Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 44

Thread: No Cause for Concern

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    2,147

    Default No Cause for Concern

    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    44,322

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    So an officially atheist government and an officially fundamentalist government can find common interest in the arms trade.
    Who'd a thunk it?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    21,570

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Are you scared, Mike? Are you really worried?
    You do know that the Maniac In Chief you voted for is more danger to you than N Korea is, don't you?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    21,570

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    So an officially atheist government and an officially fundamentalist government can find common interest in the arms trade.
    Who'd a thunk it?
    Jeff, there is an element of our population who want a war, any war, all the time.
    But you knew that!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    2,147

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    So an officially atheist government and an officially fundamentalist government can find common interest in the arms trade.
    Who'd a thunk it?
    Yeah. That's pretty close to the argument made, as i recall, although there was plenty of evidence that the two had colluded long before the Iranian nuke deal Kerry and Obama made.
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    2,147

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Longino View Post
    Are you scared, Mike? Are you really worried?
    You do know that the Maniac In Chief you voted for is more danger to you than N Korea is, don't you?
    I tend to believe people when they say they're going to do something. I'm in no danger from the President, not so sure about Kim. They say he can reach Chicago.
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Victoria BC
    Posts
    7,966

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    http://gwynnedyer.com/2017/north-koreas-icbm/

    “American bastards would be not very happy with this gift sent on the July 4 anniversary,” said North Korean leader Kim Jong-un about his country’s first successful test of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) on Wednesday. And indeed Americans are not happy about it, although it would be overstating the case to say that panic is sweeping the United States at the news that North Korea’s ICBMs can now reach America.

    One reason for the lack of public panic is that Alaska is not a central concern for most Americans, and Alaska is the only part of the United States that North Korea’s Hwasong-14 missile can actually reach.

    Another reason is that the US authorities insist that North Korea’s nuclear weapons are too big and heavy to fit on its ICBMs. (It’s not clear whether they have actual intelligence that confirms this, or are just whistling in the dark.)

    And a third reason might be that Americans are secretly embarrassed by the sheer hypocrisy of their own government’s position in this affair.

    Well, no, not really. The vast majority of Americans are blissfully unaware that there is any hypocrisy involved in demanding that North Korea refrain from getting what the United States has had for the past 72 years. So is the US government.

    US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was being entirely sincere when he said that North Korea’s ICBM test “represents a new escalation of the threat to the United States, our allies and partners, the region, and the world.” Wrong, but entirely sincere.

    He is obviously aware that the United States has had nuclear weapons since 1945, and has even dropped them on Asian cities. He knows that his country has had ICBMs since the 1950s, and still has hundreds ready to launch on short notice. How is the American posture different from the one that North Korea aspires to?

    Two differences, really. One is that the United States has at least a hundred times as many nuclear weapons as North Korea, and delivery vehicles at least two technologcal generations further down the road. Another is that the United States has a clearly stated policy that says it might use nuclear weapons first in a conflict. Weirdly, this just makes American ICBMs sound more dangerous than North Korea’s.

    That’s not really true. The United States used its first nuclear weapons as soon as it got them in 1945, but despite all the wars it has waged in the 72 years since then it has never used them again. Nuclear weapons are so terrifying that they actually force the people who possess them to think seriously about the consequences of using them.

    Pyongyang has obviously been thinking hard about the grave implications of nuclear weapons too, because it never actually threatens to use North Korea’s nukes in a first strike. It’s always about deterring a nuclear attack on North Korea. And though the North Korean regime lies and blusters a lot, you can believe it about this.

    North Korea will probably have ICBMs that can reach big American cities in three to five years if it keeps up the current pace of development and testing. That would buy North Korea a limited degree of safety from an American nuclear attack, because one or more of its missiles might survive a US first strike and be able to carry out a “revenge from the grave.” That is how nuclear deterrence works, at least in theory.

    But even full-range nuclear-tipped ICBMs would not give the North Korean regime the ability to launch a nuclear attack on America (or Japan, or South Korea) without being exterminated in an immediate, massive nuclear counter-strike. So you can probably trust the North Korean regime not to do anything so terminally stupid – unless people like Kim Jung-un are literally crazy.

    That’s why American diplomats work so hard to convince everybody else that the North Koreans really are frothing mad, impervious to logic, and not even interested in self-preservation. Only then can they argue that the North Koreans should be denied nuclear weapons, although Americans, Russians, Chinese, British, French, Israelis, Indians and Pakistanis can be trusted with them.

