Well, it was fun while it lasted...

A Europe war weary from WWI thought appeasement with Hitler was worth the price of peace.

Russian thought a treaty with Hitler would bring peace.....

Until the bombs started falling, treaties were broken, the introduction of the blitzkrieg, the sons of Europe were dying again, and Hitler fired up the ovens.

Wonder why Countries would rather be proactive in their defense. Wonder why the Jewish people choose to actively defend themselves?

How many countries fell to the might of communist Russian to have their culture dictated by a central government?

Correct me if I am wrong, but there was Asian warlords long before the USA existed?

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Sounds more like you're underestimating the consequences of triggering a nuclear war, while hyperestimating the consequences of leaving them to shrivel up in their tinpot kingdom.

If just having ballistic nukes meant he'd fire them on the US, then he already would have detonated on SK.

How doesn't this compute??


The fear is strong with US. Monsters lurking in every corner, under every bed; any state that doesn't acquiesce to our over arching international demands then they're all monsters MONSTERS I tell ya!



Everybody, its time to put your big boy pants on and quit shaking and shivering over doosh boy.

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Snarl

Feel free to join the actual debate.

I don't see it as a debate. Kim Jong Un sunk the Cheonan and shelled YeonPyeong Do (there was a time when he was a four-star general and in command of the area where these two incidents took place). He's bringing a nuclear weapons program to maturity. He's working out the kinks in his ballistic missile programs. He's openly threatened the United States and her allies with Armageddon.

There's no doubt we should destroy his ability to make war ... or take hostile action against Seoul in petulant retaliation. The best way to do that is a strategic nuclear strike. Completely obliterate all North Korean military forces within 50 miles of the DMZ, destroy his ballistic missile labs, smash his nuclear testing facility.

I know I cross a line with some with these next thoughts. I'd go so far as to wipe PyongYang from the map. I'd attack and destroy China's strategic weapons programs in the same three-minute stroke. They've propped-up the Kim dynasty for 60+ years ... they should surely be made to pay for that as well.

WOWZERS!

Do you watch a lot of soap opera's, or what?

Because that's all this is. Well of the Asian blood feud you insulted my family honor pissing match variety of soap opera.

OMG, there was another border skirmish with the drama queens, we this nation from the other side of the planet that doesn't even speak their language(s), we should NUKE millions of people into oblivion, radiate their lands, all that jazz, because OMG they had another border skirmish.

Why the hell should any of US even care?

Why the hell can't SK handle their own business?

And who are you to decide that MILLIONS of people need to eat mushroom clouds over any of it?

NUKE China while we're at it, just for good measure?!?!?!?

And people are starring this stuff??? Go ENLIST you little cowards. Do it now!

And what about the precedent it'd set? Do you not see how if they deserve to be nuked, well so do we? We drop bombs, rig elections, assassinate foreign leaders, train international death squads, amongst all other manner of warfare from economic to political to psychological all across the globe, for longer than probably either of us have been alive. And that's counts for you even if you live in the UK (we wont even get into British colonialism).

By your very logic, we deserved to be nuked decades ago.

By your very logic, the entire planet would have already been turned into an nuclear winter waste land generations ago.

Even Hitler might not have been as insane as all of this.

a reply to: neutronflux

You're not seriously comparing Fat Man the Little Boy Kim to Hitler and the Third Reich. Say it isn't so!


The dude aint nuking anyone. They'd be wiped off the map!

"Wonder why Countries would rather be proactive in their defense."

Are you not able to compute how the hostility matrix over there has always been a two way street, and that having weapons ensures they wont be invaded etc too?

Who are we to tell anyone what they can or cant do, anyways? It's not like we have anything of a moral high ground in foreign affairs. Not since WW2 anyways.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The biggest and most important item I was trying to convey was the fact Europe was taking a stance of pacification and brokering treaties with Germany Hitler had no intention of keeping while plotting genocide.

The world is going to champion the USA if Norh Korea attacks? What is the guarantee? The world seems quite happy to sit idly by while North Kore makes threats of nuclear war? What sane person would use nuclear weapons, right? Are you willing to gamble the security of the USA on how rational the leaders of North Korea are? That the world would champion the USA if attacked? Like Russia, China, Iran?

