Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Would you support a preemptive nuclear strike?
Yes; it's the quickest, most decisive way to neutralize a threat casualties and political fallout be damned 51 15.13%
No; Nuclear weapons should only be used should the enemy strike first with a nuclear weapon 286 84.87%
Voters: 337. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:12 PM
 
Location: Coastal Georgia
50,382 posts, read 64,034,538 times
Reputation: 93369

Advertisements

I have not read all the posts, but here's my thinking. North Korea has been a wart on the butt of the planet since 1950-whenever. They are ruled by one loonie after another, and their people are woefully oppressed. Is this our problem? Not really, until it affects our wellbeing.

It becomes our problem, as they gain weaponry and become more and more of a threat to civilized society. Everyone has been kicking the can down the road, and Trump has the hot potato. Trump is not a guy who will keep kicking the can, if he thinks he can squash the wart once and for all.

I'm not worried, because, the president has the best and brightest military advisors possible, and I have no doubt he will expect those most affected, like S Korea and China, to do the heavy lifting.

 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:12 PM
 
Location: Twin Falls Idaho
4,996 posts, read 2,447,785 times
Reputation: 2540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
How many times do I have to type this out?

THINK.

You're Kim. You have a nuke (so you say). You know, damn good and well, the second you fire that thing off, you're done. You will be attacked from all sides. As an egotistical little jerk, do you, as Kim, actually want to waste your one opportunity to stick it to the US by nuking Guam?

REALLY?!

REALLY?!!

He's not going to nuke Guam.

I will bet you $1000 that he is not going to nuke Guam. You can pay me at the end of August to give it time to prove that his threat today is a bunch of hot air.
I'll not make a bet that I want to lose.

You keep shouting 'think' as though you're the only only one capable of doing so.

Your chain of logic is just one such possible chain..equally likely is....Kim has no sense of reality and is operating on a whole set of referents that you don't and can't factor.

Just as possible is Trump..embattled and besieged by troubles at home..sees a way to be a hero..to be loved...does your read of Trump's character factor that in? I think Trump is more likely to provoke a strike from Kim...by his ham-handed posturing.

NK picked Guam to threaten because it's plausible---I doubt he will attack there...a massive push into South Korea is far more likely.

My point in this thread..is that Kim keeps announcing his intentions..and then following through--it deserves some thought--and IMO..trying to mind read a madman is a waste of time.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:13 PM
 
2,095 posts, read 1,560,431 times
Reputation: 2300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Sol View Post
They killed Otto.
or at least sent him back braindead
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:14 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,080,948 times
Reputation: 17865
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
That 10% figure is actually in error, and based upon some bad math.

https://www.aps.org/units/fhp/newsle.../oak-ridge.cfm
Whatever the number is, it requires a lot of energy. This is a nation the outline of which can be seen from space because there is so little lights at night. 4 billion in energy aid most certainly improved their ability to produce nuclear weapons. I'm not going to look it up but you are looking at a figure that is about half their annual GPD in the 90's.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:15 PM
 
Location: Austin
15,640 posts, read 10,400,743 times
Reputation: 19549
Quote:
Originally Posted by lisanicole1 View Post
My question is how did the world allow NK to get this close to being able to nuke countries??
William J. Clinton: Remarks on the Nuclear Agreement With <B><font color='#cc3300'>North Korea</font></B>

Good afternoon. I am pleased that the United States and North Korea yesterday reached agreement on the text of a framework document on North Korea's nuclear program. This agreement will help to achieve a longstanding and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula.


Today, after 16 months of intense and difficult negotiations with North Korea, we have completed an agreement that will make the United States, the Korean Peninsula, and the world safer. Under the agreement, North Korea has agreed to freeze its existing nuclear program and to accept international inspection of all existing facilities.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:15 PM
 
2,095 posts, read 1,560,431 times
Reputation: 2300
as the only nation to use nukes against another country, no.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:17 PM
 
Location: The analog world
17,077 posts, read 13,381,268 times
Reputation: 22904
No, absolutely not!
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:17 PM
 
Location: Southeastern North Carolina
2,690 posts, read 4,222,310 times
Reputation: 4790
Quote:
Originally Posted by gentlearts View Post
I have not read all the posts, but here's my thinking. North Korea has been a wart on the butt of the planet since 1950-whenever. They are ruled by one loonie after another, and their people are woefully oppressed. Is this our problem? Not really, until it affects our wellbeing.

It becomes our problem, as they gain weaponry and become more and more of a threat to civilized society. Everyone has been kicking the can down the road, and Trump has the hot potato. Trump is not a guy who will keep kicking the can, if he thinks he can squash the wart once and for all.

I'm not worried, because, the president has the best and brightest military advisors possible, and I have no doubt he will expect those most affected, like S Korea and China, to do the heavy lifting.
Well, I am kinda worried. Trump may have the best and brightest advisors, but I doubt that he listens to them. I'm sure that he's been advised to lay off the Twitter, but he's still tweeting, isn't he?
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:17 PM
 
Location: alexandria, VA
16,352 posts, read 8,103,478 times
Reputation: 9726
Two nut jobs with nuclear weapons playing chicken. This **** is getting scary.
 
Old 08-08-2017, 06:20 PM
 
Location: USA
31,088 posts, read 22,107,744 times
Reputation: 19102
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
I'm going to have to go with no.

How about this, let's pull our troops out of Asia (and everywhere else) and let those people deal with their own problems. Why make ourselves a target by sticking our nose where it doesn't belong.

Estoy contigo hermano
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top