I'll be there to watch it fall into the ocean.
(Feb 7, 2016, 07:25 AM)Toxic Wrote: [ -> ]I'll be there to watch it fall into the ocean.
Hahahah
Cute.
The issue is, if they launch a nuclear strike against the United States, we could very easily turn their entire country into a parking lot with our nuclear arsenal. Our current President just isn't aggressive enough, and is willing to let this country go to shit. I'm sure he would allow NK to launch a nuke against us and do nothing about it.
Leaked footage of launch:
![[Image: 200w.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/11jucxrYlHScko/200w.gif)
(Feb 7, 2016, 09:07 AM)Brax Wrote: [ -> ]Cute.
The issue is, if they launch a nuclear strike against the United States, we could very easily turn their entire country into a parking lot with our nuclear arsenal. Our current President just isn't aggressive enough, and is willing to let this country go to shit. I'm sure he would allow NK to launch a nuke against us and do nothing about it.
No, hes just very smart.
Launching a nuclear attack against North Korea can create one hell of a shit storm.
China still 'supports' North Korea with food and other things, and South Korea is right below NK, where the US Government holds troops and equipment in case of a troop attack.
Please, think of countries near NK and what countries support NK before spewing shit.
(Feb 7, 2016, 03:55 PM)Eiac Wrote: [ -> ] (Feb 7, 2016, 09:07 AM)Brax Wrote: [ -> ]Cute.
The issue is, if they launch a nuclear strike against the United States, we could very easily turn their entire country into a parking lot with our nuclear arsenal. Our current President just isn't aggressive enough, and is willing to let this country go to shit. I'm sure he would allow NK to launch a nuke against us and do nothing about it.
No, hes just very smart.
Launching a nuclear attack against North Korea can create one hell of a shit storm.
China still 'supports' North Korea with food and other things, and South Korea is right below NK, where the US Government holds troops and equipment in case of a troop attack.
Please, think of countries near NK and what countries support NK before spewing shit.
Well.... That is all very true. But my point about Obama being way too lax, and cutting back on our military way too much still stands.
First off, using Fox News as a source of intellectual political insight is probably the worst thing anyone can do. I would rather use The Onion to get a more reliable story.
Anyway,
The United States, as well as 189 other countries, are under the 1968 "Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons" or NPT. This means that the 190 countries under that pact cannot, under no circumstances, fire off a nuclear weapon. At all. Whether for testing or for use on the offensive or defensive.
Now, according to Wikipedia:
"Article X allows a state to leave the treaty if "extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country", giving three months' (ninety days') notice. The state is required to give reasons for leaving the NPT in this notice."
Still, no country other than North Korea has used nuclear weapons since this pact was signed and ratified for global use.
Additionally, using President Barack Obama as an excuse for what North Korea may or may not do is the typical excuse for the general American. The Department of Defense, Congress, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have more control over whether or not a nuclear device is launched than the president does. Even if [POTUS] has control of the nuclear football.
North Korea has been testing missiles and launching them into the ocean for years. So has Russia, China and the United States (before we just launched them into space off of the California coast). It's not a big deal.
If you look at the DMZ, the Joint Security Area (UN, USA, & ROK) forces are there 24/7 to prevent such things like this from happening. Now, is it wrong that NK is threatening people and countries with nuclear weapons? Sure it is. But should the United States do anything about it? No. Why? Take a look at the invasion of Iraq.
As TheSenDest sayd, the USA is not allowed to use Atomic weapons not even in a war...
2. Please dont use Fox News...its like ABC | CNN , pure crap
3. Let the NK's make what they want as long they dont attack someone. There small. The USA test Rockets too (2015 they got a new Rocket system). Germany will test Rockets too at 2028 (At 2028 germany can use ,,all'' weapons. The WWII things are over then)
Who said anything about Fox News? lol
You got your shit together, not sure if that was a copy paste, but if it wasn't, damn.
Anyway, the only way the U.S. would intervene with North Korea would be, quite frankly, never. NK will never launch an ICBM towards the U.S., and even if they do, it'll be shot down. We have other means of taking care of threats like these. Using nuclear missiles won't help.
Plus, this Iran Deal shit, what the fuck?
Remember the Cold War? I sense deja-vu.
Fact is, unless there's a way to neutralise the threat before (if) NK launches it, there's no way this'll end well.
NK has sympathisers, America (assuming that's the target) has allies; both have significant nuclear arsenals - or at least, big enough to cause serious damage. It's just a standoff to see who makes the first move, and what with Mutually Assured Destruction and all that... if either party does press the big red button, well, shit.
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein on point yet again. We'll annihilate each other with nukes to the point where whatever progress we've made will be wiped clean. This is why weapons suck.
(Feb 9, 2016, 10:41 AM)Safira Wrote: [ -> ]-- text --
God damn son, that was a beautiful reply. NK has China and apparently Russia as a very close "on-looker" but nothing has been confirmed as a "I will help you if <nation> attacks you" but I hope we never have to find out.
Plus, the DMZ is extremely tight. The tension is so thick that if something were to happen, it would not end well. Re: "
DMZ [ROK] soldier maimed by mines; JSA, South Korean government officials respond..."
----------
That wasn't C&P, but I thank you for the compliment 
. I could talk about geopolitics all day.
As for the Iran deal, I guess it's all on who you talk to. I've heard various stories about how it really "works" and what really "goes on". Too many quotation marks for my taste to be talking about something so volatile. I think the Obama Administration should have looked at Iran developing anything nuclear related and immediately contacted the UN (which, I think they did, right?) and NATO. Getting involved and signing papers gets nothing done. But, as I stated, it's all on who you talk to.