the Blues - black321 - Jul 16, 2025 - 11:06am
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 16, 2025 - 10:56am
 
But Why? - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2025 - 9:53am
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2025 - 9:53am
 
NYTimes Connections - geoff_morphini - Jul 16, 2025 - 9:44am
 
Wordle - daily game - geoff_morphini - Jul 16, 2025 - 9:41am
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - GeneP59 - Jul 16, 2025 - 9:32am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - GeneP59 - Jul 16, 2025 - 9:10am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2025 - 7:48am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jul 15, 2025 - 10:46pm
 
Are they married yet? YES THEY ARE! - buddy - Jul 15, 2025 - 9:20pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 15, 2025 - 8:41pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jul 15, 2025 - 7:07pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - sunybuny - Jul 15, 2025 - 3:05pm
 
Beyond mix - victory806 - Jul 15, 2025 - 12:53pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Isabeau - Jul 15, 2025 - 12:35pm
 
Alexa Skill - buddy - Jul 15, 2025 - 12:12pm
 
Where is the airplane? - rgio - Jul 15, 2025 - 9:42am
 
Gardeners Corner - Coaxial - Jul 15, 2025 - 6:42am
 
Trouble with Verizon? Or Tailscale? - jarro - Jul 15, 2025 - 6:39am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - bobrk - Jul 14, 2025 - 3:56pm
 
Economix - R_P - Jul 14, 2025 - 3:27pm
 
Immigration - R_P - Jul 14, 2025 - 3:11pm
 
Artificial Intelligence - R_P - Jul 14, 2025 - 11:16am
 
Fox Spews - R_P - Jul 14, 2025 - 10:52am
 
What is the meaning of this? - rgio - Jul 14, 2025 - 10:44am
 
Fascism In America - Red_Dragon - Jul 14, 2025 - 9:59am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 14, 2025 - 8:04am
 
Why atheists swallow, - black321 - Jul 14, 2025 - 8:00am
 
USA! USA! USA! - ColdMiser - Jul 14, 2025 - 7:57am
 
On Life as Art- heard it on KTRT 95.7 - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 14, 2025 - 7:56am
 
Comics! - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 14, 2025 - 7:53am
 
Music Videos - black321 - Jul 14, 2025 - 7:51am
 
M.A.G.A. - R_P - Jul 13, 2025 - 3:53pm
 
Infinite cat - Isabeau - Jul 13, 2025 - 11:37am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2025 - 11:35am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Jul 12, 2025 - 9:16pm
 
Europe - R_P - Jul 12, 2025 - 6:30pm
 
Democratic Party - R_P - Jul 12, 2025 - 1:37pm
 
A motivational quote - steeler - Jul 11, 2025 - 6:58pm
 
Beyond... - GeneP59 - Jul 11, 2025 - 6:35pm
 
Protest Songs - R_P - Jul 11, 2025 - 12:38pm
 
True Confessions - oldviolin - Jul 11, 2025 - 11:56am
 
Jess Roden - legendary UK vocalist - and "Seven Windows" ... - J_C - Jul 11, 2025 - 11:22am
 
It seemed like a good idea at the time - ptooey - Jul 11, 2025 - 6:10am
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 10, 2025 - 9:13pm
 
TV shows you watch - R_P - Jul 10, 2025 - 5:31pm
 
Wasted Money - GeneP59 - Jul 10, 2025 - 5:22pm
 
Rock mix / repitition - walk2k - Jul 10, 2025 - 4:31pm
 
How's the weather? - GeneP59 - Jul 10, 2025 - 3:21pm
 
Random Solutions - Random Advice - oldviolin - Jul 10, 2025 - 10:11am
 
Spambags on RP - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 10, 2025 - 9:02am
 
misheard lyrics - GeneP59 - Jul 10, 2025 - 6:30am
 
New Song Submissions system - Teja - Jul 10, 2025 - 3:36am
 
TEXAS - Red_Dragon - Jul 9, 2025 - 5:57pm
 
DQ (as in 'Daily Quote') - black321 - Jul 9, 2025 - 11:33am
 
Republican Party - Red_Dragon - Jul 9, 2025 - 7:50am
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2025 - 9:29pm
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Jul 8, 2025 - 5:43pm
 
Love & Hate - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2025 - 8:15am
 
Anti-War - R_P - Jul 7, 2025 - 6:45pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Trump Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1042, 1043, 1044 ... 1351, 1352, 1353  Next
Post to this Topic
islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 20, 2017 - 7:33am

 kurtster wrote:

Well I'll go out on a limb and call him asocial and amoral.  He feeds his family members to starving dogs, alive.  He runs concentration camps that make Hitler's and Stalin's Gulags look like summer camps.  He is content to let his people eat bark off of trees in order to survive.  He maintains a fantasy that his family has a divine right to rule based upon some event his grandfather had at a magic mountain.  And we negotiate with someone like this ... how ?

