Trump - 'Sad day' for North Korea if U.S. takes military action

[tonbridgebrit]

30 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

What about North Korea, who's been taking a dump in many countries for years and profiting from it? Ruining people's lives in the process.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/kim-jong-un-breaking-bad-the-secret-world-of-north-korean-meth

Great country you are supporting.

What is happening ?  

The article from the Daily Beast. About how North Korea is flooding China with meths.  Okay, let's say the story is true. How about, allow Beijing to sort out this problem ? Surely, people are not trying to say "oh look, North Korea are even more evil than what we thought, they're exporting meths to China, yes, even more reason to bomb North Korea".  Surely, that's not what people reckon ?

  So North Korea is harming China, and we're suppose to be more supportive of serious action against Kim, because of this ? As far as Beijing is concerned, Washington putting THAAD onto South Korea is a bigger problem that Kim supposedly flooding north-East China with meths.  

And why has the Daily Beast produced that article ? What's their intent ?  Maybe, they want to demonize North Korea, and they also want to put China into a negative light by implying that there is a big meths problem in China.

[baboon]

9 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Going on about know-it-all-experts-analyzing-the-situation, continues to provide a version of his own.... 

Ah, but it is Trump's version of events which always is correct, even when it isn't. 

Edited September 9, 2017 by baboon

[craigt3365]

19 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Let's not forget there hasn't been active war. I think that itself is a major achievement. 

Let's not forget there has never been this level of missile tests before. Nor nuclear tests. Nor videos of NYC being nuked.

 

Nor have they ever been this close to a nuclear tipped weapon. Never even close. The game has changed. Significantly.

[craigt3365]

14 minutes ago, baboon said:

Threats of retaliation not preemption, let us not forget... Notice the warmongers always leave out that part.

Ummm...I do remember seeing a video of NYC being nuked. And lots of warmongering comments from Kim. Something those who are anti-US always leave out.

[baboon]

...See how quickly they jump in?

[craigt3365]

35 minutes ago, stevenl said:

NK's threats are not serious, they were just uttered after the US threatened NK with war after a ballistic missile test. This is a very good example of 2 hotheads showing eachother who has the biggest. And we know that from Trump's hands, so does not look good for him.

North Korea has been making threats for decades. Long before Trump came on the scene. Some they have followed through on, like in the Sony hacks, back in 2014.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-korea-threats-trump_us_598b0ac1e4b0449ed506e306

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Pictures_hack

 

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

...See how quickly they jump in?

Yes, very quick when inaccurate information is being posted. LOL

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

North Korea has been making threats for decades. Long before Trump came on the scene. Some they have followed through on, like in the Sony hacks, back in 2014.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-korea-threats-trump_us_598b0ac1e4b0449ed506e306

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Pictures_hack

 

I was specifically taking about the threat of a missile to US territory, as was obvious from the content of this thread. Now you may try and continue to make NK look like the only villain here, but to all who are looking at what is really happening that will not nwork.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I was specifically taking about the threat of a missile to US territory, as was obvious from the content of this thread. Now you may try and continue to make NK look like the only villain here, but to all who are looking at what is really happening that will not nwork.

 

It doesn't change the fact that you do not know whether the threat is "serious", though. Considering the stakes, and that Kim's hard at work on making the threat ever more credible, what's the motivation to ignore it?

Edited September 9, 2017 by Morch

[stevenl]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

It doesn't change the fact that you do not know whether the threat is "serious", though. Considering the stakes, and that Kim's hard at work on making the threat ever more credible, what's the motivation to ignore it?

How serious are Trump's threats? I think at the moment His threats are more serious that NK's.

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, stevenl said:

How serious are Trump's threats? I think at the moment His threats are more serious that NK's.

 

So the rationale for calling Kim's "not serious" is that you think Trump's threats are "more serious"? Seriously?

 

This isn't a zero sum thing. The credibility of one bigmouth nutter's threats is not related to the threats made by his counterpart.

 

Trump got a bunch of advisors and generals expressing milder views. There are limits to his ability to start a war on a whim. Can we say the same about Kim? I don't think so.

