U.S. prepared to use force on North Korea 'if we must' - U.N. envoy

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, Grubster said:

I don't think Russia or China would allow the US to put missiles in Japan anymore than the US would allow Russia to put them in Cuba.

And I doubt Japan's all that into it as well. Minor point.

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

As said - if there's no leakage of fighting to PRC territory, and no PRC casualties - a direct confrontation would be unlikely. Doesn't mean the PRC won't be outraged, stressed and assume an aggressive position.

 

Barring a nuclear strike/incident, what are the possible "very severe" consequences? A host of refugees making their way to the border? It's a humanitarian crisis, no sense in picking a fight with the US over that. NK making a statement by launching some conventional attack on the PRC? No sense in picking a fight with the US over that. NK being absorbed by SK, making for a stronger neighbor with US affiliations? That's a long term proposal, nothing to be done about it at present, and not enough for picking a fight with the US.

 

 

Just saying "barring a nuclear strike" doesn't make it a negligible possibility. And of course there are also chemical, and especially the possibility of biological weapons to consider. The poor man's atom bomb. And in fact,  these are good bargaining chip for N Korea to use to compel China to come to its assistance.

It seems you're being very dismissive about the downside of such a move.

[Banana7]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

And I doubt Japan's all that into it as well. Minor point.

Japan feels very threatened by China and North Korea. Japan has lots of disputes with China about islands. NK normally launches the test missiles towards Japan.

[LannaGuy]

So they think it's ok to fire missiles at Syria but let this fat little bully-boy fire missiles near Japan and South Korea?  personally I'd send in a small nuke where he's living.

[Banana7]

8 minutes ago, Grubster said:

I don't think Russia or China would allow the US to put missiles in Japan anymore than the US would allow Russia to put them in Cuba.

They couldn't prevent them from being delivered into Japan. Could be brought in by air, submarine, or even by ship.

 

Japan is power hungry and would love to become a nuclear power.

 

 

[Peterw42]

America tends to look at any conflicts in the world in simplistic good guys verses bad guys, its never that simple and the bad guys dont always wear black hats. There are alliances, factions, trading partners, countries that bat for both teams etc. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[owl sees all]

21 minutes ago, Grubster said:

I don't understand your thinking on the US dollar.

Something like 30% of the US GDP goes to propping up the dollar. The biggest fear for the US however is the middle eastern countries ditching the petro dollar for another currency (gold/silver/euro) (remember Sadam). The Saudies are - at the present time - willing to support the dollar whilst their 'enemy' , Iran, does not want to. Israel also gets into the picture as it has massive military power, is in close proximity and is US's closest ally. 

 

The dollar is the world's reserve currency. If it becomes second to another (yuan/ruble/gold/silver) - OR countries find it more profitable to deal in other currencies - it will collapse, taking the world with it.

 

There is hope however. At the moment there are debates about nationalising the FED.  (I hope not in the same war as the scandalous way the B-of-Eng was done.

[soalbundy]

8 hours ago, UncleFester said:

You don't understand Donald Trump.

you would need a psychiatrist for that

[tonray]

All this talk of ICBM or submarine missiles to hit NK is absurd because if you did that Chinese radar would see it and assume an attack from the USA and then you start WWW III. If any attack were to succeed and it would be doubtful it would have to be bombs from airplane....unless Trump would have to call China beforehand and give them a heads up....

[soalbundy]

Donald should stick to tweeting, he's going to do no more than fart in their general direction

[owl sees all]

Another thing to consider is Kim's statement on cancers. He has said there are cures for cancers, and other diseases, and the Americans are deliberately suppressing them.

 

The pharmaceutical lobby is probably one of the most powerful in the US.

 

The lobby (cartel) does not want natural cures for any diseases - that fortunes are being made from in the form of prescription drugs - to be out in the open.

[owl sees all]

26 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

Donald should stick to tweeting, he's going to do no more than fart in their general direction

I must say Soalbundy. When I first read the post I misread it and thought it was 'twerking'. I spend 5 minutes doing a reply and then I went to copy the post down. Only then realising my error.

 

The 'twerking' along with 'farting in their general direction' made my day.

