It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Entire (all 100) US Senate called to White House briefing with Sec of State/Defense, others

page: 5
76
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: dontneedaname

I hope this doesn't mean we're going to war with North Korea. I shudder to think of what Little Kim will unleash on South Korea.

Another possibility is Trump is trying to provoke North Korea to fire the first shot. That way, it looks like the U.S. is defending itself rather than attacking North Korea first.

Either way, it's terrifying how close we are to the brink of all out war.




posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ZIPMATT

Oh, god! Oh, god! We're all gonna die?



I'll likely be the 2nd or 3rd chick from the left ... getting vaporized.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum
ANZACs God bless them! As a former American Soldier, I know we wouldn't be here without them!



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

The trick is preventing them from taking South Korea with them.

However, I think most of Asia is getting tired of them.


Problem is the longer the world waits the more of Asia they can take down with them.

It boils down to mathematics.

Strike now and risk a few hundred thousand dieing or wait and risk millions dieing.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I would much rather have NK dealt with now versus years later when Kim or whoever the new Kim is to be decides to make good on his word to erase South Korea from the face of the earth and maybe Japan too.
edit on 24-4-2017 by 4N0M4LY because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: crazyewok

The trick is preventing them from taking South Korea with them.

However, I think most of Asia is getting tired of them.


Problem is the longer the world waits the more of Asia they can take down with them.

It boils down to mathematics.

Strike now and risk a few hundred thousand dieing or wait and risk millions dieing.


That is the problem, and the worst thing is, China should have known that it was only a matter of time before their junk yard dog turned rabid.

It's one thing to have a client state run by a seemingly crazy dictator who rattles his sabre and makes a big show of force, but then, WHOOPS! He dies and his son really is crazy and bites the hand that has always fed him.

I realize that I am speculating here, but I don't think things would be going this direction if China really had a grip on Lil' Kim. There would have been a quiet resolution allowing all parties to save face a while ago.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

What makes you say that? The nuclear angle?

Personally, I think if we trade for more time, it increases the risk of the Chinese spanking the NKs. Genuinely interested in your take, though.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I'm on the side of hoping there's no war, with anyone.

The people who start it are never effected, just the people who have nothing to do with it, and cant stop it from happening.




posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: boogiegk
Has this ever happened before?


No.

I don't recall such a thing under Obama or Bush or Clinton.



because those three never asked permission from the peoples chosen representatives, instead those three charged into war with only their own go ahead as cause, they acted the king.

strange when the usual process of getting congressional approval for war is considered unusual.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Black_Fox
I'm on the side of hoping there's no war, with anyone.

The people who start it are never effected, just the people who have nothing to do with it, and cant stop it from happening.





That's the problem with everyone that are anti-war anything. It's human nature to have wars. There is no such thing as ever lasting peace. There will always be an enemy, a dictator, and a conflict someplace. It is a part of the human condition.
edit on 24-4-2017 by 4N0M4LY because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   
I guess the ultimate litmus test for another Korean war is:

1. Do they have oil
2. Is haliburton ready?

YES to both.

It's on like a bad Michael Moore documentary.




posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

More time means more time to develop a working long range missle.

Right now I doubt they could even hit japan let alone Guam or any US territory. There projection power is isolated to the korean peninsula.

If they get a working missle they could do a lot of damage to japan at the very least.


As for waiting for china? Problem is if China go it they will still likely strike south Korea and Japan as a # you.

I dont think there is any good options here.

I can not blame Trump for whatever he decides on this.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dark_Matters
I seem to remembe,r just before the failed missile launch occurred, reading another thread regarding NK's Nuclear test site activity and it mentioning April 25th as being an Anniversary of some sort, I cannot find the article to check what it was. I just remembering it mentioning it as a possible day NK might choose to showcase its strength. Then the failed launch happened and I forgot all about it, until I read this article and realising tomorrow's date jogged my memory.

Does anyone know of the anniversary or the article I'm referring to?

D_M

I believe it was the birthday of Kim il Sung.
Which ever Sung was lil Kim's grandfather.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:22 PM
link   
There is one simple question to be asked by ALL. Can the world afford to wait any longer before dealing with NK?

The answer to this question determines what needs to be done!



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

My vote is NO. North Korea has got to go. One way or the other. It is inevitable.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




I can not blame Trump for whatever he decides on this.


I don't know where I stand on this.

For decades No Ko barks real loud, and foams at the mouth.

But to me it's always been more comedic than anything else.

I would have a hard time getting behind Trump moving to military strikes.



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
There is one simple question to be asked by ALL. Can the world afford to wait any longer before dealing with NK?

The answer to this question determines what needs to be done!


Interesting question.

Who's doing that waiting?

All I see is the U.S spear heading more conflict.

If the world felt so threatened, then where is the U.K, Germany, India, Israel, etc?

Why aren't they getting involved to stop the threat?



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

I actually feel sorry for Trump on this one.

Its a mess past presidents should of deat with.

Bush should have sorted it after the first North korean nuclear test in 2006 rather than play crusades in the middle east. Same with Obama.

Trump been left with this mess and whatever he decides people will likely die and he will get blamed either for action or inaction.
edit on 24-4-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2017 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Black_Fox

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
There is one simple question to be asked by ALL. Can the world afford to wait any longer before dealing with NK?

The answer to this question determines what needs to be done!



If the world felt so threatened, then where is the U.K, Germany, India, Israel, etc?

Why aren't they getting involved to stop the threat?



Answer - It isn't a concern of Europe to intervene in the pacific asian issues. The US could make a plea argument to making a case for NATO to be involved but the chances are slim. Just my two cents.



new topics

top topics



 
76
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join