Utopia Talk / Politics / Trump just threatened to Glass NK #2

Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 07:17:39 I heard the B-1 bombers are not equipped with nukes but can carry any other weapons. I assume that includes MOAB's. If the US has to strike I would send the B-1's towards the mountains where NK has their artillery that is aimed at Seoul and shut down as many of the caves they are hiding in. I would also drop one on Kim's head. That should make short work of him and his military. I would then advise China to stand down or our nukes would be on the way.
zavyx Member	Fri Aug 11 07:33:47 I say we drop four tonne of twinkies over north korea, they'll all go crazy and start killing each other just so they can get to the twinkies before anyone else.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 08:38:05 Why waste good Twinkies when we have bombs?
Paramount Member	Fri Aug 11 09:27:53 Have you ever wondered why your country like almost all the time ends up with a conflict with other countries all around the world, while let's say Canada and Norway almost never do that.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 11:12:57 That is because we are the farthest country in the world from having a socialist government. That and we are the only superpower left and everyone wants to bring us down.
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Aug 11 11:16:01 And there's Retard Rod's typical belief of, "It's not my/our fault, even partially. It's always anyone else's fault!"
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 11:20:00 ^^^-Clueless.
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Aug 11 11:23:35 That's especially funny coming from someone with grasp of reality.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 11:26:43 I am fully aware that I have a firm grasp of reality. You do not have to tell me. Don't you wish you did?
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Aug 11 11:28:41 Typo. Everyone here knows you're borderline senile and fully delusional. Except you, of course.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 11:33:58 And everyone knows that you are burdened with your families hereditary ailment. Stupidity.
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Aug 11 11:38:11 Oh snap. Are you going to bust out the "your momma" jokes now? Are declaring forum jihad on me again? lmfao
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 11:59:50 Nope, I've said all that needs said. Are you going to keep following me around like a little puppy dog so you can keep licking my ass? Just curious.
obaminated Member	Fri Aug 11 12:02:55 Really can't blame the US for NK. They are a rabid dog that needs to be put down. Unfortunately we have sat on our hands for so long that the dog is actually dangerous to us now.
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Aug 11 12:06:43 Am I following you around?
obaminated Member	Fri Aug 11 12:15:56 I don't know, are you?
Wrath of Orion Member	Fri Aug 11 12:18:54 Are you following me around? I see you post a lot, and sometimes it is in the same thread as me. So are you??
obaminated Member	Fri Aug 11 12:31:46 You can't prove shit mother fucker, talk to my lawyer.
murder Member	Fri Aug 11 16:57:12 "I heard the B-1 bombers are not equipped with nukes but can carry any other weapons. I assume that includes MOAB's." No. MOABs can only be delivered out the back of C-130s. They aren't real weapons. They can only be used in undefended airspace. They have no real use.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Aug 11 18:32:48 Correct. Moabs are basically for showing off while plastering peasants. Although to be fair... C130s could probably operate over nk safetly after a day or 2...
Hot Rod Revved Up	Fri Aug 11 19:10:23 Thanks for the correction.
jergul large member	Fri Aug 11 22:31:40 Using Syria as template: Trump is hoping NK targets around Guam so he can respond by bombing the now empty field the mobile launchers fired from before scooting back into hiding.
