Kingwood Underground
the heart and soul of our Kingwood, Texas family
Login - Create Account - Help
Clean out your garage on Kingwood bookoo! Or find local garage sales on Yard Sale Search.com
KU Live!

North Korea: Things gettin serious. Best not mess with us

who's talking here?

SoupIsGoodFood 2
jackass 2
voice of reason 6
AwesomeTattooedDragon 9
Dorothy Parker 4
SagaciousSighFiGurl 3
Joe Blow 5
sdanielmcev 1
Four Pinocchios 1
Emperor of Kingwood 16
witchywoman 1
DVaz 1
the Markster 8
Jepperd 2
AMDG 13
urabunchcats 3
JustWatching 15
tinnman 6

     » send to friend     » save in my favorites     » flag dangerous topic flag as a dangerous topic

Joe Blow --- 68 days ago -

What's going to sting your arse like a biotch is when you look back down on it from your next life and see that your grandchildren become extinct. EFFN OUCH that'll sting like a mother.

If we make it that far. It'll be sad if not interesting to watch the fallout from a nuclear war on the other side of the world. Thanks, Dump.

CMFEO 

SoupIsGoodFood --- 68 days ago -

LOL.............. The sky is falling!!! 

tinnman --- 66 days ago -

If we make it that far. It'll be sad if not interesting to watch the fallout from a nuclear war on the other side of the world. Thanks, Dump.

Let me let you in on a little secret. It was the appeasement policies of all previous administrations that led us to this point. The Korean Fat Kid has nukes and is close to perfecting a delivery vehicle for them.

That is not going to change.

If the Fat Kid is going to drop them, do you think it really matters who is President or what that person's policy is towards appeasement?

It won't. The only way to keep it from happening is to go and take them away from him, or, take him out of the equation.

What isn't going to work is more of the same with regards to appeasement. Hasn't worked since 1953. That's 64 years for those who are math challenged.

It's a no win situation. If the President does nothing and N Korea launches nukes, he'll be remembered as the President who fiddled while Rome burned.

If the President is proactive and yet, the Fat Kid still manages to lob some missiles our way, he'll be remembered as the President that started a World War.

But, if the President draws a line in the sand, and then has the gonad to back up the threat, then he'll be known as the President that disarmed N. Korea. By the way, I am convinced that we have the capability to either take out the missiles as they are launched, or the ability to disable/disarm electronically as they are being launched.

If the Fat Kid is going to launch missiles, he's going to do it regardless of who is in office. I want a President who is willing to go and get the little fat bast*** before he ruins the world.

BTW...I need to know what, exactly, Trump has done that is going to make my Grandchildren extinct. 

AMDG --- 66 days ago -

Tin man - top of my head, I can't think of one sovereign nation that has ever been stopped from developing nuclear weapons, once committed to their production. I think you appeasement point is just a touch too easy an explanation.

The real issue is to prevent their use, once developed. So far we, along with the rest of the world has done a pretty good job of that. 

Emperor of Kingwood --- 66 days ago -

I can't think of one sovereign nation that has ever been stopped from developing nuclear weapons, once committed to their production. I think you appeasement point is just a touch too easy an explanation.

I don't, I think its right on target. The measure isn't how many have been stopped its how many should have been stopped that weren't that now present a danger to us. So, the question is why weren't they stopped? The only answer is failed policies of diplomacy and appeasement and just plain poor leadership. 

sdanielmcev --- 66 days ago -

This wouldn't be a proxy war against the Chicoms. So, except for Myanmar, they'd be fighting alone. Their people are starving. They have 1\8 of their population in the military. We have a guy named Mad Dog.
I'll sleep fine. 

Jepperd --- 66 days ago -

I don't, I think its right on target. The measure isn't how many have been stopped its how many should have been stopped that weren't that now present a danger to us. So, the question is why weren't they stopped? The only answer is failed policies of diplomacy and appeasement and just plain poor leadership.?

The other way doesnt work either. Look at Iraq. 

tinnman --- 66 days ago -

Tin man - top of my head, I can't think of one sovereign nation that has ever been stopped from developing nuclear weapons, once committed to their production. I think you appeasement point is just a touch too easy an explanation.

I understand what you are saying, but, history is speaking for itself here.

In 1994, The Clinton Administration signed an agreement that was to freeze and replace N. Korea's nuclear power plant program and replace it with more light water plants designed to produce power, not weapons grade uranium.

Implementation was troubled from the beginning, but, the deal fell apart in 2003 altogether.

After 10 years of bickering over the terms of the treaty, it broke down for good in January 2003. N. Korea withdrew from Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.