Comparisons to the USSR, the Cold War and any other situation are ludicrous.  This is unique and without precedent given the threat of using thermonuclear weapons offensively.   Our little friend, Chubby Cheeks or Rocket Man or whatever you want to call him, now has the capability and the intent to send one third to one half of North America into the stone age with an EMP that does not require accuracy of any kind.  Is not an EMP device a real threat ?  Does this not qualify as casus belli ?

Casus belli is a Latin expression meaning "an act or event that provokes or is used to justify war" (literally, "a case of war"). A casus belli involves direct offenses or threats against the nation declaring the war, whereas a casus foederis involves offenses or threats against its ally—usually one bound by a mutual defense pact. Either may be considered an act of war.

We are going to contain or prevent this potential EMP how ?  Can you say that we can shoot down an ICBM with 100% certainty to prevent the event right now ?  You are willing to risk a 100 to 300 million people with this certainty ?  If so, then fine, contain the little bastard and wait him out.  I do not share the confidence that we can shoot down an ICBM of this sort with 100% certainty and 99% is not enough.  What if he shoots multiple ICBM's ?  We can get every one of them ?

It is very apparent based upon discussions here over the years that I am about the only one here who even considers an EMP to be a real threat of any kind based upon the remarks I have received over the years when ever I have mentioned it.  Y'all are keeping yourself locked into the box thinking in terms of established conventional war and old paradigms of the past.

How would the survivors of this EMP event judge the leaders who let this happen, when it was preventable ?  People are going to die.  Do we let them die everywhere or in just one place ?  That is the choice.  Diplomacy is at a dead end.  It has done nothing other than take us to this point and decision.

 
You keep bringing this up, but it's not anything new. North Korea has had the capability of delivering an EMP from space for many years. Why is it now that you want to go to war over it?  Yes it's a threat, but no more than any other threat that they pose, and in need of no different solution.
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: The foot of Mount Belzoni
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 20, 2017 - 6:56am

 kurtster wrote:

Well I'll go out on a limb and call him asocial and amoral.  He feeds his family members to starving dogs, alive.  He runs concentration camps that make Hitler's and Stalin's Gulags look like summer camps.  He is content to let his people eat bark off of trees in order to survive.  He maintains a fantasy that his family has a divine right to rule based upon some event his grandfather had at a magic mountain.  And we negotiate with someone like this ... how ?

 
I can't help but that this is propaganda/hyperbole. On the other side, they're likely saying "The President has installed all his family members as his advisors, and cut off relations with all the media except for his propaganda machine. His party is trying to eliminate the non-white vote, and he supports the Klan." And they likely have a similar, or worse, opinion of him as well.

True or not - that's what their media is conveying.


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 20, 2017 - 5:14am

here's a reasonable/rational response to the nk issue (with a little backstory/perspective)

we didn't get into this overnight and we won't get out of it quickly either

if you have two minutes read this

Talk to, Don’t Provoke, North Korea

 Posted onApril 29, 2017

There’s little more we can do than hope that some cool heads around Donald Trump are telling him he’d be nuts to attack North Korea. I don’t know who they might be. Still, we must hope.

It doesn’t take a lifetime of study to know that, fortunately, no military resolution of the standoff is available. Ten million South Koreans live within artillery reach of the capital of Seoul, some 30 miles from the demilitarized zone separating North and South. Nearly 30,000 U.S. military personnel are around there too. North Korea has thousands of underground and undersea military facilities that American bombs and missiles would not find. A conventional US attack would be catastrophic, a nuclear attack far, far worse, for the horrifying effects would spill over to China and Japan.

So what would be accomplished? Nothing good. That’s for sure.




kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 20, 2017 - 4:34am

 Lazy8 wrote:
 buzz wrote:
Not stupid? Do you think he is mentally stable? You are betting with a lot of people lives while you sit comfortably out of range. Firing an ICBM over Japan is an act of war. What if one of his "stunts" goes wrong? What about your neighbor continually threatening your family while improving his aim? Would you wait until he pops a cap in your wife?
 
