Jump to content

Trump warns 'fire and fury' if North Korea threatens U.S., Pyongyang weighs Guam strike


Recommended Posts

Posted
7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

It could happen if Kim was convinced he's under a similar attack or that his survival is at stake. Not commenting on the chances of this happening, just pointing out that the assurances that it won't seem to rely on Kim accurately interpreting situations, and that his threshold isn't set to low.

What part of 'preemptive' are you having trouble with? How could the DPRK regime in any way ensure their survival by attacking the US?

  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Just now, baboon said:

What part of 'preemptive' are you having trouble with? How could the DPRK regime in any way ensure their survival by attacking the US?

 

Kim doesn't have to actually be under attack in order to think he's under attack. That's about as plainly as I can put it. And, we have no idea how Kim might react if he was convinced that he is going down. It is not necessarily the question you asked, but that's the point I made.

 

Posted

These threads are so funny but great reading. TVF members should be in charge of the world as they know everything.

Just blow that silly fat stupid hair cut murderer and flatten the whole of Korea and have done with it.

Nuke the lot of them.

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Kim doesn't have to actually be under attack in order to think he's under attack. That's about as plainly as I can put it. And, we have no idea how Kim might react if he was convinced that he is going down. It is not necessarily the question you asked, but that's the point I made.

 

What, you think he doesn't have radar or what? You think the DPRK leadership are sitting in a bunker reading tea leaves?

That's right, you didn't answer the questions I asked.

Edited by baboon
Posted
Just now, baboon said:

What, you think he doesn't have radar or what? You think the DPRK leadership are sitting in a bunker reading tea leaves?

That's right you didn't answer the question I asked.

 

No, I think that radars are not infallible, and that mistakes happen. As for your other question, it's the usual loaded stuff. Not much point dwelling on the obvious. Kim thinking the end is nigh, now that's a more interesting proposition.

Posted
1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

No, I think that radars are not infallible, and that mistakes happen. As for your other question, it's the usual loaded stuff. Not much point dwelling on the obvious. Kim thinking the end is nigh, now that's a more interesting proposition.

No answers once again. Why not offer some theories of your own rather than wait like a praying mantis to feast on the ideas of others?

Posted
1 minute ago, baboon said:

No answers once again. Why not offer some theories of your own rather than wait like a praying mantis to feast on the ideas of others?

I've actually answered one of your questions, and explained why I don't see the other as relevant. Also, there was a new angle offered - which you ignored.

 

Posted
These threads are so funny but great reading. TVF members should be in charge of the world as they know everything.
Just blow that silly fat stupid hair cut murderer and flatten the whole of Korea and have done with it.
Nuke the lot of them.

Seems a bit much.
Posted
1 minute ago, Morch said:

I've actually answered one of your questions, and explained why I don't see the other as relevant. Also, there was a new angle offered - which you ignored.

 

No, what there was was your usual sniping. Taking snide shots from the sidelines and not putting up any ideas of your own for scrutiny. All you offer is  'Ah, so what about..?' and 'Ah, so if...?'

Posted
Just now, baboon said:

No, what there was was your usual sniping. Taking snide shots from the sidelines and not putting up any ideas of your own for scrutiny. All you offer is  'Ah, so what about..?' and 'Ah, so if...?'

Factually untrue.

Posted
1 minute ago, Morch said:

Factually untrue.

Snide shots from the sidelines and nothing of your own to offer. As said.

Posted
52 minutes ago, baboon said:

But it is then not an accurate question, I don't think. Without qualification, you make it sound as though there is a real likelihood that the DPRK will launch a preemptive attack on the US mainland. Why would they do that? What could they possibly hope to gain?

LIghten up - it's all hypothetical, but crazy leaders are capable of crazy things... history proves that.

 

 

 

 

Posted
Just now, baboon said:

Snide shots from the sidelines and nothing of your own to offer. As said.

Baseless personal comments galore.

 

 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:


Joke?

No Jingthing enough is enough....too many problems in the world, let the good people live and kill all the rest.

More room for the good people.

Posted
1 minute ago, Hutch68 said:

No Jingthing enough is enough....too many problems in the world, let the good people live and kill all the rest.

More room for the good people.

And, who would decide who the good people are? Oh right, the "Good People" would. yikes

Posted
20 minutes ago, thehelmsman said:

And, who would decide who the good people are? Oh right, the "Good People" would. yikes

Yes the ones that don't rape, murder and threaten to kill other people.... Remove them all then no more problems.

the world needs one leader, only one. If you do wrong you should die, no more religion, it should be banned from all the world and Donald is the man to do it.

Posted
1 minute ago, Hutch68 said:

At last a man has come along that will take no shit.

...or, doesn't know shit.

Which is probably closer to the reality.

Posted
So the idiot in NK strikes Guam, kills thousands....what next?   You're suggesting the President should sit on his hands and say, "Bad luck, can't do anything because I don't have the confidence of the American people on this issue?"
 
Please be serious if you want to participate in an adult conversation.

Jingthing was merely quoting the result of a poll so your last sentence of your post is a very impuberal remark.!

Sent from my BLL-L22 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

...or, doesn't know shit.

Which is probably closer to the reality.

It doesn't matter too much. He picked a good team which will be deciding on most of the strategies.  

 

Of course, the best team would have been a bunch of political junkies who spend day and night posting on this forum.

 

Perhaps you would have been more comfortable with Clinton.

Edited by tropo
Posted
2 hours ago, Na Lee said:


Jingthing was merely quoting the result of a poll so your last sentence of your post is a very impuberal remark.!

Sent from my BLL-L22 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

impuberal......Now where did I put my dictionary.

 

2 hours ago, Hutch68 said:

Yes the ones that don't rape, murder and threaten to kill other people.... Remove them all then no more problems.

the world needs one leader, only one. If you do wrong you should die, no more religion, it should be banned from all the world and Donald is the man to do it.

I'm failing to see a glimmer of humor........yikes

Posted
2 hours ago, Hutch68 said:

Yes the ones that don't rape, murder and threaten to kill other people.... Remove them all then no more problems.

Well one of those wipes 'Donny' out of your final selection then. He would have to be removed as well. Now what? Who is your single world leader going to be?

Posted

Trump needs to invite pudgy boy to the US.  Eat some big shrimp and kimchee and swiss cheese at the White House.  Give the boy a $300 haircut and a few free chits for some leg at Pattaya.  End of world crisis. Given the severe sanctions, Trump could also pay for the gas.

Posted
9 hours ago, mogandave said:

 


All he (they) have is weak deflection...

Impeach 45!!!!!!

 

 

On what grounds??

 

I know......the evidence is mounting, won't be long now, Trump had lunch with somebody who met a Russian, or thought he may have been a Russian, in a pub 20 years ago, blah....blah....blah.

Posted
 

On what grounds??

 

I know......the evidence is mounting, won't be long now, Trump had lunch with somebody who met a Russian, or thought he may have been a Russian, in a pub 20 years ago, blah....blah....blah.

 

 

On the grounds of the Whitehouse silly.

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

 

On the grounds of the Whitehouse silly.

 

 

Quite witty dave, but no grounds for impeachment??

Edited by F4UCorsair

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...