Aeros Member	Fri Aug 11 23:51:58 I doubt even Trump really knows what he plans on doing. He seems to come to random arbitrary decisions based on the questions people ask him and the rest of the Government has to play catch up figuring how (or if) they can implement whatever the fuck drops out of his twitter feed or flapping gums. Which is bad, since there are no real plans for a "limited strike" on North Korea. If Trump decides to lob a few cruise missiles into North Korea and North Korea decides to lob a few shells into Seoul, the Operation Plan triggers will start occurring without Trumps direction. They will trigger automatically, and things can escalate before Trump even realizes he's in a major shooting war. Now, that could be avoided via careful planning and close coordination with the South Korean and Japanese governments. But come on. We all know Trump is not doing that.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 00:32:40 Aeros He will be given the option to totally destroy, I mean totally destroy the field(s) the mobile missile launchers had fired from some hours earlier. He will take that option. NK will assess damage after the strike, note it hit nothing, and rage a bit about US irresponsibility. It will trigger some emergency peace something NK will leverage for economic aid And that will be that.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 00:34:02 There are things he could do to start a nuclear war (marooning Russian forces in Syria would be top of the list). Doing the same thing in NK that he did in Syria is not one of those things.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 00:35:32 Your analysis acts as if NK and SK have never exchanged fire before. Both countries have vast escalation ladder experience.
Aeros Member	Sat Aug 12 00:47:57 The US is not going to give North Korea economic aid. We will also block any effort to provide economic aid to North Korea at the United Nations.
Aeros Member	Sat Aug 12 00:57:21 This is the thing Jergul, we are past the point of appeasement. North Korea is not going to extract anymore concessions. They have extracted all they are going to extract. The sanctions are not going to be lifted. Diplomatic Relations will never be restored. The only thing that will relieve these pressures will be North Korea unconditionally surrendering its Nuclear Weapons. Barring that, they remain an international pariah, and the US will continue to enforce the UN mandated sanctions, to include punishing Russian and Chinese banks/corporations that violate them. We will also respond to any provocation upon ourselves or our allies with war. No more sinking South Korean ships, and certainly no more shelling of fishing villages. And above all, if North Korea fires ballistic missiles at US territory, we will naturally assume they are attempting to carry out stated threats and launch the Minuteman III Missiles in retaliation.
werewolf dictator Member	Sat Aug 12 01:46:18 the only logical solution is for north korea to give up nukes in return for guarantee usa will not attack them and in order to make that guarantee credible.. trump must lock up war criminal hillary in prison.. and disenfranchise millions of her war criminal supporters anything else is folly on path to disaster
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 02:28:27 Aeros You better hope you are wrong that NK is an international pariah. Because Kim and Donald are equals in the eyes of the global community. Do you really think you will get away with Trump without my 12.5 by 2020 target? You are losing global sentiment fast...and sentiment is the key to US military, political, and economic standing. NK has been very clear on their planning to fire missiles into international waters. That is their stated "threat". I have no reason to believe Trump will depart from what he did in Syria when he ordered a strike designed to make many bangs and do little to nothing damage. You can thank the military for that. It has figured out the president and will continue to provide all bark and no bite military options for the president to order implemented in the various countries he names on twitter or from golf resorts. The yipp-yapp president.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 02:47:50 You got that, right? All NK has threatened to do is to conduct a ballistic missile test with splashdown in international waters off the coast of Guam. Their point is mainly do demonstrate the capability to hit US soil and firmly establish that a limited MAD is in fact in effect. That capability seems to be subject to some discussion for reasons I do not fully understand.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 02:59:31 President threatens with big trouble in little china. There, I said it.
patom Member	Sat Aug 12 06:03:36 jergul, do you really believe that with a vast Pacific ocean with who knows how many square miles of open water available with no islands of any sort near to test their missile range in. That it is necessary to launch their missiles so near a populated island? Given the past behavior of Kim. Do you honestly think he can be trusted anymore than Trump can? Personally I hope and pray that there are enough adults around who can prevent Trump from starting the nuclear holocaust. The question remains, is there anyone capable of keeping Kim from instigating a nuclear holocaust? I would hope like hell that China has assets in place to prevent Kim from going too far.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 09:20:28 Trump did not start this. Bill Clinton did.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 11:11:53 NK has a treaty with China that can't be honorably broken until 2021. If NK is attacked first China will be bound to defend them as they've already stated unless they break the treaty. If NK attacks first Kim will have put the nails in his own coffin as I understand. Kim will quiet down. He is between a rock and a hard place and doesn't want to lose his tight control on his Country. It's a high stake poker game. Of course China could possibly decide that removing Kim might be rationally viewed as protecting NK. Time will sort it all and the final result will be determined in the near future. Things have reached a point that schtf in a blink.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 11:26:17 The only way for this to end peaceably may be for NK to give up their nukes. I don't mean lip service, I mean to verifiably dismantle them.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 12:30:47 Or perhaps the only way for this to end peaceably is for the US to give up its nukes. I dont meant lip service, I mean to verifiably dismantle them.