    There is no evidence that the North Koreans really are crazy. In the 64 years since the end of the Korean War they have never risked a war, and they are extremely unlikely to do so now. And while there is a rather erratic leader in Washington at the moment, there are probably enough grown-ups around him to avoid any fatal mistakes on the American side either.

    So North Korea will probably get its nuclear deterrent in the end, and we will all learn to live with it – like we learned to live with mutual US-Russian nuclear deterrence, mutual US-Chinese nuclear deterrence, and mutual Indian-Pakistani nuclear deterrence.
    Nosce te ipsum

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    63,230

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    As I've said before , after Iraq any perceived enemy of the US will want nucs and a delivery system. Had Sadam been nuclear armed he would still be in power, there's an obvious lesson there for anyone.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    2,147

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Simplistic drivel. Even if you discount NK threats, Iran makes them, almost daily. The opportunity they'd have to share them with a more eager group of suicidals is significant.
    Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country. John Fn Kennedy. (D)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sitka, AK
    Posts
    25,098

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Longino View Post
    Are you scared, Mike? Are you really worried?
    You do know that the Maniac In Chief you voted for is more danger to you than N Korea is, don't you?
    Danger of anti-environmentalism? Danger of screwing up healthcare? Death from horrible hair? Death from nepotism?

    Maybe, but Congress seems to be keeping him in check.

    Death from proliferating war? Eh... the facts aren't out there yet to prove that. Sure he's pissed at the lack of 'winning' in the middle east after decades of war, but he didn't start any of that crap. He inherited that mess from Bush, and some of Syria from Obama. There's no sign he's going to war with NK, just like every other President since the ceasefire.

    I had an interesting talk with an Iraqi a couple days ago. Fear not Glen, he was pissed that Bush Jr broke his country in 2003. But he was also pissed at Obama for not insisting on a SOFA agreement with the leadership of Iraq. He was quite clear in his view that had we kept the 15,000-20,000 troops in Iraq that ISIS would not have been able to move in from Syria.

    He also was pissed at Hillary Clinton who as SoS never visited Iraq during her appointment. I haven't fact checked that yet, but he seemed sure.

    Is Trump more dangerous than NK...? I'm thinking 'nope.'
    "Simple minds discuss people, Average minds discuss things, and Great minds discuss ideas".

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    41,750

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    So how many countries has Iran or North Korea invaded on false pretenses?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sitka, AK
    Posts
    25,098

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    As I've said before , after Iraq any perceived enemy of the US will want nucs and a delivery system. Had Sadam been nuclear armed he would still be in power, there's an obvious lesson there for anyone.
    Such as Iran?
    "Simple minds discuss people, Average minds discuss things, and Great minds discuss ideas".

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    63,230

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Such as Iran, next in line.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    6,459

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by mdh View Post
    Simplistic drivel...
    Yes, yes it is.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Coast, Ca
    Posts
    17,360

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Such as Iran?
    Such as Pakistan...

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    44,322

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    I reckon China and India are a better bet if you are wagering on the next nuke to be dropped in anger.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,054

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Some wrongheaded thinking has people saying that NK leader(s) is suicidal, irrational, crazy, take your pick. That is really far from the truth. Like most small dictatorships, they are mostly interested in maintaining their power. Witness the regular purges and eliminatin of internal threats to their power. Most of their bluster which is usually followed by US/SK military exercise reaction serves to stengthen their hold on power by claiming that they are about to be invaded. Secondarily, in the case of NK, they are interested in unifying the Korean peninsula under NK rule. My thought is that the NK leaders sit around a table every monday morning and ask themselves one question: If we invade SK today, will we win? On the day when the answer is yes, they will attack just as they did in 1950. That is primary, everything else is a smoke screen.

    They have no intention of launching an ICBM on the US or Japan or SK because they know it will work against their two main goals. While US leaders might not want to retaliate with nukes to blast them off the map, the people would demand it and it would happen. The ICBMs are a bluff to hold the US in check while they take over the Korean peninsula.

    China is happy to have NK as a buffer countering US interests in the Pacific and Trump thinking he can get China to hold them back is a fairy tale like most of his thoughts.

