Should NATO do a pre emptive strike on N Korea ?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Pre-emptive strikes had always been the hallmark of mankind who sought only for survival. Rather than to wait for death's arrival, they bring death to those who sought to bring death first.

Republic Rome did not hesistate for the massive german horde to arrive first. Rome struck fast, far from its home with the help of other states to end the german rampage, and won.

Monarchial Rome sought to pay off eastern tribes when they invaded, but gold was not enough for those barbarians. They want to rule Rome, and won.

England was pacified to not strike first at Hitler's conquest,despite the rest of calls for help from europe-Poland, Denmark, France, etc. And was nearly WIPED OUT by Hitler.

USA sat out WW2 initially, with thanks to the loud vocal few who screamed Hitler and Japan meant no harm to America. It lost its fleet capability in dec 1941 when the japs bombed Pearl harbour.

MacArthur drove the N.Koreans to the chinese border, and counselled it needed to take it all the way to China to end Communist Mao's rule. He was sidelined and ignored. Millions of Chinese citizens died under the hands mismanagement by Mao, and even Deng Xiao Ping, the current revered true Leader of China, was incarcerated for decades, and now, the CCP govt a problem to our world fo working by rule of law.

Evil exists.

Evil is NOT stupid. It can learn and adapt as it had done for centuries. It knows how to attack and manipulate weak humanity's emotions for its own gain. Hitler knew he would not have a chance to win europe if europeans launched a pre-emptive strike at Germany.

So he manipulated weak humanity, play others against each others, lie and propagandized, invited the foolish to lavish dinners and staged shows of peace or rhetorics of supposed 'justified anger' against bullies.

That's how evil works and succeeded the reaping of millions of souls .

In the Iraq war, Sadam had been warned time and time again, and yet he blaustered and rage, and threatened the West with annihilation. Bush, after seeing 3000 innocents died in 911 caused by radical idealogies, waited no more and launched its pre-emptive strike, and was condemn even till today for the sufferings there, when the realities was that there had been centuries of sunni-shia fueds going on in Iraq and they could never had form a stable nation at any time.

But each time Bush's name is mentioned in the Iraq war, he gets all the blame. Evil won yet again.

Today, N.Korea had rage, and evil men condemn others if they so much as mention pre-emptive strikes. They claim N.Korea had done nothing except to use hot air.

The problem is that N.Korea possesses nukes, and evil men while claiming he had done nothing, they do not mention what will happen if the unpredictable N.Korea launch its nukes missiles first. Nuke has the capability to hurt many thousands, if not millions, provened.

But evil rules our world. Good men can only sit and wait, for the bomb to fall first, and let millions die, or evil men and evil women will only scream loudly that good men had murdered others in a pre-emptive strike. When the nukes fall, rest assured that the evil ones will hide yet again, denying they said anything, and await for another opportunity to reap more souls later on in another tragedy.

Just too bad we mankind are weak, and many are easily manipulated by evil. Let the millions of innocents die first, so that the rest will wake up, to WHO are the evil ones and where their conscience lay.

The ONLY TRUE & JUSTIFIED REASON for NO is because the CCP govt and Putin are the BIGGER EVILS. They will accept NO rationalities for countries to defend themselves by pre-emptive strikes, such as the 70,000 dead now in Syria, AND WILL ATTACK in retaliation.

The world is not ready to take on the CCP govt and Putin now, for TOO MANY are asleep and manipulated. Let the unpredictable even by China's standards baby kim launch first, with millions dead, and a mankind awakened and united, then can only we end evil, the way our forefathers woke up after Pearl Harbour, sadly only after the carnage there.




posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druscilla

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
NATO shouldn't, but the US should. We need to launch about 500 Tomahawks into NK and take out all of their missile infrastructure, and then using Project Bluebeam holographic technology, produce a giant hologram of a middle finger over the city of Pyongyang.


... because, that's what Jesus would do?

aha.



I don't presume to know what Jesus would do, but I would imagine that he wouldn't need missiles or holograms... he could just wave his hand or something to that effect and take care of it.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Crazy man with finger on the big red button













Sleep well people
edit on 9/3/13 by cody599 because: (no reason given)
edit on 9/3/13 by cody599 because: Add piccie



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by cody599
 


No. No pre-emptive strike.

Should someone fly to North Korea, get a cab, ride to the presidential palace, get out, ask to see Kim Jung Un, wait, then when he shows up, bitch-slap that little turkey in the face?

Yes.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

Well now, you go and exercise your rights of free speech and expression in Pyongyang and give him a second slap for me if you have enough life left in you to raise your paw a second time.

I shall insure songs are written and many a night of celebration is had in your honor, for your selfless sacrifice. After all, you wouldn't expect to live long enough to even register the look of shock on his pudgy face, would ya?



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by cody599
 


No. No pre-emptive strike.

Should someone fly to North Korea, get a cab, ride to the presidential palace, get out, ask to see Kim Jung Un, wait, then when he shows up, bitch-slap that little turkey in the face?

Yes.


Beezzer has 1st in queue
Then Wrabbit
Then me.....................................................

Please queue here



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Okay. Maybe not a well planned out response.


But it's better than killing a bunch of people under the pudgy little toad.
edit on 9-3-2013 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by cody599
 


Here's the line!





posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Does this help ?




posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:27 PM
link   
My answer is NO!
Let Un have his rant and rave, for this is is what he wants, for us the US and SK to do a preemptive first strike, do you not think the DPRK and China have the same agreement the we have with the South? it is sucker strike, make all the right moves on your part and make your enemy be the the first to strike.

in short i say NO!
Let him make the first move, any one knows, you use a nuke, you get nuked, I do not think DPRK has any of their own Patriot type missiles.
DPRK would be no more, and in Uns mind there is no cause for that. or should be.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Hum,

Its a tricky decision to make taking into consideration the other "allies" of NK that may repost to a pre-emptive strike... in my opinion this would be downright suicide leading to an all our regional crisis that would then spill out into other surrounding continents...

