Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So far North Korea has been more "bark than bite," and efforts to date might be considered more successful than not given little more than missile tests for show, many that fail. No North Korean attacks on South Korea or anywhere else for a long time now anyway. Sure doesn't seem likely given how North Korea would be hammered if North Korea ever did act against her enemies but who knows, but now what Trump and his supporters would consider "giving in" to China if it were Obama is now okay since it is Trump, regardless what Trump went on about before...
No point in arguing this intellectually. At least this is obvious...
It's not obvious that at some point NK won't succeed. Your argument sounds similar to European arguments against stopping Nazi Germany. That didn't work out too well.
Please don't put words in my mouth. You say you're not but you're still setting up the same strawman to knock it down.
Quoting you is not putting words in your mouth! Addressing your own words is not at all a strawman argument either. Look again, your words...
"Aid and comfort to the enemy." Those are your words along with "Obama's surrendering to Iran." Ridiculous rhetoric. You really need to consider these challenges with a little less bias...
Not sure what you would call your argument or defense to the contrary, but denial comes to mind.
That or "duck and run" also comes to mind...
Say what you mean and mean what you say, unless you are Trump or one of his supporters it seems. In which case these discussions are something like "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma" during a dust storm...
It's not obvious that at some point NK won't succeed. Your argument sounds similar to European arguments against stopping Nazi Germany. That didn't work out too well.
I'm not sure if it is because there are nothing but old timers who comment in these threads or whether there is a large group of war-prone conservatives who only know WW history, but this compulsion to compare any modern day conflict to that of Nazi Germany/Hitler is all too predictable and repetitive. If the argument is not to use force or to bomb away, then out comes the analogy of Europe v Hitler...
Gets awfully old, and just as pointless to constantly remind people that there are countless differences between the issues and circumstances today as compared to the history and circumstances that made Hitler and Nazi Germany the threat they ultimately made a reality, to the tune of two world wars.
Don't mind me or any of those differences that require a little more critical thinking than what you find in your favorite WWI & WWII history books, but if the thinking doesn't go a little further than comparing to either world war, we may unneccesarily bring on a third. Maybe the threat of North Korea and Kim Jong Loon is no different than Hitler and Nazi Germany, but from what I can tell..., I'm thinking that's still more nonsense that old timers just can't seem to consider in any other way.
Bill Clinton, authorized and helped the N. Koreans get Nukes.
That is a fact.
Now look what we have to deal with as Bill Clinton is on his deathbed.
When did North Korea get nukes?
That a fact or an alternative fact? A threat real or possible or imagined?
The truth of the matter makes a difference, wouldn't you say?
I've been traveling for the last few days, so maybe I missed something, but last I heard, all that Trump is doing now (that not long ago he thought Obama was wrong to be doing) is all about PREVENTING North Korea from having nuclear warhead capability. If North Korea somehow got that capability while I was traveling, then I guess Trump needs to change his strategy a bit and I need to catch up on the news...
I'm not sure if it is because there are nothing but old timers who comment in these threads or whether there is a large group of war-prone conservatives who only know WW history, but this compulsion to compare any modern day conflict to that of Nazi Germany/Hitler is all too predictable and repetitive. If the argument is not to use force or to bomb away, then out comes the analogy of Europe v Hitler...
Gets awfully old, and just as pointless to constantly remind people that there are countless differences between the issues and circumstances today as compared to the history and circumstances that made Hitler and Nazi Germany the threat they ultimately made a reality, to the tune of two world wars.
Don't mind me or any of those differences that require a little more critical thinking than what you find in your favorite WWI & WWII history books, but if the thinking doesn't go a little further than comparing to either world war, we may unneccesarily bring on a third. Maybe the threat of North Korea and Kim Jong Loon is no different than Hitler and Nazi Germany, but from what I can tell..., I'm thinking that's still more nonsense that old timers just can't seem to consider in any other way.
There is one obvious similarity; both Adolph Hitler and Kim Jon Oon are lunatics.
There is one obvious similarity; both Adolph Hitler and Kim Jon Oon are lunatics.
Good for you! Figure that out all on your own?
One obvious similarity between a nuclear bomb and a kitchen knife is that they can both be used as weapons, but defense against one vs the other takes a little further thought is the point. That thought process, beyond the obvious, is what makes for these points of contention regarding what Trump thinks right or wrong to do...
So this concern is something new as far as you are concerned?
Like all efforts to restrain North Korea from her nuclear aspirations for decades now, "pandering" to China is "worth it" depending on the results, with North Korea, with China and all the rest of the balance of power there along with the efforts to simply keep the peace, keep the nuclear s**t from hitting the nuclear fan, as so far has been the case.
So far North Korea has been more "bark than bite," and efforts to date might be considered more successful than not given little more than missile tests for show, many that fail. No North Korean attacks on South Korea or anywhere else for a long time now anyway. Sure doesn't seem likely given how North Korea would be hammered if North Korea ever did act against her enemies but who knows, but now what Trump and his supporters would consider "giving in" to China if it were Obama is now okay since it is Trump, regardless what Trump went on about before...
No point in arguing this intellectually. At least this is obvious...
Interesting how you ask "So this concern is something new as far as you are concerned?"
And then conclude with "So far North Korean has been more "bark than bite".
Interesting how you ask "So this concern is something new as far as you are concerned?"
And then conclude with "So far North Korean has been more "bark than bite".
So, we agree.
Interesting conclusion, but I'm not sure about the logic or whether we agree. As you wish of course...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
