Don't tell CNN that. They have 24 hour coverage of "the war" planned until they can find another story on Trump and Russia...

You would do well to curb your desire to unleash emotional outbursts before you've had a chance to fully think them through.

I'm not going to comment one way or the other on the President's comments, but to waive off N.Korea as a non-threat exposes you as shockingly poorly informed.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

It's ratings baby! We love war and even the slight hint of a war that will not happen because there is no threat gives us the boners that cause ratings.

OK. I know how you operate. You are right there is a threat. They are a nation with a military so they are a threat. You are right. I am wrong. There is a threat. You win. Write it down. slowguy won.

Now that I have bent the knee allow me to put it this way. North Korea is not the threat we are being fed. North Korea is no where near the threat that is being panicked over.

I want to think slowguy for pulling in my hyperbole. WIthout him I would get in a hyperbole loop.

They are like 99% a threat to South Korea. 0.999% threat to Japan. Maybe 0.0001% threat to the USA.

but that .0001% counts. I was wrong.

Just think a bit. Who started the rhetoric? It wasn't President Trump. Again, I'm not going to comment on whether his words were well chosen or not, but it's hard to claim that he's instigating this tension because of his ratings when the war-like rhetoric was started by N.Korea's threats in response to UN sanctions.

N.Korea is not an immediate threat to nuke Hawaii. I called out CNN for their alarmism yesterday. However, N.Korea is on their way to being a nuclear power, and we are basically past the point of being able to stop that. They will have nukes, and those missiles will be able to reach the US. They are also a direct threat to S.Korea and the large amount of troops we have on the peninsula, as well as various other allies in Asia.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Yeah. I never said that wasn't a thing. They are a threat in the way all things are a threat. I have access to two guns (not on me but I can borrow them), some knives and all kinds of chemicals. I have a neighbor I can't stand. I am a threat to him. I have weapons and a dislike, a threat. The catch is I am not going to harm him because there is no reason too. North Korea has nothing to gain from war. There is nothing saying they are about to do anything. If a war starts it's going to be the US that starts it and the US isn't going to start anything.

This is not a story because North Korea is not an imminent threat. I welcome your lecture on threat levels and I will admit I used the term "imminent threat" wrong.

The truth about North Korea barely anyone is talking about is that they aren't a threat. There is no threat from North Korea. We have a piece of shit president in trouble so he is using the war dog whistle America loves so much. To Trump's great fortune there is another piece of shit who shares his stupidity talking trash he has zero intention of backing up. It's like the dumbest flex off in history.


Well written summary.

If Trump's goal was to stoop down to the level of North Korea - then this is a big win for him! [sarcasm]

Indeed, for those outside of a geographic area, this really is no big deal. However, I am sure that in South Korea, there are very legitimate and serious concerns of what might come next.

Although, it's concerning at some level, because major world conflicts (WW1), have started out, with less benign language and miss-communication.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I agree that you've used the term "threat" too loosely.

As it stands right now, NK isn't a threat to the mainland United States. NK is talking about lobbing some missiles and having them land about 30-40 km offshore from Guam which is a US military installation. But the threat to the mainland US is overblown.

But

NK is a threat to South Korea, and most of the South Korean population lives within artillery distance of NK. NK is a very real, very large threat to them. NK has promised to launch everything it has against SK if there is a hint of an invasion. It's the only reason that NK is still standing.

Uh oh. Among the LR deranged this is clearly a defense of Trump. So now you're a Trump ballwasher.

NK is a threat to South Korea, and most of the South Korean population lives within artillery distance of NK.


They have been a threat to South Korea long before they had a nuclear weapon. An entire generation grew up with the constant threats coming from the North so for the most part, it is just business as usual.


The only thing that has changed is the U.S President's comments, which is causing concern here but the rhetoric from NK happened long before Donald J. Trump came to office. There are smart adults in the administration to protect the world from Trump so a lot of the hype is way overblown.

ONCE AGAIN EVERYONE! PAY ATTENTION!

I bow down to all of you. I have phrased something wrong. This is terrible of me. I now put myself before you as a wretch. A slug. A nothing. I can't believe this sin. Like a real asshole I was talking about a treat to the US. It was very nationalistic of me. It was very wrong of me. This is a great shame that I will never live down.

My point being is that North Korea is not the threat that is currently being sold to us by the US GOVERNMENT AND US PRESS (I am talking about the US media and government not any other nations. There are nations where the government and media of that nation are not selling North Korea as some kind of threat. I am not talking about those nations. I am also aware not all media sources in the US and not all parts of the US government are selling the North Korea threat to the US not the threat to other nations. Now as far as the term sell goes. I accept any and all criticism that selling is the wrong expression. I will also accept any and all criticism of me using the term expression wrong. If I used the word term wrong I also accept that I made that mistake.) We are being snowballed. (If you disagree with the use of snowballed I apologize and would welcome a better word to use.)

That's just not accurate.

Leadership in N.Korea has changed in the past handful of years. You can't look at generations of threats and think this regime is the same as those before.

You mentioned N.Korea sending a missile to within 30-40 km of Guam. Even a couple of years ago, they couldn't do that. If they can do it accurately, that's another step, over and above the distance itself.

