192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 01:16 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
I hope Finn's belief that we won't use nukes at any juncture is correct.

The reason we have nukes is so we can destroy an enemy before it can harm us. Why would we not protect ourselves?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 01:17 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:
Yeah, it's not like the US is the only country to have ever done this evil a deed, twice, with plans for many more deeply evil deeds, is it?

Come now. Self defense is hardly evil.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 01:31 pm
Quote:
The U.S. is prepared to launch a preemptive strike with conventional weapons against North Korea should officials become convinced that North Korea is about to follow through with a nuclear weapons test, multiple senior U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-may-launch-strike-if-north-korea-reaches-nuclear-n746366
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 01:42 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

giujohn wrote:
Respectfully disagree. Cruise missiles can take out anti-aircraft while simultaneously launching moab's... That's just one scenario.

Cruise missiles can only destroy known locations. Not useful against mobile radar/SAM sites. Not useful against fixed sites that we don't know about.

MOABs are simply not powerful enough to instantly kill an entire country before they have any chance to react. If North Korea manages to destroy Tokyo (or Chicago) while we are still in the process of destroying them, we'll have failed.


Don't usually disagree, but....

We'd have use of the satellites we have in stable orbit over N. Korea to mark each and every piece of artillery they have. Each of those would be marked and tracked and assigned how ever many cruise missiles needed to take them out. We would jam their radar and communications and take 90-95% of those threats out within an hour. At the same time, anti-missile technology (patriots or other) would be tracking anything coming over the border.

I am pretty sure that if we decide to do any kind of strike it will be rapid and overwhelming.

However, all that being said and done, most likely China will bitch slap KJU and it will not come to any of that.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:02 pm
@Olivier5,
Then I hereby bequeath France with America's leadership role when it comes to Climate Change. Show us how it's done!
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:14 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
Don't usually disagree, but....

We'd have use of the satellites we have in stable orbit over N. Korea to mark each and every piece of artillery they have. Each of those would be marked and tracked and assigned how ever many cruise missiles needed to take them out.

Military assets are often disguised from satellite detection. We've had the same satellite detection in previous wars. There were still fixed radar sites that we didn't know about until they were turned on during the war, and mobile weapons that we never managed to strike at all.

North Korea has between 10,000 and 20,000 artillery pieces aimed at Seoul. How many cruise missiles can we launch at once?


McGentrix wrote:
We would jam their radar and communications and take 90-95% of those threats out within an hour.

How do you destroy more than 10,000 artillery pieces in one hour with conventional weapons?

Assuming that we can destroy all this artillery in the space of one hour, how do you prevent undestroyed artillery pieces (that you won't get to until later in the hour) from firing on Seoul from the moment that your attack begins?


McGentrix wrote:
I am pretty sure that if we decide to do any kind of strike it will be rapid and overwhelming.

I don't see how conventional weapons are rapid enough or overwhelming enough.
hightor
 
  4  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:38 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:
How did life begin?

What is consciousness?

Is time travel possible?


I don't think your response adequately addresses Snood's comment about "alternative facts" with respect to climate analysis as your examples are very speculative questions and lack the amount of physical evidence which underlies the anthropogenic greenhouse gas hypothesis.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:43 pm
@hightor,
With all due respect to snood, do you think he's in a position to tell the difference between real and alternate facts as respects CC?
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:44 pm
The North Korea situation is way more complicated than I can understand but NK blames Trump's aggressive tweets for tension.

Quote:
TOKYO — North Korea accused President Trump on Friday of “making trouble” with his “aggressive” tweets, amid concerns that tensions between the two countries could escalate into military action.

Tensions have been steadily mounting in recent weeks, as North Korea prepares for what it is calling a “big” event to mark the anniversary of the founder’s birthday Saturday, while the Trump administration warns that all options are on the table.

Expectations for a nuclear test or missile launch in the lead-up to Saturday’s celebrations in Pyongyang have not come to pass. Instead, there are signs that the regime is getting ready to hold a huge parade this weekend, perhaps showing off new missiles — something that would qualify as the “big” event it had heralded.

