North Korea and logic

I very much want to understand the group of people who believe that we should militarily strike North Korea. Under self defense circumstances I understand it; otherwise, I don't. Somebody please give me a logical argument as to why we should attack North Korea.

a reply to: Aristotelian1
Because we would like to see the Korean Peninsula united as one entity again. Can only happen with the regime in the North effectively destroyed. Sacrifice is required for certain events to happen. The South has expressed their willingness to make this sacrifice provided its allies in the Pacific will support them, which we will.

That is all.

a reply to: Aristotelian1

There isn't one.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Aristotelian1
Because we would like to see the Korean Peninsula united as one entity again. Can only happen with the regime in the North effectively destroyed. Sacrifice is required for certain events to happen. The South has expressed their willingness to make this sacrifice provided its allies in the Pacific will support them, which we will.

That is all.

Two questions then, my friend.
1. Has ALL of the south expressed their willingness?
2. Should millions of people die in order to reunite the two countries?

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
Somebody please give me a logical argument as to why we should attack North Korea.

Option A; Sit back and do nothing like we always have while the Madmen in North Korea continue to develop weaponry that will one day actually be able to back up their threats.

Option B; Do something about it now before it is too late.

Let's not forget that the two Koreas are still at war. The agreement that saw the DMZ established was only a ceasefire. And NK has violated said ceasefire on more than one occasion. For instance in 2015 as below.

en.wikipedia.org...

Whatever happens to NK as a country is not that important. It could reunite with South Korea, it could remain under independent and still communist rule or it could become a special administrative zone of China. What is critical is exiting the Kim dynasty from power and dismantling the military culture that sees the army fed before the people. It does not need to become western leaning. It just needs to stop being a menace to South Korea, it's other neighbours and the West in general.

North Korea has even threatened to strike Australia

www.theguardian.com...

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
Somebody please give me a logical argument as to why we should attack North Korea.

Option A; Sit back and do nothing like we always have while the Madmen in North Korea continue to develop weaponry that will one day actually be able to back up their threats.

Option B; Do something about it now before it is too late.

Let's not forget that the two Koreas are still at war. The agreement that saw the DMZ established was only a ceasefire. And NK has violated said ceasefire on more than one occasion. For instance in 2015 as below.

en.wikipedia.org...

Whatever happens to NK as a country is not that important. It could reunite with South Korea, it could remain under independent and still communist rule or it could become a special administrative zone of China. What is critical is exiting the Kim dynasty from power and dismantling the military culture that sees the army fed before the people. It does not need to become western leaning. It just needs to stop being a menace to South Korea, it's other neighbours and the West in general.

North Korea has even threatened to strike Australia

www.theguardian.com...

But that is what I don't get. Who cares if they develope weapons? If they ever strike us they'll be up in smoke in less than five minuites.

originally posted by: Aristotelian1

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
Somebody please give me a logical argument as to why we should attack North Korea.

Option A; Sit back and do nothing like we always have while the Madmen in North Korea continue to develop weaponry that will one day actually be able to back up their threats.

Option B; Do something about it now before it is too late.

Let's not forget that the two Koreas are still at war. The agreement that saw the DMZ established was only a ceasefire. And NK has violated said ceasefire on more than one occasion. For instance in 2015 as below.

en.wikipedia.org...

Whatever happens to NK as a country is not that important. It could reunite with South Korea, it could remain under independent and still communist rule or it could become a special administrative zone of China. What is critical is exiting the Kim dynasty from power and dismantling the military culture that sees the army fed before the people. It does not need to become western leaning. It just needs to stop being a menace to South Korea, it's other neighbours and the West in general.

North Korea has even threatened to strike Australia

www.theguardian.com...

But that is what I don't get. Who cares if they develope weapons? If they ever strike us they'll be up in smoke in less than five minuites.

So.....

You are aware of the destructive power of a Nuclear Missile?

One bomb can destroy an entire city. There are bombs large enough now to take out smaller countries like Japan, UK etc in a single strike.

Are you really prepared to sit back and let them develop such capability just so you can have a clear conscience in the now? If anyone will use a Nuke first in warfare, it will be North Korea. They have a long term game plan and it is definitely not to make a Nuke and then invite the rest of the world over for a cuppa.

a reply to: Aristotelian1

If they didnt have weapons they'd be up in smoke in less than five minuites a long time ago.

NWO is just trying to figure out the best way to take out korea and iran without getting themselves blown to tiny pieces.

I suggest to them to build moon base first, zoom over there, then try n establish some dumb world government thats not going to work in a million years anyways.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

A few million DEAD, South Korea as a whole supports a nuclear war (or even a conventional one) with assured MASSIVE BODY COUNT????

Cant wait to see those sources....

And that's our business how exactly?????

a reply to: markosity1973

They already have nukes, right?

Who have they attacked?

