Must Read If threatened, U.S. will 'totally destroy' North Korea, Trump vows

[craigt3365]

Just now, Global Guy said:

1) North Korea has not MILITARILY INVADED anyone in the last 25 years. What you quoted were not invasions. How you confuse the two is beyond me. Feel free to PM me if you are confused again and I'll explain it better.

2) Plausible explanation? Explanation by who?

 

I'll include directions in my post next time so you can understand the context of what we are talking about.  

 

I accidentally bumped into someone when walking on a crowded sidewalk in Seoul, does that mean I attacked South Korea?  

So blowing up a ship with a torpedo and killing 25 South Korean sailors isn't a military operation?  Really? LOL.

 

I'll avoid PMs.  You'll probably go off topic and start talking about Libya, Iraq, Vietnam, perhaps even back to the American civil war. LOL

[Morch]

14 hours ago, Global Guy said:

It's just rhetoric because he is NOT going to attack anyone if left alone. There are a couple issues here and I'm speaking of his intention to build up his defensive capabilities. His crazy missile test flight paths are a different topic. The US is pushing sanctions because North Korea is going nuts with their testing and the US has to save face like all bullies do.

 

North Korea has attacked how many countries in the last 10 years? None. Zero. They've been threatening for decades.

 

They've had all kinds of weapons and easily could have attacked South Korea or who knows who else if they were hell bent on attacking other countries. This isn't a new issue. I heard about it all the time when I lived in Seoul in the early 2000s. One has to think like the North Koreans do. Examine their propaganda they feed their citizens, for starters. They truly believe the US wants to invade them. And with the US track record of, well, invading anyone they want who doesn't pose a risk to them, they have some valid justification for their paranoia. Some might just call it reality. The US is escalating this. Why can only the US build up defensive capabilities? 

 

Again, this is old news from the North Korea . But what is new, is the US increased obsession with global domination under Trump (yes, the neocons ran things before Trump too). The powers that be (neocon war mongers) who really run the US have Trump over a barrel. They told him, you play by our rules, let us make our billions off military contracts, and we'll let you stay in office. You don't, well, then we have a Zapruder film to show you.

 

And....what just got passed? A $700 BILLION dollar defense budget. The war mongers are war mongers for the profit AND they want to dominate and control any country that they can exploit for anything...oil, gas, other natural resources, and....advantageous geopolitical geography. Countries that military bases can be put in that provide a military benefit because of their location proximity to Iran, China, and Russia, for starters. 

 

Everything Trump complained about in his UN speech are things the US is doing openly but blaming other countries for. The biggest hypocrisy was how he talked about how other countries should respect countries sovereignty! What a joke. The US violates other countries sovereignty (either invasions or incursions) all the time. Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, India, Somalia, Iran, Libya, Syria, and the list goes on. Search YT for "countries the US has invaded" for a huge list of illegal invasions.

 

Anyway....the US Empire cannot go on like this forever. They will run out of money (cannot print worthless fiat money forever), out of countries to invade, and then Russia and China will be left. 

 

And it is because of this....and what I witnessed for many years working for, training by, and hanging out behind this govt curtain that I learned I could not make a difference and I left. Now, I invest in defense contractor companies because if Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, and then rest of the war hawks can get rich (richer), I want to get in on that action! 

 

So, now I say...Trump keep on bombing, invading, and pillaging the rest of the world! After each invasion, my portfolio goes up! Screw peace, there's no profit for the US in saving lives (ask the big pharma companies), the money is in murdering innocent civilians around the world baby!

 

You have no idea what Kim will or will not do. You have no assurances that he will not miscalculate, take rash actions, or go off on tangent.

 

North Korea have attacked South Korea plenty of times, would take quite an effort ignoring the many incidents over the years, some pretty serious - but I sure you're up to the task. If anything, it is South Korea's restraint that's to be commended.

 

It would be helpful for the discussion if the distinction between Kim and North Korea as a whole would be addressed. North Koreans do not have a say in how their country is run, do not enjoy free access to information - and to head of the expected nonsense- no, this is nothing like the "West". So it's not about what North Korea wants, but rather about what Kim wants. If someone wants to argue that Kim's personal political survival is of a critical or moral importance justifying the risk of a nuclear war, or even a conventional one, we'll have to disagree.