Paramount Member	Sat Aug 12 12:41:22 The US only needs to stop provoking NK. Stop with the war games and leave. I think that would make NK feel more safe and thus they wouldn't need to say that they will defend themselves if attacked.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 12:54:52 Patom "Going too far" does not seem to be very far at all. NK test threat is a direct response to a bomber (based in Guam) test very close to the NK frontier a few days before Trump got all prissy. Nk is not denying the US the right to test close to NK, it is claiming repriocity and the right to do the same against the USA.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 13:06:04 There is an obscure entity/s fueling the process or China has a vision of sugar plums. China and the U.S. need to cut off the troubling tributaries and they can accomplish that with severe sanctions on NK. They know who is fueling the process. That is a broad personal assessment, but one or the other is reasonably plausible. It is highly unlikely NK could have become nuclear efficient without assistance in my opinion. I won't vigorously defend what I've said is truth as it would be fruitless, but plausible.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 13:13:48 jergul being his usual beyond silly self. paramounted - The US only needs to stop provoking NK. Stop with the war games and leave. Why do you never blame the one that is recklessly firing missiles?
Paramount Member	Sat Aug 12 13:41:25 Maybe they will stop their practice if the US stops their war games and leaves.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 13:57:20 TJ Wiki does a pretty good job of outlining foreign assistance to NK's programme. Severe sanctions are one of the things that can trigger brinkmanship. Well, you know. How would the US act if put under an extreme sanction list by the global community? Sanctions of that type being acts of war and whatnot. The only thing NK has to gain from brinkmanship beyond demonstrating capability (by bracketing Guam with missile splashes in international waters) is to step back in trade for sanction easing (either informally by lessened Chinese and Russian border control, or though humanitarian supplies that are simply free stuff. Most likely a combination of both). There is no stepping back from the moron in chief making himself the equivalent of NKs leader. That perception is here to stay. This is the permanent damage done to US standing. My best bet has 5 water buffalo dying in a US counter strike against otherwise empty launch fields. I am thinking 123 cruise missiles will be used. 5/123 are 50% over under numbers. All bark, no bite. I know you voted for the man. Hillary was not elected. Mission accomplished. But there is an ongoing price to avoiding Clinton in the Oval Office. Me? I get a shot at 12.5 by 2020. Which is nice.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 14:29:31 paramounted - Maybe they will stop their practice if the US stops their war games and leaves. Maybe if Kim would dismantle his nuclear program The United States would not need to be there. jergul - or though humanitarian supplies that are simply free stuff. Most likely a combination of both). They've been getting that for over three decades. Every time they get free stuff they promise to give up nukes. Where has that gotten us?
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 14:37:04 HR NK would not be aiming for US aid. Free stuff from China, SK and perhaps the EU would be fine. I was however pointing to what NK has to gain by first engaging in brinkmanship, then refraining from counterattacking after the US uses 123 cruise missiles to kill 5 water buffalo. Practical easement on sanctions + free stuff.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 14:42:05 That has failed for over three decades regardless of the source of how much free stuff he got. He needs to cut his military and invest in his people along with getting rid of the nukes. You are promoting international blackmail.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 14:44:53 I am basing this on the following: 1. Time began when trump became president (he does not relate to the past beyond it being weak, a disaster, very bad). 2. He is happy with his response in Syria (58 missiles fired. The airport reopened within hours). 3. 123 missiles is far more than 58 missiles. So is far more powerful a response. 4. The military understands the commander in cheif does not understand shit. So will offer military options in line with his psycological profile that minimize escalation. 5. The case in point: A strong military response using 123 cruise missiles to kill 5 water buffalo. 6. Yay DoD!