Once they are able to miniaturize a nuclear warhead to weaponized it, that's another significant step.

Having a nuclear capability can change a country's strategic calculus. At that point, their threats have a little more credibility, and the potential risk grows much higher. A country that feels out gunned and outmanned, will behave differently than a country that feels like it's a member if the nuclear club, and knows that it can do serious damage well outside of its local sphere of influence.

To say that the only thing that has changed is our President and his rhetoric is just not true.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

What would North Korea have to gain from a nuclear attack? Or atomic attack? Or thermonuclear attack? Or whatever attack you deem correct?

Notice how you are the only one that brings this up? #fakenews

Hoodwinked

OTOH, we are an existential threat to the North Korea regime, and always have been.

No. I've not. It gets pointed out often by others. Have you not noticed that?

Hoodwinked! I like it.

Self preservation. As oldandslow mentioned, we are an existential threat to N.Korea, and its regime in particular. N.Korea looks at the world, and see itself completely surrounded by enemies. Many of these enemies have openly criticized and made fun of the regime, and called for regime change. Right now, if the world decided they had had enough of the regime, the world could stomp N.Korea, and generally limit the damage to the peninsula. With the capability for nuclear strike, that calculus changes, and the enemies have to rethink their strategy, and potentially N.Korea finds themselves safe from regime change, because the threat of nuclear retaliation is too great to be acceptable to their enemies.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

And then there are the 'piece of shit' people/media/celebrities/politicians that are so blinded by their hatred for Trump that they resent anything and everything that can in any way be attributed to him. They twist unrelated matters around to attribute fault to him in some way. If he does something that Obama did during his term, it is criticized as ignorant, stupid, or whatever. Sometimes, it is just plain funny to see the lengths that some politicians and the media will go to in order to attribute an unpopular event or development to Trump. The hatred, vitriol, and venom on display by lefties is absolutely mind boggling and I think many of them have completely lost any ability for rational thought without severe bias.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

ANY nation that possess nuclear weapons and has the will to use them should be treated seriously on the international stage. And when a nation that possesses nuclear weapons engages in a casus belli (an act or situation provoking or justifying war -- such as launching a four-missile "crucial warning salvo" at Guam, which is both a U.S. territory and home to a very large U.S. military presence) -- a prudent nation would take steps to protect itself.

Personally, I've been a part of several military exercises over the years, both on and around the Korean Peninsula (Team Spirit, being the most frequent). I've seen DPRK soldiers staring across at U.S. and ROK forces up at Camp Bonifas on the Korean Demilitarized Zone. (Art Bonifas was a U.S. Army officer who -- along with fellow officer Mark Barrett -- was murdered with axes by DPRK soldiers while supervising the cutting down of a tree that was obscuring UN observers scanning the land separating the two sides up there.). Just from my limited knowledge of the North Koreans, I can say we should be taking what they do very, very seriously. Of course, some of what they say is hyperbole, but we've been dealing with them for more than 65 years now, so I think we know how to separate speech from acts (especially acts of war).

Leaving aside the heated rhetoric from Whoa Fat in Pyongyang and the Orange-Haired Wonder in D.C., I would refer everyone to the statement released by Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis as regards the situation with North Korea. He's been in this line of work for 44 years, much of it as a very, very serious Marine Corps general officer:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE


Statement by Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis

Press Operations

Release No: NR-286-17
Aug. 9, 2017

The United States and our allies have the demonstrated capabilities and unquestionable commitment to defend ourselves from an attack. Kim Jong Un should take heed of the United Nations Security Council’s unified voice, and statements from governments the world over, who agree the DPRK poses a threat to global security and stability. The DPRK must choose to stop isolating itself and stand down its pursuit of nuclear weapons. The DPRK should cease any consideration of actions that would lead to the end of its regime and the destruction of its people.

President Trump was informed of the growing threat last December and on taking office his first orders to me emphasized the readiness of our ballistic missile defense and nuclear deterrent forces. While our State Department is making every effort to resolve this global threat through diplomatic means, it must be noted that the combined allied militaries now possess the most precise, rehearsed and robust defensive and offensive capabilities on Earth. The DPRK regime’s actions will continue to be grossly overmatched by ours and would lose any arms race or conflict it initiates.

Statement by Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis > U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE > News Release View

---

"Politics is just show business for ugly people."

I thought Obama did many idiotic things. I was not a fan of Obama. So, you know, take you Christ fixation of Trump elsewhere.

He's already backed up, from what I can tell.

So you don't think North Korea would be worried about the absolute destruction of their nation if they popped a nuke? If the term popped a nuke is unacceptable I apologize.

<< Of course, some of what they say is hyperbole, but we've been dealing with them for more than 65 years now, so I think we know how to separate speech from acts (especially acts of war). >>

That distinction - and questions about President Trump's ability to make it - is what is troubling right now. The President's statements to date can be interpreted as indicating an inability to see the difference, which makes people on both sides twitchy and runs the risk of turning speech into acts. I think everyone hopes this is just a case of fighting hyperbole with hyperbole, but someone needs to turn down the heated rhetoric a little bit. I think Secs. Tillerson and Mattis are doing what they can on that front.

How do you mean?

