North Korea says it has developed more-advanced hydrogen bomb - KCNA

[coconuthead]

the NK's only want the serial antagonists from across the pacific to back off

 

they have had their security threatened for a long time.......now they have successfully threatened Guam's, Japan's, etc.

[craigt3365]

25 minutes ago, coconuthead said:

the NK's only want the serial antagonists from across the pacific to back off

 

they have had their security threatened for a long time.......now they have successfully threatened Guam's, Japan's, etc.

So you are saying that the country who invaded South Korea, and responsible for thousands of deaths, the one who's violated the south's boarders dozens of times, counterfeits currencies, produces fake drugs for sale around the world, sells chemical weapons to Syria, etc, etc, etc, is not the problem?  Seriously?

 

Wow....

[craigt3365]

5 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

My view is this. North Korea should only be nuked IF they fire a nuke themselves, if they themselves nuke Japan, or South Korea, or Guam. No way, do I reckon, North Korea should be nuked because of firing rockets over Japan. No way should North Korea be nuked because they're detonating nukes on their own soil.

If they fire a nuke,  thousands might already be dead. No leader of a nation would allow that. No need to nuke North Korea. Plenty of other weapons available to do the job. Sad it's come to this, but the blame falls on Kim. The entire world community is against this. Even Russia and China, though there is more these two countries could do to stop this. Like quit selling them oil! LOL

[BuaBS]

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

The entire world community is against this.

No way ! A big part is laughing their heads off . Kimmy is sticking up his fat middle finger to the USA .

Kim should start his own cryptocurency , lets call it KimCoin , and see the support rolling in , and topple the sanctions against his country.

[Ruffian Dick]

8 hours ago, baboon said:

Who told you that?

And am being ironic. Of course there are Russians in the Ukraine...

[Ruffian Dick]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

If they fire a nuke,  thousands might already be dead.

Good bye to most of the Koreans in the world.

 

I've heard credible pundits say that the thing Kim is afraid of Regime Change, in other words, his regime and change being him on a meat-hook. Of course, his little game with nukes is only going to hasten that end...

Edited September 4, 2017 by Ruffian Dick

[BuaBS]

World news ( and thaivisa keyboard warriors ) are obsessing about Kim's nuclear capabilities , they forget Kim has also Bio & Chemical weapons that are easier to use than nukes . After decades of preparations , I'm sure NK must have had some already smuggled into SK , just waiting for the go order.

[LazySlipper]

23 hours ago, British Bulldog said:

What gets me is ... this last 'test' actually flew over Japan, did it not ? And armed or not, if the fuel or propulsion system 'fizzed out' and the test bomb fell out of the sky onto main land Japan, there could be a huge loss of lives as it fell on a City/Town hitting large buildings as it dropped to the streets below, shattering glass, and creating other debris,  possibly landing on a bus or two, plus cars, people etc. on a main street ... etc. etc. ... surely that in itself is enough to wake the UN up and do something about these 'tests' ... Kim, can't say; "Whoops, sorry, that was just a test, we forgot to check the fuel level on that one ..." ... ???

 

Spot on. Problem is, IMHO, that Trump, because of all the hate directed towards him, might actually be afraid to actually stick it to KJU. KJU is in desperate need of a caning but will most likely never happen...

 

The states have been paying out 'chill money' to KJU and his family for who knows how long. This diaper wearing dictator just throws a tantrum when he figures his caviar, gold, sports cars, yachts, are due for an upgrade.

 

 

[ExpatOilWorker]

One day Netflix will make a TV series, Neucos, about little Kimmy boy and hopefully it will have a very similar ending to Season 2 of a recent TV series with a similar name.

[Krataiboy]

15 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Please resd this.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/01/asia/russia-north-korea-analysis/index.html

Russia's power play in North Korea aimed at both China and US

 

Yeah, but. . . 

 

A typical mixture of truth, half-truths, flawed analysis and biased opinion from the White House's tame media equivalent of RT. 

 

Of course North Korea is being used as a pawn by all three major powers. As in Syria, the Russians are once again proving themselves more adept at the game than "The Yankees", as Kim Jong Un calls them.  

 

Could this possibly be, despite not having not won a war since defeating Japan by using the very "defensive" weapons they would deny to others, because Uncle Sam continues slavishly to adhere to the dubious principle that might is right (Understandable, I suppose, when you have a rocket in your pocket capable of destroying just about anybody and anything on the planet)? 

