• 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!

US will not use force to inspect N. Korean ship

The Mark said:
Wait a sec...

Who said that was the case?

If you think it was me, that was not my intention.

I was simply stating what the methods would be if it were decided to stop the vessel in question.
Click to expand...

Those that are calling for the vessel to be intersected and that Obama is wrong for not taking this ship out now.
 
The Mark said:
Wait a sec...

Who said that was the case?

If you think it was me, that was not my intention.

I was simply stating what the methods would be if it were decided to stop the vessel in question.
Click to expand...

Well if you're going to play nuclear brinkmanship, you had better be able to look at the chessboard at least eight or nine moves ahead.

So the US Navy demands that the ship stop.
The ship refuses and/or fires on the US Navy.
The US Navy sinks the ship.
The North Koreans respond by executing American citizens and firing a missile toward Hawaii.

What is the next step?
 
Kandahar said:
Well if you're going to play nuclear brinkmanship, you had better be able to look at the chessboard at least eight or nine moves ahead.
Click to expand...
That would seem reasonable. Who's playing?

Kandahar said:
So the US Navy demands that the ship stop.
Click to expand...
Ok.
Kandahar said:
The ship refuses and/or fires on the US Navy.
Click to expand...
Yes...
Kandahar said:
The US Navy sinks the ship.
Click to expand...
Wait, why? Why not just damage it's steering/propulsion? And weapons, if necessary?

Kandahar said:
The North Koreans respond by executing American citizens and firing a missile toward Hawaii.
Click to expand...
If it were a ship carrying illegal items, which I do not believe is known one way or another as of this moment, what would this do except anger the USA?

So why would they do such a thing?

Not to say that they wouldn't, of course.

Kandahar said:
What is the next step?
Click to expand...

If we take your hypothetical 4th step as the previous step, it would seem reasonable that we would shoot down the missile if it got anywhere near Hawaii, or simply laugh as it crashed into the sea. Practice for the radar/satellite operators?

As to the executing American citizens:
How would they acquire them.
How can we prevent that.
Is it not reasonable to assume that we would retaliate in some fashion if they did so?
Is my understanding incorrect when I think that while NK might want to taunt and mock us, they don't really want to get into a war with us?
 
Last edited:
The Mark said:
Wait, why? Why not just damage it's steering/propulsion? And weapons, if necessary?
Click to expand...

I'm no naval warfare expert, but how would we damage the weapons without damaging the ship?

The Mark said:
If it were a ship carrying illegal items, which I do not believe is known one way or another as of this moment, what would this do except anger the USA?

So why would they do such a thing?

Not to say that they wouldn't, of course.
Click to expand...

Tit for tat. The North Koreans might ask you the same question about trying to board their ship by force.

The Mark said:
If we take your hypothetical 4th step as the previous step, it would seem reasonable that we would shoot down the missile if it got anywhere near Hawaii, or simply laugh as it crashed into the sea. Practice for the radar/satellite operators?
Click to expand...

I agree with this. In other words, we basically ignore the provocation. I just question why we don't do the same thing here, when this is even less of a provocation.

The Mark said:
As to the executing American citizens:
How would they acquire them.
How can we prevent that.
Click to expand...

They already have them.
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_imprisonment_of_US_journalists_by_North_Korea]2009 imprisonment of US journalists by North Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

The Mark said:
Is it not reasonable to assume that we would retaliate in some fashion if they did so?
Click to expand...

Possibly. But our retaliatory options are much more limited than theirs, since they have the luxury of not having to care about human rights or international opinion.

The Mark said:
Is my understanding incorrect when I think that while NK might want to taunt and mock us, they don't really want to get into a war with us?
Click to expand...

Correct. And they probably have the same understanding about the United States. Which is why a game of chicken with nukes is not in anyone's interest...especially while North Korea is undergoing a leadership transition.
 
Originally Posted by Kandahar
And if North Korea responds by executing American reporters or firing missiles at Hawaii?
Click to expand...

In that case, we bomb the livin' dog **** out of North Korea. Afterall, we're much stronger than they are. Right?
 
OxymoronP said:
JUST RICE??? From N Korea where there are food shortages?
Click to expand...

No the ship is allegedly going there to pick up a shipment of rice.

apdst said:
Board the ship; by force if neccessary. If it's suspected of carrying illegal materials, then we have a duty to board and search the vessel.
Click to expand...

WITH permission of Burma, which we have yet to recieve.

Councilman said:
The naive Amateur in Chief has turned the US into a mirror image of the UN paper Tiger. Pass a Security Council Resolution and back it up with enforcement in the form of cheap meaningless emptiness, not even tough talk. Why would the US fear enforcing a resolution. Why both passing them in fact why belong to the UN in the first place they hate the US as a group and do nothing around the world. I point to Rwanda Genocide of 1994 as an example where they could have stopped it at the outset and Kofi Annan order the Canadian General on the ground to stand down.
Time to leave the UN and kick them out of the Country and start thinking about our own survival and to hell with the rest unless they are part of NATO and open it up to all countries welling to be part and never be aggressors. The rename it the World Defense Organization.
Click to expand...

