Posted on 09/04/2017 12:10:59 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Headline only so far.
The blackmail that worked with all past Presidents: give us money and food or we will do really, really bad things. They threaten, and we acquiesed. "Here! Here's money and food! Please don't do it! The NORKs are like a spoiled child with bad parents. The child throws a tantrum holding his breath and the parents panic and give him what he wants.
With his father and grandfather, it worked like a charm. FatBoy has been 0 for something like 10 so far with his escalations with Trump; the President hasn't given in and offered money and food.
The potbellied little SOB can't figure out why it isn't working, and keeps escalating. Eventually, Trump will lower the boom, but only at the right time. Everyone wants to know "When???" "When???" and assumes that since it hasn't yet happened, it won't.
The only ones who know when are Trump and Mattis, I'd wager.
“it’s ain’t a big deal these days”
A madman has control over deliverable thermonuclear weapons and potentially the ability to deliver some of them to the US mainland.
His regime is an insanity cult, sworn to our destruction.
Every day they announce they are going to nuke us.
And you think we should not act to prevent that?
Taiwan is great leverage. In reality we have a lot of leverage against China whether they want to recognize it our not.
Currently, they seem to feel that we will not use it.
Unfortunately, at this late stage of the game negotiating leverage is wasting time. I believe we must act.
“only 9 have nuclear weapons”
And only ONE is daily threatening to nuke us.
“They don’t want us to strike them.
They are trying as quickly as possible to demonstrate that they have already “broken out” as a nuclear weapons power.
We already hear those whose interest is to defend the legacies of Obama and Clinton in the media putting out the line about how now that NK is nuclear, we have to learn to live with it, we have lived with other nuclear powers for decades, there has never been a nuclear war, etc.
Kim is trying to give them support for their argument of “well, it’s too late to do anything about it, they’re already a nuclear power, we’ll just have to live with it.”
And Iran is watching very closely how we and world respond.
If we and the world let DPRK have their nukes, then Iran will get theirs.
Then Iraq
Then Syria.
Then Afghanistan.
Then Qatar.
Then Lybia.
wrong
the Norks have never ever threatened a first strike
“...A madman has control over deliverable thermonuclear weapons and potentially the ability to deliver some of them to the mainland.
His regime is an insanity cult, sworn to our destruction..”
you’ve been drinking that neocon kool aid again.
Just had a thought, it might be better to capture fat boy and his crew.
Waterboard all of their asses. The intelligence we gain would be critical — especially as it relates to Iran.
Just an idea...
Japan
Germany
Poland
Ukraine
Belarus
Croatia
Serbia
Bulgaria
Roumania
Italy
Spain
Brazil
Argentina
Switzerland
Turkey
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
Tajikistan
Armenia
Georgia
South Korea
Republic of China
Australia
Saudia
South Africa
Greece
True - but only if your enemy is known to be a rational thinker. With Kim Jung Un, we are not dealing with a rational human.
...”With Kim Jung Un, we are not dealing with a rational human”...
That would also apply to the Generals around him, who some think are controlling these events more than Kim. Either way the idea they want to be a nuclear state...with all the economics and trade as other Nuclear nations is NOT going to happen......neither are his demands going to be met.
Really? So a proven madman with nukes - and a missile capable of putting one on U.S. soil - is perfectly acceptable to you? (Shaking head in disbelief)
You’re either willfully ignorant, or a troll ...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/feb/06/usa.northkorea
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/25/politics/north-korea-threatens-nuclear-strike-us/index.html
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-21/north-korea-threatens-us-first-strike-nuclear-icbm
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/07/north-korea-threatens-to-reduce-us-to-ashes.html
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/06/asia/north-korea-preemptive-nuclear-strike-threat/index.html
I good give citation after citation - but you get the point (I hope)
Google search is your friend.
First of all, I’m not a neocon and detest them.
Secondly, you must be saying that it’s the neocons that are making all of these pronouncements out of Pyongyang under the cover of the Norklandia regime.
Because they are saying if we do not stop our military exercises with our ally in the South, they cause us to be consumed in fire.
Time to send in Mack Bolan and his Weatherby Mark V to take out Kim.
If you think that South Korea has no Army and no self-defense plans of its own, you are mistaken. They have had as long to prepare for this as the North Koreans have had to plan an attack - and it is easier to defend than to attack and hold territory. They have far more modern equipment, their troops have actually seen combat much more recently than the North Koreans, and they operate with much more initiative at lower levels in their military, similar to Western armies. The NKs operate with Stalinism, top-down command and control. South Korea has mined its roads and bridges, and will be able to significantly slow down any attack on its territory. South Korea also has its own artillery, and has a pretty good idea of where the North Korean artillery is located. Just as soon as the North Koreans open up, so will the South Koreans, thereby reducing the duration and effectiveness of North Korean fire.
As Mike Tyson has been quoted as saying, “Everyone has a plan until they are punched in the face.”
read the actual statements made by the Norks - close reading is your friend.
they have never threatened anything remotely like a first strike
what pronouncements ?
the Norks have been consistent ( in their bombastic way ) that their nukes are for defensive purposes. Their pronouncements are rather similar to Washington’s official policy for decades; nukes not for first strike only retaliatory.
I have yet to find one Nork statement that suggests they have a policy of first strike. if you can find me a Nork statement advocating first strike...
Yeah, good. I forget that some of the countries where we have troops actually have defense capabilities of their own. Thanks for the info.
Source
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.