General Mattis tells US Army to 'stand READY for war' with North Korea

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Hi Andy.. But like you said... It would be a "response"...not a "war". Just a couple of those from us... and they're done....

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Is that why under Obama there were 10 times more bombings in the ME than under Bush? Don't let facts get in the way of your agenda though.

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: TheWiseDwarf

Which means there won't be a military response. He's not going to telegraph the response. This is just a ruse to scare the sh!t out of Lil Kim.

Judging by Kim's reactions, I don't think anything Trump has said or done scares him at all. Whether that's bravado/stupidity, or NK has been planning and digging in for the inevitable war for a long time, I don't know.

We can speculate all day on what NK can or cannot do, but we simply don't know with how shrouded that place is. The fact that China is seemingly sticking by NK and Japan has stated that they will not shoot down any missiles aimed over their air space toward US territory means we might find ourselves in a very nasty position.

It would not surprise me, however, if we soon hear that an attempt was made on Kim's life. I honestly think the only way to get out of this is to remove the head of the snake. I don't think outright war will get him. He'll go underground and survive. Kinda like a cockroach, that way.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Is that why under Obama there were 10 times more bombings in the ME than under Bush? Don't let facts get in the way of your agenda though.

That really doesn't prove anything. That's actually why our readiness took such a beating. We got cut while we were still fighting wars, and by necessity we can't cut the war, you can't fight wars without bombs etc. So the cuts happened in other places, which affected our readiness. I saw this first hand, having entered service in 2004 and finished up in 2016. We were in much better shape under Bush than we were under Obama. So please don't comment on things you don't understand. The number of bombs dropped in a given period is not an indicator of the health of the armed forces.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Hi Andy.. But like you said... It would be a "response"...not a "war". Just a couple of those from us... and they're done....

As I recall that's what they said about Afghanistan and Iraq....how'd that work out?

a reply to: Zaphod58

Some folks don't understand that the US also makes it easier to go to Walmart and get the new grand theft auto, or organic avocados from Chile.

Do you think if we decide to go it we see some new stuff and lots of bunker busters?

It seems the only safe strategy is new tech that interferes with guidance and overwhelming force.

Problem is the world may not be ready to understand there isn't a lot of options for the situation. Lobbing a few tomahawk and flying in the air born isn't going to work so I imagine it's shield and fire until they are done. I just hope that doesn't make the argument they were the victim.

I don't like to make predictions, but I tend to agree with several others that such an ultimatum has likely already been issued. My assumption is something along these lines: "If you test another missile or nuclear weapon, we will revoke the armistice agreement and engage in open warfare."

Because of tomorrow's importance, there is a good chance we could see such a test occur. If we're correct that such an ultimatum were issued, troops probably already have orders to carry out in the event of a launch or test. The generals/officers/soldiers of the U.S. armed forces will carry out those orders to absolutely devastating effect.

I do not wish for war to resume in the North, and Kim should immediately cease all hostilities and illegal actions in order to prevent the destruction of his regime. All ultimatums come with an "out" should the dictator choose such a path, and he absolutely should make that choice while he still can.

Either way, our armed forces have my full support and best wishes. For everyone's sake, I hope their presence is only needed to serve as a deterrent against further provocations by Kim.

a reply to: JBurns

Because of tomorrow's importance, there is a good chance we could see such a test occur.

And that's the thing
NK must celebrate their day on the 10th
why not a short-falling launch towards the W/coast ?
a show of 'strength' and so on

Trump has yet to be seriously tested
with a veritable 'international crisis'

Despite the general ineptitude of NK threats,
they're pretty much toothless outside of their own backyard

If they were to launch towards the W/Coast ...
That would constitute (for me)
a Bay of Pigs moment of our times

Is Trump a Kennedy for our times ?
I don't believe so

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: opethPA

You know the story of Chicken Little right? That's what the OP is.

The irony of you saying that while daily telling us all how Trump is destroying the country.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

Truth is truth ya know? Sorry you can't see that. There is no irony in my statement because I present truth and accuracy that stymies most of you.
Do you know that just one of my posts will generate twenty replies sometimes? That I can get a reaction from so many tells me my words are powerful. Just tellin it like it is.

a reply to: Damiel


Agreed. I believe any country with nuclear weapons that have issued threats to use those weapons should be taken seriously. Should they launch toward CONUS or any territory/ally, we should assume it is a live nuclear weapon heading to strike a friendly city.