    I am far more concerned about getting into another land war in Korea than them having an ICBM. Maintaining a countering military strength in SK is the best insurance policy for them and us. Overt demonstration of our strength works for the NK leader in maintaining his control and I think is a strategic mistake. If we are sufficiently strong, they will know it. I was in the first war over there and have no appetite for another one.
    Tom L

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,054

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Since my comments in post #17 run counter to just about all that are offered on this forum, the news media and the political leadership, I expected some push back or counter arguments on one or more of the positions expressed.

    Are these thoughts not worthy of comment? Too radical to warrant comment? Too simple to warrant comment?
    Tom L

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New jersey
    Posts
    2,436

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    #17 may be a bit too long for Americans to read. Reduce it to a snarky one liner and you'll get comments

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,054

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by Boater14 View Post
    #17 may be a bit too long for Americans to read. Reduce it to a snarky one liner and you'll get comments
    Not really interested in replies for the sake of getting replies. I'd rather know where I'm off base in the opinion of others on the forum as I think almost all of our reaction to NK has been in error and has helped consolidate the three dear leaders in power.
    Tom L

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    31,546

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    NK is protected from an American nuclear counter strike by their proximity to American allies and to China. The geopolitical consequences of contamination of China with nuke fallout or the severe damage to South Korea or Japan of either an American missile going awry... or more likely, of NK missiles launched before an in-the-air American counter strike can land on NK ... is a great deterrent.

    Kim is indeed crazy. But one must admit that some bit of it is crazy like a fox.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    81,131

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Maybe, but Congress seems to be keeping him in check.
    only because this dumbass congress can't get out of their own way

    come on brian, these douchebags have a mandate from their voters to repeal obamacare and a willing accomplice in the white house to rubber stamp anything that they send his way, yet they truly have not got the stones to do it. . .
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    St. Paul, MN Mississippi River Milepost 840.2
    Posts
    8,244

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Danger of anti-environmentalism? Danger of screwing up healthcare? Death from horrible hair? Death from nepotism?

    Maybe, but Congress seems to be keeping him in check.

    ...

    He also was pissed at Hillary Clinton who as SoS never visited Iraq during her appointment. I haven't fact checked that yet, but he seemed sure.

    Is Trump more dangerous than NK...? I'm thinking 'nope.'
    We're seriously discussing whether the President of the United States or Kim Jung-un is more dangerous to the U.S. A new low.

    I disagree that Congress is keeping the President in check. His own incompetence is keeping him in check. Congress is essentially doing nothing about anything, including North Korea.

    Our conflict with North Korea exists only because they need a bogeyman as an ingredient of totalitarian rule. Every President since Truman knew this, and the international community led by the U.S. has largely kept them isolated and irrelevant. The real power keeping them in check since the mid 1970s has been China, with whom we have tacit agreement. Nonetheless, for the foreseeable future North Korea will be a rabid dog in a cage. There's no cure in sight, the goal is to keep the cage intact.

    President Trump is new and different of course. As an incompetent and emotionally driven neophyte and idiot who prefers the counsel of armchair amateurs and talk show bloviators to professionals, he appears not to be strengthening the dog cage, but instead to lower himself to the standards of a mentally and emotionally impaired minor dictator. He's instead opening the cage, and climbing into it, in order to prove that he's a bigger, more bellicose, more rabid, dog. Aren't we proud?

    A nuclear attack by North Korea on the U.S. is an extraordinarily low probability event with extraordinarily high consequences. Trump is sufficiently dangerous to the U.S. simply by the ways he has turned containment into a snarling and biting match with a rabid dog. And for good measure, he regularly insults and belittles the rabid dog's owner, China, for not doing things exactly as we want.

    (Oh, and your Iraqi colleague's misrecollection about Clinton? It's easy to fact check. https://history.state.gov/department...hillary-rodham)

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    31,546

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    This is an Era of reaching new lows. "Cliffs of fall, no man fathomed."
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    21,570

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Thank you so much, Mr. Ross!

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT, USA
    Posts
    9,236

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Danger of anti-environmentalism? Danger of screwing up healthcare? Death from horrible hair? Death from nepotism?

    Maybe, but Congress seems to be keeping him in check.

    Death from proliferating war? Eh... the facts aren't out there yet to prove that. Sure he's pissed at the lack of 'winning' in the middle east after decades of war, but he didn't start any of that crap. He inherited that mess from Bush, and some of Syria from Obama. There's no sign he's going to war with NK, just like every other President since the ceasefire.