 

The fact that Putin has a history of trade with North Korea - including wheat and oil without which millions might well have starved - does not justify the unsubstantiated assertion - which is what I was objecting to in my original posting - that he is covertly facilitating their nuclear programme.

 

If you (via CNN, of Fox News or the White House Press Office) have credible evidence to the contrary, let's see it.

Edited September 4, 2017 by Krataiboy
error

[tonbridgebrit]

3 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Yeah, but. . . 

 

A typical mixture of truth, half-truths, flawed analysis and biased opinion from the White House's tame media equivalent of RT. 

 

Of course North Korea is being used as a pawn by all three major powers. As in Syria, the Russians are once again proving themselves more adept at the game than "The Yankees", as Kim Jong Un calls them.  

 

Could this possibly be, despite not having not won a war since defeating Japan by using the very "defensive" weapons they would deny to others, because Uncle Sam continues slavishly to adhere to the dubious principle that might is right (Understandable, I suppose, when you have a rocket in your pocket capable of destroying just about anybody and anything on the planet)? 

 

The fact that Putin has a history of trade with North Korea - including wheat and oil without which millions might well have starved - does not justify the unsubstantiated assertion - which is what I was objecting to in my original posting - that he is covertly facilitating their nuclear programme.

 

If you (via CNN, of Fox News or the White House Press Office) have credible evidence to the contrary, let's see it.

Go on, Krataiboy, say it as it is.
The truth ? Russia has traded with North Korea. But certain posters forget that Washington has handed out loads of gifts of rice and oil to North Korea during the last two decades, to try and get them to reduce their weapons programme.

Notice how people criticise Russia and China when they try to talk to North Korea. But when Washintong tries to talk to and stop North Korea, using rice and oil, well, that's called diplomacy.

Krataiboy, the only thing incorrect about your post, is you said Putin is trading wheat and oil. Putin is actually trading rice and oil with North Korea.

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[tonbridgebrit]

8 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

If they fire a nuke,  thousands might already be dead. No leader of a nation would allow that. No need to nuke North Korea. Plenty of other weapons available to do the job. Sad it's come to this, but the blame falls on Kim. The entire world community is against this. Even Russia and China, though there is more these two countries could do to stop this. Like quit selling them oil! LOL

"No need to nuke North Korea. Plenty of other weapons available to do the job."
I don't think you know what's really happening. If Washington does do a strike on Kim, it will be nuclear. Why would Washington drop conventional explosives to knock out North Korea, when nukes are available to Washington ? Remember, Washington nuked Japan back in 1945, that's when the enemy had no nukes. Now, when the enemy has got nukes, well, even more reason to use nukes.

There's only one thing stopping America carrying out a disastrous and catastrophic strike against North Korea, and that's bearing in mind if North Korea does not fire the first nuke in this war.

And what's that ? Well, Trump is in charge. Everything that Trump does, the media will certainly be against it. So, Trump knows that a war against North Korea will not be backed by the media. This means most of America will not back it. If Hillary was in charge, all action, including a nuclear miltary strike will be called "in the interests of security", and the media will back and support the strike.

In a weird way, Trump actually makes our world safer. Trump can't sell a war to America, Hillary Clinton can. It's good that Hillary is NOT in charge.

Edited September 4, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[balo]

This is how it works. 

Every time Trump opens his mouth and talk about NK , Kim is getting mentally unstable and need to act . Because Kim was bullied  at school .

Now Kim can finish it off by destroying the world .  He is ready , just one more twitter message from Trump and kaboom !  

 

No its not a James Bond movie . It's 2017 .  Take it seriously . 

 

 

 

 

 

[craigt3365]

9 hours ago, BuaBS said:

No way ! A big part is laughing their heads off . Kimmy is sticking up his fat middle finger to the USA .

Kim should start his own cryptocurency , lets call it KimCoin , and see the support rolling in , and topple the sanctions against his country.

The entire U.N. security council voted to sanction North Korea. The latest test was a huge loss of face to China just as they are hosting the BRICs. LOL

 

So Kimmy just stuck up his fat middle finger to China also. LOL

[craigt3365]

5 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Yeah, but. . . 

 

A typical mixture of truth, half-truths, flawed analysis and biased opinion from the White House's tame media equivalent of RT. 

