So far. Of course, Woodrow Wilson is not the best comp here considering we eventually ended up in WW1.
Day 200 - He kept us out of war
- Thread starter knowknow456
- Start date
My prediction is that war with North Korea will be inevitable. If relations with Iran get worse, then possibly there, too. You can't fault this president for it. Avoiding war is not a measure of success for a president either. James Buchanan is considered one of the worst by looking the other way while southern states began procedures for suceesion it took Lincoln's leadsership to preserve the Union.
Both Bush's and especially Clinton (and Madeline Albright) and Obama were appeasers to NK.
Both Bush's and especially Clinton (and Madeline Albright) and Obama were appeasers to NK.
War with North Korea is not inevitable. However, you need to maintain relations and garner world wide cooperation especially with China to deal with North Korea effectively. The problem with war is that we can absolutely destroy North Korea, but what is the cost? The cost will be tens of thousands of lives and maybe more of South Koreans and maybe Japanese will be killed. This is not some sort of let's fly in and bomb NK and its over kind of thing. That regime will go down swinging and kill so many lives. There are other ways to handle N Korea. At this point in time, we could easily have the cooperation of the Chinese to help.
We should not be so flippant about war.
Cern. Agree on all those points you make, but it's been over 70 years. Maybe we could send Dennis Rodman again to knock sense into these people? Lol
Nuclear war means you'll be dead if you live on the east coast. So yes, by all means participate away. You sound joyous, dummy!
This situation is serious. We need a need a peaceful diplomatic solution. Period. Now is not the time for business as usual I love Trump-I hate Trump conversation. It is not about Trump. It is about the USA and the free world.
You can rest assured we have boomer submarines in position and they have moved up their alert posture. This is not a movie. It is real.
China is a key piece to the diplomatic solution. They account for the majority of NK's imports and exports.
So far Tillerson and Haley have gotten China to step up. China intervened on NK's behalf back in 1950 and without them, NK would have lost that war. By China participating in the sanctions, they have clearly sent a message to Un that they will not support them again.
In parallel, we must show Un that we are absolutely prepared to use whatever force necessary. Parallels to the Cuban missile crisis have been discussed but only go so far. Khrushchev was not as psychotic.
I believe/hope Trumps "Fire and Fury" was a planned part of the parallel process to show the "big stick. I hope and pray it was not a capricious Tweet. It does set the proper tone for Mattis to position forces and send a message to Un that Mattis has a green light if needed (God help us, I pray we don't have to use that).
Guam appears to be the next real test. If Un fires a missile at Guam, Trump will be faced with a decision of the ages. IF he does send the missile and assuming we shoot it down before it hits, does he:
1. Remain satisfied that our ability to shoot it down is sufficient to show Un that we have strong capabilities. Continue with diplomacy and ramp up the positioning of forces/sabre rattling.
2. Strike back fast and hard.
You can rest assured we have boomer submarines in position and they have moved up their alert posture. This is not a movie. It is real.
China is a key piece to the diplomatic solution. They account for the majority of NK's imports and exports.
So far Tillerson and Haley have gotten China to step up. China intervened on NK's behalf back in 1950 and without them, NK would have lost that war. By China participating in the sanctions, they have clearly sent a message to Un that they will not support them again.
In parallel, we must show Un that we are absolutely prepared to use whatever force necessary. Parallels to the Cuban missile crisis have been discussed but only go so far. Khrushchev was not as psychotic.
I believe/hope Trumps "Fire and Fury" was a planned part of the parallel process to show the "big stick. I hope and pray it was not a capricious Tweet. It does set the proper tone for Mattis to position forces and send a message to Un that Mattis has a green light if needed (God help us, I pray we don't have to use that).
Guam appears to be the next real test. If Un fires a missile at Guam, Trump will be faced with a decision of the ages. IF he does send the missile and assuming we shoot it down before it hits, does he:
1. Remain satisfied that our ability to shoot it down is sufficient to show Un that we have strong capabilities. Continue with diplomacy and ramp up the positioning of forces/sabre rattling.
2. Strike back fast and hard.
Last edited:
If you are keeping score at home, that is
1 believe
2 hopes
2 prays
1 Gold help us
Foreign policy is a tricky business.
Pirata is spot on. I'd go with choice 1 and see how it plays out. Remember though, that China is our enemy and I believe that it's not in their best interest to have a unified NK. It would put a USA ally right next door. Rather, China may be interred in preserving NK but with regime change maybe?
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Not even close. One miscalculation during the Cuban Missile Crisis would have destroyed the world. The Soviets had missiles literally on our doorstep, backed up by bombers and ICBMs that could hit all of our country and an arsenal of thousands of nuclear weapons.
This is entirely different and not even remotely as grave of a situation. No, this guy is not "psychotic." He has one goal, the survival of his regime. If he launches even one attack on a US territory or ally, his regime is done and he knows that. North Korea is a tiny country with a handful of nuclear weapons. They are very unlikely to have the capability to effectively hit the US mainland. Far different than a world superpower with thousands of weapons, bombers, missiles and submarines as the Soviet Union was in the 1960s.
