Oh lol that's where he was going with this? Poor dumb Mourn.

That's beyond NK. He's talking about the hypothetical judeo-christian war of the west versus the others.

Instead of searching this out myself, can you do me a solid and just tell me the specific ways you're lying in this post.

Yeah that post was Stephen Millerish.

Millertastic

I can also offer a BroadwaySoSyht and a Morondog, if you like.

BroadwaySoShyt.

Well, you're clearly more studied than I am or most people about this, so when it comes to actual facts, I'll defer to you.

That's what I don't get... Why isn't it in EVERY country's best interest to prevent NK from becoming fully nuclear capable? Why is it just the US (and SK obviously). It doesn't appear to be a matter of "policy" to me, but more of a matter of the preservation of human civilization. This guy is a madman nutcase, but I'll come to back to that...

He seems to have zero fear of provoking nuclear capable countries now. Perhaps because he knows we/no one will use them?

Probably? If you were putting me at ease before, this brings me right back to where I was. Probably isn't good enough. We know MAD works with Russia (or at least it has so far). We do NOT know this about NK! He's a nutbox. I've seen videos where their schools teach kids at an early age that he's more divine than Jesus Christ.

Yeah, that could be the case and I hope it is. Maybe he'll be more like China. I just don't want to place civilization's fate in it. There's a reason he's so gun-ho on obtaining nukes.

Exporting technology isn't good either. I just think the whole situation is more dangerous than you and others, I guess. I'm not a tough guy. I'm a coward man. If I know you wanna kill me then I'm gonna try and kill you first before you have the chance.

Like I said, I put zero thought into Seoul. Maybe that ends my argument right there. But I still don't understand why the rest of the world isn't just as concerned as the United States about him becoming fully nuclear capable.

The rest of the world has been too liberal up to this point. I keep saying it but how many people have died because of the wimpy liberals. If it was a world of just conservatives this would have been taken care of in his grand pappy's day.

He is no more crazy than the rest of his family was. What makes him scary is that his people will only tell him what he wants to here.

Nah, I'm sticking with 'monistat'. This old dog still has some tricks.

You appear never to have heard of noted conservatives Dwight D Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur, which is weird. Eisenhower did threaten China with nuclear attack if they didn't dial down their support for North Korea, but he still couldn't get rid of the Kim dynasty just like that.

Interesting developments...


http://www.businessinsider.com/why-u...-july-4-2017-7

The US is saying, "Hey chubby, we're not trying to kill you. So knock it off..."

I wonder if the US is going to demonstrate a satellite based mega-Watt scale precision laser weapon system soon. Be great to raise the temperature of the liquid fuel rocket to about 5000degC right as KJU walks by and lights up a Marlboro.

Aljalfrezi or Jalfrenazi?

Any use of nukes is an absolutely horrible idea. Wind and fallout do not respect borders, and any use of nukes risks use of nukes in retaliation. We're destroying the earth enough without nuclear exchanges, we don't need to be engaging in that.

Its not even an option with the pentagon from my understanding. The artillery is to close to the border to use nukes on tactical or not. So it would go like this is we did. We would pick a place not to close to China or SK and hit them. They would unleash the massive amount of unaffected artillery they have killing over a million in Seoul. If we get lucky, since its no sure thing, they have not found a way to hit SK or Japan with a nuke or two.

It just make no sense strategically. If we did attack them it would be with conventional weapons aimed at taking as much of the artillery and nuke sites out as we could. Our nukes dont really help with that.

Sorry, I have not.

I agree nukes would be bad. However, if it did come to that, I'd say suprise attack Iran first with nukes. This would take care of a lot of our problems around the world. Than we could see how KJU responds. I'm pretty sure he would give it up.

Killing two birds with one stone.

The problem is that there are a lot of good people in Iran who have American values. Therefore, I totally disagree with the plan above.

Which one of you won that argument?

The sane one.

What's with the Iran stuff? Wouldn't it be better for us to invade Saudi Arabia? After all, they are the country behind 9/11, and the largest funder of terrorism.

To be fair the country we helped Kuwait contributes a lot to ISIS too. Or at min some of their people fund it.

They would get some of the fall out.

Iran has its hands in a lot more areas that negatively affect the US. They have also directly threatened Israel. They also have a stronger military.

And which neighbouring Arab country do you think would give you basing rights to do that? (God, Americans are funny.)

Well, I think mongidig, by admitting he'd never heard of Eisenhower or MacArthur, sort of lost. Permanently.

People are not alarmed because the American people are generally ignorant, misinformed, or just dont really care about anything that doesnt affect them on a day to day basis.