Best Posts in Thread: North Korea Threats

I'm not so trustful of words that come out of any politician's mouth. You need to have some psychopathic tendencies to hold the office. Presidents (all of them) being concerned with anyone but themselves is just not in their nature. They (again, all presidents) are, largely, psychologically incapable of empathy.
Why Great Presidents Are Often Psychopaths

 

Removing missile defense? Defensive missiles and radar does not threaten China's security in any way. It sounds more like they want the radar gone so that a future invasion into SK would be a lot easier on them. Are they trying to trump Trump with the ridiculous demands and threats?

 

Of course it will be reviewed in hindsight. Hindsight is easy and always there. Foresight not so much.

"Hindsight bias, also known as the knew-it-all-along effect or creeping determinism, is the inclination, after an event has occurred, to see the event as having been predictable, despite there having been little or no objective basis for predicting it."

We could take action against NK with disastrous repercussions. Those actions will have the same people making hindsight documentaries no matter what the outcome is.

A documentary that was almost certainly made without all the information that is out there. The public will likely never see all the related documents released. Most documentaries I've seen on the topic are loaded with speculation.

 

Did they even come close to hitting one? The US tests missiles all the time and we know to check the flight tracker prior to launching. Nk could have very well have done the same for their missile's flight path.

 

I don't see nuclear weapons as a bad thing. They do serve a purpose for those countries that have them and nuclear weapons are very likely the reason we don't have regular large scale wars between highly developed countries. I don't think the world would be a safer place without them.

Countries without nuclear weapons get the sh*t end of the stick. Since the big boys can't get in fights with each other without completely obliterating each other the only choice is to fight each other through proxy wars (well, we could just not fight wars but....not human nature) in countries far away filled with people that most just don't give a sh*t about. Korean War, Cuba, Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan 80s, Pakistan, Iraq 1, Bosnia, Iraq 2, Libya, Ukraine, Syria, etc, etc. All places we have either fought wars or supplied weapons to spread our influence/control.....not a d*mn one of those countries had nuclear weapons when we were fighting there.

Nuclear weapons are about the only way smaller countries can cut the strings from their puppet masters. It may seem like many of these smaller countries are screwed up, and they very well may be, but let's not act like we haven't played a large part in making sure they stay screwed up.

I don't like seeing a nuclear NK but I can certainly understand the strategy and logic behind it. They aren't stupid or crazy. Anyone who thinks they aren't having briefing after briefing after briefing in NK to talk about their strategy and to figure out just exactly how far they can push the international community is sorely mistaken. Almost every single thing they do is a calculated decision.

There are no simple solutions to the problem....too many players with different interests in the region. I personal don't see them as much of a problem. I think Pakistan is far more dangerous a country to allow to have those weapons. They currently have nuclear missiles in taliban controlled areas....and the Taliban has been attacking their military bases in areas thought to have these missiles in an attempt to gain access to them. NK is predictable. They have been doing the exact same sh*t on a regular cycle ever since the cease fire was declared. The Taliban on the other hand, give them a nuke and you can be 100% certain they will use it on the West given the opportunity.

Everyone thinks they are the good guys.