The United States, and the world, did not do enough to hold N. Korea's feet to the fire for their part of the treaty. They gave in and gave in until the treaty had no bite. However, in the meantime, N. Korea took the money it was promised in the treaty and used it to build centrifuges....you don't need centrifuges to build power plants.

While opinions differ as to what else could have been done during the Clinton/Bush years to avoid where we are, one thing is abundantly clear.

Making threats and not following up does nothing more than to fuel the indifference countries like N. Korea have toward the entire world.

The real issue is to prevent their use, once developed. So far we, along with the rest of the world has done a pretty good job of that.

I don't disagree with your assessment that preventing the use of these weapons once produced is preferable to all other solutions.

However, do you really think we, as a world community, will be able to work with N. Korea to make sure they don't use their weapons the next time the Fat Kid decides to throw a tantrum? Are you willing to bet your life and the lives of your family on that?

I'm not.

Korea has to be willing to communicate first. We and the world haven't given them a reason to....yet.

The sooner everyone realizes that N. Korea is driving this boat to it's conclusion, the better off we will be. 

Emperor of Kingwood --- 66 days ago -

The other way doesnt work either. Look at Iraq.

Is Iraq nuclear armed? NO 

AMDG --- 66 days ago -

Tin man, emp - my point is, not much you can really do to stop a sovereign nation, determined on development to stop.

Efforts to stop use, either with regime change, assured destruction or most used giving on something they want, in exchange for inspections etc. all have been effective

You can come up with all kinds of examples of attempts to prevent development that have failed, almost by definition 

Emperor of Kingwood --- 66 days ago -

Efforts to stop use, either with regime change, assured destruction or most used giving on something they want, in exchange for inspections etc. all have been effective

Where? 

AMDG --- 66 days ago -

You seen a bunch of nukes go off lately that I missed? Everywhere 

Emperor of Kingwood --- 66 days ago -

Use no, development continues. One of the most effective deterrents to use is to not let them be developed. Otherwise its the same old MAD.

You mixed two items in your statement, use and inspections the later of which implies development and deployment. 

tinnman --- 66 days ago -

Efforts to stop use, either with regime change, assured destruction or most used giving on something they want, in exchange for inspections etc. all have been effective

No...they haven't. See my post to you about the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty with N. Korea. Do I also need to remind you about Saddam Hussein? His existence was dependent on UN inspections which he flatly refused to allow. Didn't work out to well for him or for us.

The entire treaty was set up around giving the N. Koreans money in exchange for their dismantling of their nuclear grade weapons development. This agreement has most decidedly been a dismal failure.

Why? Well...that's up for debate.

What isn't up for debate is that it has been a failure. So, here we are. Do we continue with the policies of the last 67 years?

Isn't that the definition of insanity? 

AMDG --- 66 days ago -

My point was, you can't stop development, you said no, than wrote 2 paragraphs on why yo can't stop development.

And, the world has been effective in stopping the use. Evidenced by there has been none used. 

tinnman --- 65 days ago -

US
Russia
UK
France
china
India
Pakistan
Israel
South Africa
and the Former Soviet Republics

What do these countries have in common?

Stable Governments.

It's very easy to negotiate the non use of these weapons when the governments involved aren't threatening to launch them against you, your territories, and your allies. MAD works, but only if your enemy believes in your resolve.

No one knows if Iraq actually has nuclear weapons, but, I believe if they did, they would be rattling their sabers just as loudly as N. Korea.

Again, I do not disagree with your assertion that negotiating a "cease fire" with countries with nuclear weapons is really the only way. However, N. Korea is not interested negotiating that, and furthermore, seems hell bent on perfecting it's delivery vehicle and then showing the world they'll do it.

That can't be argued.

So, if that's the case, what are the options? Negotiation has not worked for the last 60+ years. What else is there? 

AwesomeTattooedDragon --- 65 days ago -

After a lot of thought, I think I may agree (not happily) with tinman. This may be the only option when dealing with N. Korea- they may still back down, but as long as they have and continue to produce nuclear weapons, the're extremely dangerous- 

AMDG --- 65 days ago -

IMO what Nuclear capability gives North Korea a belief that they have some amount of leverage in dealing with the US. IMO how you stop that believe is with a show of real force, preferably with international support. Move 2 carrier battle groups offshore, add a large amount of additional ground forces along the DMZ.

we need to show with action, not words, that the threat of nuclear weapons does not enhance their leverage, quite the opposite. 

page 1 2 3
Login to add your comments!

see more discussions about...


Online now:
hit counters

Terms of Service - Privacy Policy - Ice Box

Kingwood Underground