 

Edited September 9, 2017 by Morch

[baboon]

39 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

North Korea has been making threats for decades. Long before Trump came on the scene. Some they have followed through on, like in the Sony hacks, back in 2014.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-korea-threats-trump_us_598b0ac1e4b0449ed506e306

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Pictures_hack

 

 

http://deadline.com/2015/11/sony-hack-guardians-of-peace-one-year-anniversary-1201636491/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/no-north-korea-didnt-hack-sony

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/196152-who-really-hacked-sony-pictures-it-probably-wasnt-north-korea

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/27/tech/north-korea-expert-doubts-about-hack/index.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1145155/Caroline-Baylon-Chatham-House-talks-reasons-North-Korean-government-probably-not-hack-Sony-Pictures.html

Edited September 9, 2017 by baboon

[craigt3365]

12 minutes ago, baboon said:

 

http://deadline.com/2015/11/sony-hack-guardians-of-peace-one-year-anniversary-1201636491/

http://www.thedailybeast.com/no-north-korea-didnt-hack-sony

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/196152-who-really-hacked-sony-pictures-it-probably-wasnt-north-korea

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/27/tech/north-korea-expert-doubts-about-hack/index.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1145155/Caroline-Baylon-Chatham-House-talks-reasons-North-Korean-government-probably-not-hack-Sony-Pictures.html

Old posts. Current analysis is pointing to North Korea. Nothing 100% proven. But a high probability. Best to find current info. LOL

 

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/north-korea-linked-to-sony-hack-attack-researchers-415603
 

Quote

 

A new report into the damaging attack on Sony Pictures Entertainment has uncovered a long-active hacking group that may be connected to North Korea.

 

Security vendor Novetta, working together with Kaspersky Labs, Symantec and AlienVault, has produced an extensive report into the attack [pdf] which it said was initiated by hackers dubbed the Lazarus Group.

 

Now, however, the security vendors that investigated the hack believe the FBI was probably right.

 

Keep up!

[craigt3365]

47 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I was specifically taking about the threat of a missile to US territory, as was obvious from the content of this thread. Now you may try and continue to make NK look like the only villain here, but to all who are looking at what is really happening that will not nwork.

All? Seriously? Doubtful. 15 nations voted to sanction North Korea. Not just the U.S. 

 

Japan is worried an errant missile will hit them. South Korea is afraid it will be attached by North Korea. Again.

 

So far, all these nations see North Korea as the only villain. None have suggested sanctioning the US.  LOL

[stevenl]

40 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

So the rationale for calling Kim's "not serious" is that you think Trump's threats are "more serious"? Seriously?

 

This isn't a zero sum thing. The credibility of one bigmouth nutter's threats is not related to the threats made by his counterpart.

 

Trump got a bunch of advisors and generals expressing milder views. There are limits to his ability to start a war on a whim. Can we say the same about Kim? I don't think so.

 

True about the advisors, who I hope can also block him.

 

No, my rationale is not 'trump is more serious', I just think the NK threat is not serious, but think Trump's one is.

 

As usual your conclusions about a post don't match the post at hand.

[baboon]

No high probability of DPRK involvement at all in the Sony hacks. I invite the reader to take a look at the links I posted and decide for his or herself if the case is as cut and dry as implied above.

Edited September 9, 2017 by baboon

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

True about the advisors, who I hope can also block him.

 

No, my rationale is not 'trump is more serious', I just think the NK threat is not serious, but think Trump's one is.

 

As usual your conclusions about a post don't match the post at hand.

 

You made a statement, obfuscated when reasoning was questioned, now it turns out there is no reasoning.

Oh well...

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

True about the advisors, who I hope can also block him.

 

No, my rationale is not 'trump is more serious', I just think the NK threat is not serious, but think Trump's one is.

 

As usual your conclusions about a post don't match the post at hand.

I also think that currently USA is far bigger threat to the world, than North Korea is. 

 

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I also think that currently USA is far bigger threat to the world, than North Korea is. 

 

 

Duly noted. Doesn't have much to do with the relevant exchange, though - which wasn't about who constitutes a greater global threat, but the threats issued by respective leaders.

[Guest]

War options:

 

North Korea starts shelling South Korea or Japan -> Nuclear war

USA starts offencive against North Korea -> Nuclear war

 

Or, both sides could just start talking, or even fully ignore each other's presence -> No Nuclear war.

 

Even in the case USA would start with a massive nuclear strike, against North Korea.. South Korea would be a toast, China would be so very pissed and Russia says 'Well, if USA could use nukes on NK, will use the tactical nukes in Europe.".. and then we all are frucked. 