Paramount Member	Sat Aug 12 14:45:47 "Maybe if Kim would dismantle his nuclear program The United States would not need to be there." But Tillerson said that the US is not an enemy to NK. If you are not an enemy why are you there and provoking NK? Also, wasn't the US there even before NK had nukes? So you would atill be there even if NK dismantled their nukes.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 14:47:04 Braketing Guam with missile splashes is a direct response to strategic bombers practicing attacks on NK. If blackmail, then you know who started it. NK will not be giving up its programme. Its not on the table. Trump should be able to recognize this if he is at all the businessman he thinks he is.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 15:02:48 1) Trump is now addressing the problem. Finally. 2) 60 missiles fired, 59 missiles hit the target. Do try to keep up. 3) President Trump will only fire those missiles if Kim fires first. 4) The President, SecState, and SacWar are on the same page. SecState is offering the olive branch, SecWar is reminding Kim that he and his people will be destroyed and The President is making it clear to the world what can happen if Kim does not realize the reality of the situation. 5) If it becomes necessary for us to retaliate with 123 missiles their water buffalo will be much safer than Kim and his people.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 15:38:46 HR 58 out of 59 is the claim. I feel my memory served me well (it was exactly as good as your google. Both of us were one off). The airport became operational within hours. All bark, no bite. Yes, my expectation is that the 123 missile option will be offered to Trump as a response to NK firing missiles into international waters off Guam. The DoD will under no circumstance offer Trump options that could lead to further escalation. Targeting populations or leadership will ensure escalation. Which would be bad, very bad. Its like you think your president is smrt or something. ROFL. Such a Loser in Chief.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 15:52:34 They said on the news it was 59 of 60 that hit the target. I never looked it up. They hit the hangers for the planes and things of that nature. There were no targets that would interrupt the function of the airport. Things of that nature could have been repaired overnight. Besides, why use a million dollar missile to make a pothole in the runway.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 16:13:40 Yepp, no targets that would disrupt the function of the airport. Thank you DoD! The president thought he did something by doing nothing except ordering the discharge of 59 missiles. NK will be worse, much worse nothing like the world has ever seen [by the US, since Trump became president] 123 missiles killing 5 water buffalo. Thank you DoD!
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 16:18:05 TL:DR I have measured the man, the DoD has measured the man. The results of the measurements are given in the form of my prediction on how the US will respond to a missile test bracketing Guam. Pity the water buffalo. There is a better than even chance that NK will go ahead with the test; simply because there is a good upside for them in it. Note that the test is subject to the leaders approval, so face-saving is baked into the statement. He does not have to approve if he does not want to. Its just a contingency plan being made available. So when I said Trump has made himself equal to...NK is looking pretty responsible comparatively speaking. It has not shot it mouth off at least.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 16:18:46 He tore up a lot of airplanes and such. 'It was hardly nothing.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 16:24:18 Lulz. Thats the spirit! And you can trump the slaying of 5 water buffalo as a success too if you like. All bark, no bite.
patom Member	Sat Aug 12 16:50:53 jergul, when do you think the US should respond if missiles are launched in the direction of US territories? 1- As soon as they are detected to be on that tragectory? 2- As soon as they are withing a 15 mile radius? 3- After they have hit a target killing who knows how many? I don't like Trump. Never have. Nothing to admire. I consider him fairly unstable. However having been in a pissing match or better yet some asshole said he was going to piss on me. The second I saw the flow of piss coming toward me I center punched the idiot. Do you honestly think Trump, after all his bluster is going to wait for the piss to hit his leg?
