• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pyongyang scraps armistice amid heightened saber rattling

j-mac said:
Nor do I, but we are down that road....What are tightening sanctions going to do when China is certainly not going to pay attention to them, and continue to supply and do business with NK?
Click to expand...

Can't do business with a charred wasteland. Just saying.
 
j-mac said:
Shouldn't this be a lesson in how sanctions don't ultimately do anything other than entrench the despots, and hurt the people of the country being punished?
Click to expand...

Sanctions have worked in some situations. South Africa is a good example.

Love the backseat geopolitical driving you're doing there.

It sucks, it's a ****ty situation and if we were dragged into a conflict, I could see myself signing up but the situation is much more complex and in the end, the only options are war or sanctions, it sucks but that's the way it is... With or without nuclear weapons there's intelligence that suggests thousands of artillery positions aimed at Soeul in the event of a war, much of the city could be destroyed.

There's china to worry about as well, much as they're pissed at Pyongyang for acting so rashly, they are not jut going to let you march into NK.
 
Gipper said:
Can't do business with a charred wasteland. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we can't get Obama to keep 10K troops in Afghanistan, do you really see him punchin' in the codes? I don't.
 
j-mac said:
Yeah, we can't get Obama to keep 10K troops in Afghanistan, do you really see him punchin' in the codes? I don't.
Click to expand...

True. One can just hope that Obamacare will be the miserable failure I expect, and that the idiots who voted for him switch sides in '16.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Sanctions have worked in some situations. South Africa is a good example.
Click to expand...

But they're not in NK's case, never have...The only thing that works since Clinton gave him the ability to further his nuke program, is to pay their ransom. Thanks Slick Willie.

It sucks, it's a ****ty situation and if we were dragged into a conflict, I could see myself signing up but the situation is much more complex and in the end, the only options are war or sanctions, it sucks but that's the way it is... With or without nuclear weapons there's intelligence that suggests thousands of artillery positions aimed at Soeul in the event of a war, much of the city could be destroyed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just not a good ending to the long road of allowing NK to be a nuke state. I'm thinkin' pressure China to step up.

There's china to worry about as well, much as they're pissed at Pyongyang for acting so rashly, they are not jut going to let you march into NK.
Click to expand...

That's true....Boy, good thing liberals constantly want to decimate the military isn't it?
 
I think we should start talking to them. Maybe we can even exchange diplomats. Dennis Rodman comes to mind.:peace
 
Gipper said:
What other options are you suggesting we use? They keep getting sanctioned, they get butthurt, they saber-rattle and threaten to send out nukes.

I firmly believe that the only reason they haven't yet is that they haven't made a proper ICBM that can do what they want it to do. I'm actually wanting to intervene before they really get to that point.

At this point, they have only themselves to blame. They talk tough, they talk tough, they talk tough...at some point you can't just talk the talk though. You have to walk the walk. I think a slight little detonation in a couple key areas would make them talk less.

Sometimes you have to be taught humility.
Click to expand...

Nuking North Korea would be a diplomatic disaster, especially preemptively. It'll freak everyone out, even our allies, the UN, and those who might otherwise be neutral. The UN would be hard-pressed to be on our side if we were the literal aggressor, meaning that UN troops can't assist and giving China and Russia more leeway in doing what they want to interfere in Korea. The problem is that North Korea's disproportionate army would be a hard beast to conquer if we decided to launch a ground invasion.
 
AreteCourage said:
First of all..current nuclear weapons would not only endanger lives in North Korea, but also South Korea, China, and others.

We could easily use other tactics...even if we attempted diplomacy and that failed...the next option isn't dropping a nuclear bomb that would devastate more than just the elites in North Korea.

Fire Bombing Pyongyang would be a better option than a nuclear bomb.
Click to expand...

The firebombing of Tokyo in WWII was actually worse than when we nuked Hiroshima IIRC. Diplomatically, though, nobody is going to care as much.
 
Gipper said:
True. One can just hope that Obamacare will be the miserable failure I expect, and that the idiots who voted for him switch sides in '16.
Click to expand...

