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?

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.

 

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.

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.

In fact enough of it all.... Nuke everywhere and start again the world needs it.

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.

9 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

To judge from polls, those wrong people would be Americans:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10640690/Americans-surveyed-misunderstood-misrepresented-or-ignorant.html

I've posted the same stuff with regards to Europeans. Not having a clue about geography. Just depends on what you want to believe.

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?

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.

 

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.

Donald Duck should calm down. He is the captain of a sinking ship which is not a nice occupation. 

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...?'

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.

1 minute ago, Morch said:

Factually untrue.

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

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.

 

 

 

 

Just now, baboon said:

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

Baseless personal comments galore.

 

 

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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?

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.

Inflammatory posts have been removed. 

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.

 

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.

32 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

 

On the grounds of the Whitehouse silly.

 

 

Quite witty dave, but no grounds for impeachment??