Trump should respond to North Korea's ICBM launch

a reply to: musicismagic

That country is likely to be...North Korea.
www.independent.co.uk...

a reply to: musicismagic

Because those countries would be China mostly and to a lesser extent Russia.

I'm sure you can suss the rest out on your own.

ETA - plus what Phage said.

I think a better idea would be to wait for one of Kims camp parades he holds every few months. Wait till he's there waving his fat sausage fingers at the passing loonies and "BOOM", rain a whole lot of pain en masse

Is everyone forgetting that China has said they will back NK as per their treaty if we attack first?

Having read the article and the comments the following can be stated:

Is it worth it? That is a question that should be asked, if they follow through with the action that is being stated, to launch an attack on another sovereign nation.

To do such, would be an act of war, and would ruin a fragile cease fire and in short a peace that has existed since the cease fire was called, ending the conflict.

Any new conflict on the Korean peninsula, will not be like the last time, and would result in far worse damage and destruction than the last time. If the USA launches an attack, China will see it as the USA provoking the conflict and then instead of holding back support to North Korea, will turn around and give them a lot of support, and Russia would probably join in, claiming North Korea as a good ally and does not want the USA to establish another country to further box it in, or even worse, causing another country in chaos. And especially one that has nuclear weapons.

The USA is already stretched thin, involved in 3 different armed conflicts right now, and engaged in other areas around the world. The population is tired of the endless war, of the people going off and coming back damaged and forever changed.

The world would view such as an act of war and may condemn the USA for it, leaving the US to do this alone, with no allies. None of the countries in the area are wanting to go into another armed conflict in that area, with just cause, as they are looking after their own citizens. And would it be wise to further alienate those few countries? What would the USA do, if say Japan decides not to participate and does not allow for the USA to use it as a base of operations? How then to get people there and back, along with equipment and a fall back.

So with all that could be lost, the question once again should be asked: Is this really worth it?

a reply to: mus8472

No, just some folks.

The real problem with NK haveing nucklear capabilities is that in the future the US would have to let NK sit at the table and have a saying.

THe other problem for the US in that region is that China would gain a strong allie with NK. That does not sit well with US geo-politics

If the US could take out NK they would have. But they cant. Not because they dont have the capasity militarly. But because of politics.

originally posted by: intrptr
Yah how dare they test missile defense. Nobody should do that except US, lol.

Now you're talking like a real man, US supremacy.

a reply to: JBurns

We should do what South Korea would like.

Since they are the ones most likely harmed in any confrontation.

a reply to: spy66

But because of politics.

If by politics you mean the high potential of great physical damage to US allies, you are correct.

Not sure why everyone keeps saying that we need to attack NK. I mean if USA really wants to play who's ---- is bigger use the nuke test sites again. Put a B53 back together and push the button, or put out some vids of the B61 being detonated. Then put out a press release saying yep still works.

Personally who cares what NK does. They will never initial any sort of fight at this point and it is not worth our time imho.

a reply to: JBurns

The test site was one of dozens of mobile and always moving rail tracks... trucks.. Constantly moving so....

originally posted by: CaptainBeno
I think a better idea would be to wait for one of Kims camp parades he holds every few months. Wait till he's there waving his fat sausage fingers at the passing loonies and "BOOM", rain a whole lot of pain en masse

Yup, smoke em if ya got em. (bunched up, that is)

I'm heartened to see that the majority of respondents to the OP's Very Bad Idea™ (VBI), are explaining to the OP why his recommendation is foolish.

As long as NK is just shooting things into the air and nothing is actually happening, nobody is hit, then there should be no reaction overtly. Yes, one could argue that it is not good for the ocean...but...

My sense, and it is not fully informed, is that NK may implode...iow, destroy itself from within, due to poverty, disease, hunger, and even irradiated citizenry. If it does, then of course, SK, China, Russia will want to rush in and 'claim it', maybe, but it's not really a 'prize'.

To talk about 'decapitating' the regime, well, there's always a handful of people who could be worse than KJU, and it's a bad idea to create a power vacuum. Right now, KJU seems to be mainly a 'bluff-er'. This is much preferred to a homicidal maniac, though we seem to want to paint him as such.

The right path, I think, is to use the 'time' to improve, prepare, learn about the enemy.

As Pericles said in his list of principles, Pericles was guided by five principles:
a) Balance the power of the enemy,
b) Exploit competitive advantages and negate those of the enemy,
c) Deter the enemy by the denial of his success and by the skillful use of retaliation,
d) Erode the international power base of the enemy,
e) Shape the domestic environment of the adversary to your own benefit

...and have an imaginative and sympathetic understanding of the viewpoint of the enemy(*).

That set of principles helped him in some ways during the Peloponnesian War around 461 to 429 BC.

He was one of the first to talk about use of economic sanctions. The problem here is that everyone needs to sanction him. He may be secretly being supported by some elements of other countries.

(*)The last one is an off-shoot of the rules in the Art of War - know thy enemy.

FWIW

a reply to: Maverick7

I would agree with you except for this.

North Korea fired off it latest intercontinental ballistic missile on Tuesday It abruptly ended North Korea's 10-week pause in its weapons testing President Donald Trump vowed on Tuesday to 'handle the situation' after launch Defense Secretary Jim Mattis warned that North Korea has the ability to hit 'everywhere in the world' He said latest missile went higher than any previous shot North Korea has taken Mattis said South Korea responded by firing pinpoint missiles out into the water Missile traveled 620 miles and landed within 200 nautical miles of Japan's coast Physicist calculates that missile tested had realistic range of just over 8,000 miles, puting Washington D.C., Europe and Australia in range Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... k

www.dailymail.co.uk...

And the fact that NK say they will destroy the US and are close to being able to try.

a reply to: bluemooone2

Do you think that Kim thinks that his country would survive if he executed a nuclear attack on the US or any of its allies?

Do you think that maybe, just maybe, his boasts are aimed at his people more than anyone else?

a reply to: Phage

It of course would not. I hope that is what is going on , but should we risk it ?

a reply to: bluemooone2

What do you think our options are? Thinking as a rational human being, not thinking like our president, that is. This requires keeping in mind the consequences of our actions in terms of the response of North Korea toward our allies.

Is North Korea a puppet state of the US?... the military industrial complex?