North Korea

[Ken 119]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

Well, I agree - but they said they were going to do it just this afternoon. Granted, it's likely an empty threat... but I don't think they've made such a threat before. It's apparently planned for mid-month.

NK are just attempting to show the world that they have the means.

[Rayvin 5294]

1 minute ago, Dr Gloom said:

my take on all of this is the traditional US position hasn't really changed. the North Koreans always get a bit lairy when the yanks and the Japanese do these annual military exercises on their doorstep. The difference this time is Trump speaks in language which isn't exactly what you'd call typical of a US president. Plenty of officials have since backtracked on his fire and fury comments. It's as you are basically, except there's an orange moron with a big mouth running the show. is he stupid enough to talk himself into an accidental war that no one wants? possibly, but the stakes are high with china not wanting to see instability on tis doorstep. the real powers behind the presidency are unlikely to let things escalate to that point. 

 

Yeah but that only works if we assume that Kim Jong Un is restrained by similar forces at his end. He won't be. He could respond in the same language as Trump and then see it through.

[Ken 119]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

Yeah but that only works if we assume that Kim Jong Un is restrained by similar forces at his end. He won't be. He could respond in the same language as Trump and then see it through.

It is chest beating man.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

6 minutes ago, Ant said:

 

i don't think he's entirely baited them but he's backed himself into a corner with his initial response, and in turn them doing something and how he's going to have to respond

 

when you come out with those lines about fury the world has never seen etc,  it'll be like the  "shock and awe", you can't say it and under deliver 

 

I don't see what the alternative is though. They're not going to respond to anything else. Any other approach will just be ignored by them whilst they continue to develop a nuclear arsenal. 

[Rayvin 5294]

Just now, Ken said:

It is chest beating man.

 

At some point chest beating has to turn into action. We're closer to that now than we were 6 months ago - that's all I'm saying

[Rayvin 5294]

2 minutes ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

 

I don't see what the alternative is though. They're not going to respond to anything else. Any other approach will just be ignored by them whilst they continue to develop a nuclear arsenal. 

 

We could just do nothing about that, and rely on MAD. Not sure I agree with that approach, but it's Renton approved at least.

[Ken 119]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

At some point chest beating has to turn into action. We're closer to that now than we were 6 months ago - that's all I'm saying

Does it?

You are caught up in the frenzy which has precedence. The only difference is a mouthy American president and NK's ever evolving nuclear arsenal and its delivery systems. OK, the stakes are much higher granted but it is the same BS.

[Ken 119]

What happens if you attack a nuclear armed state man? Think about it...

[Rayvin 5294]

Just now, Ken said:

Does it?

You are caught up in the frenzy which has precedence. The only difference is a mouthy American president and NK's ever evolving nuclear arsenal and its delivery systems. OK, the stakes are much higher granted but it is the same BS.

 

I'm just bored at work. As I said earlier, if we have a nuclear war, the only concern I'd have is making sure I'm in the blast radius of the first range of nukes. Prefer a quick death, ideally. Beyond that, I have little interest in this beyond its ability to distract me from my emails.

 

So frenzy may be overstating it. Overthinking it, possibly

[Ken 119]

2 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I'm just bored at work. As I said earlier, if we have a nuclear war, the only concern I'd have is making sure I'm in the blast radius of the first range of nukes. Prefer a quick death, ideally. Beyond that, I have little interest in this beyond its ability to distract me from my emails.

 

So frenzy may be overstating it. Overthinking it, possibly

You bored, frenzied cunt.

[Rayvin 5294]

[Renton 21978]

I think people are still in denial about Trump. It's more than a bit concerning that the rhetoric Trump employs is virtually indistinguishable from that of Kim. There's an assumption that it's empty rhetoric and that both men are sane and only concerned with self preservation. Can't say I agree with this assessment personally.

 

Also think people are underestimating Trumps executive powers as commander in Chief. Read up about it, he doesn't have to consult Congress. I'm sure he would prefer to bypass them actually. I hope these checks and balances are as robust as are assumed.

 

Also what's this about climate change not being relevant? Arguably mankind's 2 main existential threats are nuclear war and climate change. Well guess what, he's already working on the latter, and looks like he's about to start work on the former.

 

Still, at least he's not a professional politician. And especially not a female democrat at that. 

Edited August 10, 2017 by Renton

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

Nobody has really suggested an alternative way to stop NK developing nuclear weapons. Previous US governments have failed to reason with them so what is Trump supposed to do? Just let them get on with it?

[Renton 21978]

12 minutes ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

Nobody has really suggested an alternative way to stop NK developing nuclear weapons. Previous US governments have failed to reason with them so what is Trump supposed to do? Just let them get on with it?

 

That's true. I'm fairly sure the way not to approach it though is to step up the rhetoric the way Trump has. We're at a critical juncture here, and I can't think of a worse person to he leading the free world. I'd feel mech more confident if Obama was still in power personally. Difficult situations require tact and intelligence to resolve, not mindless bluster.

Edited August 10, 2017 by Renton

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

11 hours ago, Rayvin said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/10/north-korea-details-guam-strike-trump-load-of-nonsense

 

The North Koreans have released 'plans' to fire a missile 40km off the coast of Guam - the missile route will take it over Japan. If they do that, they're getting blown to hell IMO.

 

Having said that, they've told us they're going to do it, and have also told us that it won't be ready until mid-month, which suggests they're desperately hoping they won't have to.

 

Thank fuck we're nowhere near this.

 

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/895767342893936641?s=03

 

well done! Someone go check on Rents.

[Tom 14013]

Oh for fucks sake  

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

No clue why that came out black. Story of my life

[Tom 14013]

You're gonna be a vaporised black stain on the side of your 350z in a few weeks mate. I wouldn't worry about it.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

I won't have a 350z in a few weeks if I don't start looking for a job 

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

Tbf it's fairly obvious that Kim Jong hasn't looked at a mirror in a long time

 

[Ken 119]

9 hours ago, Renton said:

I think people are still in denial about Trump. It's more than a bit concerning that the rhetoric Trump employs is virtually indistinguishable from that of Kim. There's an assumption that it's empty rhetoric and that both men are sane and only concerned with self preservation. Can't say I agree with this assessment personally.

 

Also think people are underestimating Trumps executive powers as commander in Chief. Read up about it, he doesn't have to consult Congress. I'm sure he would prefer to bypass them actually. I hope these checks and balances are as robust as are assumed...

 

 

I think some people are melodramatic about Trump. Rhetoric is rhetoric. It is quite distinguishable actually. There is a clear difference between rhetoric and ulterior motive and action.

 

Trump has said that he wants SK and Japan to share more of the burden of its own security even suggesting that they should join the nuclear club. It has people in those respective countries having serious thoughts about it.

[Ken 119]

And the official word from the CCP on China's stance which I have mentioned in earlier posts;

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/donald-trump-on-north-korea-maybe-i-wasnt-tough-enough-with-fire-and-fury-line/news-story/b7f0b3cff3592f475c8883c306f696a2

Spoiler

 

[Renton 21978]

4 hours ago, Ken said:

I think some people are melodramatic about Trump. Rhetoric is rhetoric. It is quite distinguishable actually. There is a clear difference between rhetoric and ulterior motive and action.

 

Trump has said that he wants SK and Japan to share more of the burden of its own security even suggesting that they should join the nuclear club. It has people in those respective countries having serious thoughts about it.

 

If you were blinded to the origin of the recent rhetoric, you would be unable to attribute which comments belonged to which leader. There's a reason for that, both are as mad as each other. That's concerning.

 

As for a nuclear arms race in the south China sea. Is that really a good idea?

 

In a way I can't "win" here with my concerned standpoint. Firstly, I still think the probability of escalating conflict is low. Probably less than 10 percent. But if it does happen, there will be far greater concerns ahead than this message board! 

 

Guess my main issue is that people didn't think Trump would be that bad. Well, he fuckng well is. 

[Rayvin 5294]

21 minutes ago, Ken said:

And the official word from the CCP on China's stance which I have mentioned in earlier posts;

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/donald-trump-on-north-korea-maybe-i-wasnt-tough-enough-with-fire-and-fury-line/news-story/b7f0b3cff3592f475c8883c306f696a2

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Sounds about right. The thing is, does landing a missile 30km off the coast of Guam count? Would the Chinese stand for that if someone did it to them? Maybe they would, but the margins for interpretation are intriguing here.

 

If China gets involved in the war then nothing will be resolved. The US will be repelled at the cost of some 2 million dead Chinese and things will rumble on much as they have been for some time. Having said that, this briefing I suspect indicates that NK aren't going to do anything stupid. China has flat out said here that they won't support them if they attack first - so they won't, IMO.

[Renton 21978]

20 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

If you were blinded to the origin of the recent rhetoric, you would be unable to attribute which comments belonged to which leader. There's a reason for that, both are as mad as each other. That's concerning.

 

As for a nuclear arms race in the south China sea. Is that really a good idea?

 

In a way I can't "win" here with my concerned standpoint. Firstly, I still think the probability of escalating conflict is low. Probably less than 10 percent. But if it does happen, there will be far greater concerns ahead than this message board! 

 

Guess my main issue is that people didn't think Trump would be that bad. Well, he fuckng well is. 

Talking of which, there's a bbc quiz on who said what on their website, plus an article on what Trump has said previously about nuclear weapons, which gives the impression he is itching to use them.

 

Sorry, can't work how to extract the URLs from the BBC app, which my phone defaults to.