North Korea now has a "Mini-Nuke"

originally posted by: silo13

originally posted by: dragonlover12
a reply to: introvert

Totally agree with you!

Pre emptive strikes are neither legal nor moral ---- it is murder, just like I would be charged with first degree murder if I blew up a neighbor`s house because he threatened me. It is not ever the right thing to do.

Morals matter.

I understand your point.

But - are you really going to allow your neighbor - who has the ways and means to blow you and your family up, and a reason to do it - to continue pointing his missile at your place while ranting how he’s going to teach you a lesson?

Seriously - how far would you let that continue before you took him out first?

Or will ‘standing your moral ground’ be enough comfort to you when your house and family are blasted into smithereens?

peace

Introvert wouldn't be saying this if his family and him were living in South Korea. Because you don't live there, the situation looks so much easier.

nice to see republicans still living in perpetual fear.

a reply to: silo13

Self defence is allowed only after someone has "taken the first swing".

a reply to: AlephOne

Don't give Kim a chance to launch first. Preemptive strike is necessary.

Didn't the Japanese say something similar prior to pearl harbor?

a reply to: Trueman

It is called MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) and has worked since nukes have been around. Why would this be any different. If he is nuts enough to launch one at us his country will get reduced to glass. We would rather pre-empt and bring the entire world into world war? China and Russia would align with NK and we would be in a quick global conflict.

a reply to: TheOneElectric

I agree with both your posts on this page.

The thing is? We build our theories and beliefs based on a Western mindset.

I honestly don’t believe anyone who hasn’t been brought up ‘under’ Fat Boy can truly get any insight on ‘what he’s all about’.

Do I believe he’d attack the USA to redeem his honor, keep his honor - even to the extent of being nuked himself?

YOU BET!

peace

a reply to: spark9576

This maybe one of those situations where is has to get very bad, before it gets better.

It will all depend on how reasonable Lil' Kim is. I have never met him, I only know what I read or hear about him, which isn't saying much.

a reply to: dragonlover12

Maybe in the books - but not in reality.

peace

a reply to: mzinga

We cant reduce anything to glass think of the ramifications of Fallout Nuclear weapons are obsolete.

a reply to: Gargoyle91

So you think if they launched a device against us we would respond with conventional weaponry?

a reply to: silo13

It is the law here in the US, as well as the teachings of Christianity.

Peace to you and yours, Silo

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: mzinga

We cant reduce anything to glass think of the ramifications of Fallout Nuclear weapons are obsolete.

That is always an after thought. The policy states if anyone uses a nuclear weapon to attempt to destroy a nation, one or several will be returned in kind.

Fallout is the least of your concern if you aren't going to be around to see it.

a reply to: shooterbrody

The Japanese didn't have our high technology arsenal. I am a believer in first strike strategy and American technology.

a reply to: mzinga

We would knock it out of the sky and make sure they couldn't launch again, The subs would be the most dangerous.

originally posted by: Gargoyle91
a reply to: mzinga

We cant reduce anything to glass think of the ramifications of Fallout Nuclear weapons are obsolete.

One would think that nuclear power plants should be obsolete too, what with Fukushima still dumping radioactive waste into the Pacific... but they are not.
We have released a nuclear war's worth of radioactivity in nuclear weapons testing, and we are still here.
The North Koreans could lob a nuke at us and we could lay waste to them... and the world would go on spinning, with living people still on it.

a reply to: Gargoyle91

I think you overstate our ICBM intercept capabilities. We can do pretty good against some threats, but I wouldn't count on our probability to intercept an ICBM as that high. Granted if we do intercept I agree with you we would not respond with nuclear devices.

a reply to: butcherguy

Yea but would South Korea still be habitable? The cancer rates/birth defects would sky rocket all over the World in a Major attack.

Not to mention NK is too valuable for it's resources.

originally posted by: AlephOne
a reply to: shooterbrody

The Japanese didn't have our high technology arsenal. I am a believer in first strike strategy and American technology.

wow
so the Japanese were only wrong because they lost?

when has your "first strike strategy" been proven effective by the us military?

a reply to: spark9576

We don't handle them we let China sort it out , that has already started with the recent vote at the UN , China voting for the resolution rather than abstaining sends a strong message to the North.

All we can to is to keep trying diplomacy , there is no other viable option.

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: Gargoyle91

I think you overstate our ICBM intercept capabilities. We can do pretty good against some threats, but I wouldn't count on our probability to intercept an ICBM as that high. Granted if we do intercept I agree with you we would not respond with nuclear devices.

If NK has any decent engineers for building an ICBM, The US/Japan would only have 15min at the MAX to intercept and destroy an ICBM. Anything past that point is impossible. This also dependent upon trajectory of the intended target.