Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Now Trump is trying to out-crazy North Korea

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-nuclear-deal/

    Comment


    • #92
      https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/09...korea-has-won/

      Comment


      • #93
        You have to wonder how this would play out with a functioning State Dept.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Flew View Post

          FTFY: I thought you knew the difference.

          UM, no dude you're wrong

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile_submarine

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by AnalHamster View Post

            Would it be rational to nuke Japan (the only realistic way they can seriously harm that country) or nuke or conventionally attack Seoul? The counterattack in either case would devastate their country and result in the death or prosecution of their leadership. I don't get this argument, if they are rational we can't attack because then they might do something irrational? Their assumed rationality is the carrot, and their assumed irrationality is the stick. It seems to me to be the opposite, if they are rational - the reason not to attack despite them threatening to nuke you while developing better nukes - then an ultimatum that an attack will happen on a fixed timeframe would force them to the table. If they are not rational then they are crazy people with rapidly improving nukes which puts a very high cost on waiting.

            I don't paint Kim as crazy, I think he probably isn't. The thing is, I don't know if he is or not and neither do you. That level of propaganda for generations could well have sent the whole country cuckoo. My assessment is based on considering what he would do if he is crazy, and what he would do if he isn't. Either path gets me to the same conclusion, disarm them through the threat of force with a hard deadline for deploying it. If he's crazy enough to attack SK that threat to them could be carried out any time and is only getting worse. If he's crazy many people will die, but if he's crazy it's still better to force the issue now than it is to wait while he develops MIRVs for the west coast.
            All is fair in love and war. There's no conventional act of war that could be carried out against the North Koreans that couldn't reasonably incur an all out response. The idea that they will ever disarm voluntarily is completely baseless. The regime will have to collapse first.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by posthuman View Post
              All is fair in love and war. There's no conventional act of war that could be carried out against the North Koreans that couldn't reasonably incur an all out response. The idea that they will ever disarm voluntarily is completely baseless. The regime will have to collapse first.
              I don't think anyone is suggesting they will disarm voluntarily, it would be partial disarmament under threat of force, under actual force, or under heavy bribery. Their pursuit of nukes is actually pretty reasonable, it's why the US hasn't attacked them yet, but they've overplayed their hand and keep threatening to actually use nukes while being or pretending to be insane. All out response from them isn't reasonable since it means the destruction of their country. They can't win, outside of their nukes whose deployment means complete annihilation they have WW2 era weapons against US weapons systems they simply cannot match. On their end threatening war is rational but actually going to war is not. As I keep pointing out you assume they are rational actors when it comes to not acting but in the same breath say we can't act because they are irrational actors who will commit national suicide to do some damage as they die. They're one or the other and either way the conclusion looks the same to me. If they are rational and self interested then they will back down in the face of force and if they are not then it's cheaper to use force now rather than later. If they follow through with dropping ICBMs that can be nuclear tipped off the coast of Guam I think you'll find majority support domestically and internationally for a bit of preemptive military action to cut that shit out.

              Comment


              • #97
                SNL needs to comeback early to do some Kim parody sketches, Melissa McCarthy?

                Then we have drones drop thousands of VCR tapes of the SNL show into remote parts of NK and a ground swell of embarrassment rises up and they feed Kim to the pigs and then take the royal pig shit and sprinkle it amongst thousands of rice paddies.

                Do North Koreans secretly meet and tell our supreme leader jokes?

                Is Kim screwing a different female every day?

                Comment


                • #98

                  Comment


                  • #99

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Degas View Post

                      I think both are correct, the Ohio has SSBN and SSGN variants I think (ballistic and guided missiles, right?).
                      No, SSGNs are converted SSBNs that are used to support special operations despite what Wiki may tell you. Do they have cruise missiles? Sure (so do SSBNs), but both SSN and SSBN have carried nuclear cruise missiles for decades, back to the Sturgeon class fast attacks. The second generation 688 class fast attacks had 12 vertical launch tubes to fire cruise missiles, yet they are still SSN designated submarines. The US has not had an SSG submarine since the Growler was decommissioned in the mid 60s.

                      Comment


                      • Comment


                        • Originally posted by Captquint View Post
                          Can't be any more wrong then to rely on Wiki for your information. I think I'll rely on my 20+ years in the United States Navy Submarine Service serving on 2 Sturgeon class submarines, 2 Los Angeles class submarines, and an Ohio class submarine, not to mention being privy to the planning for the SSGN conversion of SSBN Ohio class submarines.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Flew View Post

                            Can't be any more wrong then to rely on Wiki for your information. I think I'll rely on my 20+ years in the United States Navy Submarine Service serving on 2 Sturgeon class submarines, 2 Los Angeles class submarines, and an Ohio class submarine, not to mention being privy to the planning for the SSGN conversion of SSBN Ohio class submarines.
                            I'm not sure what the argument is anymore, I was saying sail two SSGN's that we have four of to launch T-lams into NORK. I've been on a 688 and and the growler. Not that that is in anyway Superior to your experience.

                            Comment


                            • It needs a massive buildup and partial evacuation of Seoul before a strike, in case of escalation. I suspect seeing concrete preparation like that would scare the shit out of them and bring rapid negotiations rather than a preemptive suicidal strike from them. Currently kim il trump is not backing his bluster with any movement of assets, which is probably fairly persuasive proof to NK that he's all mouth and no trousers so it's business as usual for them with added propaganda goodness.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by AnalHamster View Post
                                It needs a massive buildup and partial evacuation of Seoul before a strike, in case of escalation. I suspect seeing concrete preparation like that would scare the shit out of them and bring rapid negotiations rather than a preemptive suicidal strike from them. Currently kim il trump is not backing his bluster with any movement of assets, which is probably fairly persuasive proof to NK that he's all mouth and no trousers so it's business as usual for them with added propaganda goodness.
                                China says they will stay out of any conflict as long as North Korea isn't the aggressor. I foresee no evidence complete enough to China to demonstrate North Korea was clearly the aggressor, given what you are describing as necessary preparations for a war. Evacuating Seoul is impossible to disguise as anything less than a declaration of war.

                                i read recently there are back door negotiations and I'm curious what they think they can do? North Korea wants the US off the peninsula. That's why they are building ICBMs; to scare away the US by threatening our homes. What could we offer them to stop building those missiles? Is Trump negotiating capitulation?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X