(08-30-2017 11:21 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 10:22 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 09:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 08:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  I like the silent treatment so far. Not so sure it's by design, we are sort of pre-occupied with the disaster in Houston at the moment, but from a military perspective it probably has NK wondering why there wasn't an immediate response from the US.

Well...Bannon let the cat out of the bag and probably got him self fired in the process, when he said publicly what we all really knew in that there is no military option for NK that doesn't involve mass death of Americans and our close allies.

True, but would you rather fight that war AFTER NK manages to kill a million or so with a nuke or before? Bottom line is that it's better fought in the very near future on the Korean peninsula than after there are civilian casualties in the mainland US, Japan, or SK.

Right now NK doesn't know what to expect in retaliation for their actions. I like that.

NK has had the bomb since like 2006.

Without a way to deliver it. That has changed.

(08-30-2017 11:52 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 11:21 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 10:22 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 09:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 08:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  I like the silent treatment so far. Not so sure it's by design, we are sort of pre-occupied with the disaster in Houston at the moment, but from a military perspective it probably has NK wondering why there wasn't an immediate response from the US.

Well...Bannon let the cat out of the bag and probably got him self fired in the process, when he said publicly what we all really knew in that there is no military option for NK that doesn't involve mass death of Americans and our close allies.

True, but would you rather fight that war AFTER NK manages to kill a million or so with a nuke or before? Bottom line is that it's better fought in the very near future on the Korean peninsula than after there are civilian casualties in the mainland US, Japan, or SK.

Right now NK doesn't know what to expect in retaliation for their actions. I like that.

NK has had the bomb since like 2006.

Without a way to deliver it. That has changed.

Maybe not with a projectile, but they likely could have gotten something into South Korea to detonate had they really wanted to.

(08-30-2017 12:00 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 11:52 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 11:21 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 10:22 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 09:50 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Well...Bannon let the cat out of the bag and probably got him self fired in the process, when he said publicly what we all really knew in that there is no military option for NK that doesn't involve mass death of Americans and our close allies.

True, but would you rather fight that war AFTER NK manages to kill a million or so with a nuke or before? Bottom line is that it's better fought in the very near future on the Korean peninsula than after there are civilian casualties in the mainland US, Japan, or SK.

Right now NK doesn't know what to expect in retaliation for their actions. I like that.

NK has had the bomb since like 2006.

Without a way to deliver it. That has changed.

Maybe not with a projectile, but they likely could have gotten something into South Korea to detonate had they really wanted to.

Across the most heavily guarded border in the world???

A few points about this... one is that Japan has options available (even if they can't execute those options) that the US does not.

The US has been at war with the North since August, 1950 and remains in a state of war. The United States - at least officially - remains committed to the 1953 Armistice Agreement. It would be a pretty big change for the US to abrogate that Armistice Agreement. China has said that it would intervene if a conflict were initiated by the US, but would not intervene if it were initiated by North Korea.

Like it or not, North Korea is the consistent party, and the US is unpredictable and constantly changing.

North Korea will not start a conflict with nuclear weapons. Those provide it with defense against great powers and provide it long-term security, just as they do for nearly every other nuclear power (India/Pakistan excepted, where they provide a local MAD status).