One Distraction Coming Up - The White House is considering direct military action

Cigar said:

The White House is considering direct military action to counter North Korea




Trump needs a war. This is why he was proposing a huge increase in defense when we were at peace. He is going to start a war. We just need some country to volunteer to be Trump's international scapegoat.

Say whatever you want about Don Cheeto, but he's a Master at BS'ing the Gullible

Click to expand...

Norks are getting ready to aim nuke-tipped ballistic missiles at CONUS. They're already testing sub-launch capability. The US should have acted long ago, and not let them get so close to holding a knife to our throat.

sanman said:

Norks are getting ready to aim nuke-tipped ballistic missiles at CONUS. They're already testing sub-launch capability. The US should have acted long ago, and not let them get so close to holding a knife to our throat.

Click to expand...

Thanl God for Reagan and Star Wars

Ever been to Panmunjom on the DMZ? I haven't, but I've seen it from a U.S. military trench on the South Korean side. The weapons are loaded and everyone is on alert 24/7. Nothing friendly going on there at all. They've been ready for war for decades.

matchlight said:

How many artillery shells did U.S. aircraft drop on Japan, and how many millions did those shells kill? The notion that North Korea could fire enough artillery shells to kill millions of people, turn all of Seoul into a crater, etc. during the day or two before the guns firing them were all destroyed is just plain silly.

You seem to think the U.S. should never use military force against North Korea, no matter what it may do. To make clear to a hostile, aggressive dictator like Kim that he can engage in whatever acts of aggression he pleases with impunity, far from being a safe course of action, would be the most dangerous course we could take. It would be an open invitation for him to make war on our allies--or even on us. The Korean War never ended, and we should always keep that in mind.

There are good reasons why, sixty-odd years later, this country continues to maintains a force of almost 30,000 servicemen and a lot of heavy weapons in South Korea. I would like to see several B-2's based in the region, possibly in Japan. I would also like to see a second carrier group based there.

Click to expand...

Japan had numerous amounts of people seeking cover from well known bombing campaigns, south korea has their major city in striking range of north korean ammo, also the us bombing was dispersed over areas while north koreas is all targeted at a highly populated center.

Their artillery is set up not to maintain a constant fire, theirs is designed to level seoul in one or two hours. They know they would lose so they have it aimed to unload all of it on civilian targets as quick as possible, to hold seoul hostage to ensure no one invades them.

Also I never once said the us should never use force against north korea, I was bringing up the severe cost of doing so. For the us to use military force against korea, the benefit would need to exceed the cost. As it is right now the cost vastly outweighs the benefit, with hundreds of thousands to possible millions killed, many of which would even be us service members in the northern ranges of south korea.

Yes we maintain a lot of equipment and men there, but that still does zero to be able to stop the largest concentration of artillery in mankinds history from unloading before we can destroy them, the literal definition is a hostage situation, they can not win the war, so they target civilians as a deterrant, knowing their ill equipped army is a joke beyond their artillery.