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 16:56:34 A 15 mile radius would be within US territorial (more or less) waters, so I would feel good about targeting any missile heading projected to land within that area. A test targeting international waters is a different matter. Those are allowed. We are speaking of conventional missiles you know. Glorified Scuds. Trump is going to do something far more serious than he did in Syria. More than twice as serious. 123 missiles instead of 59. The DoD will make sure of that when feeding him his options.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 17:55:06 Edward: After making that post I did what Trump does and took my wife, two daughters and their husbands out for a round of golf and a few drinks at the 19th even though I seldom touch the stuff. I'm back attending my country presently. It has been another beautiful afternoon filled with fun and relaxation. It is good for my full Santa beard that has reached my nipples. NK has stepped on China a few times over the past several decades. There is unpredictability involved, best laid plans, by man drawn on the forward battle board doesn't always turn out as one would expect. Can you imagine if Trump winds up on top in this situation and what happens come next election? I know it is difficult to imagine kind of like winning the election and becoming President,eh? The ulcer effect is in the works with the three leaders involved and all of it is a giant surprise grab bag. I will say that there are a list of behaviors I've never particularly cared for that Trump possesses. I made clear why I voted for him and so far I've not regretted that decision. He is doing exactly what I had expected and that is showing how inept our government has been for a very long time. This is my home and I love my Country with no plans on leaving.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 18:32:44 TJ I don't think its much of a situation. Trump shot his mouth off and there is an upside for NK to call him on it. The exchange of a few water buffalo for sanction relief after a capability demonstration seem quite worthwhile. The writing is on the wall. The DoD will not offer a robust contingency before it begins evacuating dependents from US bases in Guam and closer to the NK. We will know Trump might be given a plan with a bit of bite as military dependents begin to land in the continental US. I had never thought you had grounds not to love your country, nor that you might leave it. 12.5 by 2020 is merely a modest realignment back to fundamentals as positive sentiment strips away. Nothing to write home about really. Glad to hear you are enjoying the summer. It's there to be used :-)
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 19:05:01 ^^^-Traitor to Western Civilization.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 19:09:12 HR Au contraire! I am a patriot of the western humanist democratic tradition. I have for example been very respectful of the DoD despite some serious blemishes in its history. The Loser in Chief however...Lets just say I call it as I see it.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 19:10:32 Edward, yeah we had a great time, thanks. I realize you didn't suggest or think I had grounds to not love my country or leave it as it either. It was for whoever might not understand how I could logically vote Trump. It really isn't very complicated. I also have a pretty good handle on reading comprehension and memory so repetition is unnecessary in our exchanges. :-) Trump is only one of the unpredictable actors, and that is his game, but I'm as certain as I can be doesn't want a war. Even being so, he won't settle for what has been the status quo the previous 30+ years, because of the nuclear capability added in the mix. I suspect all parties will be satisfied in the end, but again that is another unpredictable.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 19:25:34 TJ I am also betting on all parties being satisfied. My scenario outlines such an outcome. But the scenario depends on a NK triggering. All I can say to that is that there is a better than equal chance of that happening. I always understood why you voted Trump. What options did you have (lack of options are symptomatic of issues that brought Trump to the forefront in the end). I don't really find Trump unpredictable. He has very little focus, so can speak on a wide range of topics pretty much at random (raising military action in Venezuela as an option while everyone was coming to grips with his statements on NK is a good example). I am sure he does not want a war. And I am sure the military offering him options will steer him clear of it. The status quo is what it is for a reason (NK has always been able to break SKs back). So we are left with the showmanship of doing something that can quantify as significant, but is qualitatively nothing. Bombing empty fields with a shitload of tomahawks fits the ticket and mimics the pattern established the last time he authorised an attack. I place my faith in the DoD's ability to harness quantitative expectations to acceptable qualitative outcomes.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 19:37:29 ^^^- Just as insane as tumbleweed.