What would Hillary or Bernie have done? How would they have handled the problem better? How did Obama's policy of strategic patients work out? No better than the policies of Bush or Clinton before him.
 
What if your neighbor fires a shot over your house? Would that change anything?
 
Questions. I got shitloads of 'em.
 
I'd like to hear from the Libertarians also.  

I have no way to assess the mental state of Kim Jong Un. Maybe those around him do, but I don't.

I don't care what Bernie or Hillary would have done about it. Neither of them is president and both of them are too old to be serious threats to run next time.

Obama did about all that could be done short of war—at least all the hostile things. And that's what makes Trump's bluster such a concern: what if the little weasel calls his bluff? We either go to war over a pointless provocation or we are exposed as a paper tiger. The former would cost us dearly. North Korea has fangs. They couldn't survive a long conflict but they could do an awful lot of damage while they lasted. But without a legitimate casus belli we would be fighting that war alone, without even logistic support from nearby countries.

The latter would embolden the next tinpot dictator, whoever that is, without accomplishing a thing in Korea.

Nuclear weapons are essentially defensive, insurance against an existential threat, but they don't really allow a country to project power. They won't allow Kim to invade South Korea. Using them would be Kim's last act as solid matter, the ultimate in desperate moves. They don't make him a threat any more than Pakistan having nuclear weapons means it can invade India. Our nuclear weapons aren't helping us in Afghanistan any more than the Russian's did. They didn't help us in Vietnam either.

We need to calm down, keep an eye on the real threats posed by Kim's regime, and keep working on ant-missile technology. We're only in a crisis if we make it one.
 


 
Well I'll go out on a limb and call him asocial and amoral.  He feeds his family members to starving dogs, alive.  He runs concentration camps that make Hitler's and Stalin's Gulags look like summer camps.  He is content to let his people eat bark off of trees in order to survive.  He maintains a fantasy that his family has a divine right to rule based upon some event his grandfather had at a magic mountain.  And we negotiate with someone like this ... how ?

Comparisons to the USSR, the Cold War and any other situation are ludicrous.  This is unique and without precedent given the threat of using thermonuclear weapons offensively.   Our little friend, Chubby Cheeks or Rocket Man or whatever you want to call him, now has the capability and the intent to send one third to one half of North America into the stone age with an EMP that does not require accuracy of any kind.  Is not an EMP device a real threat ?  Does this not qualify as casus belli ?

Casus belli is a Latin expression meaning "an act or event that provokes or is used to justify war" (literally, "a case of war"). A casus belli involves direct offenses or threats against the nation declaring the war, whereas a casus foederis involves offenses or threats against its ally—usually one bound by a mutual defense pact. Either may be considered an act of war.

We are going to contain or prevent this potential EMP how ?  Can you say that we can shoot down an ICBM with 100% certainty to prevent the event right now ?  You are willing to risk a 100 to 300 million people with this certainty ?  If so, then fine, contain the little bastard and wait him out.  I do not share the confidence that we can shoot down an ICBM of this sort with 100% certainty and 99% is not enough.  What if he shoots multiple ICBM's ?  We can get every one of them ?

It is very apparent based upon discussions here over the years that I am about the only one here who even considers an EMP to be a real threat of any kind based upon the remarks I have received over the years when ever I have mentioned it.  Y'all are keeping yourself locked into the box thinking in terms of established conventional war and old paradigms of the past.

How would the survivors of this EMP event judge the leaders who let this happen, when it was preventable ?  People are going to die.  Do we let them die everywhere or in just one place ?  That is the choice.  Diplomacy is at a dead end.  It has done nothing other than take us to this point and decision.


haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 9:43pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
 buzz wrote:
Not stupid? Do you think he is mentally stable? You are betting with a lot of people lives while you sit comfortably out of range. Firing an ICBM over Japan is an act of war. What if one of his "stunts" goes wrong? What about your neighbor continually threatening your family while improving his aim? Would you wait until he pops a cap in your wife?
 
What would Hillary or Bernie have done? How would they have handled the problem better? How did Obama's policy of strategic patients work out? No better than the policies of Bush or Clinton before him.
 
What if your neighbor fires a shot over your house? Would that change anything?
 
Questions. I got shitloads of 'em.
 
I'd like to hear from the Libertarians also.  

I have no way to assess the mental state of Kim Jong Un. Maybe those around him do, but I don't.