The hysteria online and in the media about this issue is incredible. I would be stunned if North Korea tried any attack because that seals the regime's fate. The Cuban Missile Crisis was the major leagues. This issue with North Korea is single-A ball.
Conventional wisdom is that regime change will be a humanitarian disaster. China will bear the brunt of fixing that problem due to their close proximity so at best they will look to preserve the status quo
China already has thousands of troops along the NK border. Is their presence to beat back anyone trying to get into China if there is, indeed, a severe bombing campaign from USA?
Also, keep two factors in mind - NK has the 4th or 5th largest army in the world (upward of 1 million). They have been preparing for war for 70 years.
If we invade, world markets (Nikkei, Dow, Nasdaq, etc) may tank. I wonder what that does for China's curreny manipulation and investments.
Also, keep two factors in mind - NK has the 4th or 5th largest army in the world (upward of 1 million). They have been preparing for war for 70 years.
If we invade, world markets (Nikkei, Dow, Nasdaq, etc) may tank. I wonder what that does for China's curreny manipulation and investments.
If we break it, someone will have to fix it.
Invasion? What is the goal? Will there be an occupation afterwards? Also, since you mentioned war with Iran as well, is the plan to invade NK then move on, or will we be fighting two wars simultaneously?
Great post. I am not going to pretend to know which choice is right. Always appreciate it when an adult enters the conversation though… LOL.
There are two things that I would add. First of all, let's take a step back and recognize we have three outstanding military leaders involved in this. Mattis, Kelly and McMaster are the best. No debate. Every person with a military background that I have spoken with, hands-down says only the best things about them. I don't see any path where Trump does not support their recommendations.
Secondly, I have a South Korean acquaintance who has family, including his dad still living there. He emigrated 10 years ago. Yes it is an "n" of one, but he is about invested as one can be. We had a lengthy conversation this week and he is very supportive of our position and trumps rhetoric.
I am not going to get my panties in a bunch with regards to how the MSM is portraying Trumps words. This could very well be defining moment for our country and actions will dictate the outcome
Last edited:
The President said the following. As far as I can tell it was quoted accurately by all MSM outlets. It is the job of the media to report what the President says, and they did it well.
"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States, they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,"
"He has been very threatening -- beyond a normal statement,"
"As I said, they will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before."
"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States, they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,"
"He has been very threatening -- beyond a normal statement,"
"As I said, they will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before."
For those that prefer their news straight from the source, the President tweeted this morning -
"Military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely. Hopefully Kim Jong Un will find another path!"
"Military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely. Hopefully Kim Jong Un will find another path!"
I have absolutely no issue reporting what Trump tweets, but if that's basically the only thing that's being reported, they are doing a major disservice to the public.
So if the tweet is the only thing being reported it is a major disservice to the public.
However, if the MSM does more than that, they risk getting your panties in a bunch.
So if they only report the facts, that's bad. If they add opinion, that's bad too. I submit, facts are critical, opinion is fine. Only weak minds cannot differentiate between the two.
Totally missed my point. There are so many factors and issues that they can be reporting on (the U.N. sanctions, Un's build-up over the past decade, our military readiness, options if there is a regime change, etc.)...things that would be helpful to better educate the masses. But 95% of what is reported is only about Trump's tweets. There are tons of facts that are going unreported or under-reported.
I understood your point. You don't like the media.
The President is the Commander in Chief. His words are vitally important and what he says stands. Get Twitter if you want your news directly.
UN sanctions - How did you hear about them?
NK buildup - How did you find out North Korea has been building up over the last decade?
Military readiness - Unless you are sitting in the Cabinet meetings, our military readiness is a matter of opinion and I know you hate MSM opinion
Options for regime change - Even if you are sitting in the Cabinet meetings, options for regime change are a matter of opinion. Predicting the future is a difficult process.
You don't like the media. - that is your point. Everything else is a subset of that point.
"If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan"
He said it publicly at least 37 times. LOL
Last edited:
Here is the difference Pirata. People in the media and his own party did take issue with that statement turning into something that wasn't true. It is called accountability.
Unfortunately, when Trump makes one of his literally hundreds ridiculous and erroneous statements, you deflect, like most Trump supporters, and point out some statement of Obama that you and other uttered countless of times as somehow that excuses Trump.
The defense of Trump always comes back to attacking Obama or Hillary. How about just sticking with Trump. He is the President and as Truman said, the Buck stops there.
You know how we know this? President Obama stood in front of a microphone and spoke those words. The MSM reported it.
Media access to the government forces our elected representatives to be accountable for the things they say and do. I find that to be a wonderful thing
Where were you in Obama's early years when every defense of him was predicated on attacking Bush?