    I had an interesting talk with an Iraqi a couple days ago. Fear not Glen, he was pissed that Bush Jr broke his country in 2003. But he was also pissed at Obama for not insisting on a SOFA agreement with the leadership of Iraq. He was quite clear in his view that had we kept the 15,000-20,000 troops in Iraq that ISIS would not have been able to move in from Syria.

    He also was pissed at Hillary Clinton who as SoS never visited Iraq during her appointment. I haven't fact checked that yet, but he seemed sure.

    Is Trump more dangerous than NK...? I'm thinking 'nope.'
    On his own, he's not as dangerous as NK. However, his temperament and methodology, or lack there of, exasperates a bad situation to the point where it makes him an equal element of disaster as Kim is. But you knew that.
    "Please be more specific or we'll choose to order a cheaper bilge-rat to replace you."

    ~seanz

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Reedville, OR
    Posts
    8,149

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    The greatest danger presented by our current POTUS is his leadership.

    Leadership matters. He is bringing out the worst in us, or of us.

    My argument against populism on both left and right is the same. Divisive rhetoric divides. Period. Full stop.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    6,459

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by C. Ross View Post
    ...I disagree that Congress is keeping the President in check. His own incompetence is keeping him in check. Congress is essentially doing nothing about anything, including North Korea...
    Congress has passed a single bill through both houses, implementing sanctions against Russia and North Korea. They very well might pass another limiting the President's ability to sanction Meuller without cause. Only two bills in seven months both a check on Trump.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    St. Paul, MN Mississippi River Milepost 840.2
    Posts
    8,244

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by B_B View Post
    Congress has passed a single bill through both houses, implementing sanctions against Russia and North Korea. They very well might pass another limiting the President's ability to sanction Meuller without cause. Only two bills in seven months both a check on Trump.
    Congress has passed and President Trump has signed 44 pieces of legislation.

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bil...nt_status_date

    This is a snail's pace compared to prior Congresses.

    Agreed that the only one of consequence is the one restraining President Trump's actions in Russia.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Oriental, NC USA
    Posts
    4,054

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by C. Ross View Post
    Congress has passed and President Trump has signed 44 pieces of legislation.

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bil...nt_status_date

    This is a snail's pace compared to prior Congresses.

    Agreed that the only one of consequence is the one restraining President Trump's actions in Russia.
    And each and every one of these pieces of legislation passed with zero open discussion in either house.
    Tom L

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Coast, Ca
    Posts
    17,360

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    only because this dumbass congress can't get out of their own way

    come on brian, these douchebags have a mandate from their voters to repeal obamacare and a willing accomplice in the white house to rubber stamp anything that they send his way, yet they truly have not got the stones to do it. . .
    I don't think the "Mandate" is from the voters. It is from the propaganda wing of the republican party. I.e. Fox news, Koch, and etc. The "Voters" just do what is suggested by a bimbo in a red dress.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    44,322

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    C.Ross" "Our conflict with North Korea exists only because they need a bogeyman as an ingredient of totalitarian rule."

    Think Orwell 1984, but it suits both parties of course.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Sorrento Australia
    Posts
    634

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    It's also a tactic for uniting a nation that may be on unsteady ground, an example being Indonesia's attitude to Malaysia in the years following their independence from Dutch colonization in 1945.
    If war is the answer........... it must be a profoundly stupid question

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    afloat with at least 6' of water under me.
    Posts
    50,542

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by Hallam View Post
    It's also a tactic for uniting a nation that may be on shackey ground, an example being Indonesia's attitude to Malasia in the years following their independence from Dutch colonization in 1945.
    That's pretty obvious, Kim's family has run NK for longer than I have insisted. It's perpetually on shaky ground. Why do you think Kim kills all of his opposition?

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Sitka, AK
    Posts
    25,098

    Default Re: No Cause for Concern

    Quote Originally Posted by C. Ross View Post
    We're seriously discussing whether the President of the United States or Kim Jung-un is more dangerous to the U.S. A new low.
    Well, consider how and why the comparison was made. Someone looking for hyperbole?

    Quote Originally Posted by C. Ross View Post
    (Oh, and your Iraqi colleague's misrecollection about Clinton? It's easy to fact check. https://history.state.gov/department...hillary-rodham)
    Thanks for the fact checking!
    "Simple minds discuss people, Average minds discuss things, and Great minds discuss ideas".

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •