North Korea says rockets to U.S. 'inevitable' as U.S. bombers fly off North Korean coast - Polidicks

[QUOTE=ironman17;52711547]So in a way, North Korea making the first move would be the ideal situation. Though even then, it would be far from ideal, since if they strike first someone's gonna have to take that punch to the jaw.[/QUOTE] You could make the argument that sooner rather than later might be better if it's truly inevitable, but the real ideal situation is just that the NK regime collapses from the inside and we swap in a more desirable government in their stead.

Death sentence waiting to happen. Good knowing you Nk

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52711981]A lot of people thought military conflict would be inevitable in different places and times throughout history. Churchill wanted to kill off the Soviets before they could settle on their newly gained possessions. McArthur wanted to nuke China. This is Curtis LeMay in 1962 : War is never really inevitable, unless you make it so.[/QUOTE] So basically, if we don't do anything, NK is just gonna hold up in their country because they know if they tried to actually start something real they'd basically be committing suicide? I suppose if one doesn't question their sanity, that's true, and to be honest, maybe it's best not to. They're not literally insane, just seemingly a little so. [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] I mean their only proper interest regarding external conquest would be South Korea, and since the war died down, there's no sign that they're gonna actually do anything on that front yet?

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52711492]Militarization of Japan and South Korea is basically the exact opposite of what China wants. With NK's recent temper tantrums, SK and Japan have both seriously upped their requests to the US, and apparently are even considering hosting nuclear weapons for the US (Though to be honest I doubt that'll make it through either country's legislature). China hates this, its completely counter to what they want in the region, and its effectively all NK's fault. So to that end, China is willing to cooperate, just so that the region doesn't militarize further which will jeopardize china's "big dick" status.[/QUOTE] but the region is already in full swing of military uplift because of Chine actions in South Chine Sea those countries are investing money into own armies, military, airforce and anti-air/anti-ship arsenal: Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines,Vietnam, Taiwan because of North Korea other countries are also investing to everything plus antimissile and antiIBCM South Korea, Japan so sort of waiting for the problem to 'dissolve' itself it became way bigger problem and headache to everyone now imagine nothing is done 10 years and NK got 100s of nuclear capable ICBM and then something goes wrong (incident alike) this isn't relatively mature sane superpower with understanding of MAD concept

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;52711951]You could make the argument that sooner rather than later might be better if it's truly inevitable, but the real ideal situation is just that the NK regime collapses from the inside and we swap in a more desirable government in their stead.[/QUOTE] And as it collapses the regime launches its nuclear arsenal in a final retaliation against SK, Japan, the U.S., anyone it feels has wronged them before collapsing. Or even barring that, it just collapses and leaves plenty of fresh nuclear weapons unaccounted for with no one there to try keeping track of them.

So what is the best option? Covert operations to neutralize the potential threat of nuclear missiles while simultaneously planning an invasion?

[video=youtube;8v0rKdlbDyU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v0rKdlbDyU[/video]

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52712189]So what is the best option? Covert operations to neutralize the potential threat of nuclear missiles while simultaneously planning an invasion?[/QUOTE] Best realistic action? Nothing. Sit on our hands and wait for the regime to collapse in a hundred years or so. A state like NK can't exist forever. The time for military intervention passed us 30 years ago. A fantasy-land ideal scenario would be to brew up a revolution in the country that swiftly eliminates the government, but something like that isn't possible in NK. They've got such a tight hold on the people and the consequences for stepping out of line are too great for anyone to risk it. There is no good viable solution to solve the NK problem without causing millions of deaths as a result. We can either do nothing and let millions within NK die over time, or intervene and let millions in and outside of NK die in an instant. Neither scenario is good but one is more preferable than the other.

sure, do nothing and wait, that worked well prior WW2 too lets hope Kim isn't fan of the doll movie Team America and isn't handing out weapons and WMDs to all the terrorists :)

[QUOTE=Megadave;52711242]"I will destroy your country will hellfire" "Oh yeah well we'll do the same" "How dare you escalate the situation" You see what's wrong here?[/QUOTE] *kill 30% of the North Korean population during the Korean war* *reduce North Korea's industrial production to rubble with strategic air raids* *install a dictatorship in South Korea that massacred all political opposition + students * *constantly sanction North Korea to prevent their society from advancing in any way* Yeah, I kinda understand why the North hates America.

[QUOTE=nulls;52712365]*kill 30% of the North Korean population during the Korean war* *reduce North Korea's industrial production to rubble with strategic air raids* *install a dictatorship in South Korea that massacred all political opposition + students * *constantly sanction North Korea to prevent their society from advancing in any way* Yeah, I kinda understand why the North hates America.[/QUOTE] We all know that the North is not like it is due to sanctions. North Korea was a puppet of Soviet Russia for the longest time, you're making it look like the war was all the doing of Big Bad America while completely ignoring the fact that the other major power in the world was involved in this fucking mess. You're also lying outright, North Korea recovered extremely quickly in the post-war period, faster than the South, its GDP was greater than the South's in the 60's and it recovered basically all industrial production to pre-war levels by then. You're also ignoring how North Korea, even to this day, receives [I]constant[/I] humanitarian aid from the US and South Korea, which is the only reason why its citizens aren't starving as much anymore. North Korea is like it is because their economic model required constant aid from Soviet Russia that they're not getting anymore (As clearly seen in the huge famine they experienced in the 90's, along with Cuba, after the Soviet Union fell), they put money that should go to farms into weapon purchases. They're ruled by a violent, ruthless, erratic dynasty of dictators, that deliberately brought us to the situation we are in these days.

[QUOTE=Dwarden;52712306]sure, do nothing and wait, that worked well prior WW2 too lets hope Kim isn't fan of the doll movie Team America and isn't handing out weapons and WMDs to all the terrorists :)[/QUOTE] NK didnt exist prior to WWII lol. "But durr turrorists!" Rehtoric doesnt really work with NK. They have neither the funds nor the supplies to support anyone, at least not in any significant capacity.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52712189]So what is the best option? Covert operations to neutralize the potential threat of nuclear missiles while simultaneously planning an invasion?[/QUOTE] Ideally you would bomb the launch sites then drop in paratroopers to comb through the rubble. The sword is tempered now you just need to beat it into shape.

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52712408]NK didnt exist prior to WWII lol.[/QUOTE] He's referencing the policy of appeasement the allies exercised toward Nazi Germany before they attacked the UK.

[QUOTE=Furioso;52712451]He's referencing the policy of appeasement the allies exercised toward Nazi Germany before they attacked the UK.[/QUOTE] This is pretty much the opposite of appeasement, though. The rest of the world is playing pretty much every card we can short of actual invasion, clearly not giving in to intimidation and showing very clearly that we are ready for a war if it does come to that. Appeasement was allowing Nazi Germany to do whatever acts of war they pleased without any sanctioning or consequence. It's the worst, most superficial comparison to make and shows a complete lack of knowledge of both what appeasement was, and what the North Korea situation is.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52712710]Not a single thing in common. What compromise was given to North Korea akin to Munich? Which countries did North Korea coup, invade, send ultimatums? Conventional wisdom today says North attacking first would be suicide, back in 1930s Germany was a capable threat.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Riller;52712733]This is pretty much the opposite of appeasement, though. The rest of the world is playing pretty much every card we can short of actual invasion, clearly not giving in to intimidation and showing very clearly that we are ready for a war if it does come to that. Appeasement was allowing Nazi Germany to do whatever acts of war they pleased without any sanctioning or consequence. It's the worst, most superficial comparison to make and shows a complete lack of knowledge of both what appeasement was, and what the North Korea situation is.[/QUOTE] I was explaining the reference, not implying it was a valid one.

It's a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't. If a war starts, it'll be a bloodbath and SK will be turned into a smoking ruin. If nothing is done, there is the distinct possibility that they'll become an even greater threat.

[QUOTE=Furioso;52712734]I was explaining the reference, not implying it was a valid one.[/QUOTE] Oh, I know. I quoted you because that's where the reference was explained so people reading my post would know what reference I was arguing against, not to argue against [I]you[/I]. I can see how it can be confusing :v:

[QUOTE=Furioso;52712451]He's referencing the policy of appeasement the allies exercised toward Nazi Germany before they attacked the UK.[/QUOTE] If thats the case, thats even dumber than implying NK existed before WWII. Theres not a single similar event that they share.

Sorry if this might sound stupid and correct me if i'm wrong but judging by the technology that the North Korean use, do you think its possible that STRATCOM will be able to pick up the missile and destroy it before it gets too close ?

