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.

 

North Korea missile: US says it will use military force 'if we must'

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Source


The US has said that it will use its "considerable military forces" on North Korea "if we must".

Describing the North's latest missile test as a sharp military escalation, the US ambassador to the United Nations said the US will table a new resolution against Pyongyang.


! Read the story !

Ostensibly a managable situation has festered...
Could Trump, concievably, irrationally,
decide to order a few Tomahawks to hit NK ?




posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
A missile launch from north Korea would be blown out of the sky a long time before it got anywhere near america.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Let me see if I understand this correctly...

It's fine for the US to have the capability of hitting NK, which they do a thousand fold...

But it's not ok for NK to have the capability to strike back?



Someone will have to explain that logic to me.
Without the use of propaganda.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Misterlondon
Granted, US air defense capacities ... yadayadayada

The question is, Would the current Potus go ahead and throw expensive toys at NK ?

There's no questioning the toys' performance



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:43 PM
link   
We have absolutely no place trying to mess with NK. If they are such a threat, let China, Russia or anyone else in the region take care of it.

Issues like this are why I did not vote for Hillary. I did not believe she would take a different stance on issues of war and it appears the Trump admin is no different.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

The neo con's been jonesin for a war. Looks like Trump is going to give em one. This Chinese thing might prove to be a little troublesome.

NK doesn't have to do anything when we got false flags burning a hole in our pocket.
edit on 5-7-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert
Y'know, instinctively ...
i saw Trump as being more likely to kick off a dumbass war than the other candidate

That one had little to prove
This one has lots to live up to

So, i'll ask it again, but differently : could your Potus launch a strike against NK ?
It's not about "but every country has a right to defend itself/what right do we have to interfeere"



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
We have absolutely no place trying to mess with NK. If they are such a threat, let China, Russia or anyone else in the region take care of it.

Issues like this are why I did not vote for Hillary. I did not believe she would take a different stance on issues of war and it appears the Trump admin is no different.


So ignore defense agreements made with SK? With Japan? Force those immediate nations to develop their own nukes? Let 'er rip. Free for all. That's the alternative you ignore. If so, what is your solution to that very real scenario?



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
Let me see if I understand this correctly...

It's fine for the US to have the capability of hitting NK, which they do a thousand fold...

But it's not ok for NK to have the capability to strike back?


While I see what you're trying to do... No one wants North Korea to have long range missiles.

And considering they say constantly they want to us them against the US, isn't it the leaders job to address the threats?



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Damiel
a reply to: introvert
Y'know, instinctively ...
i saw Trump as being more likely to kick off a dumbass war than the other candidate

That one had little to prove
This one has lots to live up to

So, i'll ask it again, but differently : could your Potus launch a strike against NK ?
It's not about "but every country has a right to defend itself/what right do we have to interfeere"



Of course he could launch a strike against NK, but the real question is does he have a logical and defend-able reason for doing so?



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker



So ignore defense agreements made with SK? With Japan? Force those immediate nations to develop their own nukes? Let 'er rip. Free for all. That's the alternative you ignore. If so, what is your solution to that very real scenario?


That's a different scenario than what I see in this case. This current issue is about a perceived escalation due to NK's missile tests. They have no attacked SK or Japan, in which I believe we have a duty to help those nations defend themselves.

When those attacks occur, I bet we will back our friends.

Puffing chests over a missile test is not the same thing.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker


And considering they say constantly they want to us them against the US...


You can quote them on that then, yes?

Not just their "we will fight back rhetoric" either...

A quote that basically says "we want to nuke the US for no reason other than sh*ts and giggles"...
I'll save you the time searching...
They haven't said that at all. Ever.


It's "Iranian nukes" all over again...
Would you let your neighbour decide what gun you can defend your home with?
I doubt that.
edit on 5-7-2017 by Hazardous1408 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
We have absolutely no place trying to mess with NK. If they are such a threat, let China, Russia or anyone else in the region take care of it.

Issues like this are why I did not vote for Hillary. I did not believe she would take a different stance on issues of war and it appears the Trump admin is no different.


North Korea is not a threat to China or Russia, they're all allies.

So why the hell would China or Russia take care of it?



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

While I agree with you that it's rhetoric that doesn't get me worked up... The actions and words they use are asking for a response.

North Korea has been playing this game for quite some time.