I don't care what Bernie or Hillary would have done about it. Neither of them is president and both of them are too old to be serious threats to run next time.

Obama did about all that could be done short of war—at least all the hostile things. And that's what makes Trump's bluster such a concern: what if the little weasel calls his bluff? We either go to war over a pointless provocation or we are exposed as a paper tiger. The former would cost us dearly. North Korea has fangs. They couldn't survive a long conflict but they could do an awful lot of damage while they lasted. But without a legitimate casus belli we would be fighting that war alone, without even logistic support from nearby countries.

The latter would embolden the next tinpot dictator, whoever that is, without accomplishing a thing in Korea.

Nuclear weapons are essentially defensive, insurance against an existential threat, but they don't really allow a country to project power. They won't allow Kim to invade South Korea. Using them would be Kim's last act as solid matter, the ultimate in desperate moves. They don't make him a threat any more than Pakistan having nuclear weapons means it can invade India. Our nuclear weapons aren't helping us in Afghanistan any more than the Russian's did. They didn't help us in Vietnam either.

We need to calm down, keep an eye on the real threats posed by Kim's regime, and keep working on ant-missile technology. We're only in a crisis if we make it one.
 


 
I suspect that Obama missed an opportunity when Kim Jong Un took over leadership. Obama continued the old cold war stance, iirc increasing sanctions in response to some slight or other that most likely had everything to do with N Korea internal politics and nothing to do with the international situation. And he refused direct talks. Obviously I don't know the whole story but I reckon he should have said, "Look, we really don't give a shit about you, as long as you stay within your little world so do that, and we have no intention of attacking you. We will talk to anyone but don't expect anything to come from it if it doesn't make the world safer and if we can't get other countries on board."

That being said, I had an enlightening conversation with someone who was very tapped in and their advance in capabilities is very troubling. Not the least because there are a lot of Iranian engineers working on missile technology in N Korea.
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 9:33pm

 aflanigan wrote:

Look at it from the perspective of previous experiences with the USSR. Was their ever a point where we decided, "we've run out of patience, diplomacy and other leverage techniques aren't working quickly enough", and it was time to initiate exchange of nuclear warheads?

It is hard to imagine the years of suffering citizens of North Korea have endured, but our unwillingness to make the situation markedly worse is not a tacit dismissal of their plight. We are not, and never have been, an omnipotent world power. The ability to trigger nuclear holocaust does not signify political omnipotence.  Instead of saying "we have tried diplomacy for 25 years", we should be framing it as, "like we did in dealing with the USSR, we have continued to follow the sane course of pursuing diplomatic and economic options to the extent possible". North Korea's system, like the Soviet Union, is likely to prove unsustainable in the long term. What's the point in firing cannons at a sinking ship that is fully capable of sinking us before it submerges? 

 


Very well and neatly said. 

There are limits to the power of any nation. The problem of North Korea's aggressiveness has existed since Truman's presidency and frankly it's not only America's problem to address. North Korea behaves badly in order to draw concessions and indirect aid. It plays on China's fear of a unified Korean peninsula and pro-Western power at it southern border. China also worries that in an alternate scenario, a collapsing North Korea would cause unrest and violence to spill over the border. China in less turbulent times has also played North Korea as bargaining chip with the US, promising to restrain NK in return for American concessions. 

But North Korea's behavior isn't only the concern of the US and China. Existing multilateral arrangements with South Korea, Japan, Russia, SE Asian nations, Australia are reasonable and productive ways to contain NK.  

My guess is that North Korea's leaders understand that no one's wanted to invade and conquer their country for a long time. NK has sufficient conventional weaponry aimed at Seoul alone to cause millions of casualties. NK has a massive army trained for and anticipating a struggle to the death. The country has no concentrations of natural resources or fixed assets worth seizing.

NK's development of long-range missile and nuclear warhead technology is an attempt to force the US, Japan and others to bargain with NK and continue to indirectly subsidize the regime. Yet that threat has very limited effect: Kim Jong Un and his advisers understand that if they strike any country with a nuclear missile, North Korea would suffer a devastating, lethal response. 

I very much doubt that Kim Jong Un is mentally ill, as Buzz worries. American news organizations worried the same thing about his father. Even if his advisers have made Kim paranoid, both the American and North Korean governments tend to buffer and diffuse rash remarks from their leaders about the other country. 

As Steve Bannon remarked to the American Prospect, there isn't a military solution to the problem of North Korea. On the other hand, North Korea loses if it starts a hot war, even just a non-nuclear one. The bigger the conflict and casualties, the more it loses—to the point that it disappears entirely.