 

Rant on.

 

 

[Morch]

12 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

China and NK have a mutual defense treaty. ( China's only one I believe ). Unless they renounce it before the war, there is no reason the US would not consider China a hostile. 

 

They still have time but better move soon or Peking may end up worse the Pyongyang

 

As posted above, the treaty in question may not compel the PRC to act as some imagine. Further, said treaty was signed long ago, under different circumstances - assuming that the PRC would feel obliged to face total destruction is perhaps not a very reasonable take. Kim's  execution of his uncle certainly didn't do a whole lot to improve his standing with the PRC, and can't really see them committing suicide in order to keep him in place.

[Morch]

56 minutes ago, Global Guy said:

1) North Korea has not MILITARILY INVADED anyone in the last 25 years. What you quoted were not invasions. How you confuse the two is beyond me. Feel free to PM me if you are confused again and I'll explain it better.

2) Plausible explanation? Explanation by who?

 

I'll include directions in my post next time so you can understand the context of what we are talking about.  

 

I accidentally bumped into someone when walking on a crowded sidewalk in Seoul, does that mean I attacked South Korea?  

 

"I accidentally bumped into someone when walking on a crowded sidewalk in Seoul, does that mean I attacked South Korea?"

 

Of course not. It means that you're trolling. North Korea's attacks on South Korea were not accidental, and did not amount to bumping into someone on the street. But then you already knew that.

[mikebike]

3 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

So blowing up a ship with a torpedo and killing 25 South Korean sailors isn't a military operation?  Really? LOL.

 

I'll avoid PMs.  You'll probably go off topic and start talking about Libya, Iraq, Vietnam, perhaps even back to the American civil war. LOL

You seem to be struggling with the definitions of INVASION and OPERATION.

[RawboneFunksta]

Invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity . . . . and don't be half-assed about it.

[craigt3365]

Just now, mikebike said:

You seem to be struggling with the definitions of INVASION and OPERATION.

Read my list of incursions.  If you bomb or go into another country with your military, that's an invasion.  So no struggle.

[mikebike]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

You have no idea what Kim will or will not do. You have no assurances that he will not miscalculate, take rash actions, or go off on tangent.

 

North Korea have attacked South Korea plenty of times, would take quite an effort ignoring the many incidents over the years, some pretty serious - but I sure you're up to the task. If anything, it is South Korea's restraint that's to be commended.

 

It would be helpful for the discussion if the distinction between Kim and North Korea as a whole would be addressed. North Koreans do not have a say in how their country is run, do not enjoy free access to information - and to head of the expected nonsense- no, this is nothing like the "West". So it's not about what North Korea wants, but rather about what Kim wants. If someone wants to argue that Kim's personal political survival is of a critical or moral importance justifying the risk of a nuclear war, or even a conventional one, we'll have to disagree.

 

Nor do we have any idea of what 45 will or will not do. We have no assurances that he will not miscalculate (but we do have evidence that he does miscalculate frequently), take rash actions (but we do have evidence that he does take rash actions frequently) or go off on a tangent (but we do have evidence that he does take bizarre tangents frequently).

 

I trust South Korea's judgement. they have been living with the vagaries of NK leadership for more than 50 years. They seem to have a good handle on the mindset of their ethnic kin and neighbours.

 

I can see your point about free access to information. The US establishment media does a much better job of shaping what it wants the public to hear while purporting to broadcast "news". Plus 45 has been opening up all lines of communication between the public and government departments and making it much easier for facts (scientific, policy, information, content of bills before the legislature) to come out.

 

If someone wants to argue that 45's attempts at distracting the public from his gross incompetence and ongoing investigations by pandering to his base and the mainstream media by inflaming a lying-dogs situation, is of critical or moral importance, justifying the risk of nuclear or conventional war, we will have to disagree.

[mikebike]

17 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Read my list of incursions.  If you bomb or go into another country with your military, that's an invasion.  So no struggle.