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

You made a statement, obfuscated when reasoning was questioned, now it turns out there is no reasoning.

Oh well...

See the last sentence of my post.

[Morch]

Just now, stevenl said:

See the last sentence of my post.

 

Read the post above again.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Duly noted. Doesn't have much to do with the relevant exchange, though - which wasn't about who constitutes a greater global threat, but the threats issued by respective leaders.

I'm not able to see what is happening in Korean peninsula as isolated situation, which would not have great global consequences if the war starts. I wish I could.

[sweatalot]

2 hours ago, oilinki said:

Let's not forget there hasn't been active war. I think that itself is a major achievement. 

may be it is not.

May be the world  wouldn't have this situation.

may be NK wouldn't have nukes

may be there was a democratic government and not that criminal Kim in NK

[Morch]

1 minute ago, oilinki said:

War options:

 

North Korea starts shelling South Korea or Japan -> Nuclear war

USA starts offencive against North Korea -> Nuclear war

 

Or, both sides could just start talking, or even fully ignore each other's presence -> No Nuclear war.

 

Even in the case USA would start with a massive nuclear strike, against North Korea.. South Korea would be a toast, China would be so very pissed and Russia says 'Well, if USA could use nukes on NK, will use the tactical nukes in Europe.".. and then we all are frucked. 

 

Scaremongering.

If North Korea start shelling South Korea and Japan, but avoids using nuclear weapons, why would there be a nuclear war? If the US launches a preemptive strike against North Korea, and North Korea does launch a nuclear missile, it still doesn't necessitate the US responding in kind. Especially so if US forces operate in the area.

 

Things could deteriorate, yes. But it's not written in stone that any conflagration will turn nuclear. Or that it will evolve into a full scale nuclear war.

 

I don't think that other than Trump, anyone among his advisors supports the US launching a nuclear strike on NK.

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I'm not able to see what is happening in Korean peninsula as isolated situation, which would not have great global consequences if the war starts. I wish I could.

 

Up to you, as the locals say.

There's something to be said in favor of seeing a bigger picture, but sometimes it makes dealing with specific instances much more difficult. Considering that it is not feasible to solve all the World's woes in one go, perhaps better to deal with what's at hand first.

[MaxYakov]

23 minutes ago, oilinki said:

I also think that currently USA is far bigger threat to the world, than North Korea is. 

 

Besides the US Navy's attacking large merchant vessels by ramming them with its destroyers en masse, can you be a little more specific?

 

Also, what do you blame Ludwig Boltzmann for?

Edited September 9, 2017 by MaxYakov

[craigt3365]

40 minutes ago, baboon said:

No high probability of DPRK involvement at all in the Sony hacks. I invite the reader to take a look at the links I posted and decide for his or herself if the case is as cut and dry as implied above.

I already posted a link showing some of the best minds in the world think it was North Korea. Your links were outdated. So yes, high probability.

 

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/north-korea-linked-to-sony-hack-attack-researchers-415603

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, MaxYakov said:

Besides the US Navy's attacking large merchant vessels by ramming them with its destroyers en masse, can you be a little more specific?

 

Also, what do you blame Ludwig Boltzmann for?

Current USA rhetoric is unstable and causes lots of uncertainty around the world. USA is not stabilising force at the moment. 

Then there is the real possibility that USA will attack North Korea and cause a war which escalates. 

For Ludwig Boltzmann.. I'm not going to say it. You'll have to decode the idea by yourself. It's not very complicated. As a hint, it's very much related on my previous post :)

[midas]

17 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Scaremongering.

If North Korea start shelling South Korea and Japan, but avoids using nuclear weapons, why would there be a nuclear war? If the US launches a preemptive strike against North Korea, and North Korea does launch a nuclear missile, it still doesn't necessitate the US responding in kind. Especially so if US forces operate in the area.

 

Things could deteriorate, yes. But it's not written in stone that any conflagration will turn nuclear. Or that it will evolve into a full scale nuclear war.

 

I don't think that other than Trump, anyone among his advisors supports the US launching a nuclear strike on NK.

 

KMS 3-2 and KMS-4 the two North Korean earth observation satellites are likely carrying weapons for an EMP attack on USA.

How could America possibly cope with that on top of the disasters which are now likely to follow from the looming hurricanes?

 

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/08/13/exclusive-congressional-expert-north-korea-satellites-orbiting-u-s-could-be-used-for-surprise-emp-attack/