Kim and Trump are posturing for their respective domestic audiences. Yes, it's disturbing that we have an incompetent, rash, loud-mouthed loon leading our country and trash-talking at the UN, but Trump's stupidity gets diffused and buffered by other people in the US government and military. 

My question: is this the military threat that the GOP is going to trot out during the '18 and '20 elections to convince people to vote the party line? Because it's pretty pathetic and contrived. At some point this kind of political theater just stops working on voters. 


Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 9:09pm

 buzz wrote:
Not stupid? Do you think he is mentally stable? You are betting with a lot of people lives while you sit comfortably out of range. Firing an ICBM over Japan is an act of war. What if one of his "stunts" goes wrong? What about your neighbor continually threatening your family while improving his aim? Would you wait until he pops a cap in your wife?
 
What would Hillary or Bernie have done? How would they have handled the problem better? How did Obama's policy of strategic patients work out? No better than the policies of Bush or Clinton before him.
 
What if your neighbor fires a shot over your house? Would that change anything?
 
Questions. I got shitloads of 'em.
 
I'd like to hear from the Libertarians also.  

I have no way to assess the mental state of Kim Jong Un. Maybe those around him do, but I don't.

I don't care what Bernie or Hillary would have done about it. Neither of them is president and both of them are too old to be serious threats to run next time.

Obama did about all that could be done short of war—at least all the hostile things. And that's what makes Trump's bluster such a concern: what if the little weasel calls his bluff? We either go to war over a pointless provocation or we are exposed as a paper tiger. The former would cost us dearly. North Korea has fangs. They couldn't survive a long conflict but they could do an awful lot of damage while they lasted. But without a legitimate casus belli we would be fighting that war alone, without even logistic support from nearby countries.

The latter would embolden the next tinpot dictator, whoever that is, without accomplishing a thing in Korea.

Nuclear weapons are essentially defensive, insurance against an existential threat, but they don't really allow a country to project power. They won't allow Kim to invade South Korea. Using them would be Kim's last act as solid matter, the ultimate in desperate moves. They don't make him a threat any more than Pakistan having nuclear weapons means it can invade India. Our nuclear weapons aren't helping us in Afghanistan any more than the Russian's did. They didn't help us in Vietnam either.

We need to calm down, keep an eye on the real threats posed by Kim's regime, and keep working on ant-missile technology. We're only in a crisis if we make it one.
 

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 3:18pm


PoundPuppy

PoundPuppy Avatar

Gender: Female


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 2:40pm

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=trump+teddy+bear+commercial
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 1:27pm

 R_P wrote: 
Yes, there's that. There's also the fact that the US is the only nation ever to have used the things.
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 1:22pm

 buzz wrote:
Other nations don't threaten to use their nukes against others. NOKO does.
 
LOL. U.S. threat of atomic warfare.
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 11:31am

 buzz wrote:
First off, I'm not supporting or agreeing with Trump. All I'm doing is asking questions that nobody has answered. It's easy to mock Trump and his policies, any moron can do that. We have tried diplomacy for 25 years. What do we do if/when Kim drops a bomb on someone? What if it's a nuke? What if his last missile test had gone wrong and killed a lot of Japanese? NOKO continues to threaten us and It's neighbors. At what point does the world make it stop? Before or after the deaths of millions? Mocking is easy and produces nothing. I know this, it's been a hobby of mine for years. I would like to hear something real.

 
Look at it from the perspective of previous experiences with the USSR. Was their ever a point where we decided, "we've run out of patience, diplomacy and other leverage techniques aren't working quickly enough", and it was time to initiate exchange of nuclear warheads?

It is hard to imagine the years of suffering citizens of North Korea have endured, but our unwillingness to make the situation markedly worse is not a tacit dismissal of their plight. We are not, and never have been, an omnipotent world power. The ability to trigger nuclear holocaust does not signify political omnipotence.  Instead of saying "we have tried diplomacy for 25 years", we should be framing it as, "like we did in dealing with the USSR, we have continued to follow the sane course of pursuing diplomatic and economic options to the extent possible". North Korea's system, like the Soviet Union, is likely to prove unsustainable in the long term. What's the point in firing cannons at a sinking ship that is fully capable of sinking us before it submerges? 
maryte

maryte Avatar

Location: Blinding You With Library Science!
Gender: Female


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:51am

There are no easy answers to this issue, but in response to the neighbour analogy, I can tell you what I would NOT do:  kill my neighbour's family.  
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:45am

 miamizsun wrote:




 
BAM! Next question!
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:40am

 buzz wrote:

Not stupid? Do you think he is mentally stable? You are betting with a lot of people lives while you sit comfortably out of range. Firing an ICBM over Japan is an act of war. What if one of his "stunts" goes wrong? What about your neighbor continually threatening your family while improving his aim? Would you wait until he pops a cap in your wife?
 