See post #23.

dude, read up on your history... a single bullet started WW1......Threats from NK with live nukes could start something.

---

sometimes

I pointed this out in the other thread, but NK did not start the war-like rhetoric in response to the UN Sanctions. It's been ongoing daily since not long after the armistice. It just slightly changes every day to fit into various news events. Daily propaganda is about 90% about the glory and deeds of the Dear Leader, and 10% is about how we're going to set the U.S. on fire and dance on our ashes. Guam? Regular part of the schtick. Here's threat of imminent war on Guam from 2013.

The media just reports them in response to sanctions, etc, because that's when they're seeking statements from NK, and they just get the daily schtick.

Maybe it does escalate somewhat due to sanctions, but it's kind of hard to differentiate between, say, "we have final approval to nuke the United States," and "we will turn the United States into a boiled pumpkin"

You have to use the Trump tactic when using long sequences of mostly redundant words:

"The hatred, vitriol, and, frankly, venom."

You need the "frankly."

You're missing the point. It's not about what would happen if N.Korea launched a nuclear strike first. It's about what would happen if N.Korea's enemies attacked the regime or N.Korean territory. Having a nuclear capability is, for N.Korea, a bargaining tool and an insurance policy. Primarily, it's insurance against attack, because they know that if they're attacked, they're all going down anyway. So if they're already going down, they have nothing to lose, and with a nuclear capability they would be able to do serious and unacceptable damage to their enemies. That requires N.Korea's enemies to think twice before trying to topple the Kim regime or invade the North.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

This is true of everything. Shit goes down. Things go sideways fast. Surprises happen. So why aren't we running around screaming like maniacs about every nation and organization on Earth? (slowguy. I understand that no very few if any people are actually running around and screaming like maniacs about North Korea. I apologize for the hyperbole.) The panic in the US does not match the threat. As far WW1 goes I can discuss that all day. Would you like to discuss the generals? Would you like to hammer out what exactly incomposses the Battle Of The Frontiers? We can hypothesise what would have happened if the Schlieffen Plan would have worked. Was it ever possible for the plan to work in the first place. So yeah. Shit happens.

I mean his red line passed, and he did nothing, not even continuing with more threats, just talking about modernized the nuclear arsenal (when really it was Bush and Obama). Mostly silence, filled in by statements by Tillerson, et al.

The adults have taken over.

I can't stand the guy.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

We're also the glue that holds their country together in the sense that propaganda conditions the entire population from essentially birth that their core mission in life is defeating the U.S.. It's a love-hate relationship.

Manafort's house was raided by the FBI yesterday.

Also, we had darned near a full decade of running "Terror Alert Condition" tickers running across the bottom of every cable news channel. We'll survive CNN.

I'm surprised so many of you even watch cable TV. I cut the cord like a decade ago.

Right. This has a stabilization effect. The enemies will think twice before invading. I also don't see any nation building up to invade them. If the do use one on a foreign invasion then it will be time to panic because that is a massive destabilization. Now how does this justify the over the top talk from Trump and the media? How does this prove that we are under a direct threat from NK raining missiles down on us? The truth is that NK is a power we need to keep an eye on and keep in contact with but they are not going to attack the US.

Yeah, I was referring to this specific uptick in rhetoric. I understand there has been trash talk for decades.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

They may believe the chances of a US nuclear retaliation is low and may be over confident in their chances in a conventional conflict. The US military doesn't have the strongest track record against enemies that can retreat back into caves and tunnels for a few years.

They may also know that a nuke shot at the US will mean the end for them. They see that we love war and are just itching for it. They have seen our insane over reaction that is our war on terror. We want to make them into these huge war mongers that may do things but they aren't doing those things.

Doesn't matter if you or I see it. What matters is the perception of N.Korea regarding the threats surrounding them. They're about to see two weeks of pretty substantial military exercises with S.Korea, which we do a couple of times a year. We can explain that the exercises are defensive I nature till we're red in the face,...that's just not how they're going to perceive them.


I already criticized the media in the other Korea thread, and told you that I'm not commenting one way or the other about the President's statements. I'm not justifying any of that stuff.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I am lost. We agree that there is a threat but not the level of threat that the media and White House are talking, correct?

We agree, apparently, that there is a threat, which is much different than what you said in your first post.

We agree that the threat is not as imminent as the news media seems to be making is sound in their efforts to grab ratings.

I haven't heard the White House overstate the threat from N.Korea. The President made his own threats, but I haven't heard anyone from the WH or from DoD or DoS make it sound as if N.Korea was some sort of imminent existential threat.

We seem to disagree on the cause and motive behind the latest surge in rhetoric. You seem to think it's due to the President lagging in domestic polling. I think this latest uptick was caused by N.Korea's reaction to UN sanctions, and the President likely responding emotionally and by instinct rather than after measured discussion with his advisors.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Trump is the White House. Commander and chief. Any other president would see that North Korea being closer to having dependable ICBMs and nuclear warheads on them is not a good thing and would increase the threat level and inform the nation. The loudness that Trump is doing it makes me think he is doing it because he is trying to shift attention. Tweeting about "fire and fury" is unnecessary unless you want to get everyone worked up. Why would he want them worked up? To change the new cycle.

