America & North Korea - Page 36 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

America & North Korea

...

Page 36 of 59

First

16 26 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 46 56

Last

Page 36 of 59

First

16 26 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 46 56

Last

08-12-2017 , 01:33 PM

#876

ufm8

enthusiast

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 67

We ain't talking about 1k lives here tough

08-12-2017 , 01:35 PM

#877

Heroball

temp-banned

Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 9,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by ufm8

We ain't talking about 1k lives here tough

Right, but if you extrapolate the premise (everyone here and everyone you knows fam/friends) then it's roughly equivalent.

08-12-2017 , 01:56 PM

#878

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heroball

If KJU does bomb Guam, what's your move?

Why would he?

08-12-2017 , 02:02 PM

#879

Heroball

temp-banned

Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 9,402

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinopoker

Why would he?

Why would he threaten to do so? Why would he escalate the threats?

Why do ppl play Russian Roulette?

08-12-2017 , 02:04 PM

#880

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShawnIndy

I think China will eventually handle the North Korea issue. They have to. They cant go to war with the United States. It makes no sense for anyone.

China is just fine with the status quo. NK is belligerent and all, but in terms of actual harm they've done nothing to anyone except their own citizens for 50 years.

NK is an American problem, and one pretty much solely of its own making.

08-12-2017 , 02:09 PM

#881

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heroball

Why would he threaten to do so? Why would he escalate the threats?

Why do ppl play Russian Roulette?

He's not playing Russian Roulette, he's trying to save face, which is a very important thing in Asia, and even more importantly than that he's worries about his own life. He knows that without nukes the USA and/or its allies can come in there and kill him any time they choose. But as soon as he has the ability to nuke the US homeland that won't be possible any more.

His actions are rational from where he's sitting.

08-12-2017 , 02:13 PM

#882

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heroball

Question for the thread: If your entire extended family/loved ones/pets/friends/etc. could be saved, but 1,000 South Koreans would die, who are you choosing to protect?

I would turn that around instead. At what point would the losses of SK lives -- or even NK citizens -- outweigh your desire to 'protect' your family friends etc.?

100,000? 1,000,000? How many is too many?

08-12-2017 , 02:30 PM

#883

ligastar

ToP 100 pAsS cAtChErS

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 30,919

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heroball

Is there a list of powerful current US allies that would back us without question in this scenario? Presumably, UK/France/Germany all on board.

doubtful. why would they follow the orange menace into the abyss? their populations wouldn't allow it. "America First". remember? we're on our own now folks. elections have consequences.

08-12-2017 , 02:35 PM

#884

ligastar

ToP 100 pAsS cAtChErS

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 30,919

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinopoker

08-12-2017 , 02:35 PM

#885

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

The choice isn't between death for one's family members versus death for a larger number of South Korean randos. The choice is between a high probability of death for millions of Koreans versus a small probability of death for a much smaller group of Americans, the group having itself some small probability of containing a friend or loved one.

08-12-2017 , 02:55 PM

#886

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Sklansky deaths of Koreans as a result of forceful US military action
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sklansky deaths of Americans as a result of comparative military inaction
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sklansky deaths of loved ones of a particular, randomly selected 2p2 politard as a result of comparative military inaction.

My order of magnitude guesstimates for these are respectively: millions, thousands, and thousandths.

08-12-2017 , 02:55 PM

#887

David Sklansky

Administrator

Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 17,075

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllTheCheese

What percentage of Americans would change their position after fully accepting your correction of their error?

08-12-2017 , 02:59 PM

#888

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Rounding to the nearest whole number, zero.

Edit: Oh, AFTER fully accepting my correction? Idk, many perhaps. But ~0 is the number that would change their position after hearing that argument.

Last edited by AllTheCheese; 08-12-2017 at 03:04 PM.

08-12-2017 , 03:35 PM

#889

awval999

Election Monitor.

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,269

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

Trump looking pretty THICCC here.

What do you expect the PM of Australia to say when he is posed with that question?

08-12-2017 , 03:40 PM

#890

cuserounder

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 8,217

It's actually even worse to want war when you realize that it's an extremely small chance of like 300K-1M Americans dying versus a huge chance of millions of South Koreans dying and millions of North Koreans dying and a still small chance of 300K-1M Americans dying plus American soldiers dying. Maybe the loss of American civillians lives is even more likely if we attack - imo it is.

When you talk about the equity of American lives, were discussing letting millions of South Koreans and millions of North Koreans die for a negligible amount of American life equity.

08-12-2017 , 04:40 PM

#891

tomj

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 4,543

Quote:

Originally Posted by awval999

What do you expect the PM of Australia to say when he is posed with that question?

UK also on board, looking like the Iraq alliance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHhrZgojY1Q

The reference however seems strangely irrelevant. There is no attempt to fool. Civil norms such as needing a reason for bombing the f*** out of another country isn't needed any longer. 'Regime change', previously a worst kept secret, is now enough. We know well enough that regime change in North Korea has been a priority since at least 2002 when Bush named his axis of evil. That NK is the first nuclear state to be directly threatened with war is of course deeply unsettling and the language of the maniac Trump invokes fear for sure.

08-12-2017 , 04:59 PM

#892

tomj

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 4,543

This is interesting, Pepe Escobar explains that in 94 Clinton signed an agreement with NK which ended in 2002 with the axis of evil speech:

http://www.atimes.com/article/north-...ire-fury-fear/

And note the propaganda machine over the nukes, and this:

"1) Beware of an engineered false flag, to be blamed on Pyongyang; that would be the perfect pretext for war.

2) The current narrative is eerily similar to the usual suspects blaring since forever that Iran is a heartbeat away from “building a nuclear weapon”.

3) North Korea holds trillions of US dollars in unexplored mineral wealth. Watch the shadowplay by candidates bound to profit from such juicy loot."

08-12-2017 , 05:23 PM

#893

ligastar

ToP 100 pAsS cAtChErS

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 30,919

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomj

This is interesting, Pepe Escobar explains that in 94 Clinton signed an agreement with NK which ended in 2002 with the axis of evil speech:

http://www.atimes.com/article/north-...ire-fury-fear/

And note the propaganda machine over the nukes, and this:

"1) Beware of an engineered false flag, to be blamed on Pyongyang; that would be the perfect pretext for war.

2) The current narrative is eerily similar to the usual suspects blaring since forever that Iran is a heartbeat away from “building a nuclear weapon”.

3) North Korea holds trillions of US dollars in unexplored mineral wealth. Watch the shadowplay by candidates bound to profit from such juicy loot."

this lines up w/ drump's rhetoric during the campain in regards to the iraq war: "why didn't we take the oil"? the madman asked.

08-31-2017 , 05:34 PM

#894

golfnutt

banned

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 5,969

Are we getting any closer to a preemptive strike or do we let NK keep getting stronger and more aggressive?

08-31-2017 , 06:15 PM

#895

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 99,984

Meaning what? More harsh words and more frequent missile tests? Yes fear of that is definitely worth a pre-emptive strike that results in guaranteed deaths of millions of S. Koreans.

Unfortunately you kind of have to wait until they cross a line first. Like Bannon said - they got us.

08-31-2017 , 06:25 PM

#896

iamnotawerewolf

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 31,482

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfnutt

Are we getting any closer to a preemptive strike or do we let Iran keep getting stronger and more aggressive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfnutt

Are we getting any closer to a preemptive strike or do we let Pakistan keep getting stronger and more aggressive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfnutt

Are we getting any closer to a preemptive strike or do we let Venezuela keep getting stronger and more aggressive?

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfnutt

Are we getting any closer to a preemptive strike or do we let Russia keep getting stronger and more aggressive?

Spoiler:

08-31-2017 , 07:45 PM

#897

golfnutt

banned

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 5,969

Quote:

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Just like everybody else...I don't know. How many years of tests can they do before their population gets bored and wants the real thing?! They just flew a missile over Japan which put their population on alert.

I just don't fully get their strategy. They seem to want to push a preemptive strike. Would they then fire a nuke at Seoul which would then ensure their total destruction? Seems like a highly -EV play. And these financial restrictions just keep pushing them more in the hole.

08-31-2017 , 07:56 PM

#898

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,513

Quote:

Originally Posted by golfnutt

The very simplest explanation is that KJU and his inner circle want to remain in power. In order for a very small group to maintain such an immense amount of power and wealth in a poor country they need to lie to their people about how much danger they are in and how they are brave, powerful and their salvation - even more so than our leadership needs to do with us.

08-31-2017 , 08:16 PM

#899

suzzer99

Save the Cheerleader, Save the World

Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 99,984

I live in a place that would be a prime target if they develop long range missiles. And still I would never want my govt to launch a pre-emptive strike, killing millions of N and S Koreans w/o N. Korea doing something egregious first. I'll take the risk, because it makes no sense they would ever launch a strike out of the blue - knowing what would happen to them.

08-31-2017 , 08:19 PM

#900

golfnutt

banned

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 5,969

Quote:

Originally Posted by microbet

Very true. That is the only way you can spend an enormous % of GDP on missiles while a huge part of the country starves. I think they are so brainwashed that the starving population is ok with the nuclear weapons program.

I just can't imagine them doing these tests for the next 10 years without something happening. It could be an internal explosion or a missile goes off course and hits a civilian population. If we haven't done a preemptive strike yet, then each day that goes by makes it more challenging.

Bannon is correct. They got us.

Page 36 of 59

First

16 26 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 46 56

Last

...

Page 36 of 59

First

16 26 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 46 56

Last