Read the list. There has been only one documented invasion of S. Korea by N. Korea - June 1950.

[mikebike]

7 minutes ago, hyku1147 said:

Again resorting to the argumentum ad hominem which you began, then complained about when returned in like kind...

[transam]

8 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Read the list. There has been only one documented invasion of S. Korea by N. Korea - June 1950.

So how would you class a ballistic missile, designed for one job, that flew over Japans landmass and airspace... ?

[baboon]

5 minutes ago, transam said:

So how would you class a ballistic missile, designed for one job, that flew over Japans landmass and airspace... ?

Outer space is airspace?

[transam]

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

Outer space is airspace?

I think you know that cheese head was sending a message to Japan and those of us with a few gray cells the route the thing flew...

[Morch]

30 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Nor do we have any idea of what 45 will or will not do. We have no assurances that he will not miscalculate (but we do have evidence that he does miscalculate frequently), take rash actions (but we do have evidence that he does take rash actions frequently) or go off on a tangent (but we do have evidence that he does take bizarre tangents frequently).

 

I trust South Korea's judgement. they have been living with the vagaries of NK leadership for more than 50 years. They seem to have a good handle on the mindset of their ethnic kin and neighbours.

 

I can see your point about free access to information. The US establishment media does a much better job of shaping what it wants the public to hear while purporting to broadcast "news". Plus 45 has been opening up all lines of communication between the public and government departments and making it much easier for facts (scientific, policy, information, content of bills before the legislature) to come out.

 

If someone wants to argue that 45's attempts at distracting the public from his gross incompetence and ongoing investigations by pandering to his base and the mainstream media by inflaming a lying-dogs situation, is of critical or moral importance, justifying the risk of nuclear or conventional war, we will have to disagree.

 

Trump works within a system that incorporates checks and balances. Kim....not so much. Making the claim that their situation is identical is appealing, but incorrect.

 

The same goes for the nonsense comparisons between USA (or the "West") and North Korea, regarding access to information. Spin it however you like, they are not even remotely the same. For starters, we are having this discussion. End of.

 

South Korea, last I checked was in favor of UN approved sanctions, was conducting military exercises with the US, and did not ask US to end it's military presence.

[transam]

Just now, baboon said:

To be sure. But my point is that the thing would hardly be whistling above the treetops as a hysterical media would have the sheeple believe. 

Nor were Hitlers V2's, but they did land and kill civilians, just civilians...

[Morch]

1 minute ago, baboon said:

To be sure. But my point is that the thing would hardly be whistling above the treetops as a hysterical media would have the sheeple believe. 

 

Which media source claimed that?

[baboon]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

Nor were Hitlers V2's, but they did land and kill civilians, just civilians...

Weren't they aimed to do so as part of a war?

[transam]

5 minutes ago, baboon said:

Weren't they aimed to do so as part of a war?

Yes, because his air force was wasted and so rockets were sent to civilian targets in the UK..Cheesy has sent a message to us all, especially Japan and Guam....

 

In my opinion NK will not receive a nuke, they will receive  massive destruction of all their naughty stuff by non nuke stuff IF they carry on down cheesy's route...A massive loss of face will ensue...

[baboon]

1 minute ago, transam said:

Yes, because his air force was wasted and so rockets were sent to civilian targets in the UK..Cheesy has sent a message to us all, especially Japan and Guam....

 

In my opinion NK will not receive a nuke, they will receive  massive destruction of all their naughty stuff by non nuke stuff IF they carry on down cheesy's route...A massive loss of face will ensue...

The message they are sending is 'Leave us the Hell alone or else'. They are not seeking Lebensraum unlike the Third Reich.

I think that even a conventional attack on them could well lead to a catastrophe. You may well disagree and fair play to you, but I think you will agree that those arguments have been done to death on other threads.

 

I am writing this from the UK. When I can be bothered to get of bed I am going to STUFF myself with good cheese just to spite you... 

[transam]

1 minute ago, baboon said:

The message they are sending is 'Leave us the Hell alone or else'. They are not seeking Lebensraum unlike the Third Reich.

