2 ms·

How do you square this with the fact that NK makes empty threats all of the time?

by xnull2guest 12y ago

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
They have thousands of pieces of artillery pointed at Seoul and have nuclear weapons. Every couple months they shell the S Korean side or a S Korean ship or kidnap someone. They may not have started WWIII, but they do act out violently. They are not all talk, unfortunately.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Right but they still make plenty of empty threats especially on a global scale. Nor have their threats to use many of the artillery they have pointed toward South Korea (including nuclear arms) been fulfilled. Of course North Korea and South Korea have violent exchange. They are countries founded by settling down opposing armies on a border neither thinks is fair. I do not see how this 'squares' the fact that they are known for making empty threats?
  - mikeash 12y ago
    Their empty threats are empty because they're either incapable of carrying them out, or don't want the consequences of doing so. They don't invade the South because they know they'd lose. They don't turn the US into a lake of fire because they're unable to do so. But hacking an entertainment company is within their means, and the consequences are not too bad. The fact that they sometimes threaten things they can't do adds no information to the question of whether they did this thing.
    - xnull2guest 12y ago
      > The fact that they sometimes threaten things they can't do adds no information to the question of whether they did this thing. I think it does. I think it calls into question that when NK makes a threat, we can't just assume that they're going to follow up on it. That is, their making a threat adds no information to the question of whether they did this thing. And that's my point. OP argues that since they made a threat we can eat dessert and wash our hands.

2 ms·

How do you square this with the fact that NK makes empty threats all of the time?

by xnull2guest 12y ago

How do you square this with the fact that NK makes empty threats all of the time?

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
They have thousands of pieces of artillery pointed at Seoul and have nuclear weapons. Every couple months they shell the S Korean side or a S Korean ship or kidnap someone. They may not have started WWIII, but they do act out violently. They are not all talk, unfortunately.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Right but they still make plenty of empty threats especially on a global scale. Nor have their threats to use many of the artillery they have pointed toward South Korea (including nuclear arms) been fulfilled. Of course North Korea and South Korea have violent exchange. They are countries founded by settling down opposing armies on a border neither thinks is fair. I do not see how this 'squares' the fact that they are known for making empty threats?
  - mikeash 12y ago
    Their empty threats are empty because they're either incapable of carrying them out, or don't want the consequences of doing so. They don't invade the South because they know they'd lose. They don't turn the US into a lake of fire because they're unable to do so. But hacking an entertainment company is within their means, and the consequences are not too bad. The fact that they sometimes threaten things they can't do adds no information to the question of whether they did this thing.
    - xnull2guest 12y ago
      > The fact that they sometimes threaten things they can't do adds no information to the question of whether they did this thing. I think it does. I think it calls into question that when NK makes a threat, we can't just assume that they're going to follow up on it. That is, their making a threat adds no information to the question of whether they did this thing. And that's my point. OP argues that since they made a threat we can eat dessert and wash our hands.