You make no sense. We are simply saving the trouble of causing another diplomatic crisis over a more than likely possibility of it just being what Burma and NK say it is. Rice. Think it through before you start deouncing the UN, I'm proud that they passed a resolution that allows for some kind of confrontation.
 
Comments in BLUE.

Kandahar said:
I'm no naval warfare expert, but how would we damage the weapons without damaging the ship?

Well of course. But how does that equal sinking it?

Tit for tat. The North Koreans might ask you the same question about trying to board their ship by force.

True, which is why I personally think before any such action is taken, we must be more sure about the cargo than we currently appear to be.

I agree with this. In other words, we basically ignore the provocation. I just question why we don't do the same thing here, when this is even less of a provocation.

Deciding which is the greater provocation depends greatly on your definition of provocation. If the ship is actually carrying illegal items, we might have a legal reason for stopping it (I know almost nothing about maritime law).
On the other hand, if there is nothing of interest in the ship, then why are we having one of our ships shadow it?
They already have them.
2009 imprisonment of US journalists by North Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ah. I vaguely remember hearing something about that recently. Which shows I ought to pay more attention to the news, I suppose.

Possibly. But our retaliatory options are much more limited than theirs, since they have the luxury of not having to care about human rights or international opinion.

In some respects, yes. However, in others (notably the disparity between our military abilities and the amount of diplomatic pressure we can bring to bear and theirs), we have the upper hand.

Correct. And they probably have the same understanding about the United States. Which is why a game of chicken with nukes is not in anyone's interest...especially while North Korea is undergoing a leadership transition.

Depending on the situation, I think it possible that (at least from the US end) such a game could be avoided. If NK wants to play such a game, I don't really see how we could stop them from playing.
Click to expand...
 
F107HyperSabr said:
Fire back !! boom !
Click to expand...

And then they fire back at Seoul killing thousands within hours and war.

Again, why is the blood thirst so high?

Bording a ship is not worth the deaths of tens of thousands.
 
TheNextEra said:
And then they fire back at Seoul killing thousands within hours and war.
Click to expand...

Why, if we had a valid reason to board the ship?

TheNextEra said:
Again, why is the blood thirst so high?.
Click to expand...

Only among some.

TheNextEra said:
Bording a ship is not worth the deaths of tens of thousands.
Click to expand...

True. But do you really think NK would attack SK simply because we boarded a ship?

If we did it without any valid reason, possibly. Even then, probably not.
But if a valid reason arises, they would be considered by many to be in the wrong if they did so.
 
The Mark said:
Why, if we had a valid reason to board the ship?
Click to expand...

Do you think that there is any possible reason that North Korea would consider valid for the US Navy damaging and boarding their ship?

The Mark said:
True. But do you really think NK would attack SK simply because we boarded a ship?
Click to expand...

No, but they could do something in response. To which we could do something in response. Which escalates into a war.

The Mark said:
If we did it without any valid reason, possibly. Even then, probably not.
But if a valid reason arises, they would be considered by many to be in the wrong if they did so.
Click to expand...

I don't think global opinion of North Korea could possibly drop much lower.
 
TheNextEra said:
And then they fire back at Seoul killing thousands within hours and war.

Again, why is the blood thirst so high?

Bording a ship is not worth the deaths of tens of thousands.
Click to expand...


What if boarding the ship could prevent the deaths of tens of thousands?
 
apdst said:
What if boarding the ship could prevent the deaths of tens of thousands?
Click to expand...

The North is already threatening us. Lets not give them a reason to actually attack us or the 20+ thousand American soldiers in South Korea, who they could easily hit with a missile.

I doubt the North is selling its nuclear weapons. They are dieing for them so why the hell would they sell them to Myanmar?

They wouldn't, so there is the reason they aren't inspecting the ship by force. Though we don't have formal relations with Myanmar, we aren't hostile.

So it looks like its jsut waht they say. Rice.
 
And what if you simply ask them to let you on board?
 
HmmI think someone needs to go and read the UN Resolutution and then order the US navy to stop the ship and board it.

Now before any of you start with me. The ship in question is and always has been one of three Arms Transporters that North Korea has used in the past. This ship has a reenforced hull and is armed with Mini-Guns and Canons plus the Crew is North Korea Regular Army.

Oh and one other item the whole Rice thing is a load of BS since North Korea gets 97% of their Rice from China.
 
Democrat4life said:
The North is already threatening us. Lets not give them a reason to actually attack us or the 20+ thousand American soldiers in South Korea, who they could easily hit with a missile.

I doubt the North is selling its nuclear weapons. They are dieing for them so why the hell would they sell them to Myanmar?

They wouldn't, so there is the reason they aren't inspecting the ship by force. Though we don't have formal relations with Myanmar, we aren't hostile.

So it looks like its jsut waht they say. Rice.
Click to expand...

I guess you missed th art about Burma/Myanmar huh you know the UN Resolution on them and the Arms ban that the US?Russia put against them.

So yea that is why the ship is going to Burma because it is illegal arms you do understand that North Korea is one of the largest Arms Exporters in the World right.

Were do you think Iran/Iraq/Syria/Libyia/Burma got their Missile tech. and small arms from.
 
Democrat4life said:
The North is already threatening us. Lets not give them a reason to actually attack us or the 20+ thousand American soldiers in South Korea, who they could easily hit with a missile.
Click to expand...

There ya go again with the, "let's do nothing because someone might get hurt", philosophy. How many times has that stratgey worked in the past?
 
Scorpion89 said:
I guess you missed th art about Burma/Myanmar huh you know the UN Resolution on them and the Arms ban that the US?Russia put against them.

So yea that is why the ship is going to Burma because it is illegal arms you do understand that North Korea is one of the largest Arms Exporters in the World right.

Were do you think Iran/Iraq/Syria/Libyia/Burma got their Missile tech. and small arms from.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying that, I'm merely saying that I doubt they are going to sell vital weapons to fend off a possible, and very probable, American invasion in the near future.


apdst said:
There ya go again with the, "let's do nothing because someone might get hurt", philosophy. How many times has that stratgey worked in the past?
Click to expand...

How many times has the "Lets bomb the North Koreans because they have empty threats and let them kill 20000 Americans plus the countless South Koreans", strategy worked?

Bush tried that and look how that turned out for him.
 
Democrat4life said:
How many times has the "Lets bomb the North Koreans because they have empty threats and let them kill 20000 Americans plus the countless South Koreans", strategy worked?

Bush tried that and look how that turned out for him.
Click to expand...


How many times did NK threaten to launch a missile towards Hawaii when Bush was prez?
 
apdst said:
How many times did NK threaten to launch a missile towards Hawaii when Bush was prez?
Click to expand...

They didn't. North Korea built their missile system that had the ability to fire towards Hawaii when Bush was President. Though I don't think there is an evidence that supports they could actually reach Hawaii.

They also set off a Nuclear bomb in a test when Bush was President and shortly after Bush left office.
 
Gibberish said:
They didn't. North Korea built their missile system that had the ability to fire towards Hawaii when Bush was President. Though I don't think there is an evidence that supports they could actually reach Hawaii.

They also set off a Nuclear bomb in a test when Bush was President and shortly after Bush left office.
Click to expand...

So, doing nothing hasn't had a positive effect? Yes?
 
Kandahar said:
Do you think that there is any possible reason that North Korea would consider valid for the US Navy damaging and boarding their ship?
Click to expand...

Not really, but I was thinking more along the lines of a "valid reason" in the sense of something which would justify to other nations/persons (who don't have the obviously biased viewpoint of the NK's) such actions.

Kandahar said:
No, but they could do something in response. To which we could do something in response. Which escalates into a war.
Click to expand...

The potential for that does exist. But it would not necessarily escalate to that point.

Kandahar said:
I don't think global opinion of North Korea could possibly drop much lower.
Click to expand...

I was thinking more along the lines of global opinion of the USA. If they responded in an incorrect way (from the viewpoint of some), we would have the moral high ground (at least in the viewpoint of those same some).

And yes, IMO it would be possible for global opinion of NK to drop lower. Attacking SK might do it, as the obvious example. Lesser examples probably exist.
 
Last edited:
The Coward Jimmy Carter forever branded "The American Coward" with his refusal to come to the aid our our imprisoned citizens in Iran. The snake Billy-Bob Clinton then backed down in Somalia after he saw they had weapons and hid under the table while Muslim extremists ran wild. His only violent respsonse was in Waco,Texas along with the whore/butcher Janet Reno in the wholesale slaughter and BBQ of American children, women and men.
Now N. Korea runs over this unqualifed idiot from Kenya because he knows he is impotent to move for a move will bring Chinese dogs into the white house and eat his family like Mike Tyson on a rampage. Oblah-blah is a sterile street pimp with as much moral backbone as he has physical muscle power. You liberal scurge voted for this third rate bookie thinking he would pay off your bet. Well try knocking on his door with North Korea doing as it pleases in front of you. Oh and don't worry about the "Nobody Home" sign on his door, it's probably just a joke, you know like the the fly squashing. Ha-Ha-Ha, whose the fly now?
 
Gibberish said:
No it hasn't. Provoking a Nuclear War based on fault intel would have less of a positive effect though.
Click to expand...


Who said anything about provoking a nuclear war? Could possibly stick to things that have actully been said, instead of fabricated comments?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom