What would acceptance of a nuclear North Korea look like?
Hello December 14, 2017, 01:26:11 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
 
   Home   Help Arcade Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What would acceptance of a nuclear North Korea look like?  (Read 329 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
(Hidden)

« on: September 24, 2017, 07:30:19 am »

Every analysis I have seen or read about the current nuclear North Korea problem suggests that there are no good military options due to the risk of massive civilian casualties likely on both sides.

Economic sanctions have only seemed to embolden the NK regime and they only hurt the average NK citizen (who will not rise up in rebellion).

Very few people (at least publicly) seem to be discussing acceptance and engagement as an option. Nobody wanted Pakistan to have nukes (though Pakistan obviously wanted them to defend against a nuclear India), but now they are a nuclear state and we simply accept that as a fact of the world.

What would it look like if we simply accepted NK's nuclear program as a fact of life? Would re-engagement with NK economically stabilize the regime and make them saber rattle less or more? Would the benefits of an improved economy directly help the average citizens of NK? 
 
And do me a favor, be respectful to one another. I'm new here but I've come here to get a gay perspective (and get seed points Wink ) not to trade or read insults.
Logged
1x Thumb Down 1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2017, 09:21:21 am »

I think this subject is boring. If NK bombs us, they die. Cool, end of the story. Blah blah blah. "Very few people seem to be discussing it," because nobody actually cares, because it's boring. Tons of people are discussing Flat Earth, because it's interesting. "Nobody wanted Pakistan to have nukes..." Nobody cares. Why would people care about that? Unless you're from Pakistan... Nukes are fake. Galen Winsor, PHD literally ATE Uranium in front of an audience and proved the radioactivity/harmfulness was bullshit. That's interesting.
Logged



(Hidden)

« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2017, 09:30:27 am »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   
Logged



(Hidden)

« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2017, 09:43:18 am »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   

We could have said the same thing about Pakistan before they had nukes.
 
Personally, I think the UN should jointly bomb NK but other countries wonder if they'll be next. (Some of them should be next.) That means the US will have to go it alone. Japan can only support, South Korea will be cleaning up civilian casualties.

Anyway, the way I see it either China steps in, the US bombs, or the world gives a seat to NK as a nuclear power.
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2017, 10:07:52 am »

And then you have global government, NK in line with the world bank. We need to negotiate a peace, not bomb them. Nobody even knows why they are being this way because our media is irrelevant. All they can do is say Kim is insane. Who knows the real story? It's the banking system. They want NK to fall so they can take over with their global banking system. We need to wait until NK makes a move. Kim is not nuts. He knows the repercussions of the global banking dictatorship. Let him be unless he attacks us.

Libya- was a very rich nation. They used gold as currency. They told France they wouldn't trade with them anymore because their PM bashed Libya's family. The French needed oil so they called on the US to invade. And Hillary was very happy to. Now they have a globalist dictatorship running the show. Man you guys don't know anything about world finances or politics. Now Libya has the globalist dictatorship hive matrix like most everyone else.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2017, 10:25:05 am by (Hidden) » Logged



(Hidden)

« Reply #5 on: September 25, 2017, 07:38:22 am »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   

A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people.  The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2017, 09:53:20 am »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   

A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people.  The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea. 

So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2017, 02:14:32 pm »

NATO and the UN are paid for by an agreed formula.   They add up the entire economy of the member states and each state pays their portion of that.    That is how it's supposed to be, but reality shows that the US pays for everything

To me, that makes the other countries' voices meaningless since they refuse to pay their fair share. 

Also, the US is expected to be the world's police when it suits the other countries. 
Logged



(Hidden)

« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2017, 04:28:35 pm »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   

A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people.  The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea. 

So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?

There is another problem there, because a couple of months ago, China said that they would not allow Kum to be removed from  power now will they won't allow regime change.    Kim is a fun guy.. he not only executes his own friends and family with artillery cannons, he also uses flame throwers and dogs to tear them apart.  I wonder if Kim ate the dogs that ate his enemies?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/850111/North-Korea-latest-news-Kim-Jong-un-World-War-3-nuclear-test-Pyongyang-Donald-Trump?utm_source=traffic.outbrain&utm_medium=traffic.outbrain&utm_term=traffic.outbrain&utm_content=traffic.outbrain&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2017, 10:59:42 pm »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   

A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people.  The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea. 

So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?

There is another problem there, because a couple of months ago, China said that they would not allow Kum to be removed from  power now will they won't allow regime change.    Kim is a fun guy.. he not only executes his own friends and family with artillery cannons, he also uses flame throwers and dogs to tear them apart.  I wonder if Kim ate the dogs that ate his enemies?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/850111/North-Korea-latest-news-Kim-Jong-un-World-War-3-nuclear-test-Pyongyang-Donald-Trump?utm_source=traffic.outbrain&utm_medium=traffic.outbrain&utm_term=traffic.outbrain&utm_content=traffic.outbrain&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain

If that's actually true then that pushes the conversation back towards the main topic: What would a world with a nuclear-capable NK look like? Baring war it seems more like the option no one is talking about.
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #10 on: September 26, 2017, 12:19:40 am »

The wold, but especially the US, panders to NK with cash and other things every time NK starts threatening the world with nukes. 

The world needs to stop pandering to these ass clowns and deal with them harshly.   

A rarely mentioned aspect of North Korea is that the handful of leaders are oppressing over 25 million people.  The people suffering the most from Kim Dung Pu are the people of North Korea. 

So are you saying that the US has the role of world police and therefore the authority (or obligation) to overthrow Kim?

There is another problem there, because a couple of months ago, China said that they would not allow Kum to be removed from  power now will they won't allow regime change.    Kim is a fun guy.. he not only executes his own friends and family with artillery cannons, he also uses flame throwers and dogs to tear them apart.  I wonder if Kim ate the dogs that ate his enemies?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/850111/North-Korea-latest-news-Kim-Jong-un-World-War-3-nuclear-test-Pyongyang-Donald-Trump?utm_source=traffic.outbrain&utm_medium=traffic.outbrain&utm_term=traffic.outbrain&utm_content=traffic.outbrain&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain

If that's actually true then that pushes the conversation back towards the main topic: What would a world with a nuclear-capable NK look like? Baring war it seems more like the option no one is talking about.

I'm not sure what you meant by "Baring".  I'm guessing "Bearing"?  in other words.. accepting an ongoing state of having a nuclear conflict at any moment with no warning?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0AxrOUJ62E
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #11 on: September 26, 2017, 12:49:08 am »

The verb bar, as in exclude.

So I wanted to ask what the solution would be excluding war. At present, it seems that accepting a nuclear NK is the only option as everything else has failed up to this point. Further sanctions will not solve this, or will they? They haven't yet.
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #12 on: September 26, 2017, 03:06:45 am »

The verb bar, as in exclude.

So I wanted to ask what the solution would be excluding war. At present, it seems that accepting a nuclear NK is the only option as everything else has failed up to this point. Further sanctions will not solve this, or will they? They haven't yet.

OH!   I should have caught that.  You said "baring" missing one R.   Should be "barring"   
Baring would mean exposing..
Barring is excluding.   

My brain was not functioning earlier today. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #13 on: September 26, 2017, 03:21:24 am »

The verb bar, as in exclude.

So I wanted to ask what the solution would be excluding war. At present, it seems that accepting a nuclear NK is the only option as everything else has failed up to this point. Further sanctions will not solve this, or will they? They haven't yet.

I have been asking swampi the same question several times. 
Why would sanctions work now when they haven't for the past 50 years with NK?   

What options are there?

Mad Maxine Waters solution is to just give NK everyhting they want.   She must have taken lessons from Obama. 
If it were up to Waters, every country in the world and Al Queda and ISIS would be permitted to have their own ICBMs with nosecones filled with multiple hydrogen bomb warheads. 

Meanwhile.. Trump has repeatedly said that he would like to see nuclear weapons abolished completely.   
It's very easy.  Even wars have rules.  Break them and one is designated a war criminal. 
Make nuclear weapons illegal including even threatening to use nuclear weapons.  If some county uses a nuke, the rest of the world should shun them - no trade - no travel - nothing.   I can't think of any country in the past 10 years that has threatened to use nukes other than North Korea and Iran.. and they technically don't even have them yet. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #14 on: September 26, 2017, 02:52:42 pm »

This is from Ron Paul today. What do you all think?

"Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis: pull all US troops out of South Korea; end all military exercises on the North Korean border; encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors."

 
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2017, 04:43:19 pm »

This is from Ron Paul today. What do you all think?

"Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis: pull all US troops out of South Korea; end all military exercises on the North Korean border; encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors."

 

Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?"   It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea.  They are in an armistice.  North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it. 

Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason,  kidnapping and raping young girls, etc. 
Logged


(Hidden)

« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2017, 11:43:30 pm »



Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?"   It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea.  They are in an armistice.  North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it. 

Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason,  kidnapping and raping young girls, etc. 


If you take Trump's speech at the UN at it's word, then each nation must be sovereign. (He contradicts himself later by calling out the weakened Cuba, Venezuela, and NK.) But the UN and US leave plenty of countries alone to pursue hateful agendas. Think of the Rwanda; look at how we ignore all that's going on in Saudi Arabia.

Arguably, NK is conducting illegal arms sales because they are barred from trading in the free market. RP's idea puts them back in, potentially.

As for forcibly entering South Korea, there's no direct evidence that they want to forcibly reunite. The two Koreas still trade with each other and have made several attempts over the decades to unify economically, each time failing because NK takes a bellicose stand towards the US.
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #17 on: September 27, 2017, 01:24:38 am »



Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?"   It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea.  They are in an armistice.  North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it. 

Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason,  kidnapping and raping young girls, etc. 


If you take Trump's speech at the UN at it's word, then each nation must be sovereign. (He contradicts himself later by calling out the weakened Cuba, Venezuela, and NK.) But the UN and US leave plenty of countries alone to pursue hateful agendas. Think of the Rwanda; look at how we ignore all that's going on in Saudi Arabia.

Arguably, NK is conducting illegal arms sales because they are barred from trading in the free market. RP's idea puts them back in, potentially.

As for forcibly entering South Korea, there's no direct evidence that they want to forcibly reunite. The two Koreas still trade with each other and have made several attempts over the decades to unify economically, each time failing because NK takes a bellicose stand towards the US.

I like Trump, but I wasn't impressed with that UN speech.  I could write a better speech than that.  Presidents never write their own speeches.  They contribute ideas to them, but they don't actually write them.  One of the most famous presidential speech writers was Ben Stein (Bueller.. Bueller?) who worked for Nixon. 

I think NK has done a horrible job in being a country.  Being bellicose to the US is probably not wise, other than being egged on by China. 
Logged
1x Thumb Up


(Hidden)

« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2017, 06:30:22 pm »



Problem with that is "why are those US troops there to begin with?"   It is because North Korea is still in a state of war with South Korea.  They are in an armistice.  North Korea has consistently threatened to take over South Korea, and would do so if they could get away with it. 

Also, that doesn't take into account that North Korea is doing illegal weapons sales, starving it's own people to death, selling it's own citizens into slavery, mass executing and torturing people for no good reason,  kidnapping and raping young girls, etc. 


If you take Trump's speech at the UN at it's word, then each nation must be sovereign. (He contradicts himself later by calling out the weakened Cuba, Venezuela, and NK.) But the UN and US leave plenty of countries alone to pursue hateful agendas. Think of the Rwanda; look at how we ignore all that's going on in Saudi Arabia.

Arguably, NK is conducting illegal arms sales because they are barred from trading in the free market. RP's idea puts them back in, potentially.

As for forcibly entering South Korea, there's no direct evidence that they want to forcibly reunite. The two Koreas still trade with each other and have made several attempts over the decades to unify economically, each time failing because NK takes a bellicose stand towards the US.

I like Trump, but I wasn't impressed with that UN speech.  I could write a better speech than that.  Presidents never write their own speeches.  They contribute ideas to them, but they don't actually write them.  One of the most famous presidential speech writers was Ben Stein (Bueller.. Bueller?) who worked for Nixon. 

I think NK has done a horrible job in being a country.  Being bellicose to the US is probably not wise, other than being egged on by China. 

++1

 angel


Logged
1x Question mark


(Hidden)

« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2017, 02:33:49 am »



You young whippersnappers and your fancy abbreviations. What does ++1 mean? It sounds like you're inviting Frederick and I to be your plus one at a party. (Which might be fun.)
Logged


Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  

* Permissions
You can't post new topics.
You can't post replies.
You can't post attachments.
You can't modify your posts.
BBCode Enabled
Smilies Enabled
[img] Enabled
HTML Disabled

 
Jump to: