Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
WKDWZD

Trump - "The US is Locked and Loaded" ...

185 posts in this topic

Just now, ms maggie said:

Look up the meaning of provocation.  Here's a thought: don't take the bait.  I love how blithely everyone ignores how catastrophic this would be for South Korea.  And of course, China would side with NK. Yippee!!!!

Kim isn't rational.  Why would you deliberately get into a meaningless pissing contest with him? He is just like Trump--everything is secondary to his image of himself as a tough guy, a serious world leader.  We at least have people around Trump who can stand in the way of him doing anything too implusively.  Kim? Don't think so.  But hey, why not publicly challenge and mock an unstable, irreponsible leader who has nuclear weapons

First off, I'm not pushing for any war and haven't posted a word that could be so construed.  As for Kim, he is irrational which is the wild card in the whole thing.  A place like Iran might get a nuke but, for all their religious zealotry, they aren't dumb enough to fire it off because they know what would happen.  We can make no such statements about Kim.  He might get indigestion one day and decide it's some US plot to poison him and fire off a nuke at the US.  He's that nutty.  So, the question is whether we're content to live with NK under those circumstances, particularly if he starts making actual launches in our direction, armed or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, veritas said:

First off, I'm not pushing for any war and haven't posted a word that could be so construed.  As for Kim, he is irrational which is the wild card in the whole thing.  A place like Iran might get a nuke but, for all their religious zealotry, they aren't dumb enough to fire it off because they know what would happen.  We can make no such statements about Kim.  He might get indigestion one day and decide it's some US plot to poison him and fire off a nuke at the US.  He's that nutty.  So, the question is whether we're content to live with NK under those circumstances, particularly if he starts making actual launches in our direction, armed or not.

So you're willing to sacrifice South Korea. Well you're honest at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Look up the meaning of provocation.  Here's a thought: don't take the bait.  I love how blithely everyone ignores how catastrophic this would be for South Korea.  And of course, China would side with NK. Yippee!!!!

Kim isn't rational.  Why would you deliberately get into a meaningless pissing contest with him? He is just like Trump--everything is secondary to his image of himself as a tough guy, a serious world leader.  We at least have people around Trump who can stand in the way of him doing anything too implusively.  Kim? Don't think so.  But hey, why not publicly challenge and mock an unstable, irreponsible leader who has nuclear weapons

Exactly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ms maggie said:

So you're willing to sacrifice South Korea. Well you're honest at least. 

South Koreans aren't people. Only Americans are people; and only a select few in the US are Americans - minorities need not apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ms maggie said:

So you're willing to sacrifice South Korea. Well you're honest at least. 

That's what you got from my post?  I asked a question.  I made no declaration.  Yet, in your eagerness to chastise, you see what you want to see.  I guess rational discussion is out of the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ncbirdfan said:

South Koreans aren't people. Only Americans are people; and only a select few in the US are Americans - minorities need not apply.

You can't read any better than Maggie apparently.  The above statement is also blatantly goofy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As are your constant prostrations to Donald Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, veritas said:

You can't read any better than Maggie apparently.  The above statement is also blatantly goofy.

Who do you think will be the first casualties if Trump keeps hitting that nest? If it would be Massachusetts, would you be so cavalier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, veritas said:

You can't read any better than Maggie apparently.  The above statement is also blatantly goofy.

NC is just a tag along with nothing really to offer on it's own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

So you're willing to sacrifice South Korea. Well you're honest at least. 

That was a totally unfair characterization of the quote to which you were responding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonsensback said:

NC is just a tag along with nothing really to offer on it's own. 

Yes. And your post just adds so much substance. :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, veritas said:

That's what you got from my post?  I asked a question.  I made no declaration.  Yet, in your eagerness to chastise, you see what you want to see.  I guess rational discussion is out of the question.

That's kinda your thing, not making a declaration.  I will: we should not preemptively strike NK. If we do, we put SK in a horrendous position. And we get into war with China. Those are the hard facts.  Why do you think this mess has festered under 3 prior Presidents? Are you as naive as Trump? 

We need to negotiate with the NKs, which of course requires a skill set Trump lacks.  And we need to speak with one voice, we and our allies in the region. We have leverage with China if we choose to use it.  This asshat making threats isn't the wise path.

Your declaration is what, exactly?  What should we do if Kim blows up a nuke offshore in Guam? Or Seattle? Simple enough question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ncbirdfan said:

Who do you think will be the first casualties if Trump keeps hitting that nest? If it would be Massachusetts, would you be so cavalier?

All I've seen Trump do is let Kim know what will happen to him if he has the temerity to fire a weapon.  Secondly, as I said above in the first sentence of my post, I haven't been cavalier at all.  That's in your imagination. I want no war.  War is the last resort.  My question is whether we should do anything if it looks like all other avenues to de-escalate have failed.  Do we live under the threat of Kim with a nuke or not?  It's a simple question with a difficult answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, veritas said:

That's what you got from my post?  I asked a question.  I made no declaration.  Yet, in your eagerness to chastise, you see what you want to see.  I guess rational discussion is out of the question.

You new here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, veritas said:

It depends what you mean by middle of the ocean.  If they dropped it 200 miles off NYC, is that a provocation or not?  Where is the line?  I'm asking this seriously.  I don't want a war or any military action if it can be avoided but how much do we put up with from the pipsqueak?

What is the point of dropping a bomb 200 miles from any target?

If, however, to bring this back to the situation at hand, North Korea targeted an unarmed missile 200 miles from New York it would not be a provocation. One could reasonably argue that they could splash one down 12.1 nautical miles (13.9 miles) from The low water line of New York and it would still not be a provocation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, veritas said:

All I've seen Trump do is let Kim know what will happen to him if he has the temerity to fire a weapon.  Secondly, as I said above in the first sentence of my post, I haven't been cavalier at all.  That's in your imagination. I want no war.  War is the last resort.  My question is whether we should do anything if it looks like all other avenues to de-escalate have failed.  Do we live under the threat of Kim with a nuke or not?  It's a simple question with a difficult answer.

Yes he played John Wayne. Kim was so s cared he called Trump senile - probably a good call on his part.

And YOU may want no war, but I'm not so sure about Trump. He's been itching for something to help his "ratings" and deflect from the Mueller investigations.

At this point we do not live under a threat of NK. But if Trump keeps egging it on, all bets are off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ncbirdfan said:

Dude...the problem IS Trump. To deny it doesn't make it go away. NK has been making threats for a long time. Kim Jong-un knows that if he were to act on his threats he would lose his country. But he wants to keep his demonstrative profile so he continues to threaten. Other presidents knew this and acted accordingly. Trump, on the other hand, needs something to boost his ego/ratings.

^^This^^

Kim must be laughing his head off.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, veritas said:

All I've seen Trump do is let Kim know what will happen to him if he has the temerity to fire a weapon.  Secondly, as I said above in the first sentence of my post, I haven't been cavalier at all.  That's in your imagination. I want no war.  War is the last resort.  My question is whether we should do anything if it looks like all other avenues to de-escalate have failed.  Do we live under the threat of Kim with a nuke or not?  It's a simple question with a difficult answer.

Really?  You missed the tweets and comments about the ineptitude of Obama/Bush/Clinton?  You missed his slam at China? You missed his lie about how HE has totally updated our nuclear arsensal? You missed his juvenile language?

Must be comforting just watching Fox, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ncbirdfan said:

Yes he played John Wayne. Kim was so s cared he called Trump senile - probably a good call on his part.

And YOU may want no war, but I'm not so sure about Trump. He's been itching for something to help his "ratings" and deflect from the Mueller investigations.

At this point we do not live under a threat of NK. But if Trump keeps egging it on, all bets are off.

Of course.  It's the standard demagogue ploy. Start a war to distract from your dismal record at home. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ms maggie said:

That's kinda your thing, not making a declaration.  I will: we should not preemptively strike NK. If we do, we put SK in a horrendous position. And we get into war with China. Those are the hard facts.  Why do you think this mess has festered under 3 prior Presidents? Are you as naive as Trump? 

We need to negotiate with the NKs, which of course requires a skill set Trump lacks.  And we need to speak with one voice, we and our allies in the region. We have leverage with China if we choose to use it.  This asshat making threats isn't the wise path.

Your declaration is what, exactly?  What should we do if Kim blows up a nuke offshore in Guam? Or Seattle? Simple enough question.

I make plenty of declarations in here.  I do it all the time. You apparently found one since you concluded that I wanted to sacrifice S. Korea.  In this case, I was trying to have a civil discussion by asking a question but you take every post as a partisan piss-fest.  That makes it difficult to have any interaction with you.

The difference between now and prior Presidents is that Kim had no viable weapon then.  The previous administrations have dumped their failure on Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WKDWZD said:

What is the point of dropping a bomb 200 miles from any target?

If, however, to bring this back to the situation at hand, North Korea targeted an unarmed missile 200 miles from New York it would not be a provocation. One could reasonably argue that they could splash one down 12.1 nautical miles (13.9 miles) from The low water line of New York and it would still not be a provocation.

Great, then they can drop one 12 miles off Plymouth like I said.  I can only imagine what your government might say about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, veritas said:

I make plenty of declarations in here.  I do it all the time. You apparently found one since you concluded that I wanted to sacrifice S. Korea.  In this case, I was trying to have a civil discussion by asking a question but you take every post as a partisan piss-fest.  That makes it difficult to have any interaction with you.

The difference between now and prior Presidents is that Kim had no viable weapon then.  The previous administrations have dumped their failure on Trump.

She should have said you never own up to your declarations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

Really?  You missed the tweets and comments about the ineptitude of Obama/Bush/Clinton?  You missed his slam at China? You missed his lie about how HE has totally updated our nuclear arsensal? You missed his juvenile language?

Must be comforting just watching Fox, huh?

He will reply by saying he doesn't read Trump's posts. That way he can wipe his hands clean. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

That's kinda your thing, not making a declaration.  I will: we should not preemptively strike NK. If we do, we put SK in a horrendous position. And we get into war with China. Those are the hard facts.  Why do you think this mess has festered under 3 prior Presidents? Are you as naive as Trump? 

We need to negotiate with the NKs, which of course requires a skill set Trump lacks.  And we need to speak with one voice, we and our allies in the region. We have leverage with China if we choose to use it.  This asshat making threats isn't the wise path.

Your declaration is what, exactly?  What should we do if Kim blows up a nuke offshore in Guam? Or Seattle? Simple enough question.

Not on you but in general.....ABOUT WHAT? Does anyone clearly know what they want? I doubt they even know.

Oh yeah sanctions. But the question is ....even before the nuke thing and the subsequent sanctions....WHAT THE BLIP DID THEY WANT? Other than to be left alone to try and absorb SK.

That's all I can come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, veritas said:

I make plenty of declarations in here.  I do it all the time. You apparently found one since you concluded that I wanted to sacrifice S. Korea.  In this case, I was trying to have a civil discussion by asking a question but you take every post as a partisan piss-fest.  That makes it difficult to have any interaction with you.

The difference between now and prior Presidents is that Kim had no viable weapon then.  The previous administrations have dumped their failure on Trump.

NK got it's first nuclear weapons in 2006. And that was a different KIm.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0