How do you trust anyone with a blatant disregard for life. What if North Korea sales a nuclear weapon to a "terrorist" that launches the nuclear weapon? Who is the world going to wipe off the face of the earth?

The other point I was making, how does pacification secure a country from hostile acts?

a reply to: neutronflux

How many of these "threats" had nothing to do with them WARNING that they'll counter-attack??

The US makes threats of nukes all the time. Iran comes to mind... before they even have nukes!!!

Meanwhile, read my post to Snarl. Please. Otherwise we're the most raging hypocrite warmongers ever, and by the same tokens of logic you guys are passing, we deserved to be nuked long long ago. And this kind of stuff here, its the surest way to go about arranging it.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Name the last time we threatened a nuclear war? We promise nuclear retaliation. But please cite where the USA has threatened first strike with nukes?

a reply to: neutronflux

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

What sane person would even bother with threats of using nuclear weapons? A rational person would know they would be wiped off the face of the earth to use your term. So such threats would be meaningless? But you have North Korea making threats of using nuclear weapons as first strike in an unprovoked attack?


Thanks for ignoring the question if you are willing to gamble the security of the USA on the sanity of North Korea's leaders.

What countries would rally with the USA if the US is attacked.

What happens if NK sales a nuclear device to a terrorist willing to use it?

originally posted by: neutronflux
But you have North Korea making threats of using nuclear weapons as first strike in an unprovoked attack?

REALLY???

Then why do only 41% of Koreans even count him as their "enemy" (2015 poll)? How could that even be possible???

Got some sources?

I do:

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
In 2015 only 41% of South Koreans even even viewed Fat Little Boy Kim as their "enemy".
www.voanews.com...

And note that wasn't even number that supported trigger total war with NK!!

OH! But 53% of United Statesians want to blow it up!!!!
www.foxnews.com...

Lets go with that number!!!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Please don't use lots of quotes with no context. Just makes it like you rely on mass media and have no ability to set context for debate.


Please cite were the USA stated it would use nuclear weapons as first strike?

originally posted by: neutronflux

What happens if NK sales a nuclear device to a terrorist willing to use it?

What if what if what if WHAT IF?!?!?!?!?!?!?

What if we applied your foreign policy logic to anything else? There's gangbangers in Chicago. They'll each probably attack someone somehow by the end of the year. We better go round up 100,000 coloreds and mexican's off the streets up there.

But what do we do with them after? That's a serious question!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I thought this was about NK stating they would use a nuclear weapon against the USA in a first strike?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Again, are you willing to bet the security of the USA on the sanity of the leaders of North Korea?

a reply to: neutronflux

That's all from the horses mouths. The commander in chiefs, their henchmen. It's common knowledge "all options are on the table" means 'we'll launch nukes, bitches!'.

This is just getting silly now.

a reply to: neutronflux

Are you really so scared of Lil Kim? Like OMG he's gonna devastate the US if we dont blow him up first! THis is serious sky is falling stuff, over a little twerp with no money.

This is just war propaganda!

Less percentage of South Korean's are worried about the situation than American's that actually want to have a damn war over there!!! Pure war propaganda is marching you guys like the pied piper with a bunch of lemmings.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Thanks for quote out of context. The context of what you quoted was in reguards to your assurance any country using nuclear weapons would be wiped off the face of the map. My question was, "If NK sakes a nuclear weapon to a terrorist willing to use it, who is the world going to wipe off the face of the earth."

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: neutronflux

Are you really so scared of Lil Kim? Like OMG he's gonna devastate the US if we dont blow him up first! THis is serious sky is falling stuff, over a little twerp with no money.

This is just war propaganda!

Less percentage of South Korean's are worried about the situation than American's that actually want to have a damn war over there!!! Pure war propaganda is marching you guys like the pied piper.

I just don't trust the security of the USA to a leader willing to make grave threats using nuclear weapons as first strike. If an individual threatens the security of you family, is it about the threat? Or the security of your family.

a reply to: neutronflux

POST A SOURCE.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Again, how does appeasement secure a country from attack. I will help you out. It doesn't.