North Korea

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

58% of Americans favor military action as last resort

Post by Alexis » Sat Sep 23, 2017 6:52 am

Gallup poll 6-10 September, 2017

Question: "If the United States does not accomplish its goals regarding North Korea with economic and diplomatic efforts, would you favor or oppose using military action against North Korea?"

Favor: 58%
Oppose: 39%

Among Republicans, 82% favor military action if economic and diplomatic efforts fail.

Question: "Do you think the situation involving North Korea can be successfully resolved using only economic and diplomatic efforts, or not?"

Yes, can be: 50%
No, cannot: 45%

Jim the Moron
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: North Korea

Post by Jim the Moron » Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:12 am

Needed here (and absent) - a clear expository of what US goals are "regarding North Korea." As far as I can see, there are none. The CB is free to threaten.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: North Korea

Post by cassowary » Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:15 pm

The goal is to stop Fatty Kim from getting nukes/rockets that can hit the US.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1345
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: North Korea

Post by Sertorio » Sun Sep 24, 2017 2:48 am

cassowary wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:15 pm
The goal is to stop Fatty Kim from getting nukes/rockets that can hit the US.
I agree. So that the US may continue to bully the rest of the world with total impunity. If more countries follow the exemple of North Korea, there won't be any more Vietnams, Iraq invasions, wholesale threatening of "unfriendly" countries...

DESTROY KIM!!! NOW!!!...

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: North Korea

Post by cassowary » Sun Sep 24, 2017 3:05 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Sep 24, 2017 2:48 am
cassowary wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:15 pm
The goal is to stop Fatty Kim from getting nukes/rockets that can hit the US.
I agree. So that the US may continue to bully the rest of the world with total impunity. If more countries follow the exemple of North Korea, there won't be any more Vietnams, Iraq invasions, wholesale threatening of "unfriendly" countries...

DESTROY KIM!!! NOW!!!...
If the US (with permission of the UN) did not intervene in Korea in 1950, South Korea would be ruled by a ruthless dictatorship now. The people would be starving. If the US did not intervene in Vietnam, South East Asia might be under Socialist/Communist rule today (according to LKY). The US saved SE Asia and South Korea.

User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

Paroxysm quite soon

Post by Alexis » Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:26 am

cassowary wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:15 pm
The goal is to stop Fatty Kim from getting nukes/rockets that can hit the US.
I agree, that is the actual US goal, different from stated objective of complete Nork denuclearization, which everybody in Washington must know is no longer attainable.

The NK - US situation seems to be heading towards a paroxysm, this within a relatively short time. One or maximum a couple of years from now I guess, one of two things will have happened:
- NK will have demonstrated a credible ability to fire nuclear warheads on the 48 US contiguous States, quelling any idea of US preventive strike
or
- The US will have attacked NK

No telling which one it will be.

Anyway, it should be on Trump's - and Kim 3rd's - watch.

User avatar
dagbay
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 8:27 pm

Re: North Korea

Post by dagbay » Mon Sep 25, 2017 11:40 am

Alexis wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:26 am
cassowary wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:15 pm
The goal is to stop Fatty Kim from getting nukes/rockets that can hit the US.
I agree, that is the actual US goal, different from stated objective of complete Nork denuclearization, which everybody in Washington must know is no longer attainable.

The NK - US situation seems to be heading towards a paroxysm, this within a relatively short time. One or maximum a couple of years from now I guess, one of two things will have happened:
- NK will have demonstrated a credible ability to fire nuclear warheads on the 48 US contiguous States, quelling any idea of US preventive strike
or
- The US will have attacked NK

No telling which one it will be.

Anyway, it should be on Trump's - and Kim 3rd's - watch.
Seems these alternates are resonable but I think that Iran is a missing part of that play as well. Iran has worked with NOKO all along sharing info and materials. It is going to be involved with either alternative. The US may have to abandon it's hope to limit nuclear proliferation and live under the resulting threat or act decisively to change the makeup of both nations. Personally I am convinced that the colateral damage of militarywill increase with any further delay as it has in the past decades.
I'd rather be diving or flying alas for now I am on terra firma.

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 1805
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Paroxysm quite soon

Post by cassowary » Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:05 pm

Alexis wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 12:26 am
cassowary wrote:
Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:15 pm
The goal is to stop Fatty Kim from getting nukes/rockets that can hit the US.
I agree, that is the actual US goal, different from stated objective of complete Nork denuclearization, which everybody in Washington must know is no longer attainable.

The NK - US situation seems to be heading towards a paroxysm, this within a relatively short time. One or maximum a couple of years from now I guess, one of two things will have happened:
- NK will have demonstrated a credible ability to fire nuclear warheads on the 48 US contiguous States, quelling any idea of US preventive strike
or
- The US will have attacked NK

No telling which one it will be.

Anyway, it should be on Trump's - and Kim 3rd's - watch.
Why don't we make a guess? How many of you will bet on:

1)NK wins - it gets its missiles that can hit the entire US. Trump failed to stop Fatty Kim.
2)The US wins - it attacks N Korea and destroys its nuclear program by force.

My guess is 2).

Jim the Moron
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: North Korea

Post by Jim the Moron » Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:14 pm

3) No one wins (my guess), at least short-term. Millions of North Koreans and other folks die. NK no longer exists as a polity, and becomes part of a unified Korea.

User avatar
armchair_pundit
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: North Korea

Post by armchair_pundit » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:11 pm

4> Anyone think China is going to sit it out?

Image

Post Reply