Why would North Korea start a war with the United States?

a reply to: uwontbelievethis


You don't start a fight you don't think you can win.

I'm thinking EMP's, attacks to our power grids, water supplies, infrastructure.

a reply to: LABTECH767

We carry out ACTUAL acts of war (economic, political, covert, psychological, etc) while all around their borders doing military maneuvers year round year after year to intimidate them, and then they respond with 'we'll nuke you'.

I did a challenge sort of thread not too long ago, demanded examples of them just THREATENING us. And when I looked at the examples it was all MSM spin BS. They take half sentences that include the words "we'll nuke you", cut out the context, and wrap two pages of MSM 'perspective' around it that absolutely fail to provide any context whatsoever about their legitimate reasons to be pissed and reactionary.

It's an interesting time to be observing conservative types, as finally they're all in solidarity about the MSM being evil LIARS but then I see them cite NBC and the like to push this Neocon agenda.

I ask you all: What would YOU be doing if you were NK? Would you just lay down like a whipped dog and stop building defenses and endgame countermeasures for if you get invaded?

Dont forget what we'd do with our own nukes if say China was about wrapped up with a total invasion and permanent occupation scenario: we'd nuke the hell out of them.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: uwontbelievethis


You don't start a fight you don't think you can win.

I'm thinking EMP's, attacks to our power grids, water supplies, infrastructure.

Good theories, exactly my point. Why pick a fight you'll lose?

Never underestimate your opponent!

a reply to: uwontbelievethis

If a bully says he'll to beat the hell out of you if you dont comply in handing over your lunch money, and you respond to him you'll kick him in the balls, who in this scenario really "THREATENED" who?

Or is there not a difference between the words threat, and warn?

Reality is: NK is no threat to US as long as they cant retaliate to our shores. Which means we can keep bullying them with no concerns except for how they could level SK in a day. Well bullies dont like marks that can fight back. And that's what all this drama with them having nukes is about.

Solution is simple: give SK a few nukes for if NK ever tries to invade them and call it a day. We dont even need to be there. SK has more people, more money, more industry, more global sympathy, more allies both local and afar than backwards NK.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

They keep stating they want to develop a nuclear weapon that can reach the U.S.

It has nothing to do with the conquest of SK.

They want to attack the U.S.!

a reply to: uwontbelievethis

WHY do they want to attack US?

And could you please pull up some quotes for us?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

So far the US is the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons to attack an enemy, it definitely shortened the remaining portion of the second world war in Asia and possibly by years because the Japanese were preparing to retreat to there mountain's and had started construction of massive underground facility's including air strip's but the shock that a single plane could now wipe out an entire city forced them to surrender in order to save there population from certain annihilation.

BUT it is actually only a matter of time, not an if but a when will someone else use a nuclear device in aggression or defense.

It is the most idiotic and insane weapon ever developed and using it is not much different to a suicide bomber blowing himself, thankfully most of the world have realized this, even the Pakistani's have not used there's because of the concept of MAD.

There is a good argument that the nuclear standoff prevented the cold war from turning into a non nuclear world war three.

In a conventional war though even with the superior quality of NATO equipment the overwhelming numbers of Warsaw pact troop's and equipment had given rise to the very likely projection that the soviet's could have won a conventional war of conquest in western Europe in a matter of week's not month's or years.
So to prevent that everyone had nuclear bomb's pointed at one another across the iron curtain, it was the only way to keep the peace but once or twice it very nearly did turn nuclear.

The difference is that lil kim is a nutter mate, if he get's a way to deliver his dirty nuke's he will actually want to use them and will likely detonate one over international water as a show of strength claiming it is a weapon's test, he even has China which was always NK's friendly uncle very concerned about this.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Quotes from who or what?

I assume any source I use you will attempt to discredit.

Sure I can dig something up, maybe from the Obama era.

North Korea has hailed as a success its latest test of an intercontinental ballistic missile describing it as a "stern warning" for the US.

www.bbc.com...

What some view as a "warning" I take as a threat.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
The difference is that lil kim is a nutter mate, if he get's a way to deliver his dirty nuke's he will actually want to use them and will likely detonate one over international water as a show of strength claiming it is a weapon's test, he even has China which was always NK's friendly uncle very concerned about this.

If he's so insane, bent on conquest or whatever, suicidal, desperate to test out a nuke, then why hasn't he blown up SK in any actual capacity yet??? Nuke the US = INSTANT DEATH SENTENCE! Attack SK there's some slight chance of winning and having actual gains.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Why? Because the war has never ended.
Korea and the US are in a cease fire (armistice).

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: LABTECH767
The difference is that lil kim is a nutter mate, if he get's a way to deliver his dirty nuke's he will actually want to use them and will likely detonate one over international water as a show of strength claiming it is a weapon's test, he even has China which was always NK's friendly uncle very concerned about this.

If he's so insane, bent on conquest or whatever, suicidal, desperate to test out a nuke, then why hasn't he blown up SK in any actual capacity yet??? Nuke the US = INSTANT DEATH SENTENCE! Attack SK there's some slight chance of winning and having actual gains.

He hit's the SK, the US takes him out as allied forces.
He hit's the US, he sends a message before the US takes him out.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme



What's the message? "We want to be turned into a parking lot in the next 20 minutes?"

Doesn't it seem fairly obvious that Li'l Kimmie's head is not exactly screwed on straight?

He is just going full retard, and everybody knows you NEVER go full retard!

I think there's probably some arbitrary line, and when or if he crosses it, his little empire will just quickly and quietly cease to exist. It doesn't necessarily have to be the U.S. that does it, it could very well be China, or even (GASP!) Russia.

It's a very different culture, but I don't really see the point of Kimmie constantly popping his head up out of his box to threaten anybody. It just makes chopping it off a lot easier.

It just seems to me that if something like that were to happen, the real tragedy would be the North Korean civilian population. I can't imagine that their lives are very easy as it is now, but it could always be worse.

Let Kimmie talk big and make threats. As long as that's all it is, what difference does it make?

ANYONE!

Please cite us in here some of these "threat" quotes.

And be sure they aren't half sentences, but full paragraphs with actual context.

Thanks!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

In your mind what is the motivation to provoke the U.S.?

Why try to anger us?!?

That's what I'm asking.

a reply to: uwontbelievethis

Read the rest of my posts in here and I've already put this into perspective.

We've been ATTACKING them with actual ACTS OF WAR for decades (political, covert, economic, psychological, etc) while CONSTANTLY provoking them with military maneuvers all around their borders just to add insult to injury.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Again, we are still at war.

But lets talk about these acts of war?
Sanctions (economic war)?
Political? Same family in power for over 50 years.
Covert? Same war we are playing with every country including allies.
Psychological. . ? Reaching much?

And them?
Constant artillery launches around multiple allies.
Having a US (civilian) captive that has ended up dead, recently.
ETC. . .

originally posted by: uwontbelievethis
a reply to: Metallicus

I hope if, when, we attack we use as little force as necessary.

Do you think he is trying to provoke an attack by us, the U.S., in order to justify the use of nuclear weapons?

No, I don't believe he needs to justify the use of nukes...at least in his deranged little mind. He has been taught that the U.S. is the enemy and that is all he needs to know to use his nuclear arsenal.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

You clearly know not nearly enough about the situation to be making an informed opinion about agreeing to go to war there there, while I dont have the time to walk you through it one on one that many details. If you're truly interested in being informed I've beaten all this stuff to death here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


(I'm seriously working on a most complex film project itself I dont have time for, with not much time to do it before Vegas trial ends, and am merely popping in here in between tedious menial tasks, so getting into a rich data intense back and forth is not what I'm signed up for tonight while I've already done that work on this topic where most peoples minds made up and a waste of time anyways)