"We May Not Be Able to Stop a North Korean Missile"

1337BeachedWhale1337 said:
I still don't see the metaphor that you're referring to. Saying "something that is arguably far worse is taking place in North Korea at this very moment" is a metaphor? That's not a figure of speech, that's simply what I believe... Something arguably far worse is taking place in North Korea right now, it's not a metaphor, it's simply a statement. I'm not applying "Never again" to anything, I'm simply saying that that's a lie, and explaining why I believe that is a lie... You can't say "Never again" when something just as bad/even worse happening again right now...
Click to expand...
A metaphor doesn't require a figure of speech. That is only one definition. Here's another:
a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
Click to expand...
This is the type metaphor that was used. It is simply a definition of a use of rhetoric and language. It says nothing about truth of either proposition.
 
Blessedmom said:
War with North Korea would be a war with China & Russia. China wants & needs the North. China, Japan, & Korea have a long & very complicated history. No one wants to touch North Korea, a country with no real resources, no oil.... even South Koreans don't want to be financially & socially burdened even if there was a miraculous unification. Yes, it's hell on earth there but a war with China & Russia would be far worse;( If China really wants to...they can stop North. We need to pressure China!
Click to expand...
I don't believe China or Russia would interfere if we attacked, I don't see how it would benefit either of them more than it would hurt them. If we preemptively attacked North Korea it would probably make them very angry, but there's ways around that. We could bait North Korea into attacking us and use that as justification for fighting them.
kinnem said:
A metaphor doesn't require a figure of speech. That is only one definition. Here's another:

This is the type metaphor that was used. It is simply a definition of a use of rhetoric and language. It says nothing about truth of either proposition.
Click to expand...
I'm still not seeing how what I said fits that definition of a metaphor, but I am not an English major so I probably just don't properly understand what a metaphor is, my apologies for that. In school I was taught a metaphor is a comparison without using the words like or as, and that was that. Regardless, wether or not I used a metaphor is very tangential to the topic at hand.
BTCS/USN said:
BeachedWhale, your phrase "according to the news" speaks volumes. Careful what you wish for. No true warrior wants to get into a war. They're the ones that actually understands what that entails and take my word for it, you want to make that option the very last one in the toolbox.
Click to expand...
The issue has been going on for longer than I've been alive, and if nothing is done I would not be surprised if it went on until long after I'm dead. I think the all of the options in the toolbox are long gone. I don't want war unless the benefits of it outweigh the costs, and in this case I believe they do to a great extent both from a moral and strategic standpoint.

MemberLG said:
What international law did North Korea break by developing her nuclear weapon and associated technologies?

It's okay for our Allies to have nuclear weapons but not our enemies?

Don't get me wrong, North Korea's nuclear weapons are not a good thing, but what moral authority do we have to start a war against North Korea?

Why can North Korea demand that US give up our nuclear weapons as we might use them against North Korea?
Click to expand...
Japan and South Korea’s power resides in their citizens and democratic deliberation as established by law. North Korea’s power lies in just one man. He is neither mature, nor does he support democracy, human rights, international law, and environmental sustainability. It is therefore far more dangerous for nuclear weapons to be in the hands of Kim Jong Un than in South Korea, Japan, or ourselves. Kim's lack of respect for these core values makes him more likely to use those weapons in a way that grossly violates them, and he therefore should not have them. Russia, North Korea, China, Pakistan and Iran are all lacking in the qualities of democracy, human rights, environmental sustainability and international law. Therefore they should not be trusted with nuclear weapons, which can do major damage to these core values.
 
kinnem said:
I'm glad you're so confident that you won't actually be risking millions of lives.
Click to expand...
And allowing one immature man who completely disregards the well being of others the capability to strike the United States with a nuclear weapon is not risking millions of lives? There and benefits and risks to not fighting as well, and one of the risks in both courses of actions entail is a lot of people dying.
 
Jcleppe said:
I didn't think my jaw could drop any farther, while just shaking my head.
Click to expand...
I could have said the same thing when you told me I either took the wrong history classes or was joking for stating that North Korea, and the prison camps that it entails, are as comparibly horrible as what took place during the holocaust.
 