[QUOTE=Sire Noodles;52713148]Sorry if this might sound stupid and correct me if i'm wrong but judging by the technology that the North Korean use, do you think its possible that STRATCOMM will be able to pick up the missile and destroy it before it gets too close ?[/QUOTE] Maybe A very big maybe at that, our missile defense system is not great.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52712710]Not a single thing in common. What compromise was given to North Korea akin to Munich? Which countries did North Korea coup, invade, send ultimatums? Conventional wisdom today says North attacking first would be suicide, back in 1930s Germany was a capable threat.[/QUOTE] remember period prior WW2 where naive diplomacy steps gave dictator all what he wanted (land, countries, anulled treaties w/e) plus you joking right ? like invading SK wasn't enough criminal ? let me remind the war is still ongoing and NK considers the only resolution to be union of both Koreas, by force (while calling it peaceful) do you even know that NK tried to restart the war at minimum twice post-cease fire (was turned down both by USSR and PRC) it wasn't South who attacked the North in first place nor it wasn't South who took 100 to 400k civilian prisoners as 'slaves' and then claimed they not POV (never returned to South) so i start to be quite worried when people trying to defend criminal dictatorship regime responsible for million(s) killed civilians and even it's right to exist such mindset is reason millions died and millions will die ... but i guess you got no problem with some taint of blood on own hands [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52713036]If thats the case, thats even dumber than implying NK existed before WWII. Theres not a single similar event that they share.[/QUOTE] nobody implied anything about NK existing prior WW2 (sigh, how you even got such idea?) (as Furioso wrote, the similarity is in approach leading to worse outcome (do nothing or withdraw))

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52712189]So what is the best option? Covert operations to neutralize the potential threat of nuclear missiles while simultaneously planning an invasion?[/QUOTE] That is literally what NK is looking for any sign of to launch their missiles. [t]https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/327183/IMG_1763-314934.JPG[/t]

[QUOTE=UnidentifiedFlyingTard;52713169]Maybe A very big maybe at that, our missile defense system is not great.[/QUOTE] well at least it's not a 0% chance.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;52713213]That is literally what NK is looking for any sign of to launch their missiles. [t]https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/327183/IMG_1763-314934.JPG[/t][/QUOTE] cant wait to see a tyrannical regime get invaded in my lifetime

[QUOTE=Dwarden;52713174]remember period prior WW2 where naive diplomacy steps gave dictator all what he wanted (land, countries, anulled treaties w/e) plus you joking right ? like invading SK wasn't enough criminal ? let me remind the war is still ongoing and NK considers the only resolution to be union of both Koreas, by force (while calling it peaceful) do you even know that NK tried to restart the war at minimum twice post-cease fire (was turned down both by USSR and PRC) it wasn't South who attacked the North in first place nor it wasn't South who took 100 to 400k civilian prisoners as 'slaves' and then claimed they not POV (never returned to South) so i start to be quite worried when people trying to defend criminal dictatorship regime responsible for million(s) killed civilians and even it's right to exist such mindset is reason millions died and millions will die ... but i guess you got no problem with some taint of blood on own hands [editline]24th September 2017[/editline] [/quote] Neither situation holds anything in common. Youre still comparing apples to oranges so you can say that the outcome of using diplomacy is the death of millions. A more apt comparison would be the US ignoring Imperial Japanese aggression in the pacific, but even then thats a shitty comparison. Nazi Germany and North Korea are 2 completely different nations and their histories shouldn't be compared. One was an military industrial complex based on a fascist government intent on conquering. The other is a puppet state whose economy was based on support from the Soviets. Quit making shitty comparisons. The NK problem isn't really comparable to any recent event in history. Furthermore, saying we shouldn't start a war that will lead to the deaths of millions is not defending the NK regime. Me saying "hey, lets not start a war that will kill millions on NK, SK, Japan, Guam, other pacific islands, and potentially mainland US." Is not me defending the NK government, its me saying we shouldn't start a war where millions will die in the first hour of warfare. [QUOTE=Dwarden;52713174] nobody implied anything about NK existing prior WW2 (sigh, how you even got such idea?) (as Furioso wrote, the similarity is in approach leading to worse outcome (do nothing or withdraw))[/QUOTE] I got that idea from your poorly written and vague posts, so excuse me for misinterpreting your post when you just vaguely mention WWII.

oh no