Rooting for failure. Good attitude!
 
j-mac said:
Yeah, we can't get Obama to keep 10K troops in Afghanistan, do you really see him punchin' in the codes? I don't.
Click to expand...

He's not any more or less hawkish than anyone we've had in the past 20 years. Considering Afghanistan is becoming somewhat of a lost cause I don't blame him for withdrawing.
 
We could "smart-bomb" their asses, kill minimal civilians and walk away from this mess while we dust our hands. Let Carter and Clinton whale away at it and condemn what happened - all it is is squawking...

I'm all for diplomacy, however North Korea has no desire for diplomacy...

I want a NK surrender but that will never happen.

No one will do anything about the situation so I don't really see the point in having the debate here or even in government.
 
MadLib said:
Nuking North Korea would be a diplomatic disaster, especially preemptively. It'll freak everyone out, even our allies, the UN, and those who might otherwise be neutral. The UN would be hard-pressed to be on our side if we were the literal aggressor, meaning that UN troops can't assist and giving China and Russia more leeway in doing what they want to interfere in Korea. The problem is that North Korea's disproportionate army would be a hard beast to conquer if we decided to launch a ground invasion.
Click to expand...

You can't maintain an army that size for long. What are they going to feed their soldiers? What fuel will they use? It's a military that's just for show.
 
Hatuey said:
You can't maintain an army that size for long. What are they going to feed their soldiers? What fuel will they use? It's a military that's just for show.
Click to expand...

The entire country is surrounded by land mines. I think both sides understand this.
 
Hatuey said:
You can't maintain an army that size for long. What are they going to feed their soldiers? What fuel will they use? It's a military that's just for show.
Click to expand...

An initial assault would be devastating, just because of the way South Korean cities are built. Thousands can die in a single artillery strike if Seoul is targeted. If a full assault breaches the border, it will be equally devastating, and once they start getting desperate for supplies, they become even more dangerous. They'll continue to push forward or die, simply because the North Korean soldier knows that anything we throw at them is nothing compared to what their own will do to them and their families if they fall back or surrender.

If it came to ground fighting, we would be forced into a war of attrition. They will fight until the last man is dead, and we will comply with that request. War is not the desirable outcome for either side.
 
Last edited:
AreteCourage said:
No it is not time for that at all. Nuclear weapons shouldn't be used unless there is no other option...after we exhausted every other effort.


I hate it when people want to use those weapons...too many innocent people will die. Do you want that?
Click to expand...

If we get nuked...you really expect to sit on our hands? You wouldn't be just a little spun up if LA got a radiation bath?

Leveling that nation is an option. Not the first. I personally don't WANT to nuke them...but if they want to play the game...we aren't the ones that will lose.

I honestly propose some Cold Waresque resistance to NK government. Shuttle in guns and ammo. Drop off leaflets about their government, how crappy their lives are, how much their government spends on luxury. Start putting food at the border. You know. The usual penetrate deep and destroy from within stuff.
 
The tactics here are all wrong. Send in a couple teams of specialists to the palace. When they are in place air drop a few tons of Snickers bars and while the people and army are distracted by the wealth of nutty goodness take down the leaders. Easy peazy.
 
MadLib said:
He's not any more or less hawkish than anyone we've had in the past 20 years. Considering Afghanistan is becoming somewhat of a lost cause I don't blame him for withdrawing.
Click to expand...

Well, you do have a point on the withdrawing of troops. But on Obama's hawkishness, I don't think he wants to do any of this...He is a liberal that believes that we can talk to people that want to destroy us, and that if we apologize, and profess out loud what an ignoble country America is, then he will be elevated as a visionary. Obama is a narcissist with a deep seeded dislike for this country, probably ingrained during his upbringing from his communist father, and mother, then later his communist grandfather, who paired him up with known communist, and CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis, and furthered by in his own words hanging out with social radicals in collage, and Marxist Professors.

The sooner we can purge our system of those like Obama who hate the fact that we are a free people, the better.
 
Mr.Nick said:
The entire country is surrounded by land mines. I think both sides understand this.
Click to expand...