I think that even a conventional attack on them could well lead to a catastrophe. You may well disagree and fair play to you, but I think you will agree that those arguments have been done to death on other threads.

 

I am writing this from the UK. When I can be bothered to get of bed I am going to STUFF myself with good cheese just to spite you... 

I hope Cheshire cheese.....I dream of a slab of the stuff out here.......

[baboon]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

I hope Cheshire cheese.....I dream of a slab of the stuff out here.......

Whichever one will upset you the most...

[transam]

Just now, baboon said:

Whichever one will upset you the most...

Burger "cheese"...........

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, baboon said:

The message they are sending is 'Leave us the Hell alone or else'. They are not seeking Lebensraum unlike the Third Reich.

I think that even a conventional attack on them could well lead to a catastrophe. You may well disagree and fair play to you, but I think you will agree that those arguments have been done to death on other threads.

 

I am writing this from the UK. When I can be bothered to get of bed I am going to STUFF myself with good cheese just to spite you... 

 

There is no "they". This is about Kim's political survival.

And it's either a nothing-burger or a potential catastrophe, can't be both.

 

 

[craigt3365]

2 hours ago, mikebike said:

Read the list. There has been only one documented invasion of S. Korea by N. Korea - June 1950.

Jeez.  Have to lay it out. Unreal.  Please read the article before commenting.  You're only making yourself look foolish.  And invasion is when something unwanted enters your space.  Such as artillery, troops, etc. LOL

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/10130248

 

Quote

 

January 1968

A team of 31 North Korean commandos crosses into South Korea and breaks into the presidential palace, the Blue House, in an attempt to assassinate President Park Chung-hee. The attempt is crushed by South Korean security forces, Mr Park survives but seven South Koreans and most of the commandos are killed.

 

August 1974

President Park's wife dies during a second attempt on his life - she is hit by stray bullets after a suspected North Korean agent opens fire at a public function.

 

 

I could go on and on.  Why are you defending these guys so strongly?

 

 

 

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, baboon said:

The message they are sending is 'Leave us the Hell alone or else'. They are not seeking Lebensraum unlike the Third Reich.

I think that even a conventional attack on them could well lead to a catastrophe. You may well disagree and fair play to you, but I think you will agree that those arguments have been done to death on other threads.

 

I am writing this from the UK. When I can be bothered to get of bed I am going to STUFF myself with good cheese just to spite you... 

With regards to the number of times they've attacked South Korea, they are hardly sending a message of leave us alone or else.  Just found out they assassinated Park's wife.  Great country.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mun_Se-gwang
 

Quote

 

Mun Se-gwang (December 26, 1951 – December 20, 1974) was a Japanese-born North Korean sympathizer who attempted to assassinate South Korean president Park Chung-Hee on August 15, 1974. The assassination attempt resulted in the deaths of Park's wife, Yuk Young-soo, and a high school student, Jang Bong-hwa.

 

During his interrogation, Mun confessed to have been aided in his bid to assassinate President Park by an official of a North Korea aligned residents association in Japan.

 

 

Buy hey, they just want to be left alone!

[Ron19]

 A couple of troll posts have been removed

[baboon]

26 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

With regards to the number of times they've attacked South Korea, they are hardly sending a message of leave us alone or else.  Just found out they assassinated Park's wife.  Great country.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mun_Se-gwang
 

 

Buy hey, they just want to be left alone!

Correct. They just want to be left alone. Well done.

[craigt3365]

4 minutes ago, baboon said:

Correct. They just want to be left alone. Well done.

Strange definition of wanting to be left alone.  Going into your neighbor's country and killing people. 

 

They should have been dealt with long ago.  Sadly, we're dealing with the consequences of that now.

[baboon]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Strange definition of wanting to be left alone.  Going into your neighbor's country and killing people. 

 

They should have been dealt with long ago.  Sadly, we're dealing with the consequences of that now.

Really strange, threatening to retaliate if attacked. Unheard of...

[transam]

4 minutes ago, baboon said:

Correct. They just want to be left alone. Well done.

Left alone to acquire nukes to threaten at will....At last you got it...