So while I'm not quivering in my boots, I also expect the US to respond with more of a presence over there. Which is concerning considering the trillions of dollars worth of minerals that could pay for a US "preemptive strike and war".

I'm a realist.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: introvert
We have absolutely no place trying to mess with NK. If they are such a threat, let China, Russia or anyone else in the region take care of it.

Issues like this are why I did not vote for Hillary. I did not believe she would take a different stance on issues of war and it appears the Trump admin is no different.


North Korea is not a threat to China or Russia, they're all allies.

So why the hell would China or Russia take care of it?



Why would China want their buddies in NK to attack or nuke their materialistic cash cows that are the American people?



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
Let me see if I understand this correctly...

It's fine for the US to have the capability of hitting NK, which they do a thousand fold...

But it's not ok for NK to have the capability to strike back?



Someone will have to explain that logic to me.
Without the use of propaganda.


Because North Korea threatens to attack us every single day and there is no reason to doubt their intentions.

You're question is this stupid, imagine this scenario:

One of your enemies tells you if he gets a knife then he will stab you. You scratch your head and think, "well hell, if I can have a knife, why can't he? I mean, after all I am very progressive so I'm going to think outside the old box of wisdom."

Then, in all your liberal tolerance and wisdom decide to hand him a knife. Then he stabs you and you wonder why his friends who hate you too didn't prevent this from happening.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert
Y swear to.... whoever :p
i can (potentially) see "news flash"
whilst watching sons & daughters

cut the Oval Office

Trump :
The time for fallow talk is over, my fellow americans,
as i speak, American bombers have just .....(taken off/ bombed/razed *delete as applicable*)

No real logic behind it all
Just an Archie Bunker kneejerk

Archie Bunker on steroids, maybe !
but even so ...

SK and Japan wouldn't want be Trump's collatoral damage

Did i just say "collatoral" ?
Ooops



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: introvert
We have absolutely no place trying to mess with NK. If they are such a threat, let China, Russia or anyone else in the region take care of it.

Issues like this are why I did not vote for Hillary. I did not believe she would take a different stance on issues of war and it appears the Trump admin is no different.


North Korea is not a threat to China or Russia, they're all allies.

So why the hell would China or Russia take care of it?



Why would China want their buddies in NK to attack or nuke their materialistic cash cows that are the American people?


Because China and Russia want to see the US military weakened to an equal level to theirs.

Secondly, we're bound to see new classified technology become unclassified during this attack.

Third, the US manufacturing is so depleted, that in the event of a war, Chinese factories will be working overtime to produce war materials for both countries.



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
Let me see if I understand this correctly...

It's fine for the US to have the capability of hitting NK, which they do a thousand fold...

But it's not ok for NK to have the capability to strike back?



Someone will have to explain that logic to me.
Without the use of propaganda.


Correct. Because: The USA has NOT threatened NK and fat and stupid Kim Un. Fat and stupid Kim Un (he eats like a king while his citizens starve) So "fat Kim" is relevant). on the other hand, Kim Un has been threatening the USA quite fiercely even to go as far as threatening to nuke the USA. And for quite some time now they have been engaged in illegal testing of weapons in violation of their OWN SIGNED AGREEMENTS.

I hope this clears things up for you.

edit on 5-7-2017 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2017 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: nwtrucker



So ignore defense agreements made with SK? With Japan? Force those immediate nations to develop their own nukes? Let 'er rip. Free for all. That's the alternative you ignore. If so, what is your solution to that very real scenario?


That's a different scenario than what I see in this case. This current issue is about a perceived escalation due to NK's missile tests. They have no attacked SK or Japan, in which I believe we have a duty to help those nations defend themselves.

When those attacks occur, I bet we will back our friends.

Puffing chests over a missile test is not the same thing.


I see your logic but I must point out the sequence of nations that have developed nukes. US begets Russia, then France and England. Israel and South Africa, and especially China to India to Pakistan. Keeping up with the Jones is becoming more and more prevalent. As the non-proliferation pact continues to be ignored, there's less reason not to match. Failure by the US-and the rest of the world, for that matter- to curtail NK and it's open season for any nation. No escaping it.

As far as the comment to be willing to use military force? If you say you aren't willing to use force, why have a force at all?
That rhetoric is mandatory to convince others to heed without actual war. Trump is a lot more convincing that Obama...




top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join