It is only through threat of force that NK can be reigned in. If the issue was simply them possessing weapons, it'd be an entirely different discussion. The Kim regime has been engaging in provocations for years (even with Obama and his predecessors) and its bellicosity has arrived at a point of no return. Now, I don't believe they've yet hit that point (as evidenced by the lack of U.S. strikes against NK), but they are undoubtedly at risk of preventative strikes basically at any time.

Their disregard for treaties and diplomacy is evidenced by their actions over the years. This including shelling SK territory, and an attack with a surface mine against SK naval forces. I believe one of these incidents was caused by the minor act of SK attempting to use balloons to fly money/medicine/unbiased truthful information into the reclusive dictatorship. Free information is such a threat to Kim and his misguided system of government that he commits acts of war in effort to prevent it.

I believe it is far too dangerous to allow them to continue to posses nuclear weapons. Such a regime cannot stand the test of time, and when it collapses how many of those nuclear weapons will end up in someone's garage or basement? The nuclear arms race it would spur around the world is another problem with them keeping the nuclear weapons.

Just my 2c

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TheWiseDwarf

War Pigs are intentionally pumping MSM and Social media with anti Korean rhetoric and rumors of war so everyone is desensitized to it.

North Korea is a cancer to the world. Given time they will be selling nukes to terrorists if they haven't already. No desensitizing required, i say we kill them all.

a reply to: FocusedWolf

The same could be said about the U.S., at least North Korea stays within their own borders.

Oh, and about selling terrorists weapons, did you hear about the $100 billion weapons deal that Trump made with Saudi Arabia, the biggest terrorist financier in the world?

a reply to: JBurns

Yeah ...there's something there to what you're saying
Massive bombing, boots on the ground or whatever
it's going to be too late and pointless

- pipe dream here - maybe an icbm exclusion zone ?
Once "your" misslie enters international airspace
we're taking it down and out

Not happy ?
We'll do it again
and again

until you get it

.... that's my (admittedly Trumpish) response

NK response (?) "you bombed mahh bomb ? That's an act of war"
*bye bye SK, japan, bits of China, part of Siberai , Sri lanka ... to boot*

No more holidays in Goa ;'(

What to do ?

I'd be willing to bet that Iran gave its buddy some "assistance."

So much for that nuke deal. Thanks loads, Obama.



Edit: Here's a screenshot I got from Twitter. DefCon posted this a few hours ago, about the same time the OP started this thread:

a reply to: Damiel

That's a really good idea, we just need to ensure our missile defense system is able to knock them down with a very high success rate and we'd be good to go! Realistically, with a widespread successful missile defense system nuclear weapons become kind of pointless.

I'd imagine a small stockpile would be maintained, but once one country can shoot them down reliably (possibly by the hundreds or thousands) they are essentially useless. They're already useless, thanks to MAD but such doctrine does require them to be kept/maintained.

I'm all for using advanced technology to save us billions of dollars per year!

I am convinced we are going to all wake up to the news that Trump has flattend North Korea in the night.

Good luck to him and good luck to you guys across the pond. Show rocket man who’s boss.

Nice to see a president of the USA with some guts for once

a reply to: TheWiseDwarf

a reply to: fusiondoe

I am convinced we are going to all wake up to the news that Trump has

...

...said at 8pm...

"My fellow americans ...as i stand humbly before you,
beamed into the homes of mllions on your tv screens
and monitors and i-phones ...

American bombers are, as i speak,
carrying out air raids on North Korean strategic targets"
...

Whist highly extremist as a projection
with Trump i can clearly imagine i i

Kim and Trump in the same sand pit ?
Sand in everyone's eyes
who gives a f***

They don't

originally posted by: FocusedWolf

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TheWiseDwarf

War Pigs are intentionally pumping MSM and Social media with anti Korean rhetoric and rumors of war so everyone is desensitized to it.

North Korea is a cancer to the world. Given time they will be selling nukes to terrorists if they haven't already. No desensitizing required, i say we kill them all.

Thats whats wrong with the world.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Is that why under Obama there were 10 times more bombings in the ME than under Bush? Don't let facts get in the way of your agenda though.

Don't let the apples look like the oranges......US Army.....the thread is about the US Army.....how many bombs did the US Army drop after telegraphing their targets six months in advance under Obama?