What would Hillary or Bernie have done? How would they have handled the problem better? How did Obama's policy of strategic patients work out? No better than the policies of Bush or Clinton before him.
 
What if your neighbor fires a shot over your house? Would that change anything?
 
Questions. I got shitloads of 'em.
 
I'd like to hear from the Libertarians also.  

 


buzz

buzz Avatar

Location: up the boohai


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:33am

 Red_Dragon wrote:

He understands how the awful game is played.

The genie is out of the bottle; there is no way North Korea is going to eliminate its nuclear capability. The world has to learn to live with another country with the bomb, just as it's learned to deal with all the other countries with th bomb. The US having a president with the tact of a poorly-disciplined 6 year-old doesn't help.

 
How do you KNOW
 
 
off to work. y'all have a nice day. 
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:29am

 buzz wrote:

Not stupid? Do you think he is mentally stable? You are betting with a lot of people lives while you sit comfortably out of range. Firing an ICBM over Japan is an act of war. What if one of his "stunts" goes wrong? What about your neighbor continually threatening your family while improving his aim? Would you wait until he pops a cap in your wife?
 
What would Hillary or Bernie have done? How would they have handled the problem better? How did Obama's policy of strategic patients work out? No better than the policies of Bush or Clinton before him.
 
What if your neighbor fires a shot over your house? Would that change anything?
 
Questions. I got shitloads of 'em.
 
I'd like to hear from the Libertarians also.  

 
He understands how the awful game is played.

The genie is out of the bottle; there is no way North Korea is going to eliminate its nuclear capability. The world has to learn to live with another country with the bomb, just as it's learned to deal with all the other countries with th bomb. The US having a president with the tact of a poorly-disciplined 6 year-old doesn't help.
buzz

buzz Avatar

Location: up the boohai


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:25am

 Red_Dragon wrote:

I bet is that if the rest of the world accepts the fact of North Korea's nuclear status, North Korea will stop the threats. Kim is not stupid; he understands that as long as he possesses the weapons, no one will use theirs against him. This is how the madness of nuclear weapons has worked for decades.

 
Not stupid? Do you think he is mentally stable? You are betting with a lot of people lives while you sit comfortably out of range. Firing an ICBM over Japan is an act of war. What if one of his "stunts" goes wrong? What about your neighbor continually threatening your family while improving his aim? Would you wait until he pops a cap in your wife?
 
What would Hillary or Bernie have done? How would they have handled the problem better? How did Obama's policy of strategic patients work out? No better than the policies of Bush or Clinton before him.
 
What if your neighbor fires a shot over your house? Would that change anything?
 
Questions. I got shitloads of 'em.
 
I'd like to hear from the Libertarians also.  
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:08am

 buzz wrote:

Other nations don't threaten to use their nukes against others. NOKO does. 
 
How long would you tolerate your neighbor threatening to kill you and your family? Lots of people own weapons, hammers, and hands but don't threaten to use them. What if your neighbor continually threatened your family while he was taking target practice?  

 
My bet is that if the rest of the world accepts the fact of North Korea's nuclear status, North Korea will stop the threats. Kim is not stupid; he understands that as long as he possesses the weapons, no one will use theirs against him. This is how the madness of nuclear weapons has worked for decades.


buzz

buzz Avatar

Location: up the boohai


Posted: Sep 19, 2017 - 10:04am

 Red_Dragon wrote:

How about this. North Korean IS a nuclear power now. Let's start treating it like one. Do we impose sanctions and make threats against the other nuclear powers in an effort to get them to give up their insane weapons of mass destruction? No. We live with the elephant in the room and deal with them like we deal with other nations.

 
Other nations don't threaten to use their nukes against others. NOKO does. 
 
How long would you tolerate your neighbor threatening to kill you and your family? Lots of people own weapons, hammers, and hands but don't threaten to use them. What if your neighbor continually threatened your family while he was taking target practice?  
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1042, 1043, 1044 ... 1351, 1352, 1353  Next