 

Of course North Korea is being used as a pawn by all three major powers. As in Syria, the Russians are once again proving themselves more adept at the game than "The Yankees", as Kim Jong Un calls them.  

 

Could this possibly be, despite not having not won a war since defeating Japan by using the very "defensive" weapons they would deny to others, because Uncle Sam continues slavishly to adhere to the dubious principle that might is right (Understandable, I suppose, when you have a rocket in your pocket capable of destroying just about anybody and anything on the planet)? 

 

The fact that Putin has a history of trade with North Korea - including wheat and oil without which millions might well have starved - does not justify the unsubstantiated assertion - which is what I was objecting to in my original posting - that he is covertly facilitating their nuclear programme.

 

If you (via CNN, of Fox News or the White House Press Office) have credible evidence to the contrary, let's see it.

Please point out the lies in that CNN article or you are just trolling. I've not read an article that says Russia is supporting their nuclear weapons program. If you see one, please share!

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

"No need to nuke North Korea. Plenty of other weapons available to do the job."
I don't think you know what's really happening. If Washington does do a strike on Kim, it will be nuclear. Why would Washington drop conventional explosives to knock out North Korea, when nukes are available to Washington ? Remember, Washington nuked Japan back in 1945, that's when the enemy had no nukes. Now, when the enemy has got nukes, well, even more reason to use nukes.

There's only one thing stopping America carrying out a disastrous and catastrophic strike against North Korea, and that's bearing in mind if North Korea does not fire the first nuke in this war.

And what's that ? Well, Trump is in charge. Everything that Trump does, the media will certainly be against it. So, Trump knows that a war against North Korea will not be backed by the media. This means most of America will not back it. If Hillary was in charge, all action, including a nuclear miltary strike will be called "in the interests of security", and the media will back and support the strike.

In a weird way, Trump actually makes our world safer. Trump can't sell a war to America, Hillary Clinton can. It's good that Hillary is NOT in charge.

South Korea is conducting drills to wipe out Kim. They don't have nukes. So that negates what you're saying and reinforces my comment. A nuclear attack will never happen and is not needed.

 

Seoul steps up military response to North Korea's nuclear test

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/04/asia/north-korea-nuclear-test/index.html

 

A huge loss of face to China just as they are hosting the BRICs summit. In China!

[tonbridgebrit]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

South Korea is conducting drills to wipe out Kim. They don't have nukes. So that negates what you're saying and reinforces my comment. A nuclear attack will never happen and is not needed.

 

Seoul steps up military response to North Korea's nuclear test

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/04/asia/north-korea-nuclear-test/index.html

 

A huge loss of face to China just as they are hosting the BRICs summit. In China!

Craigt, what are you trying to say ?
"South Korea is conducting drills to wipe out Kim. They don't have nukes. So that negates what you're saying and reinforces my comment. A nuclear attack will never happen and is not needed."

Correct, South Korea does not have nukes. If war breaks out between North Korea and South Korea, and if the USA is not involved, in that case, North Korea will win easily. That's because North Korea have got nukes.

I'm trying to say, that with America involved, Washington will nuke North Korea. What makes you reckon Washington won't nuke North Korea ? Washington nuked Japan back in 1945, bearing in mind Japan had no nukes. And indeed, I don't have a problem with people saying that Japan deserved to be nuked. Washington was correct to nuke Japan. And if Washington nuked a non-nuclear Japan, well, why not nuke North Korea, when North Korea has actually got nukes ?


Why are you trying to say that this is a loss of face to Beijing ??  I really do think you should look at Washington, and see what's really going on. I don't hate Trump, but lots of Americans feel that Trump is making America look ridiculous in this situation. I'm not part of that crowd that is saying that America's reputation is being dragged through mud by Trump. I reckon that the media is the real issue, they have got something against Trump. They are the ones who are trying to say that Trump is an absurd man, they are trying to say that Washington's credibility is being destroyed by Trump.

And here's you, trying to deflect Washington's mass loss of credibility (bearing in mind that this loss is being done by the media) by trying to make it look like that it is Beijing that looks silly.

[Krataiboy]

6 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Go on, Krataiboy, say it as it is.
The truth ? Russia has traded with North Korea. But certain posters forget that Washington has handed out loads of gifts of rice and oil to North Korea during the last two decades, to try and get them to reduce their weapons programme.

