North Korea threatens strike on Guam

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/politics/north-korea-considering-guam-strike-trump/index.html

Strike or be striked first. At this point I see thise as the only two options. Fighting is not a matter of altruism, it is a matter of national security. Fighting is not casually throwing away millions of lives like they are not, it's sacrificing those lives for the safety of hundreds of millions.


I will be surprised if we aren't fighting on the Korean Peninsula by the end of the year.

Thoughts?
 

Maplerock

Proud to be an American
5-Year Member
Diplomacy first, right? Lots of innocent sons and daughters over there... just as precious as our own.
 
Diplomacy first, right? Lots of innocent sons and daughters over there... just as precious as our own.
Diplomacy first? Is that a joke? I don't know where you've been, but we've been using "diplomacy" to "handle" the situation for the last 70 years. How many more decades of diplomacy do you want to attempt? A couple more and maybe North Korea will have the nuclear technology to light up the entire planet...

Lots of people are going to die if we strike first. Even more people will die if North Korea does, pick your poison. The sooner we strike the weaker their nuclear technology will be.
 
This is something that will likely result in greater than 10x more deaths than 9/11 and y'all are joking about it. If 9/11 jokes aren't funny, I'm not sure why it's acceptable to joke about this. Hundreds of thousands, or even millions of lives are likely to be taken and y'all are laughing about it. This is a serious topic, so I would greatly appreciate it if y'all didn't crack jokes about it. If any of y'all made a serious thread about 9/11 I wouldn't go on there and crack jokes,so I would appreciate it if y'all would do the same for me. Thanks.
 

cb7893

5-Year Member
I will be surprised if we aren't fighting on the Korean Peninsula by the end of the year.

Thoughts?
Given that the PDRK threat to Guam shortly followed the President's ultimatum that "North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,” the fight better begin by the end of the week or the President will prove to be a big sissy. It's a binary situation.

You picked a bad time to attend the an SA. The fight will be over by the time you commission. There's still time to enlist.
 

cb7893

5-Year Member
This is something that will likely result in greater than 10x more deaths than 9/11 and y'all are joking about it. If 9/11 jokes aren't funny, I'm not sure why it's acceptable to joke about this. Hundreds of thousands, or even millions of lives are likely to be taken and y'all are laughing about it. This is a serious topic, so I would greatly appreciate it if y'all didn't crack jokes about it. If any of y'all made a serious thread about 9/11 I wouldn't go on there and crack jokes,so I would appreciate it if y'all would do the same for me. Thanks.
Weren't two long threads on this exact subject enough for you.
 
Given that the PDRK threat to Guam shortly followed the President's ultimatum that "North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,” the fight better begin by the end of the week or the President will prove to be a big sissy. It's a binary situation.
No disagreements there, except instead of the end of the week I would give him a couple months.
You picked a bad time to attend the an SA. The fight will be over by the time you commission. There's still time to enlist.
Believe it or not, but I am considering leaving USMA to enlist depending on how the situation develops.
 
This is something that will likely result in greater than 10x more deaths than 9/11 and y'all are joking about it. If 9/11 jokes aren't funny, I'm not sure why it's acceptable to joke about this. Hundreds of thousands, or even millions of lives are likely to be taken and y'all are laughing about it. This is a serious topic, so I would greatly appreciate it if y'all didn't crack jokes about it. If any of y'all made a serious thread about 9/11 I wouldn't go on there and crack jokes,so I would appreciate it if y'all would do the same for me. Thanks.
Weren't two long threads on this exact subject enough for you.
If you would like to talk about a different thread please post on said thread or send me a private message. Thanks.
 

NTWLF ONE

Member
I spent more days than I can count on the Peninsula working in the HTACC at Osan. Korean Defense Medal for my efforts...Did all the major exercises...UFL, UFG, Key Resolve,.... etc...Had a great conversation with the South Korean MOD one day as he visited the HTACC. I know that OPLAN well but the South Koreans understand the implications better than anyone...war on the Korean Peninsula would be devastating...
 
Last edited:

NTWLF ONE

Member
I think most of us appreciate your engagement and enthusiasm on this forum as a future junior officer. Earn that commission, get the high level security clearance you need, take a look and I think you will be impressed with our missile defense capabilities and deterrence...
 
We can't, the threads you start end up locked.
It's not my fault that people elect to make personal attacks instead of having a civil discussion. The reason some of the threads have gotten out of hand is because people started attacking other people instead of their arguments.

And actually, none of my threads are locked...
 