Edited July 7, 2017 by Scott
Altered quote edited

[Morch]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

Just saying "barring a nuclear strike" doesn't make it a negligible possibility. And of course there are also chemical, and especially the possibility of biological weapons to consider. The poor man's atom bomb. And in fact,  these are good bargaining chip for N Korea to use to compel China to come to its assistance.

It seems you're being very dismissive about the downside of such a move.

 

I did not claim it was a "negligible possibility". There are no credible textbook scenarios in the case of nuclear weapons used, so it would be difficult to assess possible responses of various parties. To a certain extent this what nuclear deterrence is all about - nobody willing to risk things getting out of hand.

 

With regard to use of chemical or biological weapons, doubt that relates to the US side, but more to NK. The same applies - there would be no pretext for the PRC to engage the US over NK use of such. If you meant use by NK vs. the PRC as a threat, still wouldn't make any sense getting into a fight with the US. Help us or we'll nuke you (replace nuke with gas or whatever) isn't a very good motivator.

 

I don't know that I'm dismissive of anything, certainly not of unclear "downsides" of unspecified "move". Not advocating a US strike or saying it's a good idea. Just pointing out that the opinions about the PRC's possible military involvement, or them "calling the shots" do not seem to be well thought out.

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Banana7 said:

Japan feels very threatened by China and North Korea. Japan has lots of disputes with China about islands. NK normally launches the test missiles towards Japan.

 

And how would it benefit Japan to add another reason and target for these countries, on its soil? As opposed to the US being able to issue such a threat via submarines or indeed, from a thousands of miles away?

 

Can't see Japan welcoming US nukes on it's soil. Sorry. There's nothing whatsoever to be gained.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Peterw42 said:

America tends to look at any conflicts in the world in simplistic good guys verses bad guys, its never that simple and the bad guys dont always wear black hats. There are alliances, factions, trading partners, countries that bat for both teams etc. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 

I think there's quite a consensus when it comes to NK's regime, though.

 

Edited July 7, 2017 by Morch

[Morch]

1 hour ago, tonray said:

All this talk of ICBM or submarine missiles to hit NK is absurd because if you did that Chinese radar would see it and assume an attack from the USA and then you start WWW III. If any attack were to succeed and it would be doubtful it would have to be bombs from airplane....unless Trump would have to call China beforehand and give them a heads up....

Mistakes could happen, and the stakes are high - which is one reason nothing happened so far.

 

But more to the point, it doesn't work this way. When a missile launch is detected, the trajectory and target are quickly determined. More accurate on both sides than most imagine.

 

Whether or not there will be warning given to the PRC is a good question. When the US attacked in Syria, such a warning was issued to the Russians - but circumstances were different: Russian troops at target area, and limited goals of attack. It was more a political price paid at the expense of operational performance. Giving such a warning to PRC over NK is different story, considering the goals.

[tonray]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

Mistakes could happen, and the stakes are high - which is one reason nothing happened so far.

 

But more to the point, it doesn't work this way. When a missile launch is detected, the trajectory and target are quickly determined. More accurate on both sides than most imagine.

 

Whether or not there will be warning given to the PRC is a good question. When the US attacked in Syria, such a warning was issued to the Russians - but circumstances were different: Russian troops at target area, and limited goals of attack. It was more a political price paid at the expense of operational performance. Giving such a warning to PRC over NK is different story, considering the goals.

A destroyer did not see a cargo ship ram into it. If you think once an icbm is launched that someone will rely on what could be flawed data when you only have less than 10 minutes to retaliate you don't understand human nature and fallibility.

 

look at the map.. NK capital and Bejing are pretty much in the same path.

Edited July 7, 2017 by tonray

[Jai Dee]

Several off-topic troll posts have been removed from this thread.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, tonray said:

A destroyer did not see a cargo ship ram into it. If you think once an icbm is launched that someone will rely on what could be flawed data when you only have less than 10 minutes to retaliate you don't understand human nature and fallibility.

 

Ah, the obligatory "informed" same-same comment. I'll skip, thanks.

[tonray]

Just now, Morch said:

 

Ah, the obligatory "informed" same-same comment. I'll skip, thanks.

Ah the same know it all.. +thanks 

[billd766]

14 hours ago, UncleFester said:

Rotund man threatens the USA. That cannot stand.  President Trump is not Obama. He will strike. Perhaps you have a better idea? Would you prefer we get on our knees like most of Europe and beg him not to bomb us?

 

It's not in our nature.

 

Neither is killing millions of innocent people.

 

I assume that you will want to be in the front lines if it ever happens. To do your bit for your president and country and add another useless and pointless death.

 

Good for you.

 

I do so admire all the keyboard warriors that come on here and believe that violence and destruction are the way to fix things.

[billd766]

11 hours ago, Naam said:

when did Europe get on its knees? in your hallucinating dreams?

 

Please don't feed the troll. It only makes him happier.

 

Ignoring ALL his comments is much better.

[ilostmypassword]

33 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I think there's quite a consensus when it comes to NK's regime, though.

 

Whatever that consensus may be, it's not about what's next on the to-do list.

[Grubster]

2 hours ago, Banana7 said:

They couldn't prevent them from being delivered into Japan. Could be brought in by air, submarine, or even by ship.

 

Japan is power hungry and would love to become a nuclear power.

 

 

They could and would prevent them from sending intercontinental missiles into Japan, you cannot put an intercontinental missile on a plane. Have you ever seen a missile silo? They are more than a little bit huge. You cannot build one without the world knowing. Submarines have small short range missiles. Yes they could bring by ship as the Russians did in the early sixties only to be met at sea by the US and the promise that John F Kennedy made to them that they would not reach Cuba with them, as the US already knew that Cuba had built the Silo's and that was with fifty year old intelligence and technology.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, Banana7 said:

China is supporting N. Korea and has done far too little to deter kim.

 

USA doesn't have to resort to armed conflict. There is a very simple solution.

 

USA should put a 2 or 3 dozen thermo-nuclear warhead intercontinental missiles in Japan, with sufficient range to reach N.  Korea and Beijing, Shanghai and a few other Chinese cities on the East coast of mainland China.

 

As soon as USA commences preparations for the missiles in Japan, I bet we would see China making a significant effort to reign in Kim.

 

 

 

 

Do you really believe that for one minute Japan would even consider allowing that to happen.

 

In case you have forgotten, Japan is the ONLY nation (so far) to have been attacked by nuclear weapons. Those were only tiny and primative weapons at that and look at the loss of life and devastation they caused.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

America tends to look at any conflicts in the world in simplistic good guys verses bad guys, its never that simple and the bad guys dont always wear black hats. There are alliances, factions, trading partners, countries that bat for both teams etc. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 

Or could it be that the friend of my friend is also my enemy?

[Grubster]

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

Another thing to consider is Kim's statement on cancers. He has said there are cures for cancers, and other diseases, and the Americans are deliberately suppressing them.

 

The pharmaceutical lobby is probably one of the most powerful in the US.

 

The lobby (cartel) does not want natural cures for any diseases - that fortunes are being made from in the form of prescription drugs - to be out in the open.

Although that would be a good topic and may be partly true the retarded little fat man is now where near the first to bring it to light.

[Morch]

17 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Whatever that consensus may be, it's not about what's next on the to-do list.

There was no such suggestion made, just an observation with regard to how NK's regime is generally perceived. And before the expected tiresome nonsense, do read it in the context of the post replied to etc.

[Grubster]

11 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Do you really believe that for one minute Japan would even consider allowing that to happen.

 

In case you have forgotten, Japan is the ONLY nation (so far) to have been attacked by nuclear weapons. Those were only tiny and primative weapons at that and look at the loss of life and devastation they caused.

They actually saved more lives then killed. The Japs were lucky the US didn't finish them with conventional warfare,  a couple hundred thousand allied troops would likely have died in that invasion of Japan too. The Japanese loved their leaders unlike N Koreans.

[owl sees all]

1 minute ago, Grubster said:

Although that would be a good topic and may be partly true the retarded little fat man is now where near the first to bring it to light.

True, there is a  fair bit of literature on 'cures' and the like. One particularly is the honey found in NK that helps with cancer.

 

He is very high profile and has an audience of hundreds of millions. The pharmaceutical gangsters in the US want him to shut his mouth.

 

I am only highlighting the obvious really. People have the ability to access facts/ideas/evidence/truth like never before. Gone are the days when the US press/media can change everybody's minds.