However, what i just dont get, is why, after all this time and with our Western modern infiltration ressources, has no-one has just simply popped Kim Jong Un?

I'm sure that there are a few disgruntled North Koreans over there who would just love to co-operate and take him out!

I dont see what is so difficult!

Last week i saw the documentary "The Gatekeeper" about Shin Bent in Israel... watching those satellite cameras zooming in on targets and just like... bang... no more target... so easy!

I just don't get it?

Kindest respects

Rodinus
edit on 9-3-2013 by Rodinus because: phrase added



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by MrSpad
 


In a nut shell pre-emptive strikes are another name for imperialism.

CJ


No. The opposite in fact. A well done one can limit the amount of death, damage and size of a conflct. If you are about to be invaded and hit the other nations airforce first the odds are the invasion will not be able to go forward since the invader will not have air superiority. Doing nothing in that case would have lead to a long a far more costly ground war.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
No.

Since re-starting the Korean war has a near certainty of leaving the South Korean capital in ruins with many thousands of South Korean civilians dead, it is a bad idea.

They North Koreans can bluster all they want. Just ignore them.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rodinus
Hum,

Its a tricky decision to make taking into consideration the other "allies" of NK that may repost to a pre-emptive strike... in my opinion this would be downright suicide leading to an all our regional crisis that would then spill out into other surrounding continents...

However, what i just dont get, is why, after all this time and with our Western modern infiltration ressources, has no-one has just simply popped Kim Jong Un?

I'm sure that there are a few disgruntled North Koreans over there who would just love to co-operate and take him out!

I dont see what is so difficult!

Last week i saw the documentary "The Gatekeeper" about Shin Bent in Israel... watching those satellite cameras zooming in on targets and just like... bang... no more target... so easy!

I just don't get it?

Kindest respects

Rodinus
edit on 9-3-2013 by Rodinus because: phrase added


No disrespect but that would be shin bet

Maybe they're torn between Iran and NK ? Israel wants Iran out of the way but NK seems the stronger threat at the moment.

Just maybe China's playing a very clever game ?



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
No a preemptive strike by NATO would merely give credence to the propaganda that is fed to their population daily.

It would allow the North Korean government and people to unite and focus their energies against a single enemy therefore strengthening the regime rather than weakening it. Such a regime if backed into a corner and on the verge of defeat would in my opinion be much more inclined to use nuclear weapons if they felt they truly had nothing to lose.

Although the North Korean military may not be particularly advanced compared to Western nations they have sheer fanaticism which would drive them on and I can well imagine their infantry attacking in sheer waves. South Korea would undoubtedly come under fierce attack.

Furthermore any attack would have to include China. You can well imagine their response if NATO launched a preemptive military strike upon their borders without them being involved. The political and global fallout from such an attack would be calamitous.

North Korea in my opinion is at this stage best left alone.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Rodinus
 





However, what i just dont get, is why, after all this time and with our Western modern infiltration ressources, has no-one has just simply popped Kim Jong Un?


And what difference would that make?

Just because Kim Jong-Un is assassinated doesn't mean the Stalinist regime in North Korea would magically collapse. In fact there is the potential for the opposite to occur. The government could just blame the United States and use it as an excuse to launch an attack.

It may lead to a power struggle and it could be messy.

But anyway the United States isn't usually so overt. They prefer to launch coups rather than outright assassinations.

That's what I think anyway.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


Huh? That is simply taking the mickey. Care to share some examples? How did that Iraq thing work out again?

CJ
edit on 9-3-2013 by ColoradoJens because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by cody599
 


I don't think NATO should, but I would like to see the U.S. attack North Korea using a incapacitating agent like BZ. This is like '___', only it lasts about 72 hours and causes infected people to just sit down and not give a # about anything. They would just be laughing their ass off about anything. Then we could just walk in there and grab that little fat ass dictator and haul his ass off to Gitmo where they could feed him grass and maybe a handful of rice like he does for his people.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by rjbaggins
 


What is this BZ any links?, im intrigued, sounds a little bit like a strong acid trip ( not that id know...
)

IMO, there needs to be something creative like the stuxnet virus with iran, or nothing at all, if the SAS could just take out the fat man and maybe a dozen generals ( discretely: poisoning, accidental gas explosion etc) out there would be a power vacume which would cause a coup im sure , but then again the new guy could be worse, but i dont see how...
edit on 9-3-2013 by larapa because: formatting
edit on 9-3-2013 by larapa because: i can



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by larapa
 


BZ is a military incapacitating agent. I was stationed at Edgewood Arsenal where it was tested. You can look up Edgewood and it will probably have quite a bit of information on it. It is one hell of an acid trip. There isn't any first aid for it if you get dosed. The Army says that if any of your men get contaminated with it, tie them to a tree so they don't hurt themselves or anybody else. The films of volunteers who took this was pretty wild. After about 20 minutes they said screw these tests they were supposed to do while under the influence of it. They just sat on the ground laughing at nothing and everything. It's a great weapon to use because it's odorless and colorless and once the enemy is dosed with this you can just walk in and gather intelligence and just tie everybody up and nobody gets hurt. Of course I was told my a Major that it wasn't a good agent to use because it doesn't scare the enemy as much as a good blister agent. The CIA was testing it in the begining and then the Army was doing most of it.





top topics
 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join