Notice how people criticise Russia and China when they try to talk to North Korea. But when Washintong tries to talk to and stop North Korea, using rice and oil, well, that's called diplomacy.

Krataiboy, the only thing incorrect about your post, is you said Putin is trading wheat and oil. Putin is actually trading rice and oil with North Korea.

 

I stand corrected. Rice one, Tonbridgbrit!

[Justgrazing]

5 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

"No need to nuke North Korea. Plenty of other weapons available to do the job."
I don't think you know what's really happening. If Washington does do a strike on Kim, it will be nuclear. Why would Washington drop conventional explosives to knock out North Korea, when nukes are available to Washington ? Remember, Washington nuked Japan back in 1945, that's when the enemy had no nukes. Now, when the enemy has got nukes, well, even more reason to use nukes.

There's only one thing stopping America carrying out a disastrous and catastrophic strike against North Korea, and that's bearing in mind if North Korea does not fire the first nuke in this war.

And what's that ? Well, Trump is in charge. Everything that Trump does, the media will certainly be against it. So, Trump knows that a war against North Korea will not be backed by the media. This means most of America will not back it. If Hillary was in charge, all action, including a nuclear miltary strike will be called "in the interests of security", and the media will back and support the strike.

In a weird way, Trump actually makes our world safer. Trump can't sell a war to America, Hillary Clinton can. It's good that Hillary is NOT in charge.

The U S has long possesed the means to obliterate N K .. Richard Nixon was on the verge of weilding the nuclear stick on N K in 1969 after the N K'ers shot down an American spy plane killing everyone on board as he considered it tantamount to an act of war .. It was only Henry Kissinger who talked him out of it by pointing out the consequences .. And the same consequences exist today only more so because now N K has Nuclear fireworks of its own .. Just about every military " expert " on the subject think a pre-emptive strike by the U S on N K that would take out all of his Nuclear and Chemical weapons in one simultaneous devasting strike is fanciful .. He has mobile launchers for these rockets that are notoriously difficult to target .. They have hundreds of artillery pieces some hidden within chambers hewn from sold rock near the D M Z all pointing at Seoul and all capable of hitting it with Chemical or Nuclear shells .. If a simultaneous pre-emptive strike by the U S fails to destroy all of those Kim then has nothing to lose and what he does have left you can bet he will rain down on S Korea and Japan which is where the deadly consequences will play out .. Besides the most obvious casualties from Nuclear explosions there is the radioactive fall out issue , the destruction of infrastructure leading to inability to care for casualties , diseases proliferate because of loss of clean water , lack of sanitation due to loss of electricity for sewage works etc etc the list goes on .. And then there's the effect on the economies of S Korea and Japan .. not to mention China who itself would not be immune to radioactive contamination and the effect of the economic disaster plus whatever N Koreans survive such a strike are quite likely to wanna get the hell out of there and China is just over the border .. 

[JSPS]

What's this big round thing.

NK Leader Kim Jong Un inspects the world's largest butt plug


Sent from my SM-G935P using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Thongkorn]

Just now, JSPS said:

NK Leader Kim Jong Un inspects the world's largest butt plug


Sent from my SM-G935P using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Mr kim i s saying " are you certain it won't hurt and make me walk funny.

[harada]

Have I got time for a few more buckets of ice cream before the next launch?

[craigt3365]

9 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Craigt, what are you trying to say ?
"South Korea is conducting drills to wipe out Kim. They don't have nukes. So that negates what you're saying and reinforces my comment. A nuclear attack will never happen and is not needed."

Correct, South Korea does not have nukes. If war breaks out between North Korea and South Korea, and if the USA is not involved, in that case, North Korea will win easily. That's because North Korea have got nukes.

I'm trying to say, that with America involved, Washington will nuke North Korea. What makes you reckon Washington won't nuke North Korea ? Washington nuked Japan back in 1945, bearing in mind Japan had no nukes. And indeed, I don't have a problem with people saying that Japan deserved to be nuked. Washington was correct to nuke Japan. And if Washington nuked a non-nuclear Japan, well, why not nuke North Korea, when North Korea has actually got nukes ?