 
He didn't tweet about it. He was in a meeting about something else, he was asked about N.Korea's threats, and he responded in the moment.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

"The loudness that Trump is doing it makes me think he is doing it because he is trying to shift attention. Tweeting about "fire and fury" is unnecessary unless you want to get everyone worked up. Why would he want them worked up? To change the new cycle."

And you don't think that maybe, just maybe, he is responding to what he and just about everyone else except you view as a significant threat to a number of allied countries and, eventually, the mainland US? Maybe you think Trump and Kim Jung Un are actually in cohoots and they are orchestrating the whole thing.

That's quite a leap you are making there and exemplifies what I said earlier about the desperate and irrational measures lefties are taking to disparage Trump at any opportunity.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

You mentioned N.Korea sending a missile to within 30-40 km of Guam. Even a couple of years ago, they couldn't do that. If they can do it accurately, that's another step, over and above the distance itself.

I've never mentioned Guam.

Once they are able to miniaturize a nuclear warhead to weaponized it, that's another significant step.

The "threats" I was referring to are more related to South Korea and Japan. They have been threatening them for years and don't need a nuclear weapon to cause a lot of damage, particularly in SK. I still wouldn't take their nuclear threats against the U.S seriously.

Administrations in the U.S have always kind of kicked the can down the road when it comes to NK. Everyone knew they were led by a whacko but they were thought of as that annoying Uncle you just ignore. I've never heard a U.S President say they would be met with fire and fury and it is that language that has changed. Trump is now acting exactly like Kim, which really isn't that surprising, they are quite similar in a lot of ways. Both are pre-occupied about how others see them, want to project an air of toughness and seem to have a chip on their shoulder and have to prove themselves. The fact that 2 thin-skinned leaders are in a pissing contest is more worrisome to me than the fact that NK has a nuclear weapon. Lots of countries have that but none of them have a leader like Kim or Trump.

Which brings up a good point. If Kim has a decent number of nukes that he can put on a missile will he get more bold? Incursions into South Korea, attempts at terrorism elsewhere come to mind.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Not to mention sale of said nukes to the highest bidder... Chaching!

My fault. You're right, it was Durhamskier in the post before yours.


Lots? The list of nuclear powers is less than 10, and the list of those with deployed nuclear weapons is about 5. I wouldn't call that "lots of countries." The addition of another member to the club, especially one with such an odd regime at its helm, is certainly significant. I think there are enough redundant controls in place in the US that you don't need to worry overly much about the President saying something nasty.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I don't have time to read the whole thread, so I apologize if I'm repeating anyone's points:

I don't agree. NK's geographic location in Asia plus its history with China as its patron make it a player no matter how you cut it. Plus, didn't Obama tell Trump during one of their post-election sit downs that NK is the most dangerous current issue in the world? If Obama and Trump are on the same page on an issue then that leads me to think they're both correct.

That said, I don't think the nuclear threat is what this whole thing is all about. I'm not sure what it IS all about, but there's something else going on, and if I had to guess I'd say it's related to ISIS, Hezbollah, Quds Force, or some other exporter of ME violence... Did anyone notice that yesterday NK freed a Canadian pastor that it had been holding for two and a half years? There's something else going on beneath the surface...

THAT said, I don't think Kim is stupid, nor do I think he's anywhere near as crazy as he's made out to be. I think he's rational but is a pretty good saber rattler.

---

War is god

Trump's threats in the past at Kim have been fairly direct. And silly to think China would ever want a unified Korea.


"I would get China to make that guy disappear in one form or another very quickly,” The Donald, fresh off a victory in the New Hampshire primary, said of Kim Jong Un on “CBS This Morning.”

"And you don't think that maybe, just maybe, he is responding to what he and just about everyone else except you view as a significant threat to a number of allied countries and, eventually, the mainland US?"

Sure. I could be wrong about everything.

"Maybe you think Trump and Kim Jung Un are actually in cohoots and they are orchestrating the whole thing. "

That is really stupid. Yes, that is what I am saying. I think Trump and Little Kim are golf buddies. Wait until Trump golf courses open across all of North Korea.

"That's quite a leap you are making there and exemplifies what I said earlier about the desperate and irrational measures lefties are taking to disparage Trump at any opportunity. "

What leap? I don't think I am the only person on Earth saying North Korea isn't a huge immediate threat to the US. Also there is long and glorious tradition of politicians blowing things out of portion to change the news cycle. As far as you accusation of "desperate and irrational measures" I am taking to disparage Trump take a gander at what i have to say about the Democratic party and how I think the Russian probes are a waste of money and time or more exactly the lack of Russian posts. Now sit down and put on your red ball cap. Turn on Fox News and relax. You have a war on Christmas coming so you need your energy.

I didn't realize the true level of fear there is about North Korea right now. Granted my wording was bad but the push back against the idea that there is no need to be on the verge of shooting war with North Korea disturbs me. I am beginning to think there is going to be some kind of conflict because the people are getting on the war path. We just have to have boogie men.

We just have to have boogie men.

Not only does the government need a bad guy, but Trump is constantly looking for an enemy. He had someone during the Republican nomination (Lying Ted and Little Marco) and then of course Crooked Hillary. Then it was the media, James Comey and now he seems to be on the attack against Mitch McConnell.