1337BeachedWhale1337 said:
And allowing one immature man who completely disregards the well being of others the capability to strike the United States with a nuclear weapon is not risking millions of lives? There and benefits and risks to not fighting as well, and one of the risks in both courses of actions entail is a lot of people dying.
Click to expand...
Or, a North Korean nuclear attack on anyone, let alone the US, may never happen... or it does happen, and our anti-missile defense brings it down. For examples, see the history book chapters on the Russian or Chinese nuclear attacks on the United States.
 
kinnem said:
Or, a North Korean nuclear attack on anyone, let alone the US, may never happen... or it does happen, and our anti-missile defense brings it down. For examples, see the history book chapters on the Russian or Chinese nuclear attacks on the United States.
Click to expand...
That could certainly happen. Or, North Korea could continue to exist for the next 7 decades, develop advanced nuclear technology, Kim Jong the 5th turns out to be crazier than his ancestors, our anti missile defense systems fail(which would seem highly probably based on the article) and hundreds of millions of people die. There's risks to both courses of action, but I believe the risks of not attacking are greater than the risks of attacking. Saying that the course of action I believe is correct is wrong simply because it results in people dying is not reasonable, because the course of action you are advocating could result in even more people dying. The problem will get harder and harder to fix as time goes on, which is why I believe it needs to be fixed in the present. I believe the risks of not attacking outweigh the costs of attacking. Clearly you believe otherwise, and I can see your perspective even if I don't agree with it.

I'm not a history buff, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Russia or China have ever been dictatorships during the nuclear era. Assuming this to be true, North Korea is different than Russia or China in that one person holds the sole power of being able to launch a nuclear weapon. That to me makes them a much larger threat, coupled with the immaturity of who that dictator happens to be. Along with that, I don't believe much trust should be placed in a sample size of 2.

Even if that ideal situation of yours plays out, the prison camps will continue. Theres hundreds of thousands of people in them as we speak, and millions would live and die unimaginably painful livesover the course of those decades, perhaps resulting in even more people dying than if we had just fought a war. Is it not immoral for us to allow that to happen? Sometimes the harder right is sacrificing yourself for the well-being of others. The world becomes a better place if more and more people decide to this.
 
Last edited:
Or even Nikita Khrushchev, who put nuclear weapons into Cuba. No risks there.
 
:popcorn1::popcorn1::popcorn1: This is a 3-bucket of popcorn spectacle. Fun to watch on a slow news day.

The "debate" reminds me of this...

 
cb7893 said:
Every hear of Joseph Stalin? Mao Zedong?
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. I believe it should still be kept in mind that that is a sample size of 2, Stalin and Mao were likely much more competent than Kim, when Kim dies his descendent will take over and likely won't be much better, and with each new Kim, there will be one more dictator in our history that has had the sole power to attack others will nuclear weapons. Should the situation continue for another 50 years, that could mean 2 or 3 new leaders, and at that point the sample size that we are currently looking at would be smaller than the trial that I am advocating to end.

I also like how I make many points in my arguments, but commit small slip ups, and instead of attacking my overarching point you simply look at those errors. I noticed you never brought up how ridiculous, uninformed and insensitive my comparison of North Korea to the holocaust is after I cited examples of the atrocities taking place in NK.
USMCGrunt said:
:popcorn1::popcorn1::popcorn1: This is a 3-bucket of popcorn spectacle. Fun to watch on a slow news day.

The "debate" reminds me of this...

Click to expand...
I find it quite sickening that someone can find humor in a discussion over one of the most tragic situations in human history, but to each his own.
 
Last edited:
1337BeachedWhale1337 said:
I have.... Your point? Mao wasn't even alive during the nuclear era, so I'm not sure why you are bringing him up when I very clearly stated the words "during the nuclear era" in the post that you quoted...
Click to expand...

I swore I would drop out of this thread. I feel it's my duty to insult and try to humiliate you before you commission so that you learn something about humiliating yourself before it's done by someone who can really matter in your life.

What are you calling the nuclear era?

When did Mao and Stalin live?

Were they dictators?

When did the USSR and China develop nuclear weapons?

Ever heard of the Rosenbergs?

Setting aside your complete and total ignorance of history, do you really think that you and a few other internet armchair clown generals are really on to something? That you all see some opening that the national security apparatus has missed? What do think the evacuation of 10+ million folks from Seoul would look like? So do we leave the folks in Busan and Incheon or do we evacuate them too? Forget the NK nuke(s). What do you think 10's of thousands of rockets fired from thousands of launchers would look like?