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 19:53:49 If we take all parties for their word a stalemate won't last long. I think China, something nagging at my intuition, is the most unpredictable character in the mix, even though they've clearly expressed their intentions Trump and Kim have their cards stuck to their foreheads and been warned. Trump isn't going to let go. I won't go beyond that remark. The only option I see is one being eliminated from the equation. Someone is going to get checkmated.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 19:56:26 TJ, you may very well be right.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sat Aug 12 19:58:24 But, I sure hope it not by someone being kicked in the nuts.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 20:05:17 It'll be a Judas, not the butler.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 20:10:52 All I can say is that the US alliance system will collapse if presidentially posturing leads to significant casualties in a minor allied nation. The alliances will melt away if Trump shooting his mouth off leads to lots of dead south koreans. Trump will not let go. I just feel he will be satisfied with a lot of bangs in a few empty fields. I also feel the DoD will nudge him into that outcome when presenting him with attack alternatives. He will have done what Obama would not do. And that is by accounts the yardstick he uses to gauge success. Bang, bang...bark, no bite.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 20:12:48 I am repeating myself, but that represents me rethinking the issue, but coming to the same conclusion. I do not see Trump outmaneuvering the DoD.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 20:40:38 Edward->Trump will not let go. I just feel he will be satisfied with a lot of bangs in a few empty fields. Nope, I'm petty certain of that not being the case. We'll simply need to disagree and let time answer. Trump won't attack first. If the U.S. or an ally is attacked Trump doesn't need any approval. It is an automatic declaration of war. With Mattis, Kelley, and Dunford in his Cabinet the contingencies are well formed. There won't be any weak influences interfering with dictates in such a war. A world war will be a huge possibility at that point. Needless to say, this is one time I hope to be wrong.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 20:46:11 Ah, but I am not speaking about an attack. I am speaking of NK conducting a conventional missile test with splashdowns in international waters off the coast of Guam. I am trusting the contigencies in that event are at least twice as much bang as the contigency he chose when he wanted to bomb Syria. The president never needs prior approval. He can do whatever he likes for 90 days. I guess we were just speaking about different things.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 20:51:47 Correct about the 90 days. That won't be the case, as I said, NK doing as you suggest will not trigger Trump to attack them. If they hit Guam though, swhtf without a doubt and the 90 days you suggest will be a nonexistent clause.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 21:06:52 Trump will attack a few empty fields if NK does the test I think. It would be in character and in his best interests to do so. So I guess I am advocating a sterner response than you are in the case of a missile test off Guam. I am not considering an attack on Guam. Nothing NK has released suggests it will do such a thing outside of a MAD framework.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 21:22:07 Yes, that is where we are in disagreement. It wouldn't serve Trump to drop any ordinance on NK. That would spark a China entry militarily. He will keep giving Kim stern warnings to see how far he is willing to puff his buttons. Not know what China actually will do is why I felt they were the most unpredictable in the mix.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 21:23:23 Not knowing*
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 22:05:57 I thought China had been quite transparent. It will not entertain regime change.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 22:17:00 I'm not certain about the regime change. I am certain that they said if NK was attacked first they would intervene per treaty. I'll check and see if I can verify what you've said unless you have a source and save me the trouble. I did suggest in our exchange early that they could still rationally honor their treaty protecting NK as a safe sovereign by eliminating Kim at the helm. I don't expect that to happen though, unpredictable.
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 22:20:08 http://www...tect-north-korea-regime-change
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 22:21:22 http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1060791.shtml
jergul large member	Sat Aug 12 22:23:53 Initial link incorrect (I was using it to hunt down the original source). Global times is state run and state controlled. I would treat the editorial as authorative.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 22:40:19 I agree with most everything in that article. I missed the part that China has made a transparent statement. That would should has meaning. Do you have another source? "China should also make clear that if North Korea launches missiles that threaten US soil first and the US retaliates, China will stay neutral. If the US and South Korea carry out strikes and try to overthrow the North Korean regime and change the political pattern of the Korean Peninsula, China will prevent them from doing so." We've discussed what China has actually said as far as I can confirm.
TJ Member	Sat Aug 12 22:41:00 I might be absent for a good while. I have family at the house.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 01:49:19 You quoted the relevant passage I found transparent. Operations with a regime changing (reunification) scope will trigger Chinese intervention. Limited and proportionate retaliatory strikes are an acceptable response to NK launches that threaten US soil. A missile test bracketing Guam would allow for a retaliatory strike against the proverbial 5 water buffalo is my take on it.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 02:01:42 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40913650 "The wild card in the current situation is how far President Trump's rhetorical brinkmanship will deter the North from pushing ahead with its missile testing programme. The North Korean military has threatened to test fire four intermediate range missiles in the vicinity of the US military facilities on Guam later this month. No US President could tolerate a direct attack, but a test launch in the international waters close to the island would arguably represent a "grey zone" contingency that would require a more nuanced response, stopping short of full-blown military conflict." Not much I disagreed with in the opinion piece. I would have mentioned Ukraine instead of Iraq as an example of a country that learned nuclear disarmament is frought with peril the hard way.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Sun Aug 13 05:24:51 jergul, it takes just over 14 minutes for a missile to reach Guam. How many minutes should the USA wait before they retaliate?
TJ Member	Sun Aug 13 09:59:05 The language said "China should" and why I pulled the paragraph to post. Maybe it is a geographic difference in how statements are interpreted. The communication is a roadblock toward understanding. I don't understand that as a verification of transparency. Another article stated that China gave a stern warning to NK to stop their missile testing because of the U. S. seriousness. Does anyone really know what goes on in actual negotiation other than attendees? Time and results will be the transparent theater for the entire planet when it comes to visualization and realization. The speculating has entertained.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 11:51:47 TJ The article is an editorial in a state own and controlled newspaper. I would take it as policy line, but you do not have to. I have read elsewhere that China's position is that NK should have a moratorium on testing in return for a moratoriom on military excersises in and around south korea. Ei that NK should not do anything unilaterally. Despite UN resolutions ordering otherwise. One thing is clear. China wants everyone to shut the fuck up.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 11:53:01 HR The timing of the response in a PR issue. So a time of day when the press people in the whitehouse think most americans are awake and watching the news.
TJ Member	Sun Aug 13 12:29:29 I'm not the predicting type, but in this case I'll make an exception. I think Kim is on a fast track that will end his reign.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 12:42:45 That outcome is not acceptable to China. I would give better odds on Trump being impeached for one of a number of reasons.
TJ Member	Sun Aug 13 12:55:33 What China won't accept is losing NK. Not Kim. So now, we wait and see which if either or neither of us are correct. :-)
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 13:13:13 Hard to attempt removing a head of state without creating a cascade effect. Imagine if NK thought they could do that with the US. Would NK ending Trump's reign avoid a devastating military conflict? Applying repriocity is a useful tool in policy evaluation. Besides, removing Kim without regime change is meaningless and only assure the next fellow will be completely paranoid (with good reason) and would seek to put in place a truly massive nuclear deterrent. So it would be an all bark, no bite outcome in any event. We will see. But my money is on Kim dealing with the guy after Trump as the most likely outcome.
TJ Member	Sun Aug 13 13:56:59 Your scenario was not part of my formulation for me stating the end of Kim's reign. I don't see it going down as you. China at the present appears to be contradicting in their intentions. I don't believe it is the U.S. that will end Kim's reign. China either does or doesn't want to end the nuclear proliferation. There is clarity coming out of the U.S. departure from the previous Administrations actions. Either China does it or the U.S. will I'm feeling certain. You can take it from there as you chose, but I'm willing to wait and see what actually happens. It all depends on what China is willing to risk and I don't believe it is a conflict with the U.S. that will assure world war. The apple cart will instantly become apple sauce. Trump is shoving Kim's tactics right back up his ass and in character of a counter puncher. Is it a dangerously high stake game, but fully initiated as he said: "lock and loaded" There is only one way that this can end and that will be determined by China. It is a choice of destiny.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 15:12:56 TJ China will certainly end profilation in NK the day after the US ends profilation in Israel. The US is as likely to force the end of profilation in NK as China is to force the end of profilation in Israel. Snapping dog minor allies serve their purposes. Both the US and China will keep their pets. Repriocity being the useful tool that it is. You seem to be reversing your earlier position that the US would not attack in this last post. Trump should not be on the same stage as Kim. Punch or counter punch; it makes him a clown in a circus arena with another clown having a clown fight. My money is still on "this" not ending while Trump is in office. The scenario I outlined earlier still holds as the course in the best interests of both the US and NK leaders (though to the detriment of several water buffalo). Trump gets his bang. Kim gets his buck.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 15:19:55 I should mention I am a staunch Nato supporter. That will end if the battle of clowns draws significant minor alliance blood. I am not a Nato supporter so that Norway can become an arena where larger powers hash out their personality differences.
TJ Member	Sun Aug 13 16:14:17 "You seem to be reversing your earlier position that the US would not attack in this last post." Nope, haven't altered my position one iota. I said the U.S. won't attack NK unless it's mainland or an ally is struck by them and sticking to it correct or not remains to be finalized. This will be resolved between China and the U.S. so I'd personally advise Kim to watch his P's and Q's carefully. I've not seen where China has been using Israel as a bargaining option, not that they might not be trying. When that assertion is confirmed I'll address it in my process. I can see where you would want that to be part of the discussion, but I'm not biting on the insertion in this discussion. NK is at China's doorstep and if they don't want a military build up in their range of influence they'll attend to the hot pocket. What I want isn't a choice so not entered into my exchanges. The clown may turn out to be the ringmaster. Still not finalized.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 16:31:16 You are framing the argument as a conditional: If NK strikes the US or its allies, then China NK does not have to mind its p's and q's very carefully to avoid striking the US or its allies. NK can for example bracket Guam in missile splashdowns without striking the US or its allies. China is not using Israel as a bargaining option because neither the US nor China will trade in their useful snapping dogs. I was using it comparatively. We sometimes think in terms of chopping off the heads of snakes, or demilitarizing other country's minor allies. Raising comparisons (how would the US act if NK ended Trump's reign, or under what circumstances will ending profilation in Israel ever be on the US table?) provide useful clues on the realities once the viel of US exceptionalism is stripped away. Removing heads of states anywhere will likely have a cascade effect and keeping snapping dogs everywhere seems a likely prediction. A military build up is no longer a threat to China, but would compell countermeasures (note how little we speak of China's military modernization as we concern ourselves with the snapping dog). Ringmaster or clown. It is still a circus. Trump should not be there. Big mistake.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 13 16:33:39 Anyway, we are way behind the times. All this is very day before yesterday. Trump in the mean time has caused domestic outrage in comments on Charlotteville, and threatened to use force against Venezuela (unsolicited. He brought it up at random. I saw the sound-byte). We must try to keep up.
TJ Member	Sun Aug 13 16:57:05 I think China's military modernization and capability goes without a need for discussion. Trump denounced all hatred and bigotry on sides who fall into the category. He has done so specifically at other times. The white supremacists are considered evil by anyone who isn't one. Controversy is the new normal since the election and why it is rampant is obvious. I'm not behind. I know you can multitask. :-) '''But, yes this discussion has reached its needs. I'm not sure what was behind his Venezuela comment. I don't think it was a message to Venezuela, but his remark is in its infancy. As I've said before, I'm not fond of a lot of Trump's behaviors.
	show deleted posts