He can never seem to have a dialog with anyone that has opposing views. He either loves them because they are the greatest ever or hates them and proceeds to attack non-stop. There is nothing in between. I think the country and the world are starting to see through him and realize he's not really to be taken seriously.

I agree. I think Trump represents a part of this nation that we don't want to claim.

One thing you need to take into account is the US is treaty bound to defend Japan and South Korea. In essence, an attack on either one, particularly with a weapon of mass destruction, pretty much obligates us to reply in kind. One of the reasons for that is that the US has asked that Japan and South Korea to not add nuclear weapons to its arsenal and in return the US has promised to back them up with those weapons should such a response be needed.

As I write this, the Japanese are placing missile defense batteries in the middle of Tokyo and testing its bomb shelter system indicating that they are taking the threats very seriously. If North Korea actually hits Japan with one of those missiles, and Japan declares war on NK, then the US is also treaty obligated to support Japan if not enter the war directly. If NK weaponizes the missile(s) that hit Japan with a nuclear warhead and mass casualties are suffered, the US is then obligated to respond in kind.

Maybe you think this is something to laugh at and not take seriously, but I tend to see it another way.

"Maybe you think this is something to laugh at and not take seriously, but I tend to see it another way. "

This is what I love. While in the thread I explain what I meant and said I worded the first post badly everyone needs to think I am talking about how much fun North Korea is. North Korea is a threat in that it it is a military power in the middle asia. It is lead by a tyrant. We need to keep an eye on them. We need to let them know we are not to be fucked around with. We need to continue out military presents in the south so they don't get any funny ideas. What I am talking about is the over the top bullshit being talked around. We are not about to wake up to an umbrella of North Korean ICBMs reigning down on our childrens heads. Guam is not about to be blown up. NK is not preparing to attack other nations. They have no reason to do this. They a saber rattling because that gets people to the table to talk to them and to back people off from attacking them. What they are doing has been done by nation states since the beginning of humans gathering in large groups.

The vibe I am getting is that you DO NOT tell an American that something is not a threat. It's like we need to be threatened at all times. Our love of war and of being the biggest guy with biggest dick is, to quote Trump, sad.

x2. They already have shown they are willing to strike a few years ago when they shelled the S Korean Island and sank a S Korean ship. I think unless the North stands down, unfortunately, a conflict is inevitable.

It is not inevitable. That is the beauty of the situation. We don't have to attack.

Therein lies the rub. You're correct we don't have to attack. The US is in an unenviable position. Attack first and risk the condemnation of nations around the world for a preemptive strike (Our record with Iraq doesn't help much). Don't attack, and NK does attack (SK, JPN, Guam, etc) and risk the condemnation of the nations around the world of not doing more to prevent a NK attack.

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

I think you're right, but with respect to the response in North Korea, I'm not sure that his instincts were wrong. As we know, North Korea has a long history of creating friction with the US and its neighbors to extract concessions. President Obama's team refused to play that game. It appears President Trump has signaled to North Korea (in his own unique way, reflecting his years of experience negotiating real estate deals) that he intends to continue that policy and not to treat their threats as reflecting a need for positive engagement. The continuation of the current policy - even if the messaging is way off-key - is, I think, something this administration should get credit for, regardless of whether one thinks that Trump is an ignorant blowhard who's in way over his head or the Second Coming of Ronald Reagan.

The problem is that he wasn't just talking privately to North Korea, of course. Everybody else (allied governments, non-allied governments, US and South Korean and Japanese civilians, etc.) heard it also, and they came away with a very different sense of the intended message.

But maybe I'm just being optimistic.

Do you honestly think that if we launch an attack on North Korea they wouldn't start battles with other nations? If they have the power to attack Japan right now then what prevents them from saying fuck it and as the US starts attacking them they send some missiles Japan's way? If we attack before they do do you think South Korea will walk away with major harm. Also the thing everyone keeps not talking about is the people of North Korea. If we go in and start fighting the population will become refugees and flood surrounding nations. What happens then? How will we guarantee their safety? How will we rebuild North Korea? You brought up Iraq. HOw did that turn out for us?

The vibe you should be getting is that you shouldn't say that something is not a threat, when it clearly is. Nobody would be giving you any crap if you said that Bermuda is not a threat. But when you make outlandish statements that don't express an understanding of reality for the purpose, apparently, of taking a pot shot at the President and the media, then you get the kind of vibe you've been getting.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Am I your special boy? Do you just feel an unbreakable desire to respond to me and not read my responses? Is there something about me that you just can't say no to?

I invite you to reread my posts on this thread. Read where I freely admit I can 100% wrong about this. Read where I admit that I my original post was terribly written. Read where I agree that North Korea is a threat. I think we should continue to keep a force in South Korea. I think we should keep a carrier strike group with in range. I think we should be in constant contact with them. How much more clearly can I say it?

Now to restate my position. This level of panic in the media and from the president is bullshit. This isn't a pop shot. Look at the media and what the 24 hour news source is doing with this story. Listen to our bumbling president have a hard time getting a rational sentence out. I am not saying anything crazy. I am not saying anything new.

I love being your special boy but for fucks sakes read what I write.

I brought Iraq up for exactly that reason, how did it run out, a preemptive attack, not so good. That's the position the US is in now, if the US strikes first, there is no reason for NK to not launch everything they have in every direction. But, the big BUT, what happens if NK strikes first, then what? For the record, I'm in the wait and see camp, as a previous poster pointed out, the US is bound by treaty to respond if SK and/or JPN are attacked. As for the North Korean population, who knows, that's a population that hase been brain-washed for 65-ish years. They might simply lay down arms and look for a way to support their families, or the vast majority may fight to the very end for their Dear Leader. There is no good immediate good outcome for the Korean Peninsula. If war breaks out, it'll be a human catastrophe for good long while. I see an overthrow of the regime as the best possible outcome, but even that isn't pretty. Not for a country wholly dependent on it's government to tell them the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

The tricky question, that no previous administration or Security Counsel member-state (ie Russia and China) have ever figured out, is how to diplomatically defuse the North Koreans, it's quite obvious sanctions do not work. With a real threat of a NK nuke now, perhaps Russia and/or China will do more to defuse the situation.

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

We are convinced that a first strike will avoid terrible things. Why is that to believed? We attack they go nuts. Is it better because we attacked first? All a preemptive strike will do is make the American war boner more satisfying but it won't prevent shit.

Good point. It's hard to stop or even slow momentum. With tensions running high, all it'll take is some NK gunboat to sink a SK patrol boat (or vice versa) and they're back in a hot war. It's even harder to slow momentum with jackass statements like Trump's, and now he's said that his "fire and fury" statement maybe wasn't tough enough. Not sure how to make statements tougher.

---

War is god

It's clear. I understand the progression of this thread. However, it's not clear that you are taking that into account when you complain about the vibe you're getting. And it's not clear that you understand what other people are telling you, when you claim that the reason you're getting this vibe is because Americans need to feel threatened.


I've read everything you write, which is why I feel like you are just writing your own shit, and paying very little attention to the responses you're getting. When you say that the vibe is one that shows Americans need a threat, and that it makes them feel like they have big dicks, then I surmise that you didn't pay any attention to the actual responses you got. Moreover, it makes me think you aren't even maintaining a consistent position with your own posts. It's hard to complain that we're telling you N.Korea is an actual threat because we need to have some threat in our lives, considering you've already acknowledged yourself that N.Korea is an actual threat.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

I have to say I'm having a little difficulty following your logic here.

North Korea perceives itself to be vulnerable to attack from the rest of the world. North Korea is interested in self-preservation. North Korea is fully aware that if it launched a nuclear attack, it would face total destruction in response. But having nuclear weapons provides North Korea with protection from attack.

Under that scenario, isn't North Korea only really a threat if someone else decides to attack them first? Isn't Tibbs right in saying that in this understanding of things, nuclear weapons in NK are stabilizing?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

ear

Yes and no (speaking for myself). Sure, nuclear weapons are an inherent deterrent.

But there several aspects of NK related to nuclear weapons that inject some instability.

The first is that NK has a historic tactic of dangling threat of nuclear capability as a lever for extracting aid from the West. The West has been very reliable in providing aid (which NK depends on) in exchange for concessions in nuclear development. Over decades. That "dangling" is now becoming an issue. In the B. Clinton era it was enrichment, etc. Back then we gave them energy aid and other things to stop enriching. Which basically did little more than maybe pause things. Possibly it did nothing. So we've consistently rewarded NK for their behavior. But now we're talking about being on the verge of completing an ICBM. That's a different thing to dangle. At some it's not a cute little political game anymore.

The second instability is in the government/military. There's been instability among senior military in NK. Top generals executed or purged. Was that a nascent military coup that was put down? Does the military control the the nukes? Or does the political party not trust the military and maintain its own command structure independently? That instability is a little scary for a bureaucracy that has a nuclear capability. Here in the U.S. we have strong protections against the "Dr. Strangelove" scenario. The odds are probably effectively nil. In NK I'd speculate that those odds are quite a bit higher.

Or course what I say changes sometimes. I am fine with being wrong. I am totally OK in rewriting things because I am barely literate. Sometimes it takes me a while to make things clear.

I get that people are freaked out about North Korea. I see on the news and hear the barely formed words of our president that things are not cool. Fine. North Korea has shot a few new missiles and they might have some nukes. I agree that is bad. I agree we need to keep an eye on them and let them know we are on to them and will not accept attacks outside of their borders. My problem is the the level of panic. This is not the new Cuban Missile Crisis. When people are talking about pe emptive strikes and the president is using Game Of Thrones language I get worried.

I don't like the vibe because this reminds me of the lead to Iraq. It reminds me of how I felt and talked. I had people try their best tell me that Iraq was not a direct threat to the US and I wouldn't listen. I disregarded them and said they weren't paying attention and that they where being stupid. Look at what happened in Iraq. I listened to and believed what my president and the press told me. I was wrong then. So now I am keeping a cool head and looking around at what is happening.

As a nation we do need a threat. All groups do. To be the victim is a natural part of being human. It helps us team up. It gives our ideals meaning. If I was wrong I would expect to be responded to with rationality and cold facts. I wasn't. I was even treated to the sarcastic theory that I think that Trump and Kim are working together. I am not getting a good vibe from the nation about this. It is OK that I feel this way because I have zero power over any of this. The simple fact that so much energy has been put into my wrongness gives me the feeling this whole North Korean thing is about emotion not facts.