1337BeachedWhale1337 said:
I personally wouldn't mind graduating a bit early and taking a visit to the Korean Peninsula...
Click to expand...

You are one tough SOB!
 
Hey, let's prove we can have a civilized debate for once. I get most don't agree with the young man, but there isn't a need to humiliate or insult one another. It had been civil and not personal, let's keep it that way.
 
cb7893 said:
I swore I would drop out of this thread. I feel it's my duty to insult and try to humiliate you before you commission so that you learn something about humiliating yourself before it's done by someone who can really matter in your life.

What are you calling the nuclear era?

When did Mao and Stalin live?

Were they dictators?

When did the USSR and China develop nuclear weapons?

Ever heard of the Rosenbergs?

Setting aside your complete and total ignorance of history, do you really think that you and a few other internet armchair clown generals are really on to something? That you all see some opening that the national security apparatus has missed? What do think the evacuation of 10+ million folks from Seoul would look like? So do we leave the folks in Busan and Incheon or do we evacuate them too? Forget the NK nuke(s). What do you think 10's of thousands of rockets fired from thousands of launchers would look like?



You are one tough SOB!
Click to expand...
I typed that and shortly thereafter realized that I had mixed up Mao with another historical figure lmao(notice that the post was edited 15 minutes after it was made). Slept 2 hours last night. I'm supposed to be humiliated because I made a mistake? Why don't you actually attack the points I'm making, and prove them wrong, instead of picking out small pieces of information and saying their wrong? That would "humiliate" me a lot more. What I said in that quoted post is not pertinent to the points I've made, they are simply pieces of misinformation that I stated. Yeah, I made a stupid mistake, mixed up historical figures, and shortly thereafter realized it and edited my post. I'm so embarrassed on this anonymous forum.

This is a discussion dude, I'm stating my damn opinion. You've never disagreed with what the government has done? So if I disagree with what the government is doing, all of a sudden I'm an armchair clown General?

There's no need to make personal attacks dude. It's a discussion, please either take part in the discussion, or leave it. And by taking part in the discussion, I mean attacking the points I am trying to make, not picking out the smallest minuteau like wether or not I used a metaphor and saying that I'm wrong.

Doesn't always take a tough SOB to be willing to fight for something, sometimes it just takes anger.

I'm "completely and totally ignorant of history", but you told me off for comparing the horribleness of the situation in NK with the holocaust... I later gave you some evidence to back up my point and you never responded to it. Do you honestly still believe it was ridiculous of me to compare NK to the holocaust after you read about the conditions of the prison camps in NK? Why did you stop bringing it up? Why do you insist on attacking the smallest of details and elect to ignore the big points I'm trying to make?

"What do you think 10's of thousands of rockets fired from thousands of launchers would look like?"

What do you think Kim Jong the 5th with his advanced nuclear technology lighting up half the planet would look like?
 
Last edited:
1337BW, one of my son's AROTC buddies spent part of the summer after his MS3 (junior) year in Korea on a CTLT assignment, shadowing a 1st lt. platoon leader. You might look into this opportunity. Just promise us you won't initiate hostilities.

If you find yourself on the beach this summer (and as a beached whale why wouldn't you?), bring some history books, including something on Korea. Once you get past the table of contents, you'll be more knowledgeable on the subject than the President. Luckily, if you count the books read by him and by Secretary Mattis and divide by two, you'd be in the thousands. (0 + thousands/2 = thousands).

Congratulations on finishing your first year at USMA.
 
Don't know why I am reading this thread. I have to admit the Dr Strangelove quotes keeps me coming back for more; the Peanuts strip was an unexpected added bonus. Waiting for a video or meme attachment next.
 
bpu said:
Don't know why I am reading this thread. I have to admit the Dr Strangelove quotes keeps me coming back for more; the Peanuts strip was an unexpected added bonus. Waiting for a video or meme attachment next.
Click to expand...

"Fluoridation"....

"precious bodily fluids"....

and as a career naval aviator who pre-flighted a lot of survival gear...my personal favorite..

"A fella could have a good time in Vegas with all this stuff.".....:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top