The real game is punking them before they can actually counter-attack beyond the penninsula. But you can keep sucking up all that NWO / MSM / Neocon / Neolib war propaganda, if you dont mind being self-deluded.

a reply to: Idreamofme

NWO is just trying to figure out the best way to take out korea and iran without getting themselves blown to tiny pieces.

Isnt the NWO a group of wrasslers from days gone by ? Why do they want to take NK out ?

a reply to: markosity1973

So india pakistan russia etc can have nookes but no one else can. Seems fair.

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Aristotelian1

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
Somebody please give me a logical argument as to why we should attack North Korea.

Option A; Sit back and do nothing like we always have while the Madmen in North Korea continue to develop weaponry that will one day actually be able to back up their threats.

Option B; Do something about it now before it is too late.

Let's not forget that the two Koreas are still at war. The agreement that saw the DMZ established was only a ceasefire. And NK has violated said ceasefire on more than one occasion. For instance in 2015 as below.

en.wikipedia.org...

Whatever happens to NK as a country is not that important. It could reunite with South Korea, it could remain under independent and still communist rule or it could become a special administrative zone of China. What is critical is exiting the Kim dynasty from power and dismantling the military culture that sees the army fed before the people. It does not need to become western leaning. It just needs to stop being a menace to South Korea, it's other neighbours and the West in general.

North Korea has even threatened to strike Australia

www.theguardian.com...

But that is what I don't get. Who cares if they develope weapons? If they ever strike us they'll be up in smoke in less than five minuites.

So.....

You are aware of the destructive power of a Nuclear Missile?

One bomb can destroy an entire city. There are bombs large enough now to take out smaller countries like Japan, UK etc in a single strike.

Are you really prepared to sit back and let them develop such capability just so you can have a clear conscience in the now? If anyone will use a Nuke first in warfare, it will be North Korea. They have a long term game plan and it is definitely not to make a Nuke and then invite the rest of the world over for a cuppa.

I don't think the government of North Korea is suicidal. If they strike us it is game over. They are up in smoke. They know that.

a reply to: Gothmog

Banks

Life is never fair. Snowflakes expect fair. Can never happen.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: markosity1973

The real game is punking them before they can actually counter-attack beyond the penninsula. But you can keep sucking up all that NWO / MSM / Neocon / Neolib war propaganda, if you dont mind being self-deluded.

South Korea for a start. (Conventional weapons) I linked the 2015 attack in my first post.

And instead of name calling and insulting me, why do you not do your own research?

NK has nuclear bombs, but it does not yet have a way to deliver them unmanned. At the moment they would have to use a very easily blown out of the sky plane, similar to the Enola Gay when it dropped the bomb on Nagasaki.

NK is working very hard to develop said missile system and with every failed launch they inch ever closer to being able to deliver on their threats to the outside world. Russia and the USA also had many failures before they developed their systems.

And for those 'other countries have nukes too' apologists; Since when did allowing every mad regime in the world to have nukes make the world a safer place?? Less is more sometimes. And this is definitely one case where it applies.

a reply to: markosity1973

I don't believe those are the only two options. History, and not rhetoric or name-calling, should counsel us. We are now in our third generation of Kims making these ridiculous statements. Yet, they've not started a war yet. The US, on the other hand, is the only nation to actually attack someone with an atomic weapon. Also we've been using depleted uranium warheads in the Middle East for years now. The last 20 years prove that we, the US, are much more of a threat to world peace than Korea is.

There is no proof that more people would be hurt by the US doing nothing than if we attacked Korea.

a reply to: markosity1973

OMG!!!!!!

North and South Korea rubbed elbows over propaganda loudspeakers.... quick fire up the U.S. ICBM tubes and prepare to turn NK into a parking lot!!!!!!

And HOW IS THAT OUR BUSINESS TO BEGIN WITH???????

a reply to: Xeven

Life aint fair i agree, but i aint complaining bout it. Im fine. Just sick of hearing about korea and russia for 30 plus years. Need a new bad guy. Maybe switzerland,....or something fresh. Gotta mix it up a bit. Maybe iceland needs to be taken out?

Maybe do a vote online on which new bad guy we can kill? Thats a fresh idea and gives us all a chance to pick the next target. Keeps us engaged.

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
I very much want to understand the group of people who believe that we should militarily strike North Korea. Under self defense circumstances I understand it; otherwise, I don't. Somebody please give me a logical argument as to why we should attack North Korea.

the logical argument is the same that the US used for every single war it started/fueled/supplied guns to.

the American people are so dumbed down, they would never use actual logic to question anything, not even why most threads in the ww3 forums are related to countries which have not been involved in any militaristic conflicts with other nations or spied, bombed, incited riots, support 'regime' changes, invaded other countries, dropped nukes and next biggest bomb after nukes on another country.

... even why the US only seems to bring freedom to nations which can't fight back...
Russia did what it wanted with Crimea, and we didn't dare give them militaristic ultimatums...
hmmmm.