I like pizza parties.

Look, how would you feel if Maxine Waters was the president?

Well, that's how a lot of us conservatives feel right now. ;-P

Hope that helps you understand why you will never see me in a red ballcap. We are in a tough spot here. We have to stand behind this guy because, well, he's The Guy. And, keep telling ourselves over and over again, '...at least it's not Hillary...at least it's not Hillary...'

Have some compassion, for cryin' out loud. It's tough being Republican right now.

Greg

---

If you are a Canuck that engages in gratuitous bashing of the US, you are probably on my Iggy List. So, save your self a bunch of typing a response unless you also feel the need to gratuitously bash me. If so, have fun.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f___ things up" - Barack Obama, 2020

This has never been a cute little political game. The president choosing what breed of dog to get it a cute little political game. We have gotten ourselves in a little pickle with North Korea over the decades because they are a problem. They are a big problem but there is just no evidence they are a nation that exceeds it's borders. It's incredibly unAmerican to sit and wait but the only smart thing is to sit and wait.

I agree with all of that. I don't think anyone is exactly thrilled with the idea of NK having nuclear weapons. But I don't think slowguy's explanation of why a nuclear North Korea is a threat really works. Seems like a purely defensive stance on their part, not something that threatens us.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I hate the idea of Maxine Waters as president. I don't like any Democrats that I know of.

I have no compassion. You guys picked him. This was your choice. Also you don't have to stand behind him. That is the beauty of a democracy you can say fuck that guy. Your party can work to get him out.

Except that one time, when they, you know, invaded South Korea.
And the time they kidnapped those civilians in South Korea and Japan.
And then there was the time they sank that South Korean warship.

Trail's post covered some of the pertinent points. Keep in mind, I'm not arguing specifically that a "nuclear DPRK" is a threat, or that a "nuclear DPRK" does or doesn't stabilize the region. I was countering Tibbs' first post, which said that DPRK is not a threat at all. DPRK is a threat, regardless of nuclear capability. The addition of nukes gives them a bigger set of tools to work with.

In my opinion, having nukes is not purely defensive in the mind of KJU or DPRK leadership. It provides a deterrence from attack, for sure, and that's the point I wrote about in a previous post. It also provides them with potential leverage for bargaining/extortion (depending on how you view it). It also may provide them, in their minds, the status and power to pursue other aims or military plans. For example, they might feel like they can harass S.Korea more brazenly, or assert claims over disputed islands, etc with less chance of the international community interfering, because they can hold the threat of nuclear strike over the heads of the world's powers.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Yes 67 years ago the North Invaded the south.

Yes the kidnapped people. Not good but not and invasion.

Israel attacked one of our warships. Am I too believe Israel will attack the US?

The fact is North Korea has shown no signs of crossing it's borders.

I was countering Tibbs' first post, which said that DPRK is not a threat at all.

I think Tibbs is more right than wrong, unless you're South Korea.

DPRK is a threat, regardless of nuclear capability. The addition of nukes gives them a bigger set of tools to work with.

Gives them bigger tools, maybe. But they still can't threaten us, unless they're flat suicidal. They're no threat to us whatsoever with conventional military forces, and we'd wipe them off the earth if they used a nuke. So really, no actual threat.

Even as bargaining leverage, it's probably not that bad a situation. Our appeasement in the past has been aimed precisely at trying to keep them from getting nuclear weapons. Predictably, that didn't work. But now that they have them, what other negotiating move do they really have? Give us food and money and technology, or we'll nuke you? Not really a viable course.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Despite the incident with the USS Liberty (for which the Israeli government paid a monetary settlement), the occasional bout of spying between friends, and intermittent political disputes, relations between the US and Israel are generally positive. Relations between North Korea and South Korea, not so much.

I get that this looks a lot like the run up to the Iraq War to you, but I don't think this rises to the same level of deliberate marketing. Unlike Iraq, which apparently seemed like a good idea to some people, it's not in anyone's interest to get into an actual war with North Korea right now. There is always the risk of miscalculation, of course, but I really think this is just posturing by the leadership on both sides.

I don't understand this attitude that just because we would beat them handily, they're somehow no threat. If we go to war with DPRK on the peninsula, many S.Koreans and Americans will die. Probably Japanese too. If they launch a nuke at Guam, Hawaii, wherever, the fact that we would then wipe them off the face of the planet doesn't negate the damage that their strike would have caused. I'm pretty certain that, in that scenario, the people of Guam, Hawaii, or wherever, are going to feel threatened, for whatever time they can feel that way before the missile hits.

I'm not arguing that DPRK is a threat to the existence of the United States.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

It is posturing. I am just worried about the temperament of the natios and it's leaders in regards to the posturing.

If we go to war with DPRK on the peninsula, many S.Koreans and Americans will die.

If.

But why should we go to war with North Korea? They can't threaten us. Unless we go to war with them on the peninsula.

If they launch a nuke at Guam, Hawaii, wherever, the fact that we would then wipe them off the face of the planet doesn't negate the damage that their strike would have caused.

That's true. I think what I'm saying is that there does not appear to be any likelihood of that happening. Your earlier posts didn't indicate that you consider it a real possibility either- you portrayed the regime as rational and interested in self preservation.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

You can say all these things can happen, and they can, but all kinds of things can happen. Where is the proof that it is going to happen?

A new Korean war would be a lot worse than you think. It will cause chaos through out the region.

-
sooooo what is their point in (if they follow through), dropping ordinance "near" Guam? Tibbs is making the point that "that's all they are saying they will do"; why is this a hunkey-dory scenario?

So you support an preemptive attack on North Korea, correct?

"That in a nutshell is what this is about. If a military option is on the table, then it needs to be decided before they have a reliable nuke. That window is closing quickly. Americans will accept casualties, even American servicemen, when it's not-in-my-backyard. Risking a city in the continental U.S. is another story. "
I asked if I was correct. Am I? This statement can go either way. I can be wrong. I have been wrong before.

"Tibbs is making the point that "that's all they are saying they will do"; why is this a hunkey-dory scenario? "

They have not threatened to hit Guam. That is a fact. So what do we do?



Note: I took a question out for clarity.

They are a big problem but there is just no evidence they are a nation that exceeds it's borders.

Except that one time, when they, you know, invaded South Korea.
And the time they kidnapped those civilians in South Korea and Japan.
And then there was the time they sank that South Korean warship.

How many times has the U.S, Russia or China exceeded their borders?

A long time ago, when there were only 2 superpowers, the idea of mutually assured destruction kept people feeling safe. Then the UK and France developed weapons and China felt vulnerable so they got it. Stability returned. Later, India developed nuclear capability so Pakistan felt threatened and followed suit.

Up until recently, the world was relatively at peace again despite the fact that Pakistan, a troubled country, had a weapon. Israel is in the Middle East and they are a nuclear power but Iran is close so another case of MAD.

Now North Korea wants to gain recognition and gain a weapon and the world is supposed to freak out because there is a madman in charge (just like in Pakistan). I think the world will survive, others will develop weapons and despite the crazies in Iran, Pakistan and North Korea, the fear of the end game will keep things peaceful.

Do you think they're going to attack Guam?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Well for starters, because we're obligated by treaty to defend S.Korea.



I think they are interested in self preservation and self interest, and from that perspective, they can be said to be a "rational actor." However, their idea of self interest, how they view and understand the world around them and their options, and what they might view as acceptable risk are very likely not in line with how we view the world, and so it's difficult to predict reliably what they might do. We should be careful not to mirror image, and assume that they view their interests the same way we might if we were in their shoes.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Where is the proof that it's going to rain tomorrow? Weatherman said that it can happen, but all sorts of things can happen.

Don't waste my time. Nobody offered the opinion that any of this is certain, and nobody can "prove" that something will happen in the future.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Human actions are different then weather. You never know is a bad thing to build policy on.

Well for starters, because we're obligated by treaty to defend S.Korea.

Fair enough. They are a threat to South Korea, who we're bound to by treaty. They are still not a threat to us. (And again, might be time to reconsider our global treaty obligations.)


I think they are interested in self preservation and self interest, and from that perspective, they can be said to be a "rational actor." However, their idea of self interest, how they view and understand the world around them and their options, and what they might view as acceptable risk are very likely not in line with how we view the world, and so it's difficult to predict reliably what they might do.

There's a difference between "they never do what we want," and "we can't figure out what they're going to do." In recent decades, their overall stance has been quite predictable. Even if not, it's certainly been geared towards self preservation and self interest, and attacking the US would be radically out of line with their past behavior.

They aren't a threat to us at all without nukes. They are only threat to us with nukes if we assume they're genuinely crazy. They don't appear to be crazy.

I hear you about the danger to South Korea and treaty obligations and all that. But I think people ought to speak a little more precisely when the topic is war, nuclear or otherwise. People insist that North Korea is a real threat to us because they're bad guys. They're bad guys, but they're not threat to us.

It's kind of funny how so many Americans see such dire threats from such insignificant countries.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Nobody said, "you never know." And human actions vs weather has nothing to do with "proof" that something will happen in the future. As usual, you're just typing whatever nonsense comes into your head.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

It's kind of funny how some people think that if a country can't destroy us, they present no threat.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Vise versa bubba. You have flat confused me.

No. You just confuse yourself. If you took time to read, understand, and then form a response, instead of just spewing nonsense, you might be less confused.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Egads. South Korea and Japan provide such immense strategic and economic value to the United States I think it'd be insanity to back out of those alliances.

I mean if you wanted to hold up the freaking crown jewel of the theory of liberal Westernism, globalism and "free" trade and how it mutually benefits all parties it's freaking US<->Japan/Korea.

-
Read my post and you'll have your answer...then you can answer my question.

You have been around a lot longer than I have but I have already figured out that Tibsy is off his meds.

Save yourself some frustration and let it all go. Move on.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Wouldn't them being a threat to Japan and South Korea be an indirect threat to us? I mean if North Korea blew up Souel even with convention artillery, I think it would be a major impact to the US economy and American interests in the region.

Go fuck yourself bra.

Ok bra.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?