5 ms·

Too bad the cowardly U.S. government does not do anything but "negotiate". Grab an M-16 and go get 'em! Easier said than done, right?

• mariana 17y ago
  "Never get involved in a land war in Asia"
  • TriinT 17y ago
    "Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events." -Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
    • javert 17y ago
      Gulf War? Civil War (from the Union side)? Lots of US wars have been straightforward and successful. And an attack on NK would not even qualify as a "war".
      • TriinT 17y ago
        To show how committed you are, why don't you volunteer for that attack!? If you talk the talk, you must be willing to walk the walk...
        • javert 17y ago
          Actually, my current employment does relate to maintaining U.S. air superiority, though I'm a civillian computer science guy. I would enjoy being a military pilot, and if I were, I'd volunteer for this mission.
          • TriinT 17y ago
            USAF pilots have it easy. Until they're shot down over enemy territory, that is... I know nothing about NK's nuclear capabilities, but I doubt a few well-place JDAMS would do the job. Bombing nuclear facilities is not trivial. Israel did it successfully once, though. A pre-emptive attack on NK could be a great idea, or it could be a disaster. There are thousands of U.S. soldiers in South Korea. An attack on NK would give them the motive they want to attack SK. I don't know if you've read about NK's elite troops. Those guys are savages... cold-blooded killers... they would eat U.S. Army babies for lunch if the combat took place on the ground.
• javert 17y ago
  No - we could easily, totally dismantle NK's nuclear capability using aerial bombing. It's literally that easy.
  • TriinT 17y ago
    Yeah, we all know how effective the bombing of Serbia in 1999 was. The USAF cannot blow up hardened bunkers deep underground. You need boots on the ground to get the job done. And U.S. soldiers and marines would be brutally punished by the North Koreans as soon as they set foot on NK territory. You could count on thousands and thousands of flag-draped zinc caskets. Better keep negotiating until the only option left is the military one.
    • javert 17y ago
      It's not necessary to destroy all deep bunkers to effectively dismantle NK's nuclear weapons program. I would be stronlgy opposed to a ground invasion. Your post appeals to the straw man fallacy by implying that I support a position I do not.
      • TriinT 17y ago
        The point I am trying to make is simple: bombing a country is an act of war. If you start a war, you must be ready to face the consequences, including using ground forces to supplement the air raids. NK can't send bombers to attack the U.S. but they can cross the border and engage U.S. forces in SK. This would have to be carefully thought out... I don't have the intel to assess whether an attack on NK would be effective or not, and fortunately I don't have the power to send thousands of kids in harm's way.