Why are you trying to say that this is a loss of face to Beijing ??  I really do think you should look at Washington, and see what's really going on. I don't hate Trump, but lots of Americans feel that Trump is making America look ridiculous in this situation. I'm not part of that crowd that is saying that America's reputation is being dragged through mud by Trump. I reckon that the media is the real issue, they have got something against Trump. They are the ones who are trying to say that Trump is an absurd man, they are trying to say that Washington's credibility is being destroyed by Trump.

And here's you, trying to deflect Washington's mass loss of credibility (bearing in mind that this loss is being done by the media) by trying to make it look like that it is Beijing that looks silly.

The U.S. will definitely be involved in any attacks on North Korea. They are there to support their allies and protect the US. But a nuclear attack won't happen. It's known Kim won't fire first. But will use the threat of attack for negotiations.

 

I know you hate the US and are China's #1 supporter. But it was a massive loss of face to them. Instead of showing off at the BRIC summit, all talk will be about North Korea.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/04/china-what-can-beijing-do-about-north-korea-donald-trump-kim-jong-un

Quote

Experts say Kim Jong-un’s latest provocation – which some believe was deliberately timed to upstage the start of the annual Brics summit in China – exposes not only the scale of the North Korean challenge now facing China’s president but also his dearth of options.

 

[Scott]

Post with foreign language removed.  

 

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

The U.S. will definitely be involved in any attacks on North Korea. They are there to support their allies and protect the US. But a nuclear attack won't happen. It's known Kim won't fire first. But will use the threat of attack for negotiations.

 

I know you hate the US and are China's #1 supporter. But it was a massive loss of face to them. Instead of showing off at the BRIC summit, all talk will be about North Korea.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/04/china-what-can-beijing-do-about-north-korea-donald-trump-kim-jong-un

 

Craigt, I don't hate the US. I just reckon that the US government (Washington) has done a lot of stuff, and previously (when Obama, and Bush was there) the media, the media was constantly putting Washington into a highly positive light.

If I did hate the US, if I did hate Washington, well, I can very easily turn up here on ThaiVisa, and constantly say that Washington is looking _____  stupid. Do that on a daily or weekly basis, and that's bearing in mind that the media is constantly attacking Trump. But I'm not doing that. It's just that I find it odd that some people (and some of the media) are using this to try and make Beijing look negative.


So you reckon the US will be involved in any attack on North Korea ? Well yes, I think we all accept and know that. There's no way South Korea can on it's own (without Washington) ,fight a war with North Korea. No way. You say that it's known that Kim won't fire first, I think I agree on that. The problem we've got is, is that Washington might attack Kim, even if Kim does not fire any missiles. Do you think that Washington's frame of mind is "we know that Kim will never fire the first missile, but we're still going to knock him out with our attack".

Actually, if Kim refuses to fire the first missile, do you think that this makes Kim harmless ? To me, if Kim continues to detonate nukes in North Korea, and carries on firing missiles above Japan, well, Kim isn't actually causing real harm. So yes, I reckon Kim is harmless in such a scenario. So, how about let Kim continue to do what he is doing, and don't launch any attack on Kim, and only attack him if he actually fires a missile ?

Edited September 5, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[tonbridgebrit]

9 hours ago, Justgrazing said:

 "a pre-emptive strike by the U S on N K that would take out all of his Nuclear and Chemical weapons in one simultaneous devasting strike is fanciful .. "

Yes, I think so. But does this mean that Washington won't carry out a pre-emptive strike ?

[tonray]

3 hours ago, harada said:

Have I got time for a few more buckets of ice cream before the next launch?

The guy is gonna stroke out or have a massive heart attack in in less than 5 years..wait him out.

[sweatalot]

17 minutes ago, tonray said:

The guy is gonna stroke out or have a massive heart attack in in less than 5 years..wait him out.

may be a drone could help him out of his misery before?

[Justgrazing]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Yes, I think so. But does this mean that Washington won't carry out a pre-emptive strike ?

The pre -emptive strike has nightmare written all over it and to be honest tonbridgbrit I don't know mate if the U S will go that far .. You'd like to think that Trump has enough people around him who fully understand the implications of that scenario and will advise him wisely .. But if the fat kid throws the first punch so to speak God help us .. 

Edited September 5, 2017 by Justgrazing
Spelling

[Jdiddy]

2 hours ago, tonray said:

The guy is gonna stroke out or have a massive heart attack in in less than 5 years..wait him out.

 

The Fat Controller is probably not expecting to live that long so he's going all out on the fried chicken and ice cream