We've got side scanning sonar. It's really not that hard to find them. Our guys use this technology to locate buried weapon and ammo caches. With the training and equipment our guys have develops in the middle east finding and disarming those mines wouldn't be a huge task.
 
tech30528 said:
The tactics here are all wrong. Send in a couple teams of specialists to the palace. When they are in place air drop a few tons of Snickers bars and while the people and army are distracted by the wealth of nutty goodness take down the leaders. Easy peazy.
Click to expand...

HM? I see a new commercial coming on...

 
MadLib said:
Nuking North Korea would be a diplomatic disaster, especially preemptively. It'll freak everyone out, even our allies, the UN, and those who might otherwise be neutral. The UN would be hard-pressed to be on our side if we were the literal aggressor, meaning that UN troops can't assist and giving China and Russia more leeway in doing what they want to interfere in Korea. The problem is that North Korea's disproportionate army would be a hard beast to conquer if we decided to launch a ground invasion.
Click to expand...

The UN wouldn't approve? Aw shucks. Well now I know we can't do it.
 
tech30528 said:
We've got side scanning sonar. It's really not that hard to find them. Our guys use this technology to locate buried weapon and ammo caches. With the training and equipment our guys have develops in the middle east finding and disarming those mines wouldn't be a huge task.
Click to expand...

We're talking a huge mine field here - not mines here and there but everywhere.

Why we're busy picking through them all the North Koreans will be picking soldiers off one by one... So attacking on foot would be extremely difficult and deadly.

The best way to invade North Korea would be through an initial aerial attack and then send the troops in after an area is secured via plane/chopper.

There are a few safe ways into NK on the DMZ but they're all highly guarded...

The best way to oust this totalitarian cult of personality would be through an outright bombing raid - to totally obliterate Pyongyang and their entire military industrial complex... The US would never do that tho because our military and our politicians are too concerned about the "image" it would present to the world so they would "take it easy" and send thousands of kids to their death because they think an "even playing field" is a better image than winning a fight while flexing our muscles and creating a path of epic destruction- destruction we're more than capable of.

Every time we go to war the opposition gives us 100% and we give them 10% (if that) of our mite.

We could beat half the world via bombing if we really wanted to... Hell, Saddams "army" formally surrendered after a few bombing raids.. They were done and had no desire to fight our military. They were done with it before the troops even got to them.

Sorry if I drifted off topic...
 
Gipper said:
The UN wouldn't approve? Aw shucks. Well now I know we can't do it.
Click to expand...

The UN is how to get anything done in the modern world. Remember the original Korean War? They helped us and for several reasons, not the least of which the fact that the government of China that they recognized was US-friendly. Since the opposite is true now, and because there are a lot more UN-recognized countries (some friendly and some unfriendly) we might actually be condemned and hell, maybe even "peacekeeping forces" will be UN-approved to kill our soldiers rather than help them. That is 1000% more likely if we use nuclear missiles, which frighten our allies as well as everyone else.

Your apprehension is understandable. But it is just unrealistic to expect to be able to engage in something that could spiral into World War III without UN help. That's what gives us more troops as well as legitimacy.
 
j-mac said:
NK not answering...hmmmm....Is China behind this escalation? Is this just another in the long line of extortion tactics used by NK? What's going on here?
Click to expand...

China has nothing to gain from North Korea acting out of line, the last thing it wants is America turning even more of an eye to the East Pacific. Plus its like when your dog ****s on someone else's lawn, ya your dog did but you still look like an asshole too. China has enough of an image problem to not want more bad press.
 
Wiseone said:
China has nothing to gain from North Korea acting out of line, the last thing it wants is America turning even more of an eye to the East Pacific. Plus its like when your dog ****s on someone else's lawn, ya your dog did but you still look like an asshole too. China has enough of an image problem to not want more bad press.
Click to expand...

Didn't the last NK nuke test go off about 40 miles from the Chinese border?
 
A magician makes you look at one hand while he does his "trick" with the other.


Keep one eye on Iran.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom