Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Chat' started by HippoCrushEverything, Jan 8, 2017.
what do you guys think about trumps improv threat on nuclear war?
i guess im not super worried cuz im not confident NK can hit the US as of today, but it doesnt seem like the kind of thing you should give an off the dome speech about
The thing is he never threatened it.
what was he threatening
North Korea has graduated from 'missile tests' to 'military exercises' very rapidly, and even if North Korea would struggle to guide a warhead to a particular target (they'd have no problem with the distance to several US cities at this point), I think chronic underestimation of North Korea is a mistake.
There's a very common propaganda tactic where you alternate between calling some group a buffoonish joke that you could easily dispose of, and then switch to calling them an existential threat. One says a war will be easy, the other says it's necessary, but they're largely mutually exclusive. The United States and its allies could topple North Korea, that is not in question, and with some diplomatic effort they may even be able to do so without China getting involved, but make no mistake: it would cost millions of lives and it would be among the greatest humanitarian crises in history.
Trump's comments don't really do anything to affect US policy or the defense apparatus in place, luckily. However, they are a propaganda victory for North Korea, they should make Tillerson question what the **** his job even is, and its probably a thorn in Mattis' side too. Trump has demonstrated several times that he has little idea about how the US arsenal actually works (both in a tactical sense, and also in political, technical, economic, and procurement senses), how nuclear strategy actually works, and in turn, I think he's unlikely to realize the real threat North Korea poses. The single most important aspect of nuclear deterrence is clear, precise messaging to your adversaries about what you are prepared to do and that you have the demonstrable capacity (both practically and politically) to do so. Trump just talking off the cuff, and out of sync with the messaging from his Departments of State, Energy and Defense do not help that. It did no harm this time, but remember its worth remembering that the Cuban Missile Crisis was a crisis of poor communication as much as anything else.
"Fire and Fury"
Politically it means nothing. The statement amounts to no policy outcome or decision.
Everyone knows if someone attacks the US they will be met with either or both of those things.
Likewise for any other country for that matter.
The statement is broad enough that people can get excited over it and narrow enough that it can exclude many other things.
Sure, we're not too worried about an ICBM dropping on LA.
What we SHOULD be worried about is our 'fraternal Asian ally' getting stomped around by boots on the ground. I can give you 1.2 million reasons why. Sure, the command and logistical train would be a nightmare for them to maintain, but those first few days would be pretty hairy for our buddies in the South(and US service members!).
And that's if Mr. Pudgy(or whatever Trump called him) doesn't just lob a nuke at a much closer and easier target of Seoul. A depressed trajectory shot would take very little time.
All in all, tense situation not to be taken lightly. Thank God for the Almighty SecDef. I'm glad to know that when Chuck Norris sleeps, he has nightmares about General Mattis.
In a statement Tillerson, along with some generals, suggested that this whole things is nothing. It seems the military is just thumping its chest for good ol' funding.
Some of us peons pay our bills that way, sire!
Yeah, like when Obama said we could destroy NK?
What's with you and your double standards?
so Alex Jones just joined this thread
That's really not what I mean. I mean that the ability of the Secretary of State to conduct diplomacy depends on foreign powers trusting that the Secretary has the ear of the policy and legislation creating powers, who are the ones who actually effect the diplomacy he or she promises. If his words are not in lock-step with the President, he is weaker for it - both in terms of his ability to conduct diplomacy and in terms of his ability to keep his job. And certainly being content to take the number two position to Defense on America's foreign policy decision making, and his willingness to leave allocated funds on the table, and to shrink his own portfolio has not endeared him to the career diplomats and bureaucrats of Foggy Bottom, whose support is another major source of the Secretary's power.
That note was a lot less referential about the true nature of the North Korea relationship, and a lot more literal, as in increasingly his job as a diplomat is dead.
Mr Obama gave warning of the possible consequences. “We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals,” he told CBS News. “But aside from the humanitarian costs of that, they are right next door to our vital ally, [South] Korea."
“North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen,” Trump said. “And as I said, they will be met with the fire and fury and, frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.”
"and frankly, power" haha this guy doesnt know when to shut up and stop piling on useless descriptors
so if NK threatens the US, we will nuke them is that what he is saying?
tree fitty is trying to parse his words to figure out his meaning, but im with VIce, when talking about stuff like this there can be no ambiguity. You must be clear, and if you are going to draw red lines you must be ready to back them up, but I dont think trump had the backing of his generals in drawing this red line, and I dont think he has any support in enforcing it
obama made the mistake of drawing a red line in syria a while back, and was weakened by not following up on it.
I think we can agree this is a much more serious situation. One that requires more than improvisational rhetoric
I am scared of NK. The people who are in control there truly have nothing to lose if they feel their position in power is threatened. Its all they have and its all they care about and I think of any nuclear power they are the MOST likely by far to use them
hes constantly doing this, and I think its a big cause of the chaos
he will say something crazy, ask his staffers to apologize, then he will totally contradict them again
here he is making diplomacy on a whim, and thus reducing tillersons ability to do his job, and reducing his confidence that anything he does say will have any weight. Not just confidence in himself, but why should NK or anyone else take the words of tillerson to mean anything? at any moment the president could tweet out something completely different without consulting anyone
I mean it's the typical sabre rattling that's done every few months between us. I didn't mean he's eloquent about it.
Honestly we should just ask China to take them over and keep NK for themselves.
I knew what you meant. I was expanding on it.
i think a little nuance is appreciated
im not against yelling at north korea, but pointless escalating and careless words are NOT neccessary when so much is at stake
It's pretty nuanced actually. The media is just riding this like they usually do.
Past admins have used the same tactics.
Interpret these with the same lens you interpret the current admin:
'We could destroy you,' Obama warns 'erratic' North Korean leader"
"Facing the first direct challenge to his administration by an emerging nuclear weapons state, President Obama declared Monday that the United States and its allies would “stand up” to North Korea, hours after that country defied international sanctions and conducted what appeared to be its second nuclear test."
China have no use for below standard peninsulae full of bad smell air, bad smell people and bad smell food. China build own glorious island on great ocean instead.
i dont care about that we just looked at the exact quotes. and if you see trump deliver that warning in video you cant help but cringe
Yea its cringe for sure.
Point is nothing different really is being said policy wise.
If the NK regime is being toppled, I doubt that the US would be like "Hey China, take NK for you, we don't want it".
NK has one of the largest untapped reserves of valuable minerals in the world. China, Russia, Japan, the US and South Korea would be fighting all over the place to get NK for themselves.
That's why China has been so shy about enacting stronger sanctions against NK. The NK regime is basically fully dependent on trading with China, and if Beijing stops it the NK regime would fall. That would mean:
1) a shit load of poor, sick, famished North Koreans pouring over the border into Chinese territory;
2) a fight between the North Korean generals for power, which could mean civil war and possibly the use of nuclear weapons. Kim Jong-un is crazy, but at least he is under control. A bunch of generals fighting among themselves would be crazy and out of control;
3) a local war between nations trying to seize NK for themselves would be an economical, political and humanitarian crisis for China, South Korea and Japan (and for the US on the long run).
They wouldn't wage war to seize NK. Because they haven't. If China took over, no one would wage war then either. We lose nothing letting China have them. At least we know China wont get pissy and lob a nuke at us. They like selling us things.
Thank god you are not a military advisor, a diplomat, a counsellor to world leaders, an academic, a teacher, a bus driver, or even a barista. If you think like this I wouldn't even trust you to get my latte correctly, sorry.
Oh, and Trump is threatening military intervention in Venezuela too.