Last edited:

Day-Tripper

5-Year Member
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/politics/north-korea-considering-guam-strike-trump/index.html

Strike or be striked first. At this point I see thise as the only two options. Fighting is not a matter of altruism, it is a matter of national security. Fighting is not casually throwing away millions of lives like they are not, it's sacrificing those lives for the safety of hundreds of millions.


I will be surprised if we aren't fighting on the Korean Peninsula by the end of the year.

Thoughts?
Nothing will happen.

North Korea was warned never to develop the capacity to build nuclear weapons - they did.
North Korea was warned never to test nuclear weapons - they did.
North Korea was warned never to build ICMBs - they did.
North Korea was warned never to develop nuclear warheads for ICBMs - they did.

Now we find out that North Korea may have as many as 60 nuclear weapons in their arsenal.

So what?

Big deal.

Since post-World War Two lots of countries have armed themselves with nukes but none have used them. Why would North Korea be any different?

North Korea is perceived to be ruled by a madman, but they've not started a war since 1950. Their leadership isn't determined to unleash nuclear war, but to merely remain in power and enjoy a lavish lifestyle at the expense of their fellow countrymen. They might be evil and ruthless, but they are nothing but pragmatic.

Since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq (pre-emption at its worst), North Korea (and I suspect a few other countries) have determined that the only way to stop a US attack and regime change is to develop nuclear weapons. It makes sense. Check mate. No "Operation North Korean Freedom" in the offing.

The US lived with the USSR having as many as 50,000 nuclear weapons at the height of the Cold War, and as I recall the 1980s we didn't go to sleep at night terrified of a Commie first strike every night.

We can live with a nuclear-armed North Korea. If we can't, then the US faces the option of initiating a war that will claim hundreds of thousands of lives.

North Korea's nuclear program may have prevented a US invasion but it doesn't do them much good otherwise. What good are those nukes other than for deterrence? None. They can't sell 'em. They'll get blamed (and nuked in return) if their buyers ever try to use them. They can't threaten the US, South Korea or Japan for, say, economic aid or else they'll use them. What if the US, South Korea, Japan, etc. just says "No". What's Kim going to do? Nuke Seoul if not enough food aid trucks show up at the border?

Of course, the world is probably more troubled by the "madman" in the White House nowadays more so than they are of anyone in Pyongyang or Tehran or Islamabad.
 

Maplerock

Proud to be an American
5-Year Member
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/08/politics/north-korea-considering-guam-strike-trump/index.html

Strike or be striked first. At this point I see thise as the only two options. Fighting is not a matter of altruism, it is a matter of national security. Fighting is not casually throwing away millions of lives like they are not, it's sacrificing those lives for the safety of hundreds of millions.


I will be surprised if we aren't fighting on the Korean Peninsula by the end of the year.

Thoughts?
Nothing will happen.

North Korea was warned never to develop the capacity to build nuclear weapons - they did.
North Korea was warned never to test nuclear weapons - they did.
North Korea was warned never to build ICMBs - they did.
North Korea was warned never to develop nuclear warheads for ICBMs - they did.

Now we find out that North Korea may have as many as 60 nuclear weapons in their arsenal.

So what?

Big deal.

Since post-World War Two lots of countries have armed themselves with nukes but none have used them. Why would North Korea be any different?

North Korea is perceived to be ruled by a madman, but they've not started a war since 1950. Their leadership isn't determined to unleash nuclear war, but to merely remain in power and enjoy a lavish lifestyle at the expense of their fellow countrymen. They might be evil and ruthless, but they are nothing but pragmatic.

Since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq (pre-emption at its worst), North Korea (and I suspect a few other countries) have determined that the only way to stop a US attack and regime change is to develop nuclear weapons. It makes sense. Check mate. No "Operation North Korean Freedom" in the offing.

The US lived with the USSR having as many as 50,000 nuclear weapons at the height of the Cold War, and as I recall the 1980s we didn't go to sleep at night terrified of a Commie first strike every night.

We can live with a nuclear-armed North Korea. If we can't, then the US faces the option of initiating a war that will claim hundreds of thousands of lives.

North Korea's nuclear program may have prevented a US invasion but it doesn't do them much good otherwise. What good are those nukes other than for deterrence? None. They can't sell 'em. They'll get blamed (and nuked in return) if their buyers ever try to use them. They can't threaten the US, South Korea or Japan for, say, economic aid or else they'll use them. What if the US, South Korea, Japan, etc. just says "No". What's Kim going to do? Nuke Seoul if not enough food aid trucks show up at the border?

Of course, the world is probably more troubled by the "madman" in the White House nowadays more so than they are of anyone in Pyongyang or Tehran or Islamabad.
Great post. I hope you're right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top