Rep. Peter King: US could make preemptive strike on North Korea

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 10:54 AM
link   
link ...


Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) said Tuesday that the United States had the right to take preemptive military action against North Korea if there was "solid evidence" that Kim Jon Un planned to attack the United States or South Korea.

"If we have good reason to believe there's going to be an attack, I believe we have the right to take preemptive action," King said on CNN's 'Erin Burnett Outfront.'

"I don't think we have to wait until Americans are killed or wounded or injured in any way," he continued. "I'm not saying we should be rushing into war, don't get me wrong, but if we have solid evidence that North Korea's going to take action, then I think we have a moral obligation and an absolute right to defend ourselves."


I understand what he is saying - but does it really need to be said?

Is this helpful?

Or is this just another ratcheting up of the war rhetoric?

Besides what constitutes "solid evidence"?

edit: watch the video at the link. The CNN host, Erin Burnett, is actually the one who brought it up. She seemed to like the idea, imo.

edit on 4/3/13 by SherlockH because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/3/13 by SherlockH because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 10:59 AM
link   
I'm all for it. Turn them and China into glass. The world would be better off.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SherlockH
 


Satellite imagery showing rockets ready to launch ?? Maybe this is the real reason Mr. O. is heading for Denver today...to spend some time in a bunker, while we whack NK.


+25 more 
posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by wrksstudios
 
edit on 3-4-2013 by all2human because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by wrksstudios
 


Your fear scares me.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by wrksstudios
I'm all for it. Turn them and China into glass. The world would be better off.


Somehow I doubt that



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
He is exactly right. There are many things which we could do to a lot of people around the entire world.
While most of the countries of the world are made up of what many people would call "useless eaters", just why would we want to nuke any one or more of them.
Some people would be better off to let their posteriors do the talking.
It would likely make more "sense" !

By his statements, Iran can rightly invade or atleast open fire on Israel. Would he agree to this happening?
That is what he has said!

Can't help but think Forrest's momma was right, "stupid is as stupid does".
edit on 3-4-2013 by teamcommander because: after thought
edit on 3-4-2013 by teamcommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by wrksstudios
I'm all for it. Turn them and China into glass. The world would be better off.

We sort of need China in a way, as they need us. Our economies depend on each other, and I don't think either wants war with the other at this point....not over this. turning anyone into glass at this point would be overkill.

OT: I too, would like to know what they consider "solid evidence". I don't think that comment will help anything at all. It's something we all knew without being said. I think it was said to put lil' Kim's panties in a bunch, as he does to us.
edit on 3-4-2013 by PutAQuarterIn because: (no reason given)


+7 more 
posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by wrksstudios
I'm all for it. Turn them and China into glass. The world would be better off.


People like you are the cause the USA is receiving less and less respect world wide. Your arrogance to wanting to wipe off a 5,000+ yo civilization is amazing. And this from some 250+yo society of misfits, land robbers and religious fanatics that now is called the USA.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by PutAQuarterIn
 


We have no dependence on China. We don't need China for a thing. We will just find the next country in line to exploit cheap labor. India, Taiwan, and host of other Asian countries will just get more business out of us. China is just the cheapest at the moment. Will it hurt? Sure, but in the long run its just a bump in the road.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Is anyone getting deja vu?

These are the same types of things that were said about Iraq before we invaded.

It sounds as if the war drums are begining to be beaten. I wouldn't be surprised if we invade N. Korea in the next couple of years.


*sigh*



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   
I hope this isn't Iraq all over again.

Cause this could escalate beyond everyone, bad all bad!

A preemptive strike is what Lil'Kim wants. I don't know the
guy , but I find it hard to swallow that his regime believes
they have any chance what so ever. They know that if we
attack first, that gives China provocation to help defend them.

Then Russia is helping China, all the super powers become hostile
Then the smaller countries governments find themselves in a position
where they have to choose sides, and who best fits there interest.

Slippery slope, we should be talking to this guy not making assumptions
on national TV. Then you need the sheep I guess.





posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   
When is a preemptive strike considered a first attack?
By his logic, the US can strike first if NK is about to attack SK (or the US).

Does that mean China can "preemptively" strike the US, if the US is about to strike NK ?

Considering this is in the msm, that the US is actively thinking this, China would have every reason to "preemptively" strike, before the US "preemptively" strikes.....

**sigh**

This loses logic



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by SherlockH
 
The US should in no way make a preemptive strike on N.Korea. N.Korea is China's little "pet project" and if we start a conflict with them we had best be prepared to go to war with China- something that most people do not want, but that China would feel is necessary to "save face". However, if N.Korea were to make any feeble attempt to attack the US we would be well within our rights to turn them into toast and China would be able to bow out gracefully with their pride intact.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Ah, the operative words "solid evidence" don't seem to have the same meaning to our government as they do to the rest of us with a shred of common sense.

I've seen our government parade out "solid evidence" to justify the Iraq / Afghanistan invasions. Yellow cake uranium, secret bunkers where they're building nukes, mushroom clouds on the horizon.......The credibility of the US government when it comes to reasons for pre-emptive war is zero.

We will never know if any evidence presented to us is solid or made up.

My biggest concern is that, because North Korea and Iran have become buddies (www.forbes.com...), this is our "back door" excuse to hit Iran as well. I think if anybody has itchy trigger fingers, it is the US. We couldn't justify a direct hit on Iran, because the excuses used a decade earlier no longer fly. I don't trust our media and our government to tell us the truth about this whole mess, and I remain suspicious that suddenly our new boogeyman is North Korea.

In the end, if nukes are used, the "justification" will be lost in the rubble.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by conspiracytheoristIAM
reply to post by SherlockH
 


Satellite imagery showing rockets ready to launch ?? Maybe this is the real reason Mr. O. is heading for Denver today...to spend some time in a bunker, while we whack NK.


He does not need to go to Denver to whack [snip] lil kim.. There are better bunkers and security at the white house.. I doubt Obama has any intentions on whacking [snip] anyone.. They still have not pulled the plug on Iran BEFORE they DO get the bomb and START acting like NK and actually use their nuke for whacking [snip] Israel... No the president does not have the ca-hones for it.
edit on 3-4-2013 by Gazrok because: whacking and whacking off are two COMPLETELY different things....



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:48 AM
link   
I vote we have a preemptive strike too! .....on Peter King's political future. That kind of thinking is a love affair with death and dealing it to others that I'm starting to find almost clinical in it's level of SICK.


The idea that we have a two bit office holder saying this is even worse. It's bad enough that the public has so many who have apparently been led to the trough of death and destruction, like a magic elixir. It's scary when it's elected officials.

I'm by no means anti-war....if it's started against us. I'm sick and tired of being the nation who STARTS them though.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Pre-emptive war is illegal under international law.

Frankly - our government doesn't own a large enough reserve of trust to convince the world that pre-emptive war is justifiable.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by SherlockH
 



"I don't think we have to wait until Americans are killed or wounded or injured in any way,"


Yes...politically....we DO. To do otherwise, isn't just tactically unsound, it's political suicide. "Evidence" will not be enough...like the "evidence" used to justify Iraq? No, that trick only works once fellas....

Just ONE artillery shell from NK...and we're good to go...otherwise, we play the waiting game.



posted on Apr, 3 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   
just what we need, more wars! more young americans dead so the bankers can rebuild and profit





 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join