The United States has sent an aircraft carrier strike group to the Korean Peninsula region, and Trump has repeatedly tweeted that if China won’t use its leverage to rein in North Korea, the United States will act.


WP

I wish someone would tie Trump down away from any forms of world wide web for communicating when he starts tweeting for no good purpose except for making the world less safe.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:47 pm
@revelette1,
Well, if the NK regime is blaming Trump tweets for tension we have got to shut the guy down!

I have a feeling the aircraft carrier is creating more tension than the tweets.
Lash
 
  1  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:51 pm
The Fat Bastard's specially timed practice detonations in the past few weeks is why we're cutting a path toward him right now.

And here's related recent news.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/13/north-korea-preparing-for-nuclear-test-satellite-images-suggest
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:55 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
physical evidence which underlies the anthropogenic greenhouse gas hypothesis.


No climate scientist rejects this hypothesis, and it is nothing new. 95% of what are (inappropriately) called "greenhouse gases" is good old H2O. Carbon is a slight fraction of that total, and is by no means "toxic." Indeed, carbon is absolutely essential to life on earth, and many climate scientists argue that we need more of it, not less, in the atmosphere right now.

Very few of those who proclaim to be on the side of "settled science" really have any clue of what they're talking about. They just feel secure in saying "97% of scientists believe" notwithstanding the fact that the 97% figure has been repeatedly debunked, and notwithstanding that they can't really specify exactly what it is that this imaginary 97% supposedly believe.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  4  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:55 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Then I hereby bequeath France with America's leadership role when it comes to Climate Change. Show us how it's done!



They already have, and they know how to do health care, and the food is devine. Maybe we can teach the French how to lard their food up with a ton of salt, high fructose corn syrup, and get really really fat.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:57 pm
@glitterbag,
Maybe. Are you planning on moving there?
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -1  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 02:59 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:
We'd have use of the satellites we have in stable orbit over N. Korea to mark each and every piece of artillery they have. Each of those would be marked and tracked and assigned how ever many cruise missiles needed to take them out. We would jam their radar and communications and take 90-95% of those threats out within an hour. At the same time, anti-missile technology (patriots or other) would be tracking anything coming over the border.

I am pretty sure that if we decide to do any kind of strike it will be rapid and overwhelming.


Exactly, Gent.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 03:03 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
You have a point, but I can see valid reason for the air craft carrier if the US military thinks we it need it there. On the other hand with Trump just talking smack to NK, it is recklessly stupid. As the Chinese leader put it:

Quote:
“The United States and South Korea and North Korea are engaging in tit for tat, with swords drawn and bows bent,” Wang said at a news conference after a meeting with visiting French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault, Xinhua reported. “We urge all parties to refrain from inflammatory or threatening statements or deeds to prevent irreversible damage to the situation on the Korean Peninsula.”


WP
layman
 
  -2  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 03:04 pm
Obama. If we prevent North Korea from developing nuclear weapons by preemptively attacking them, there will be some who say the U.S is evil.

Trump: Yeah? So the **** what? America First, Baby!
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 03:08 pm
@revelette1,
The important point about this "warning" from China is that it is directed at NK as well as the US. China has been issuing warnings and condemnations against us for decades. This one is nothing new. However, only since the Syrian attack have they issued them against NK and this is at least the second one.

They are not about to issue a warning to NK that makes them look like they are doing our bidding so they include it in a warning to both nations. I'm pretty sure plenty of top officials in NK understand what's going on here.



0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 03:10 pm
@glitterbag,
The food in Berlin is much better than that in Paris.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Fri 14 Apr, 2017 03:18 pm
@Lash,
If we do, it will be because NK has used theirs.

If they do, all bets are off and even China might nuke them.

Collecting these weapons for leverage is one thing, but using them is entirely something else.

I wouldn't worry. Even an animal like Fat Boy Kim has a sense of self-preservation, and if he doesn't, his generals do. They'll shoot him in the head if he decides he wants to die in fire and glory.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.72 seconds on 11/28/2024 at 12:27:41