Every partisan does this and I'm sick of it. Term limits and the dissolution of political parties would be the best thing to happen to this country in a long time.
No previous President does it to Trump's extreme. He does it with every topic even his own criminal investigation.
Dissolution of political parties? Has there ever been one stable democracy that has had no political parties? Not that I know of, so this is absolutely pie in the sky. I am not a believer of term limits as well. Experience counts in politics. You don't want continual neophytes in Congress. What must be done is to hold our politicians accountable.
That is not what is being done. And when you defend Trump with your deflections, you do not hold him accountable. That in essence is a very big problem nationwide.
Who said I was defending Trump? Where did I attack Hillary or Obama?
Peacenik said the President's "words are vitally important and what he says stands".
I was simply pointing out that his statement has not always held true. I have alot more faith that Trump's words will stand.
Here is another for you:
"We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized,"
So go ahead and hop back up on your high horse and start lecturing again about how words matter.
So your point is that Trump will stand by his words? You mean these words:
"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States, they will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,"
"He has been very threatening -- beyond a normal statement,"
"As I said, they will be met with fire, fury and frankly power the likes of which this world has never seen before."
So, some more threats and Trump is going to start his Fire and Ice invasion of Westeros? Really? So if Un makes one more bad threat, he is going to do what? Are you sure Trump is going to stand by his words?
Give me a break.
Obama invented it. He did not earn the the moniker "blamer in chief" for nothing. Up until his presidency, there was very little retro blaming by either side.
This discussion was moving along nice until Peacenik starts with the snarky innuendo and putting words in people's mouths.
How about we get back to discussing the NOKO situation?
If you want to bash Trump, go start another thread and call it "Discussion on Trump's stupid NOKO Tweets"
I promise I won't read it and post there and so you guys can have your own circle-bash.
So my point is that you like to tell other people what their point is. You consistent display your inability to make an effort to understand what someone is saying. you seem to like to figth and attack people rather than discuss a topic.
You take things literally when it suits you and bend the truth when it suits you. You state your opinion as fact. You sling insults and innuendo.
My point is that you and you ilk seem incapable of an intelligent discussion with anyone who might have a different world view. than your own.
That notwithstanding, I will respond to your inflammatory retort.
To the extent that I state that Trump will stand by the fire and fury comment, I believe that he will listen to the defense and intelligence community and respond appropriately to whatever actions NOKO takes. I am less worried about his words than I am about his actions. His statement is sending a clear message to NOKO that any and all military options are on the table.
He is not stating that as eloquently as I would like. If you compare his Tweets to Kennedy's address to the nation for the Cuban crisis, Kennedy was much more statesmanlike. Then again, times have changed. I'd prefer to see something closer to Kennedy's words but with a little more bluntness but not as much bluntness as Trump has done.
If you look at commentary on Churchill's speeches, there is a camp that says they were ineffective and perhaps he was drunk at the time he gave them. In the end, Churchill's actions did more than his words.
While words matter, I believe actions matter more.
You take things literally when it suits you and bend the truth when it suits you. You state your opinion as fact. You sling insults and innuendo.
My point is that you and you ilk seem incapable of an intelligent discussion with anyone who might have a different world view. than your own.
That notwithstanding, I will respond to your inflammatory retort.
To the extent that I state that Trump will stand by the fire and fury comment, I believe that he will listen to the defense and intelligence community and respond appropriately to whatever actions NOKO takes. I am less worried about his words than I am about his actions. His statement is sending a clear message to NOKO that any and all military options are on the table.
He is not stating that as eloquently as I would like. If you compare his Tweets to Kennedy's address to the nation for the Cuban crisis, Kennedy was much more statesmanlike. Then again, times have changed. I'd prefer to see something closer to Kennedy's words but with a little more bluntness but not as much bluntness as Trump has done.
If you look at commentary on Churchill's speeches, there is a camp that says they were ineffective and perhaps he was drunk at the time he gave them. In the end, Churchill's actions did more than his words.
While words matter, I believe actions matter more.
Let's be clear. There is no snarky innuendo. I am saying it straight out. Hall85 doesn't like the main stream media. He brings it up all the time, including in this thread. He continually chooses not to differentiate between fact and opinion which surprises me for a man of his overall intellect. From time to time we discuss it.
If you have a specific issue with something I have said about this topic, stop with the snarky innuendo and state what it is. I will respond.
So in addition to poor reading comprehension, you now think you are qualified to be my personal analyst. You need to get over yourself buddy.
Easy folks...Back to NoKo.
To summarize some of all your great points.
I believe that diplomacy and communication should continue. All the right steps are being taken.
Let's see how the sanctions work on Noko.
The MSM will never report fairly. They are irrelevant to people who do their own research .
To summarize some of all your great points.
I believe that diplomacy and communication should continue. All the right steps are being taken.
Let's see how the sanctions work on Noko.
The MSM will never report fairly. They are irrelevant to people who do their own research .
