• 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!

Yeay Trump, Ready to go to War in N Korea

I wonder what would happen if we dropped a nice big fat nuke on Pyongyang? Not to say I support such a measure, but that sure would make a splash.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the war has never been formally ended.
Click to expand...

You're right. Only the hostilities ended. In fact they didn't completely end. We had a handful of people killed on the DMZ during the year I was there. Across the road from our compound was a Turkish army compound. One morning we awoke to see two North Korean Soldiers hanging dead on their gate. Apparently they infiltrated into the wrong area and the Turks wouldn't have messed with the concept of prisoners of war. It isn't exactly peaceful but close to that.
 
radcen said:
This is a fair point.

And to be fair even further, the rhetoric is actually probably necessary. One of Reagan's strengths was this type of "tough guy" rhetoric, and it served him and us well. Some were panicked that he'd get us into a war, but the only thing he did in that way was Grenada.

Trump, though, is less predictable, and more prone to irrational whim.
Click to expand...

Add "already suffering from credibility issues" to your list. I don't recall Reagan having tht problem here and abroad.
 
Risky Thicket said:
As far as I am concerned that would be a decision ultimately left up to South Korea as it will be South Korea who will be take the brunt of a military action.
Click to expand...

That's the problem. That midget lunatic has Seoul in the crosshairs with missiles, ready to fire in the event the **** get's real.
 
Roadvirus said:
That's the problem. That midget lunatic has Seoul in the crosshairs with missiles, ready to fire in the event the **** get's real.
Click to expand...

From what I've been reading about that subject, I think that threat may be overstated. Most of the threat to Seoul seems to be posed by artillery pieces--possibly 10,000 or more of them--which would be firing at the limit of their range. Artillery shells surely can damage buildings and kill people, but they usually contain only a few pounds of explosive. We are not talking about a thousand-plane raid from World War Two, in which three thousand tons or so of bombs rained down on a city. Even the V-2 attacks on England--and each of those missiles carried a ton, most of it explosive--did not kill nearly as many people as the Germans hoped, partly because many fell in open spaces.

The U.S. can locate an artillery piece only a moment after it has fired, either with drones or equipment on the ground, and these things could be placed wherever needed. Against a powerful air force with guided weapons, artillery, once located, does not stand much chance of surviving for long. Whatever damage North Korea hoped to do to Seoul with artillery, it would probably have not much more than an hour, if that, in which to do most of it.

As another deterrent, it would not surprise me to see the U.S. once again place tactical nuclear weapons at bases in South Korea. That would probably be more a political than a military move, because the U.S. has plenty of nuclear weapons at sea that could hit any target in North Korea in retaliation for any use of nuclear weapons by Pyongyang.
 
Last edited:
The left will of course continue to spin President Trump's message, if not outright lie about it. The bottom line is that Trump believes in peace thru strength, while ex-president Barry believed in peace thru incompetent diplomacy.
 
radcen said:
This is a fair point.

And to be fair even further, the rhetoric is actually probably necessary. One of Reagan's strengths was this type of "tough guy" rhetoric, and it served him and us well. Some were panicked that he'd get us into a war, but the only thing he did in that way was Grenada.

Trump, though, is less predictable, and more prone to irrational whim.
Click to expand...

i dont see that when it comes to war, i believe he will defer to people who have more knowledge on the subject then he does.
 
radcen said:
This is a fair point.

And to be fair even further, the rhetoric is actually probably necessary. One of Reagan's strengths was this type of "tough guy" rhetoric, and it served him and us well. Some were panicked that he'd get us into a war, but the only thing he did in that way was Grenada.

Trump, though, is less predictable, and more prone to irrational whim.
Click to expand...

No truth to that statement...

WASHINGTON, April 18— The United States Navy clashed with Iranian forces across the southern half of the Persian Gulf today, crippling or sinking six armed Iranian vessels. One American attack helicopter was reported missing.

''We've taken this action to make certain the Iranians have no illusions about the cost of irresponsible behavior,'' President Reagan said today. ''We aim to deter Iranian aggression, not provoke it.
Click to expand...

http://http://www.nytimes.com/1988/04/19/world/us-strikes-2-iranian-oil-rigs-hits-6-warships-battles-over-mining-sea-lanes-gulf.html?pagewanted=all
 
Last edited:
Risky Thicket said:
Who said that we shouldn't under those circumstances?

At the same time we don't need Trump/Bannon provoking a war. What bothers me more than ever is that we have two unstable "leaders" with the ability to use nuclear weapons. Neither understand nor appreciate the delicate art of diplomacy while both seem to find the devastating affects of nuclear war a reasonable loss.

Once again I find it the perfect opportunity to submit that the US must return to the draft which includes women, no deferments for rich and well connected kids. Also, Americans must insist, demand, that the US following the Constitution giving only Congress the power to declare war.
Click to expand...

Good post.

Lets face it - if NK fires a missile and it hits Japan - we must step in and defend them. Any president would have to do that.

You are right that the really sad thing here is that we have TWO nut jobs on opposite sides of the world involved in this and that just makes it all the more likely that this will get hot and bloody unnecessarily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom